Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Challenge Cup finalists Leicester and Montpellier each make two changes from their semi-final XVs

(Photo by Getty Images)

Leicester and Montpellier have each made two changes to their Challenge Cup final XVs following respective semi-final wins three weeks ago over Ulster and Bath. The Tigers have Dan Kelly in their midfield in place of Matt Scott, with Cyle Brink coming in at back row for George Martin.

ADVERTISEMENT

Montpellier, meanwhile, have changes in the same two places, Jan Serfontein lining up at inside centre for Julien Tisseron and Fulgence Ouedraogo chosen at blindside for Nico Janse van Rensburg.

The French club’s bench looks very tasty, though, especially with the World Cup-winning Cobus Reinach and Handre Pollard ready to be thrown into the Twickenham fray should they be needed by Montpellier in a contest with Leicester that will be played in front of an attendance of 10,000.

Video Spacer

RugbyPass is sharing unique stories from iconic British and Irish Lions tours to South Africa in proud partnership with The Famous Grouse, the Spirit of Rugby

Video Spacer

RugbyPass is sharing unique stories from iconic British and Irish Lions tours to South Africa in proud partnership with The Famous Grouse, the Spirit of Rugby

“We haven’t shared a matchday with Tigers supporters for more than a year and we are excited that we get that chance again on Friday night,” said Leicester boss Steve Borthwick, who opted to keep England No9 in reserve on his bench and stick with semi-final starter Richard Wigglesworth. “Our fans have been incredibly supportive from afar and we are pleased they have the chance to enjoy some live rugby in the upcoming weeks.

“I’m very pleased our players get the chance to play in front of Tigers fans again after so long. In every game we go out to put in a performance that our entire Tigers community is proud of, and that is what I will be asking of the players again this week.”

LEICESTER TIGERS: 15. Freddie Steward; 14. Guy Porter, 13. Matias Moroni, 12. Dan Kelly, 11. Nemani Nadolo; 10. George Ford, 9. Richard Wigglesworth; 1. Ellis Genge, 2. Tom Youngs (capt), 3. Dan Cole, 4. Harry Wells, 5. Calum Green, 6. Hanro Liebenberg, 7. Cyle Brink, 8. Jasper Wiese. Reps: 16. Charlie Clare, 17. Luan de Bruin, 18. Joe Heyes, 19. Cameron Henderson, 20. Tommy Reffell, 21. Ben Youngs, 22. Zack Henry, 23. Kini Murimurivalu.

MONTPELLIER: 15. Anthony Bouthier; 14. Arthur Vincent, 13. Johan Goosen, 12. Jan Serfontein, 11. Vincent Rattez; 10. Alex Lozowski, 9. Benoit Paillaugue; 1. Enzo Forletta, 2. Guilhem Guirado (capt), 3. Mohamed Haouas, 4. Florian Verhaeghe, 5. Paul Willemse, 6. Fulgence Ouedraogo, 7. Yacouba Camara, 8. Alexandre Becognee. Reps: 16. Bismarck Du Plessis, 17. Robert Rodgers, 18. Titi Lamositele, 19. Tyler Duguid, 20. Jacques Du Plessis, 21. Cobus Reinach, 22. Handre Pollard, 23. Gabriel N’gandebe.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 1 hour ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian? Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian?
Search