After some basic housekeeping by Mike Scott and a quick ‘testing 1, 2’ of the microphone, off we went. 

The first question encompassed the disappointing start to the season and the dual roles of Mark Evans.  Should ME appoint a new head coach and bottle washer?

“No, or else I would have done it already wouldn’t I?”, was the short answer.  To elaborate a bit, Mark went on to say that this particular question would always arise if results go the wrong way.  “There would always be a feeling among the support base that I am doing too  much and should appoint someone else to do the [coaching] job, but I’ll stand by my record: 11^th, 9^th, 7^th, 6^th in the ZP and two European cups with, what most commentators in the game would term, not the most star-studded, well-resourced side in the ZP.  When I feel that I can appoint someone who can do better, I will appoint them.  Until then, if people don’t like it – tough.”

The follow up question was aimed at the players. Are the bottles dirty... do we need a new head coach and bottle washer?

Andre took the microphone and gave the captain’s view on the question of not enough coaches and bottle washers.

“There was a massive improvement at Newcastle [and there was you know; I saw it!]  The players need time to get used to the new defensive system . . .  but the way forward is to defend as we are doing.  We will see the rewards as the season moves on.  We have not had the desired start but we’ve only lost one home match.  We will progress up the ladder to a position that we want to be in.  We have the ability to achieve that . . .  and the players stand by Mark Evans.” 

We seem to concede a lot of penalties.  Could Mark Evans comment on our style of play and Rob Andrew’s comments at the weekend?

[You bet he could!]  “John Wells has rung me and is very upset.  He doesn’t like anyone but Leicester being called cynical [tee hee] . . .  we actually have had the lowest penalty count in the ZP for two years running . . .  no, London Irish shaved us by 3 last year.  To say that we are an undisciplined side is ‘nonsense’ [he wanted to use one of those asterisk words, but he’s too polite] . . .  the statistics don’t back it up . . .  on Sunday we got on the end of a pretty inept refereeing display.  The penalty count was 18-7 and 10-1 in the crucial third quarter of the match.” 

Now onto Rob Andrew:

“Rob did well for his team, shouting on the touchline, affecting the way the game was refereed.  He’s a good lad for a beer but he’s got a track record for this kind of thing . . .  it’s never his team – always someone else’s fault.  They never looked like scoring a try in open play from here [or Sunday] until next Tuesday.  If they had lost he would have gone from saint to sinner in 80 minutes.  It was a big game: Jonny back from injury; Matt Burke’s debut; first home game . . . Rob’s Rob: that’s what he does.  It’s laughable frankly and could have been a Code of Conduct Violation but we don't want to get into that sort of thing “

Borthwick’s out for this weekend’s match.  Are you going to miss the fun you had with him last season?

Simon M:  “It was good fun, but Bobby Fiddler’s not a bad replacement.  They are very technical in the line-out and you’ve got to work hard to get your own ball, let alone steal theirs.  We will miss him though; we’ve got a special soft spot for him.”  [Ah, ain’t that sweet? ;o)] 

Andre then asked Simon to reveal what he said to Borthwick when Simon Keogh scored the winning try in the game on 2^nd May. 

Simon declined to give us his actual words but said he enjoyed telling Borthwick how pleased he was with the win. 

Next onto everyone’s favourite man on the pitch: the referee! How do you pick yourselves up when it’s obvious that decisions are going against you?

Gavin: “Sometimes . . .  [the mike died at this point; lots of fiddling around] OK, sometimes you can . . . [splutter from the mike; Gavin told ‘just shout!’]  SOMETIMES, you can think you’re hard-done-by.  On Sunday when the referee had given the penalty try, Andre got us in a huddle by the posts and told us we had to play to the ref.  You can’t get frustrated or it can have a snowball effect.  You have to keep smiling at him and every now and again you get a call that goes your way . . . and it goes 50/50 at the end of the day.

Jeremy: “You have got to get on with it . . . detach emotionally, and even more so when it’s going against you.  On Sunday the referee couldn’t even tell us what the penalty try was for [that gives you confidence in some officials doesn’t it?]  but you have to control what you can control.”

