The Tuesday Top 5 - Green and Gold Rugby

The Tuesday Top 5

The Tuesday Top 5

We had a bit of a break, but now we’re back full of enthusiasm and optimism. Hands up who enjoyed the rugby on Sunday afternoon!


It was pretty good, wasn’t it! Well in this edition of the Tuesday Top 5 we recap some of our thoughts in the lead up to, and during the game. We also take a quick look at the numbers from the game, make of them what you will!

What is going on?

It is post Bledisloe game 1 and one of my biggest takeaways was how different the experience was from past years. It maybe because of COVID and different timing. But in the lead up to the game things were missing, different, normal. When the squad was named the selections were pretty much as expected, no surprises, no “seriously? Why is he still there!”; so that was new.  We didn’t hear any of the usual idiotic egotistic dribble of the past emanating from Camp Wallaby. That’s new. Then the team selection, not much of a surprise. Decent balance, selection on form aligning with players usual positions…….hang on!

Where’s the outrage, the debate, the frustration; the please shut up Cheika and Co feelings I had in the past?

But what was I expecting in the lead up? It’s hard to say. I am so used to having a feeling of disappointment in the game overall compliments of RA (but I still secretly hang on to a glimmer of hope for it to succeed despite all of the RA’s boards efforts -past and presently in parts) and that of the previous coaching regime. I didn’t even have that suppressed feeling of secretly wanting the Wallabies to fail to help force change. Can I still blame the Tahs?

Maybe SRAU had given me false optimism? I thought our teams have played at a pretty high standard giving us some really good rugby at times. But how could I measure it without having the Kiwis involved? To be honest, I really enjoyed it just being about us, the Aussie players and teams. Seeing both the teams and players develop and play off against each other was really fantastic. Aside from the increased rivalry, it was good to see them directly competing against each other and being able to compare them side by side. Would a domestic centric build-up be good enough to make them competitive or had I been watching a lower standard game through rose coloured glasses and we would get a reality check once we went up against the Kiwis? But why did I feel a level of confidence, of hope, optimism and excitement?

What is going on? Maybe this is the start of a renewal of the Wallabies. Do I dare subscribe, get invested?  Where is all the overdone rhetoric, the hyperbole? I want to get on-board but it’s hard to shake the past baggage and build up my hopes. The quiet, the subdued build up and quiet confidence is confusing me. But I like it!

Wallabies Coach Dave Rennie will be making his home in Queensland

Wallabies Coach Dave Rennie will be making his home in Queensland

Game day:

So here’s the thing, I’m watching the Wallabies and they are going through phases and it strikes me; why I am not expectantly waiting for them to drop the ball as per usual? This is new. But how? Can it simply be that we are watching players in form who have performed well recently who I have seen play well? That they are playing the way I expect them to play? (side note – did you hear Rennie mention in his post-game interview that SRAU might have been beneficial to our players leading up to this game?) The other interesting part of this was that when the Wallabies did make errors I didn’t feel the same level of frustration as in the past. Why is that? The errors seemed to be from positive play and were no different to the errors the Kiwi’s seem to be making. Had I lowered the bar? Actually I think I had higher expectations. Has Aussie rugby all of a sudden learned the fundamental skills of rugby or have we cleared house of a generation of players with poor fundamentals?

Or maybe, even more significantly, has the psychology of the past, which was the real issue, been wiped away and in combination with a new coaching regime and COVID forcing us to use far more younger (cheaper!) players and actually focusing on Aussie rugby (domestic) rather that what the Kiwis or South Africans are doing, are we seeing what we are capable of?

As I watched I also realised another difference. These players were playing like a team. Considering the lack of time together, a lot of new faces and combinations, they had more cohesion than any of the Wallabies teams I have seen in years. Again, what was the difference? From my perspective the egos, the individuals, the reputations didn’t seem to be apparent. These were players playing their game in positions that were relatively familiar but doing their job in a team. They all seemed settled, no real nerves and nobody overplaying. They were just playing their game; not to an ill-conceived poorly conducted, over engineered script.

