Always a Wasp
General Category => Wasps Rugby Discussion => Topic started by: Rossm on December 28, 2021, 01:18:08 PM
-
Posted by Wasps' rugby:
-
Alfie would do well to change his appearance. He might think he looks cool, but that scraggly beard and those blonde highlights make him very easy to spot on the pitch. It used to be the same with James Haskell. A brief glimpse would tell any opponent where he was. In conspicuous is best. Notice how we didn't use him as a battering ram last match, and gave him permission to roam? Much better.
-
I think he's letting his highlights grow out.
-
I think he's letting his highlights grow out.
A little bit of natural hair dye would do that very quickly. Given his age and how short his hair is, those blonde highlights would have grown and been trimmed out ages ago if he was doing as you suggested. I think he has merely gone from all blonde to just keeping the tips blonde.
-
I think he's letting his highlights grow out.
A little bit of natural hair dye would do that very quickly. Given his age and how short his hair is, those blonde highlights would have grown and been trimmed out ages ago if he was doing as you suggested. I think he has merely gone from all blonde to just keeping the tips blonde.
It may of course be a cunning plan :) Make him more conspicuous and use him as a decoy?
-
I think he's letting his highlights grow out.
A little bit of natural hair dye would do that very quickly. Given his age and how short his hair is, those blonde highlights would have grown and been trimmed out ages ago if he was doing as you suggested. I think he has merely gone from all blonde to just keeping the tips blonde.
It may of course be a cunning plan :) Make him more conspicuous and use him as a decoy?
Stop he will probably come out with a blue barnet next.
-
Never thought I would read a discussion on hair styles and dyes on this highly masculine site.
-
Never thought I would read a discussion on hair styles and dyes on this highly masculine site.
Me too.. but its not a cut and dry thing.... styles come and go.. "Hair Today.. gone tomorrow".
-
Those two have been great. Also, West coming back has made a huge difference at scrum time.
-
Anyone remember BTL's black and gold barnet?
-
I think this is something and nothing.
Lots of players have incredibly distinctive features and it doesn't really hurt them.
Virtually all players are known by the officials these days... And it's hard to hide from the cameras no matter what you look like.
Ashley Johnson was pretty recognisable and I don't recall him having too many problems.
Odogwu's hair is quite distinctive
James Gaskell's hair is a disaster, but doesn't seem to attract much attention during a game
Tommy Taylor had lots of blond hair bouncing around and again seemed fine
-
Agreed, but otoh wasn't there that game reffed by Smalles who repeatedly pinged Gaskell, who had upset him by 'helpfully' starting a 54321 countdown on a 'use it' call and who was wearing a distinctive blue scrum cap, only to not ping him at all once he changed it at HT.
-
Agreed, but otoh wasn't there that game reffed by Smalles who repeatedly pinged Gaskell, who had upset him by 'helpfully' starting a 54321 countdown on a 'use it' call and who was wearing a distinctive blue scrum cap, only to not ping him at all once he changed it at HT.
Yup
-
Agreed, but otoh wasn't there that game reffed by Smalles who repeatedly pinged Gaskell, who had upset him by 'helpfully' starting a 54321 countdown on a 'use it' call and who was wearing a distinctive blue scrum cap, only to not ping him at all once he changed it at HT.
+1
Gloucester game wasn’t it?
-
At every game since I think Jamma has changed his scrum cap at half time.
-
Those two have been great. Also, West coming back has made a huge difference at scrum time.
100% agree, our scrum was pretty weak and West has improved it greatly. It will only get better and could be a decent weapon for us
-
I also think that Alo is no mug at TH.
-
At every game since I think Jamma has changed his scrum cap at half time.
This is correct, not sure anyone got to the bottom of this in the end - perhaps became superstition.
As a side note, it’s again testament to the signings and level of play so far from Stooke and Fifita as well as Cardall and de Chaves (who’s probably off very soon if not already with the US league starting soon) that we’ve hardly mentioned Gaskell being out
-
,Briefly returning to Frosty and Alfie it is to be hoped Eddie keeps his sticky paws off them,. and off several others of our young players. I know all players want to be internationals and also it makes for better salaries etc but he doesn't half seem to muck them about.
-
,Briefly returning to Frosty and Alfie it is to be hoped Eddie keeps his sticky paws off them,. and off several others of our young players. I know all players want to be internationals and also it makes for better salaries etc but he doesn't half seem to muck them about.
+1
-
Indeed so. Alfie will be involved sooner or later. Frost at the minute is a bit off I think but then again no-one is immune from the invitation to attend a training session or three where they get told “what they need to work on” whilst depriving them of on the pitch experience with their club.
-
Very much agree. A lot of thus bringing young players in really young and not playing them can be counter productive.
-
Very much agree. A lot of thus bringing young players in really young and not playing them can be counter productive.