We have a new scrum half for a short period of time.  Could you explain the reasoning behind that?  Will it disrupt our current scrum halfs?

Over to Mark: “We would love to have Mat Henjak for the whole year, he will be the Wallabies’ next scrum half, but he’s contracted to the Brumbies.  The original way we had the scrum halves planned didn’t come to fruition.  It’s risky to run the squad with just two scrum halfs.  With Simon Keogh in the squad most weeks it leaves us exposed.  Most sides have a starter, an understudy and a youngster.  We have Steven So’oialo (who’s getting better with each game) and Simon Keogh (a very talented half back) so you would normally go for a youngster, but we thought we’d try to look at it a different way.  There’s only one country where we could get a class half back not contracted at this time.  A large number of our games are gone by December.  You have played over half the season.  We had the opportunity to look in Australia to see if there was someone who would fit the profile.  Henjak was a lad who was very young who had not had a lot of rugby, and so we gave Eddie Jones a call and told him that we had a spot where Henjak could come and compete for a place. I felt that signing a test player for 13/14 games was better value than a club player for the whole season.”

Following on from this question on No. 9s: Simon Keogh left Leinster because he wasn't playing at his preferred position of scrum half, are we not in danger of losing him because he’s not playing scrum half?

Mark:  Simon Keogh left Leinster because he wasn’t playing at all.  Harlequins represented an opportunity.  Lots of players we have signed were not getting a start at their former clubs, think of Will Greenwood at Leicester, Mel Deane at Sale, I could go on but it would be boring.  Simon wants to be in the team.  He wants to play.  He’d rather be on the wing in the first XV than playing scrum half for the 2nds.  You’ve got to be sensitive to a player’s needs, but I’ll play them where I think they should play.”

Would you prefer to play Munster at Twickenham or the Stoop?  This question was directed to the players.

Jeremy:  “Munster would never leave Thormond Park unless they had to.  Most teams prefer to run out at home, but the Stoop won’t be the same in January . . . “

Over to Tony Copsey:  “We are hopeful of planning permission for the new West Stand.  The Munster game will be a popular game; you can tell that because we've even got half a dozen STHs who live in Limerick.  Moving the game to HQ is not giving up ‘home’ advantage . . .  Twickenham used to be home to Harlequins.  It is partly a commercial decision.  The game can attract 10,000 to 20,000 fans easily and it would be short-sighted to be at the Stoop with a capacity of 7 or 8,000 at the most.”

“We’ve learned from our experiences from the London Double Header.  We know that we can block supporters together so that we will be able to put our STHs/members etc together.”  

The plans for the new stand are ambitious.  Do these plans mean you have less money available for your squad?

Mark: “Harlequins works very simply: we don’t lose money and I’m fully supportive of that policy.  We are not dependent on patronage.  We are a business and we keep the business afloat £100k either way.  This can depend on things like a good Cup run.  If you believe that the game will continue to grow like it has the last 10 years, if you are not in a ground of at least 15,000 capacity you will not be in the frame . . . unless you have someone who can fund financial losses so long as you win games.

We have been funded generously during a period when we lost millions of pounds.  When I was appointed I was told that had to stop.  The Board said “spend less; do better.

It’s not a question of diverting money from the playing squad.  The new stand will be financed by the sale of land and bank debt.  We couldn’t finance £8 million of debt but we can finance £5 million.  As for the squad, it comes down to how much we can spend and not lose money.  We can spend up to the point where we don’t lose money overall.  There are other clubs who spend more on players than we do and a few spend less.  We don't pay money into offshore accounts, much to the players' disappointment and we don't pay money to the players through sponsors. We are completely transparent and the day we’re not, I’ll go.”

I'm expecting Quins to have good runs in the HC and PG cups, and will be up there in the play-offs at the end of the season, but having Internationals in the squad, how will the club cope with restriction on the number of games players can play?