But there was even more to this messing with the psychology of this Wallabies supporter. I had set the bar low like many, hoping we would give it a good shake and end up at least close to the Kiwis. But then I was struck by something new; but not new. JoC 2.0 playing 10 like I had seen most of the season. Koroibete and Daugunu as threatening as we had seen all year, Banks secure at the back like he has been all year, Wilson bringing his physicality and skills.……players playing with the form we have seen and what we all expected. Just like we had seen them playing all year. This led me to a very disturbing and a difficult question I am yet to answer. If they are playing to the standard I had seen in SRAU, how can that standard be producing this type of performance against the All Blacks?

Whatever has happened isn’t it refreshing? But with it brings a challenge. Aussie rugby has shown it has been held back, mainly by itself. It’s clear we have the players, skills and ability. What we seem to have an issue with is the psychology that in the past we have coveted, but somehow we have recently shed. Maybe it’s as simple as the players just being happy to be playing rather than looking at what’s in it for them (take the hint RA and RU administrators!). I can’t wait for the next game and to see more players get a shot and the team evolve. I expect it will be a bumpy ride in parts, but it’s an exciting ride that I want to get on.

Wallabies fans celebrate a try. Photo: Cameron Spencer/Getty Images

Wallabies fans celebrate a try. Photo: Cameron Spencer/Getty Images

Can we ride the wave?

What a dream marketing outcome. Just when Aussie rugby needs some good PR we get a cracking game that shows off a new Wallabies team and introduces some new names and provides a great platform to build on for the next few games. We needed a good showing, a bit of hype and it was awesome to see reporting about the game at the top of the page in the mainstream media. I am not sure if that would have pleased certain broadcasters as good PR might tend to push the value up.

SRAU appears to have been a really positive factor in the success Rugby is having this year. The SRAU ratings were decent all things considered, it has allowed us to bring in fresh blood, up the standard and renew interest in the game. As Rennie mentioned, he believes it provided the opportunity for Aussie Rugby players to develop and focus on themselves and Aussie rugby, not what the Kiwis or others are doing.

COVID forced the changes that have turned out to be beneficial to Aussie rugby. Fingers crossed the Rusted on, RA, state unions and influential pundits can read the room, tea leaves, writing on the wall, and ride this wave. But we are already seeing the risks and shortfall of our current planning. The NRC that had been platform that has been providing these new players appears to have no future. Not only will that hurt us in the development stakes it also hurts us in value. SRAU is a good product, but is limited due to the number of teams so is a short duration competition. We can’t expand on that without adding teams which then compromises concepts such as competition with international partners such a Trans –Tasman (TT) competition.

Right now our Rugby diet is being fed by the Kiwi Mitre 10, the SARU domestic competition and European games. Without some at minimum, semi-professional or above Aussie rugby on our screens we run the risk of irrelevancy due to absence. If it can’t be seen it doesn’t exist. And let’s face it, against what’s available club Rugby really isn’t going to attract a new audience. The NRC may be an option to fill the gap and if we dare to dream we could have a NRC that leads in to a SRAU, that then leads in to a TT concept, and even a team or two in the Global Rapid Rugby where we can also develop talent. A step under SR level.

The weekends game may also have helped with some of the politics and perceptions. The Wallabies on the weekend sent a clear message; Aussie rugby is on par with the Kiwi’s. It’s not the substandard product those over the ditch may have assumed it is, and RA tend to treat it as.


Justice for #SIMMONS

Before you say it, hold on and let me present the case. If it wasn’t for Simmons the Wallabies would have lost on the weekend. Seriously!  Let’s just step back and look at what transpired and consider the facts.

So, with the game in the balance, the All Blacks hot on attack, a try would have put the Wallabies behind, a converted try would have essentially put it out of reach. Even if you defend as well as you can, there is always a risk that they will get the better of you. So what do you do? If only you could tempt them to take the least damaging option that keeps you in the game.

Now, sometime it takes a villain, that maligned but brave soul to make the difference. At that time many will want to prosecute that player for what they did. Oh, and the Twitterarti certainly did; naively. But in time, with maturity and careful study you come to discover that in fact it was the act of a calculated master villain!

I really admire Rob, to come on at that point, to be in the middle of a maul, game in the balance, and to have the genius and bravery to manipulate the script, to commit the offence that lures the Kiwis into taking a penalty to draw the score!  Consider it a moment. The All Blacks, at risk of losing on home soil, finally on attack in the Wallaby half, back end of the game. All Blacks don’t compromise, they are winners. But they did. Rob’s lure of the easy points to avoid the loss as a trade-off to get them off attack and the risk of them scoring a try to win the game was a masterstroke. It saved the game for the Wallabies. Singlehandedly!

