So says rugbypass

Hmmm, one in one out is hardly an overhaul, and it's also old news (or an old rumour)

Someone has basically summed up all of the 2nd row rumour posted here over the last month and turned it into a blog post.

Yet again we are linked with a player who has had a terrible run of injuries!!
RleQ

But if they don't have a history of injuries; they will seem to soon gain one shortly after joining us.

Think this has been pulled from this site, if the reporter knew his stuff he would know that Mathews is off to maybe Northampton but more likely wasps to replace Launchbury who is probably off to sale and the injury prone symmons who is coming to Quins,,, don’t think it’s the 2nd row that needs bolstering as I think glynn and merrick have played pretty well this season

As much as I think Matthews is better than quite a few posters describe on CAW, him replacing Launchbury is a huge ask.

Hasn't Launchbury already re-signed for Wasps?

Quote:

T-Bone
Hasn't Launchbury already re-signed for Wasps?

Yes - [www.bbc.co.uk]

Arniepie has peaked!

Yeah I was going to say...a club would have to be insane to choose Matthews over Launchbury.

Thank you QP 😁😁😁😁 just relaying 3rd Hand information I get from the shoe shine boy in police squad

Quote:

arniepie
Thank you QP 😁😁😁😁 just relaying 3rd Hand information I get from the shoe shine boy in police squad

Great reference! I'm sure Kramer's caddy in Seinfeld was channelling shoeshine Johnny.

Symonds would be a great signing. He was awesome for the Chiefs in Super Rugby.
Apparently had the biggest engine of anyone in the team and knows how to play at a high tempo.
If he can get that sort of form back he would definitely bolster our pack.

2.00m, 117kg, 29y. Perfect.

Glyn is not a prem player never ever will be - this is typical; of our squad - some players are not not good enough

Quote:

Fanski
Glyn is not a prem player never ever will be - this is typical; of our squad - some players are not not good enough

I think Glynn has shown he is fine at Premiership level, and would certainly be fine as our 5th choice lock (which is what he's supposed to be).

The problem is that we have had to rely on him too much, and whilst he's a good grafter, he's not the sort of level we want to be seeing week in week out if we're to compete with the top teams (which is what the board are allegedly targeting).

But without the injuries we wouldn't be relying on Glynn so not sure how much of that is the club's fault.

The bigger issue is that we knew Twomey would be out for ages, and yet rather than trying to bring in someone at his level, we instead relied on Merrick, Matthews and Horwill to carry the load, and I'm not sure that Merrick and Matthews are the required standard either.

Quote:

talkshowhost86

Quote:

Fanski
Glyn is not a prem player never ever will be - this is typical; of our squad - some players are not not good enough

I think Glynn has shown he is fine at Premiership level, and would certainly be fine as our 5th choice lock (which is what he's supposed to be).

The problem is that we have had to rely on him too much, and whilst he's a good grafter, he's not the sort of level we want to be seeing week in week out if we're to compete with the top teams (which is what the board are allegedly targeting)

But without the injuries we wouldn't be relying on Glynn so not sure how much of that is the club's fault.

The bigger issue is that we knew Twomey would be out for ages, and yet rather than trying to bring in someone at his level, we instead relied on Merrick, Matthews and Horwill to carry the load, and I'm not sure that Merrick and Matthews are the required standard either.

Agreed

To avoid any doubt about the rules, here is a link to the full Salary Cap rules. Glynn joined on us in July as Injury cover for Twomey. If you look on page 21, section 5.3, clauses e and f define that an injury cover player must be:

Quote:

(e) the proposed replacement has either an equivalent level of experience to the Injured Player or has less experience than the Injured Player;
(f) the Salary payable to the proposed replacement is either comparable to the Salary of
the Injured Player or is lower than the Salary of the Injured Player;

Now, as good as we think Twomey is (or more accurately has the potential to be), our cover for him while he is out has to be considered by the independent Salary Cap Manager to be at a similar level or lower to him both in terms of experience and salary level. So we wouldn't have been able to simply throw money at a Whitelock, nor would we have been allowed to pick up, say, Itoje (were he available/willing) as even though he's of the same experience, his salary worth is far higher. Glynn may not be the best lock in the world, but there are rules that we have to abide by. He's come in and done a decent enough job, also having to cover for back row as well after our injury troubles there too (something he probably didn't expect to have to do). He may not be ripping up trees, but he's far from poor.

Quote:

Fearless Fred
To avoid any doubt about the rules, here is a link to the full Salary Cap rules. Glynn joined on us in July as Injury cover for Twomey. If you look on page 21, section 5.3, clauses e and f define that an injury cover player must be:

Quote:

(e) the proposed replacement has either an equivalent level of experience to the Injured Player or has less experience than the Injured Player;
(f) the Salary payable to the proposed replacement is either comparable to the Salary of
the Injured Player or is lower than the Salary of the Injured Player;

Now, as good as we think Twomey is (or more accurately has the potential to be), our cover for him while he is out has to be considered by the independent Salary Cap Manager to be at a similar level or lower to him both in terms of experience and salary level. So we wouldn't have been able to simply throw money at a Whitelock, nor would we have been allowed to pick up, say, Itoje (were he available/willing) as even though he's of the same experience, his salary worth is far higher. Glynn may not be the best lock in the world, but there are rules that we have to abide by. He's come in and done a decent enough job, also having to cover for back row as well after our injury troubles there too (something he probably didn't expect to have to do). He may not be ripping up trees, but he's far from poor.

Agreed that we couldn't just throw money at Glynn as an injury replacement. But we must have known about Twomey's issues therefore we could have signed someone else on a permanent basis earlier on. Particularly if we weren't that sold on Matthews (which we presumably aren't as we're apparently letting him go).

I understand we can't plan for injuries all the time, but it wasn't as if Twomey's injury issues came out of nowhere.

Glynn is a good squad player. He's also been getting better as he gets more game time.

Glynn ran himself into the ground at Sale. As the late subs came on after Marlers brain fart he was immense around the park and looked far more of a leader than his more esteemed team mates, and could barely jog back to the last restart. While he is no Itoje, a few more with that work rate wouldnt hurt the team. Thats not a dig at Matthews btw who also fronted up with ball carrying, not his forte, while we were a back row down.