Most of them, and their coaches, tend to say that they've come back with a far better idea of what's needed, and know what they're going for. Umaga had some of his best games ever for us after his first sessions with England.
-
Very much agree. A lot of thus bringing young players in really young and not playing them can be counter productive.
Most of them, and their coaches, tend to say that they've come back with a far better idea of what's needed, and know what they're going for. Umaga had some of his best games ever for us after his first sessions with England.
I said it at the time and still think it: There’s a lot to be said for young players spending a bit of time with England just to see what’s happening, but it only works once. The next time should only be if they are in real contention to play.
-
Plus 1
-
Very much agree. A lot of thus bringing young players in really young and not playing them can be counter productive.
Most of them, and their coaches, tend to say that they've come back with a far better idea of what's needed, and know what they're going for. Umaga had some of his best games ever for us after his first sessions with England.
I said it at the time and still think it: There’s a lot to be said for young players spending a bit of time with England just to see what’s happening, but it only works once. The next time should only be if they are in real contention to play.
I wouldn't want to guess myself. Different environment and coaches can be beneficial even repeatedly I believe. It's frustrating for the supporters, but quite simply, our opinions don't really count.
-
Certainly training with England can be beneficial...IF....the nature of the individual and the way England want to play suit that t individual and the way their club have been focusing upon.
Jacob certainly seemed to benefit in the short term - though as for any player, I'd expect that a change of approach/removal of staleness can be a benefit. But players like Ollie Lawrence have been set back as he didn't fit with the "Jones way" - and that's an opinion seemingly shared on their club forums. Ditto when Yarde went to a training camp a while back. And you'd probably be able to argue that Daly was hindered by playing for England - let alone training with them, let alone what happened to Devoto in a squad lacking 12's....
You are likely to pick up tips etc from the players you are with - but I'd need to be convinced that a club with the coaches that we have - including two of the recent England team - would not be able to set out what players need to do to improve.
-
..... and does anyone know why the two recent England coaches chose to leave the England regime and go elsewhere , ie Wasps? Just a genuine question.
-
..... and does anyone know why the two recent England coaches chose to leave the England regime and go elsewhere , ie Wasps? Just a genuine question.
Mitchell was quoted - John Mitchell said he left his role as England defence coach because he wanted to return to club rugby and due to the difficulties of working under COVID-19 restrictions, not because of a fall out with head coach Eddie Jones.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/john-mitchell-england-wasps-rugby-22404167
As for Ed - no idea.
-
A HR training question.
'What does an external observer conclude when staff under a specific senior manager leave at a rate faster than is the norm for that sector/industry?'
The answer is 'That the senior manager is generally found to be an unpleasant person to report to/work for. That does not mean that the senior manager is not effective, but it does mean that continued support of that manager by their supervisors/employers will result in continued high staff turnover, which could impact negatively on the public perception of the organisation. Where training or other intervention to improve the situation is deemed unlikely to succeed, the supervising employer should seek alternative personnel to fulfil that role.'
The failure of so many organisations to follow this basic advice is indicative of a lack of professionalism at the highest levels of those organisations. In turn, one could conclude that continued poor management would eventually lead to crisis for the organisation itself, often commercial failure.
One has only to look at some British industries that have failed to see how true this is and was. Such as the car industry.
The problem is not Eddie. He is merely a symptom. At some point, his employers will have made such a poor job of running things that the organisation will fail. It has been coming for years.
-
..... and does anyone know why the two recent England coaches chose to leave the England regime and go elsewhere , ie Wasps? Just a genuine question.
Mitchell was quoted - John Mitchell said he left his role as England defence coach because he wanted to return to club rugby and due to the difficulties of working under COVID-19 restrictions, not because of a fall out with head coach Eddie Jones.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/john-mitchell-england-wasps-rugby-22404167
As for Ed - no idea.
Mitchell was lying. The truth would have hurt him, so one cannot blame him for doing so.
-
..... and does anyone know why the two recent England coaches chose to leave the England regime and go elsewhere , ie Wasps? Just a genuine question.
Mitchell was quoted - John Mitchell said he left his role as England defence coach because he wanted to return to club rugby and due to the difficulties of working under COVID-19 restrictions, not because of a fall out with head coach Eddie Jones.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/john-mitchell-england-wasps-rugby-22404167
As for Ed - no idea.
Mitchell was lying. The truth would have hurt him, so one cannot blame him for doing so.
That's a bit strong, Nelly. Let's just say Mitch was being diplomatic ;)
-
..... and does anyone know why the two recent England coaches chose to leave the England regime and go elsewhere , ie Wasps? Just a genuine question.
Mitchell was quoted - John Mitchell said he left his role as England defence coach because he wanted to return to club rugby and due to the difficulties of working under COVID-19 restrictions, not because of a fall out with head coach Eddie Jones.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/john-mitchell-england-wasps-rugby-22404167
As for Ed - no idea.
