Kyle Sinckler issues 'chilled-out demeanour' warning about Samoa
Kyle Sinckler has warned England not to be fooled by the laid-back off-field nature of Samoa, this Saturday’s Pool D Rugby World Cup opponents in Lille.
Steve Borthwick’s side have already qualified for an October 15 quarter-final fixture in Marseille with a game to spare, but tighthead Sinckler has issued an appeal for his teammates to be careful given his experiences at Bristol with Samoan pair Steven Luatua and Chris Vui, whom he faces this weekend.
“They are both pretty chilled out, they don’t say too much,” he explained. “Both have leadership roles at Bristol. Don’t tend to say too much, more lead with their actions.
"Two massively physical players, great lineout options, great hands, good offloading skills, but honestly couldn’t be any more different than they are off the rugby field, literally the most chilled our personalities you will ever meet. They are really, really cool guys.
“When I first joined Bristol there was a big Pacific Islander culture. You have Pat (Lam, director of rugby) and you had Alapati (Leiua), John Afoa, Steve Luatua, Chris Vui, Charles Piutau, Charles’ brother (Siale), there was a big islander influence and with Semi (Radradra), Siva (Naulago) and my time just in rugby, you always are around Pacific Islanders so you kind of have a general idea and one of those things – especially up front – is they are extremely physical.
“Don’t be fooled by their nice demeanour and chilled-out demeanour, they can definitely flick the switch and when it is time to go, those guys can really go. It’s going to be a big test for the team that goes out there on Saturday against a hugely physical Samoa side.
“All our focus is on the Samoa game, we don’t want to look too far ahead because the moment you take your eye off the ball, that is kind of when you get in a bit of trouble. It’s great for me personally to be here, to be a part of the team. The last three games we have gone very well but the job in hand is Samoa and that is all our focus.”
Sinckler added that Luatua and Vui were immensely useful in helping him to settle when first arrived at Bristol in 2020. “100 per cent. Even though Surrey to Bristol is only an hour and a half, two hours, at that time in my life that was a huge move for me. All I knew growing up was Harlequins and living in London or Surrey where the training ground was, and then to move to Bristol was huge.
“Those guys, Chris, Steve, Pat and your Bristolians like your Joe Joyces, your Callum Sheedys even though apparently he is Welsh, your Harry Randalls, those guys, Andy Urens really, really made me feel welcome.
"For me, they showed what it was like to play for Bristol because it is a real community feel and, to be honest, I couldn’t speak more highly of Steve and Chris, they are really stand-up guys and they have always made me feel welcome ever since I joined Bristol.”
Regarding the presence of former All Blacks forward Luatua in the Samoan ranks, Sinckler reckoned the change in the Test rugby eligibility rules is a positive for the sport.
“Knowing Stevie personally, I know it means a lot to him and Charles as well who made the decision to go back and play for Tonga. Knowing those guys it was more about giving back to their community and where they are from.
“Obviously massively appreciative to play for the All Blacks but the sense I got from those guys was that they wanted to give something back to their community.
"If you just look at the Tonga game against South Africa and how competitive those guys were, look at Samoa in the World Cup and how competitive that team has been, it’s nothing but good for rugby those guys coming back and strengthening those so-called tier two nations.
“It doesn’t feel like that when you are playing against these teams every test match is highly competitive but when you have the likes of Charles and Steve Luatua, Charlie Faumuina has come back to play for them, (Christian) Leali'ifano etc, etc, these guys are world-class players. It’s good to see and it’s good for rugby.”
By coincidence, England will have Manu Tuilagi in their ranks, coming up against the country of his birth and a Samoa team his brothers represented in the past. “Manu has been around the block for a while now but he has never actually played against Samoa so I think he is looking forward to it and it should be fun.”
Latest Comments
Don’t pay a blind bit of notice to Lukie… he likes the sound of his own voice and is always looking for something controversial to say. He has been banging on about Leinster's defensive system all season like he knows something Jacques Nienebar doesn’t. Which is the reason why he didn’t apply for the job obviously
Go to commentsI’m all for speeding up the game. But can we be certain that the slowness of the game contributed to fans walking out? I’m not so sure. Super rugby largely suffered from most fans only being able to, really, follow the games played in their own time zone. So at least a third of the fan base wasn’t engaged at any point in time. As a Saffer following SA teams in the URC - I now watch virtually every European game played on the weekend. In SR, I wouldn’t be bothered to follow the games being played on the other side of the world, at weird hours, if my team wasn’t playing. I now follow the whole tournament and not just the games in my time zone. Second, with New Zealand teams always winning. It’s like formula one. When one team dominates, people lose interest. After COVID, with SA leaving and Australia dipping in form, SR became an even greater one horse race. Thats why I think Japan’s league needs to get in the mix. The international flavor of those teams could make for a great spectacle. But surely if we believe that shaving seconds off lost time events in rugby is going to draw fans back, we should be shown some figures that supports this idea before we draw any major conclusions. Where are the stats that shows these changes have made that sort of impact? We’ve measured down to the average no. Of seconds per game. Where the measurement of the impact on the fanbase? Does a rugby “fan” who lost interest because of ball in play time suddenly have a revived interest because we’ve saved or brought back into play a matter of seconds or a few minutes each game? I doubt it. I don’t thinks it’s even a noticeable difference to be impactful. The 20 min red card idea. Agreed. Let’s give it a go. But I think it’s fairer that the player sent off is substituted and plays no further part in the game as a consequence.
Go to comments