Mark: “We only have Will G in the EPS (England Players’ Scheme).  Of the 22 games we have, 6 clash with England games so he can only play in 16 of our games (provided he’s picked of course) and the maximum these players can play is 32 games.   If people look at the facts, only 3 players played more than 32 games last season.  After the World Cup the players were in shock. Mentally they may have been burned out, but not physically. It’s nonsense.  The press and the England management use a particular statistic and generalise.  Charlie Hodgson hardly played last season, he went on tour with England, played three games and then had to rest when he came back! It’s crap [Quick! Asterisks!] frankly.   Most players play between 18 and 22 games a year.”

Which game are you looking forward to?

Gavin:  “It’s a cliché, but Saturday’s.  The way we performed last Sunday was an indication of how we will perform on Saturday.” [HURRAH!]

Jeremy: “I agree with Gavin – it’s Saturday’s.  I’m pretty confident that we can do the business. I am sure that wasn't the one you were expecting me to say.”

Tony C: “Munster.  I think it will be the turning point.” 

Mark: “Newcastle at home . . .” [lots of sniggers]

Andre:  “This weekend will be the be-all and end-all.  We have to do it for the supporters and for the team.  Bath matches are tough and this one will probably come down to the last 5 minutes. [Oh good – no fingernails again, and severe palpitations!]  Munster away too – I can’t wait.”

Simon M:  I agree with everyone else but I’m looking forward to playing in the Heineken Cup, I've never played in it before and it's special.”

Scotty:  “Newcastle at home.  I’ll be looking forward to continuing our conversation with Rob Andrew.” 

Can we please have Ref-Link wired up to Mark Evans for the Newcastle game?

Mark : “I’m very quiet during a match.  If people want club officials to run up and down the touchline shouting, swearing and gesticulating, then we’ll all do it.  What they’re doing is not trying to change a decision that's just been given but perhaps the next one or the decision after that.  Rob Andrew should have been sent to the stand, in other sports he would have been.  [Yeah! Bin him]  It will be a sad day when rugby’s culture includes that sort of behaviour.  Rugby’s ethos shouldn’t incorporate that sort of thing, but if it does, then I’ll join in!”

Who’s the ref on Saturday?

Mark : “Chris White”. 

Now Mark rates Mr White and he’s arguably one of the best referees in the world. From a Quins point of view though, I’ll be hoping he doesn’t repeat his performances of 4 April 2003 or 22 February 2004! 

In relation to refereeing, other sides appear to play the referee better than we do – do you agree?

Mark : “I think Andre Vos is a master at it . . .  “

Andre:  “That’s a hard one to answer.  It’s something for us to look at but we don’t want to be a side who tries to get away with too much [but I thought we were cynical and nasty and . . .].  As a team you should not go out there and try to get away with stuff you shouldn’t get away with.”

Mark went on to talk about how some refereeing decisions go your way and others don’t; for example: “We owe the 2001 Shield to a decision by Nigel Whitehouse and we lost the Powergen because of Lander [wash out your mouth, please!].  Montferrand thought they had been hard-done-by in May and they probably have a point. [No, no, no – anyway, that guy punched Jason so serves him right :o)].  Decisions don’t even out over the course of a game but they do over the season.  Obviously you don’t want a bad decision in a one-off final because you can’t get that back.” 

Nearly finished now . . .

Who from the squad would you least like to share in room with and why? 

Simon M: “Ace – he's the worst snorer.  You probably don’t want to be in the next room either, about three rooms away from Ace is where you want to be.” 

Jeremy:  “I don’t know the players yet.”

Gavin: “Simon Keogh – he asks 100 questions before he goes to sleep.  He’s too nosey.”

Jeremy: “Yes, Simon Keogh.” 

On that note, we thanked the panel very much and headed off to our respective homes, looking forward, I hope, to getting behind the team on Saturday and doing our bit to spur them on to a win!

Bookmark or share this story with:

• Digg
• Delicious
• Facebook
• Reddit
• Stumbleupon

SPORTNETWORK SPECIALS