Mitchell was lying. The truth would have hurt him, so one cannot blame him for doing so.
That's a bit strong, Nelly. Let's just say Mitch was being diplomatic ;)
Yeah, OK. Wait for his autobiography tell all. Diplomats can be extremely economical with the truth.
-
..... and does anyone know why the two recent England coaches chose to leave the England regime and go elsewhere , ie Wasps? Just a genuine question.
Mitchell was quoted - John Mitchell said he left his role as England defence coach because he wanted to return to club rugby and due to the difficulties of working under COVID-19 restrictions, not because of a fall out with head coach Eddie Jones.
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/john-mitchell-england-wasps-rugby-22404167
As for Ed - no idea.
Mitchell was lying. The truth would have hurt him, so one cannot blame him for doing so.
I'd go as far as suggesting that I was a skeptic in respect of the reasons given and that he'd suddenly come to such a decision just after signing a contract.....
-
Certainly training with England can be beneficial...IF....the nature of the individual and the way England want to play suit that t individual and the way their club have been focusing upon.
Jacob certainly seemed to benefit in the short term - though as for any player, I'd expect that a change of approach/removal of staleness can be a benefit. But players like Ollie Lawrence have been set back as he didn't fit with the "Jones way" - and that's an opinion seemingly shared on their club forums. Ditto when Yarde went to a training camp a while back. And you'd probably be able to argue that Daly was hindered by playing for England - let alone training with them, let alone what happened to Devoto in a squad lacking 12's....
You are likely to pick up tips etc from the players you are with - but I'd need to be convinced that a club with the coaches that we have - including two of the recent England team - would not be able to set out what players need to do to improve.
This is basically a longer and much better explained version of what I was thinking. Selective picking of a youngster with no intention to play can in some situations be beneficial to them short term, and it gives a kick to established players to boot as they think their place might be more under threat. When it would be troublesome would be if it becomes not done on an ad hoc basis, and becomes a blanket policy - 'every squad has X new youngsters in to have a look at'. That would be potentially counter productive for my money, and Mike has some v good examples of where it has not worked which illustrate the dangers nicely.
-
I've never thought of Mitchell as diplomatic - but I suppose there's always a first time.
-
Certainly training with England can be beneficial...IF....the nature of the individual and the way England want to play suit that t individual and the way their club have been focusing upon.
Jacob certainly seemed to benefit in the short term - though as for any player, I'd expect that a change of approach/removal of staleness can be a benefit. But players like Ollie Lawrence have been set back as he didn't fit with the "Jones way" - and that's an opinion seemingly shared on their club forums. Ditto when Yarde went to a training camp a while back. And you'd probably be able to argue that Daly was hindered by playing for England - let alone training with them, let alone what happened to Devoto in a squad lacking 12's....
You are likely to pick up tips etc from the players you are with - but I'd need to be convinced that a club with the coaches that we have - including two of the recent England team - would not be able to set out what players need to do to improve.
This is basically a longer and much better explained version of what I was thinking. Selective picking of a youngster with no intention to play can in some situations be beneficial to them short term, and it gives a kick to established players to boot as they think their place might be more under threat. When it would be troublesome would be if it becomes not done on an ad hoc basis, and becomes a blanket policy - 'every squad has X new youngsters in to have a look at'. That would be potentially counter productive for my money, and Mike has some v good examples of where it has not worked which illustrate the dangers nicely.
Some young players are called up to "Extended training camps" or some such and are never in line to be picked. It's a great opportunity to gain experience of the coaching methods and atmosphere of the international camps without any selection pressure and also giving the coaches a great chance to see the players more closely.
However, some young and often very inexperienced players (with just a handful of first team appearances) are called up to the full proper test squad. These players then seem to spend a month or two effectively just holding tackle bags without even a sniff of getting on the bench for a chance at a cap.
The first scenario is great. The second scenario, much less so.
-
Absolutely, two very different scenarios there, and the latter is the type I am worried about too.
-
Agree with the above - my concerns do remain about players that England have apparently discarded or seemingly picked too soon and then have left them in limbo
The two I was thinking of were Nick Isiekwe and George Martin.
Nick was picked to tour SA when aged 20 after touring Argentina and playing 4 mins of test rugby and starting a warm up game (when 19) He was picked to start the first test, pulled after 35min, never to be seen again. And yet, since and especially in his loan season, has looked one of the outstanding players in the Prem, a leader on the pitch and yet not even invited to a meet up.
George Martin ended up getting a cap off the bench, last 6ns vs Ireland, having started 6 Tigers games (or there abouts) in a game where England were crap and got stuffed, playing 14 men......aged 19......
Seemed to be omitted from the squad for the easy summer games and not in the AI's either. what was a player with 6 Prem stats doing in a 6Ns game? And what's with him now - now that he seems to be in better form than when picked....
It's that sort of waste of talent that gets my goat.....and I'd guess will change post RWC...