1
Springbok Handre Pollard to make long-awaited return for Tigers
By Tom Vinicombe
Handre Pollard, one of the most highly anticipated Premiership signings of the 2022-23 season will make his starting debut for Leicester on Friday night when the Tigers take on Sale.
Pollard has made just a solitary appearance for Leicester since coming on board at the start of the season, featuring off the bench in a 51-18 loss to Saracens in October. The experienced Springboks playmaker has been sidelined since his Premiership debut, with a knee injury first suffered during the Rugby Championship flaring up in the defeat.
Friday night's fixture at Salford City Stadium will mark the final match of the calendar year for both sides.
Pollard's inclusion at No 10 is the only change new coach Richard Wigglesworth has made to the match-day squad from last weekend’s league win over Gloucester at Mattioli Woods Welford Road.
Pollard’s inclusion sees Freddie Burns shift to the bench.
Second-rower Calum Green, who is also included among the replacements, is in line for his 100th Leicester Tigers appearance.
Pollard will line up opposite in-form Sale playmaker Rob du Preez, who one international appearance for the Springboks to his name.
With Pollard sidelined and Elton Jantjies also unavailable, South Africa relied upon the inexperienced Damian Willemse in the No 10 jersey throughout the latter stages of the Rugby Championship as well as the team's northern tour, with youngster Mannie Libok also earning minutes at flyhalf throughout November.
With 63 Test caps to his name, Pollard's return to action will be welcome news for both Springboks and Tigers supporters.
Friday's clash between the second-placed Sharks and fourth-placed Tigers is due to kick off at 7:45pm.
Leicester Tigers:
15 Freddie Steward [63]
14 Anthony Watson [9]
13 Guy Porter [52]
12 Dan Kelly [47]
11 Harry Potter [52]
10 Handré Pollard [1]
9 Jack van Poortvliet (vc) [56]
1 James Whitcombe [31]
2 Charlie Clare [64]
3 Dan Cole (vc) [301]
4 Harry Wells [167]
5 Ollie Chessum [39]
6 Hanro Liebenberg (c) [71]
7 Tommy Reffell [87]
8 Olly Cracknell [11]
REPLACEMENTS
16 Gabriel Oghre [2]
17 Nephi Leatigaga [75]
18 Joe Heyes [110]
19 Calum Green [99]
20 Sean Jansen [11]
21 Ben Youngs [290]
22 Freddie Burns [113]
23 Chris Ashton [22]
Trending on RugbyPass
2
Stuart Hogg addresses rumours of rugby return
3
'Bulls***': Ex-England international calls out Eben Etzebeth
4
Black Ferns Sevens coach provides update on injured duo
5
Latest Comments
Who got the benefits out of Schmidt, Lowe, Aki, and Gibson Park?
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