His worth and influence is undeniable. We struggled with the line out with him not on the field. Yes, it is hard to admit it, you don’t like Rob. But his lineout expertise is unquestionable. Thinking back now, how valuable would it have been if we had won a few more if our lineouts?  It’s also undeniable that once on the field we finally disrupted the Kiwi line out. Thank you Rob!

Rob; the hero villain, the maligned saviour. Misunderstood, unappreciated, but his penalty; that brave genius act was the difference between the Wallabies getting the draw and losing the game. A true hero.

To those that slandered him, bow your heads in shame!

Justice for #SIMMONS

Rob Simmons (did he call anyone else?)

Rob Simmons (did he call anyone else?)

By the numbers

These are just the basic stats from the weekend. No analysis, no chatter, just some numbers for you to look through and interpret as you wish.

All Blacks Wallabies
Tries 2 2
Metres 473 564
Defenders Beaten 21 24
Clean Breaks 10 10
Passes 131 203
Offloads 3 10
Turnovers Conceded 21 12
Tackles 188 119
Missed Tackles 24 21
Kicks In Play 31 24
Penalties Conceded 7 14
Possession % 39% 61%
Territory % 39% 61%


  • Patrick

    If I get this right you are calling Simmons a kiwi?

    • Funk

      Exactly my thoughts, if it was the other way around, is there any question that an AIG wouldn’t have infringed to avoid the Walllabies scoring a try?

      • Patrick


  • Patrick

    Well put for the first part (and the rest but I particularly liked the first part)!

    “Ultimately we were not physical enough to hold onto the ball and build pressure, and too often with the ball we did not really look like creating anything. We we made a few critical silly mistakes and will really need to lift the intensity in contact and change things up a bit for next week if we are to try and win it”.

    Except this time that’s the kiwis and not us. For all the reasons you said (I would add simply not selecting players who are just not up to it, let alone in critical positions), it was so much less stressful (and more exciting!) to watch than the Wallabies.

    Obviously lots to work on, but as a starting point, it seems like a good one to me.

  • GeorgiaSatellite

    Thanks MST. I think Ben Darwin has outlines it pretty well: the more often a few teams play each other, the better the cohesion of the squad selected from those teams.

    • Patrick

      Well that is probably a factor. But just picking test-quality players in their natural positions is probably a factor as well :)

      Also having a defensive plan based around tackling players not around modern dance.

      • Greg

        I thought having players defend in their positions was incredible innovation.

        • Patrick

          Revolutionary! See also: not dropping the ball, kicking more than 20m for touch,…

      • KwAussie Rugby Lover

        having players play in their position is the biggest cause of the cohesion. I’m not a fan of picking combinations from state games or below, pick the best player in each position, if they’re good enough they’ll work well together, if they can’t then maybe they aren’t the best player then.

    • Anonymous bloke

      My understanding is Rennie works hard at culture, and has been doing so remotely for the last 6 to 12 months, which also has a positive impact on cohesion.

      • Who?

        They had a LOT of social media this week about how good the culture was, how Rennie was bringing in the heritage of all the players (particularly the PI guys), how tight everyone was. From what they posted, it looked very, very believable.

  • Greg

    Thanks MST.
    The Simmons discussion is an interesting one.

    Brain snap or determined to stop the maul even with a penalty?

    The heart says brain snap.

    The head struggles… how can you not hear the ref’s directions….. They were loud. They were clear.

    Maybe he is a misunderstood genius!

    • Nutta

      MST has a point. He likely stopped a try. Take it or leave it.

      • Greg

        I think you and she are right

      • Pedro

        The ball came out though, then the darkness knocked it on.

        He needed to stop it coming out to entirely fit this narrative.

      • Brumby Runner

        Not in my book Nutta. If anyone stopped a try, and that is very debatable, then it was Williams with his decision, whether right or wrong, to issue the penalty.

    • Who?

      The heart says brain snap because that’s the picture that was painted of him as a young bloke, and we never imagine that players can change. Cooper’s still the wild child throwing unsafe passes and defending in the backfield (ignore that he defended at 10 for Wessels last year), Beale’s still electric, Foley’s still the ice man, Hooper’s still all action no impact…

      About the only player we’ve given a chance to change – and purely because he’s earned it by going to hell and back, and proving it the hard way – is JOC. Good on him. The rest, we still see them as the same rough player they were at 22.

