Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Video - Going on these comments, Marler and Yarde weren't best mates

England loosehead Joe Marler has revealed that he didn’t speak to teammate Marland Yarde for the 18 months preceding the winger’s exit from the club.

ADVERTISEMENT

Yarde left Harlequins under a cloud two weeks ago, after the club lost patience with the winger.

Speaking on the Rugby Pod, Marler said that he had already given up on the troubled player long before Yarde’s now infamous mid-season departure from the club.

“I hadn’t spoken to the bloke in 18 months. I’d lost the plot with him a good while ago. And let him be, let him do his own thing, because I’d given up on it.

“He’d made the decision that he wanted to leave…you know, all the best to him,” Marler told the podcast. “I wish him all the best. I don’t wish nastiness upon anyone.

“He’s one of those to just leave, as he won’t change in my mind. Me and him just don’t get on.”

He also described Chris Robshaw’s comments on Yarde as ‘punchy’, saying if Robshaw was prepared to say something negative about a player, he must have a reason.

Marler also said he was ‘****ing gutted’ he missed the Wales England forwards training session in Bristol this week.

ADVERTISEMENT
Video Spacer

Marland Yarde is settling in at new club Sale, where he gave this interview upon arrival. The former England winger was not selected for Eddie Jones’ November Tests squad, and will hope to turn his fortunes around at the northern club.

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 4 hours ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Yep, that's exactly what I want.

Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.

It's 'or'. If Glasgow won the URC or Scotland won the six nations. If one of those happens I believe it will (or should) be because the league is in a strong place, and that if a Scotland side can do that, there next best club team should be allowed to reach for the same and that would better serve the advancement of the game.


Now, of course picking a two team league like Scotland is the extreme case of your argument, but I'm happy for you to make it. First, Edinbourgh are a good mid table team, so they are deserving, as my concept would have predicted, of the opportunity to show can step up. Second, you can't be making a serious case that Gloucester are better based on beating them, surely. You need to read Nicks latest article on SA for a current perspective on road teams in the EPCR. Christ, you can even follow Gloucester and look at the team they put out the following week to know that those games are meaningless.


More importantly, third. Glasgow are in a league/pool with Italy, So the next team to be given a spot in my technically imperfect concept would be Benneton. To be fair to my idea that's still in it's infancy, I haven't given any thought to those 'two team' leagues/countries yet, and I'm not about to 😋

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.

Incorrect. You aren't obviously familiar with knockout football Finn, it's a 'one off' game. But in any case, that's not your argument. You're trying to suggest they're not better than the fourth ranked team in the Challenge Cup that hasn't already qualified in their own league, so that could be including quarter finalists. I have already given you an example of a team that is the first to get knocked out by the champions not getting a fair ranking to a team that loses to one of the worst of the semi final teams (for example).

Sharks are better

There is just so much wrong with your view here. First, the team that you are knocking out for this, are the Stormers, who weren't even in the Challenge Cup. They were the 7th ranked team in the Champions Cup. I've also already said there is good precedent to allow someone outside the league table who was heavily impacted early in the season by injury to get through by winning Challenge Cup. You've also lost the argument that Sharks qualify as the third (their two best are in my league qualification system) South African team (because a SAn team won the CC, it just happened to be them) in my system. I'm doubt that's the last of reasons to be found either.


Your system doesn't account for performance or changes in their domestic leagues models, and rely's heavily on an imperfect and less effective 'winner takes all' model.

Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't.

No your systems doesn't. Not all the time/circumstances. You literally just quoted me describing how they aren't going to care about Challenge Cup if they are already qualifying through league performance. They are also not going to hinder their chance at high seed in the league and knockout matches, for the pointless prestige of the Challenge Cup.


My idea fixes this by the suggesting that say a South African or Irish side would actually still have some desire to win one of their own sides a qualification spot if they win the Challenge Cup though. I'll admit, its not the strongest incentive, but it is better than your nothing. I repeat though, if your not balance entries, or just my assignment, then obviously winning the Challenge Cup should get you through, but your idea of 4th place getting in a 20 team EPCR? Cant you see the difference lol


Not even going to bother finishing that last paragraph. 8 of 10 is not an equal share.

126 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Will Bristol's daredevil 'Bears-ball' deliver the trophy they crave? Will Bristol's daredevil 'Bears-ball' deliver the trophy they crave?
Search