Ackerman hoping 11 changes will end Gloucester losing streak
Head coach Johan Ackermann insists Gloucester are on the path to recovery despite being in the midst of a four-match losing run.
The Cherry and Whites head to Harlequins for Sunday’s Gallagher Premiership clash at the Stoop looking to reignite a season that started with wins against Sale and Wasps but has since stalled.
“We didn’t play well in our last Premiership games against Leicester and Saracens, we all know that,” Ackermann said.
“We have played better in the last two weeks even though the results haven’t reflected it. But I felt that the intent was back, the urgency was there.
“So now we really have to put in an 80 minute performance. We can’t have any more excuses on a Monday morning.
“We have to make other teams be better than us, because at the moment we’ve been making mistakes and other teams capitalise on it.
“It’s now time for a performance and I know that Harlequins are going to feel the same.”
Ackermann has made 11 changes, including the return of half-backs Danny Cipriani and Joe Simpson.
Harlequins have been defeated in three of their four Premiership matches and have been hit by the loss of Mike Brown to a knee injury, with England’s most capped full-back unlikely to play again this season.
England prop Kyle Sinckler returns to the bench, however, in his first outing since being knocked out in the World Cup final against South Africa.
“It is great to have someone of the quality and experience of Kyle back in the squad,” Quins head of rugby Paul Gustard said.
“He has slotted back into training well and we look forward to seeing him back in action after a superb World Cup in Japan.”
In Sunday’s second fixture, Premiership pacesetters Bristol host London irish, who have picked Paddy Jackson at full-back.
Gloucester Rugby:
15. Tom Marshall; 14. Louis Rees-Zammit, 13. Chris Harris, 12. Mark Atkinson, 11. Ollie Thorley; 10. Danny Cipriani, 9. Joe Simpson; 1. Val Rapava-Ruskin, 2. Franco Marais, 3. Jamal Ford-Robinson; 4. Alex Craig, 5. Franco Mostert; 6. Ruan Ackermann, 7. Lewis Ludlow, 8. Ben Morgan (capt)
Replacements:
16. Corné Fourie, 17. Josh Hohneck, 18. Fraser Balmain, 19. Freddie Clarke, 20. Jake Polledri, 21. Callum Braley, 22. Billy Twelvetrees, 23. Matt Banahan
Unavailable for selection:
Ruan Dreyer, James Hanson, Willi Heinz, Jaco Kriel, Ed Slater, Henry Trinder, Owen Williams, Jason Woodward
Latest Comments
Everywhere you turn some irish journo is advocating Ireland as the greatest, reasoning that the wc is a 4 year cycle event so, they say wc doesn’t matter it’s the rugby in between that should account for the accolade. If there was no wc then some substance could be gained, however in my opinion the moment that defined Ireland’s fate against the abs was 37 phases of repeated head bashing against a brick wall. If a change in strategy or a tinker with the game plan was executed then things could've been vastly different. And to point a finger the let down was in the hands of the number 10.
Go to commentsI have heard it asked if RA is essentially one of the part owners and I suppose therefor should be on the other side of these two parties. If they purchased the rebels and guaranteed them, and are responsible enough they incur Rebels penalties, where is this line drawn? Seems rough to have to pay a penalty for something were your involvement sees you on the side of the conned party, the creditors. If the Rebels directors themselves have given the club their money, 6mil worth right, why aren’t they also listed as sitting with RA and the Tax office? And the legal threat was either way, new Rebels or defunct, I can’t see how RA assume the threat was less likely enough to warrant comment about it in this article. Surely RA ignore that and only worry about whether they can defend it or not, which they have reported as being comfortable with. So in effect wouldn’t it be more accurate to say there is no further legal threat (or worry) in denying the deal. Unless the directors have reneged on that. > Returns of a Japanese team or even Argentinean side, the Jaguares, were said to be on the cards, as were the ideas of standing up brand new teams in Hawaii or even Los Angeles – crazy ideas that seemingly forgot the time zone issues often cited as a turn-off for viewers when the competition contained teams from South Africa. Those timezones are great for SR and are what will probably be needed to unlock its future (cant see it remaining without _atleast _help from Aus), day games here are night games on the West Coast of america, were potential viewers triple, win win. With one of the best and easiest ways to unlock that being to play games or a host a team there. Less good the further across Aus you get though. Jaguares wouldn’t be the same Jaguares, but I still would think it’s better having them than keeping the Rebels. The other options aren’t really realistic 25’ options, no. From reading this authors last article I think if the new board can get the investment they seem to be confident in, you keeping them simply for the amount of money they’ll be investing in the game. Then ditch them later if they’re not good enough without such a high budget. Use them to get Jaguares reintergration stronger, with more key players on board, and have success drive success.
Go to comments