    • Mike D

      I think he took a calculated risk and backed himself to disrupt a lineout if they went to the corner.

  • Nutta

    New teams, new coaches, new looks and not 4-6mths of interplay through Super so both teams ‘knew’ each other. I luved the game. It was great. I’ll save that game recording.

    But don’t get brow-beaten into holding ourselves to a lower bar. Don’t think my no-choice-tolerance of the shit served in the past has turned to acceptance. Expect more. Demand more. Push to be better.

    That said, it’s not often you see the AB’s give near x2 the turnovers and over 50% more possession & territory to an opponent. I don’t expect to see it twice. So in the cold light of day and analytics, we blew a chance there.

    So now it gets harder.

    Good. Let’s get it on. I want more.

  • KwAussie Rugby Lover

    Thanks MST, great to have you back. I agree 100% on the NRC issue. The lack of a decent tier between Club and Super rugby is a real negative for rugby here. I understand that the whole NRC program needed to change so that it could better reflect the tribalism of the area and to be honest I would just have let NSW carry on as they were and pushed it elsewhere. We’ve already seen how poor the NSW Super team has been for the last few years and if they continued their lack of support with the NRC while other states enveloped it then the lack of results at Super level would continue. I say let them fail and when they finally wake up then welcome them back in. That to me is a much better idea. TBH while I do enjoy club rugby, I’m not that into it and I’m certainly not going to watch a couple of club games from any of the states or areas here when I can watch Mitre 10 games or SARU Currie Cup Games or even the games up north. The club games just don’t cut it.

    Fantastic result last weekend and it’ll be interesting to see where that goes this week and how much each team improves. Apparently there’s an election as well back in NZ but I’m not sure anyone cares about that as much as they do about the ABs getting better

    • Who?

      What you and MST have said makes me wonder…….

      Can GRR merge with NRC?! Can we make that happen, then have SRAu/TT? That might work really well – we could have whatever teams Twiggy wants from GRR, which included PI teams. Then we take the Aussie teams into SRAu/TT (including the Force!), the PI teams feed into a TT PI team…
      Could that work?! Could that ultimately be the solution we all need?!

      • UTG

        I know guys who have played NRC, they all say there’s no buy in from the players and no one really wants to be there. The majority of that is to do with the timing of the comp and the mid-tier status it occupies.

        • Who?

          NSW teams, right? If so, I don’t blame them – the NSWRU did nothing to help that situation. The SRU actively sought to discourage it.

          We need something in that level. Club rugby doesn’t cut it.

        • UTG

          Yep, Rays.

          The main issue was (at least in the NSW case) that the sides had very limited preparation before the competition and there was no real sense of team.

          I don’t think is too hard an issue to fix but it requires working with club competitions.

        • Who?

          I think your last sentence is correct, but not only club comps. It needs collaboration across every direction. The financial risk was left to whoever purchased the licence. The QRU stopped clubs from bidding and took on that risk itself (concerned they’d lose clubs due to the financial losses that may have accrued). The NSWRU and SRU didn’t do that. If either body had stepped in, they could have worked with the clubs to create a real pathway, and tied down the Super players with it as part of their contract (as the QRU did). If it’d been the SRU jumping in, it would’ve been fantastic (they’d have felt some ownership, rather than feeling their beloved Shute Shield was being threatened). Instead, some of the clubs jumped in (at their own financial risk), pathways weren’t naturally developed…

        • Reds Revival

          It’s one of the very few times where I can say that QRU got it right. They are famous for making poor business decisions (e.g. revolving door coaching selections).
          They are finally stringing a few good decisions together (Thorn, NRC, Reds to Regions, and the Ballymore redevelopment).

        • Who?

          Reds to Regions?!?! Please tell me more!!! I’m out of the loop these days, but back around 2013-14 (I was at the QRU AGM in 2013 when they made the call on the NRC), but that was a term I used – an exact term – for about 3 years before I stepped back from official roles. I don’t know if it ever made it up the chain from me, but I definitely used the phrase widely inside my region (and have the emails to back it up!).

          Not as confident in the Thorn decision, but NRC was definitely a win. And I said “Reds to Regions” heaps of times… Trying to get some form of connection between the team in Brisbane and the wider areas of the state (because we had nada).

        • Reds Revival

          I hate to tell you, but Thorn really championed the Reds to Regions in January this year. All of the squad had to go to different regions around the state. They were billeted with Rugby families and had to help out in local communities. Liam Wright and Harry Wilson went to a property at Barcaldine and spent two days doing fencing.
          In my area Isaac Lucas helped out with the building of a new clubhouse, as well as junior camps.
          It was really well received by everyone, and apparently the guys loved it. Apparently its a lock in for next year too.

        • Yowie

          Liam Wright and Harry Wilson went to a property at Barcaldine and spent two days doing fencing.

          Was there only one swag available between them?

          (Sword fighting joke. Ba-dum ting)

        • Reds Revival

          Don’t give up the day job just yet, Yowie…

        • Who?

          Not being a great head coach doesn’t mean Thorn’s not a good bloke. Just means he’s not a great head coach (I still don’t see what he contributes – his attack is McKay, his defence was Peter Ryan and is now the new guy, he doesn’t run scrums, the lineout’s rubbish…).

          My view of Reds to the Regions was to sign up each club in a region to a Reds player. Across the state, with club numbers, you might end up with each Reds player being affiliated with 5 clubs each. Their involvement would be that they would visit in the pre-season to help recruitment, visit during the June break (or now after the season) to encourage (primarily) kids in their game, and send through updates on how they were personally going.

          Sending people out to help run fences might be useful for keeping players grounded, but it doesn’t necessarily help local club comps (not in the same way having Isaac run camps would’ve done), which was the point of my proposal.

        • Reds Revival

          Sometimes the head coach is like a CEO. He sets the culture and expectations for the business and drives results. A lot of times, they are not technically brilliant in any one area, but have a good understanding of the big picture and selling that to the team. That’s where I see Thorn brings benefit to the Reds. They definitely have improved their attitude and grit under Thorn (e.g. the defensive effort against the Rebels was more grit and resilience than brilliant defensive execution). He drives that, and he has been smart enough to let the likes of McKay, Lilliicrap, and now Todd to coach their area of expertise.
          “You prove that you are smart by hiring people that are smarter than you”.

        • Who?

          I absolutely see head coaches that way – the model being Macqueen, who understood staffing your weaknesses before many coaches seemed to understand they could have weaknesses to staff.

          Thorn sets culture, but I don’t see him recognising weaknesses or having recruited his assistants. It very much looked like QRU found his assistants. Where I give him credit is fitness. The year Stiles had the Reds solo, they wanted to be tough, but they couldn’t pull it off. They tried to hit everyone hard, but in doing that, they often fell off the tackles, and by 60 minutes they were gassed. Then they’d get smashed. Thorn’s the king of the gym; he fixed the fitness.

          If it were clear Thorn were the one doing the hiring, it’d be a bit easier to credit him with the quality of his team. But even beyond that, SRAu was his fourth season, and he still barely got above .500, and he was 1-6 in his third season.

        • Reds Revival

          I think you would find for guys who have got their break via the NRC would probably disagree with you. From a Qld perspective, that includes, Dizzy Zander, Ryan Smith, Tuiilima, Hunter Paisaimi, Harry Wilson, Fraser McReight, Seru Uru. While 2 of them are U20’s, the rest were all club players who got to play Super Rugby as a result of the NRC.

        • UTG

          I’m sure they would (although, I think a lot of those names you list were going to make it anyway). I don’t think the attitude of the up and coming talent is the issue. It’s more getting Super Rugby journeymen and amateurs from club level enthusiastic about the comp that is the issue.

        • Who?

          Was fun sitting watching the game on Sunday and turning to my son, saying, “Do you remember watching him (Tom Banks) playing for Qld Country..?”

      • MST

        Consider this. Twiggy has shown interest in supporting the NRC from what have read. It works for him as it keeps the Force players playing or most of the year (he is paying wages so wants them playing).

        I think NRC (test be daring and suggest the we add the women comp in the mix and paly double headers!), into the SRAU with the Force then split into a SR replacement (TT) with GGR running at a similar time, or during the international window.

        If GGR and RA worked together, the players floating around during the international window or end of year could be marque GGR players. Mutual benefit?

  • Pedro

    Does anyone think what Simmons did was legal anyway? I know the ref told him “no” so it’s illegal based on that. But without that he appeared to stay bound and just end up near the ball, which he then had rights to bundle up.

    • LED

      Like any maul optics are as important as reality. Simmons was legally moving through the maul from the back, then the maul rotated and 2 players outside Simmons exited leaving Simmons exposed on what was then the side of he maul the Ref was standing on. He then changed to grab another ABs player and that was enough for the ref to ping him. I never really understand the laws with respect to this because technically he did not swim up the side or join from the side. But given where he ended up – on the side with no one else outside him, it looked like he had. Its another reason that mauls are a bit of a blight on the game. They end up getting the defending side pinged for a penalty 90% of the time which honestly is boring. Thats not the “always a contest” rugby was made to be at all.

      • Pedro

        Yeah I’d agree with you, but because he never became unbound I thought he was allowed to grab whomever he liked.

      • Who?

        When the 2 ABs and 1 Wallaby departed the maul, leaving Simmons on the side, his right arm stayed wrapped around Whitelock (i.e. no change in bind) until 17 Black returned to the maul (he was the first to depart), entering in front of the rear feet, catching Simmons in the maul again. At that point, he moved his bind off Whitelock – but he was legal to do so.
        Being on the side of the maul doesn’t mean you have to unbind and retreat, it means you can’t advance up the side. But when you’re caught in it again, there’s no longer any requirement for specific binding.
        Williams was just looking for any excuse. It was far less obvious than the illegal maul entry from Uelese which had been the penalty that created the maul where Simmons was penalized.
        And I’ll take a maul penalty attempting to spoil from a lock. That’s their job.

      • it’s not 100% clear, but it looked to me like he was initially in position legally, then that side of the maul cleaned out as various players (on both sides) reset to the back. No particular malice there, they seemed to think they weren’t helping much.

        At this point he’s on the side of the ruck, and there are some slightly different laws. He’s not allowed to “swim up the side” which is basically about changing his binding to advance. What I saw, others may disagree, is he changed the binding on his left arm just after the others had moved, then in a big sweep he changed the binding of his right arm, both of them to a player further towards the AB back feet. That’s swimming up the side of the ruck, and a penalty.

        It’s a matter of timing, and not a matter to pillory Simmons over, but it looked to me like a technically correct call. There were other penalties that Williams could have given in and around the creation of that maul, so even if you want to feel aggrieved about that particular thing he blew the whistle for, a penalty at the maul was the right call. I think he just gave it for the last thing he saw.

  • donktec

    Enjoyed the write-up MST which i think can be summarised as ‘dare to dream’. Maybe one day we can read about Simmo’s version of events in the “tell all” memoir i’m sure he has been working on in ‘the bubble’. Agree that SRAU has been really good in allowing the local players (and coaches?) to develop.

  • Brumby Runner

    MSTs, I admire your work most of the time, but I do not give your version of Rob Simmons any credence at all.

    Your assumption is that without that penalty the ABs were certain to score a try and win the game. Quite clearly, that was not the assumption of the ABs themselves. Otherwise, they would not have taken the penalty but would have kicked for the sideline to work off a lineout, or set a scrum.

    I sincerely believe your take on the matter is bordering on outlandish and certainly to honour a penalty magnet like RS with the clarity to behold the inevitable try in the making is just inconceivable.

  • Mike D

    Actually quite like Simmons. I think he is maligned. I think, whether or not you were going tongue in cheek, maybe he was matching the darkness in tactical infringing – pushing the boundaries on the basis of a risk assessment. Goes something like this:
    Chance that they’ll score if they maintain the maul – high.
    Chance of stopping the maul entirely legally – low.
    Likely outcome if I get pinged? Balance of probability they’ll go for the shot at goal, knowing they should get the restart.
    OK go to the edge of the laws and see if I can stop it, otherwise wear it on the chin and back myself to disrupt a lineout if they go to the corner.
    I think Rob is a very good reader of people’s patterns – hence his efficacy at the line out – and he possibly employed that in this instance. He also strikes me as highly introverted so probably doesn’t influence the ref quite as well as say, Referee Aron Smith – maybe to him he DOES signal to the ref his compliance, just to the rest of us it’s not obvious because we’re not that introverted so we miss the signals.


Brumbies first, then for the love of the game. "It infuriates me to be wrong when I know I'm right." —Moliere

More in Rugby