Bath
HEAVENS ABOVE – NORTHAMPTON SAINTS V BATH
Underhill: return?
By Rokobilly
January 3 2025
And as the New Year turns the corner, so does the Premiership. Half the season is gone so we return to the opening day fixtures albeit in reverse.Back in September, the build-up to the game was all about a Twickenham reprisal. Bath were out for revenge or so it was said. True or not, it was a strong Blue, Black and White performance that day. I recall Will Butt ripping holes through midfield with particular fondness.Fast forward four months and eight games and Bath have won a further seven matches. Saints have won just four of their nine. 19 points and seven places separate the two sides in the table.A banker away win for Bath then? Maybe not. There are signs the Saints may be stirring.
Northampton have won 3 of their last 4 - including beating Castres and Bulls in Europe, the latter at altitude in South Africa (the contradiction in that sentence is not lost on me!). In the Premiership, a home thrashing of Newcastle followed a (not unusual) loss away at Sarries. Confidence will be building, perhaps linked to the return of their talismanic scrum-half Alex Mitchell.
As an aside, with Six Nations selection on the horizon, Mitchell v Spencer this week will be a very interesting sub-plot. Especially with the re-emergence of Raffi Quirke as a possible bolter for one of Steve Borthwick's less settled positions.
Last weekend’s 61-0 shellacking of Falcons by Saints mirrored Bath's own 68-point drubbing of Saracens. Both home victories were simultaneously impressive and caveated. For all the excellence and ruthlessness on show, the visiting teams had rotated players to target other games and then also lost significant personnel to injury in the early stages. Falcons lost three players to late pre kick-off withdrawals. Definitive conclusions are thus hard to draw.
Perhaps instead we need to look ahead for clues about how the teams may approach this Sunday. Europe returns the following weekend and it may be that Saints are prioritising that competition. A strong seeding for the knockouts is within their grasp.
Their next cup game is away at Stade Francais - 0 from 2 so far in Europe and struggling in the Top 14. It's a very winnable fixture. Following that Munster head to Franklin Gardens. One imagines that is a big target for Saints. I don't expect significant rotation this weekend from Saints but it doesn't hurt to play an opposition fighting on two fronts.
Bath, who are clearly prioritising League over Cup have Clermont at home, Leinster away and then back to the Prem for Sale away pre-6 Nations. This is a key test of our squad depth, conditioning and JVG's management. All have been excellent to date - an acceptable blip at Benetton excepted.
I hope we go full bore at the Gardens this week with a few tweaks to freshen things up. Perhaps Underhill, Bayliss and Reid starting. Maybe Max instead of Cam. A front row reshuffle.
We will want to put in a show at home against Clermont but I can see JVG prioritising Sale over Leinster in a game where both sides will be missing England players.
These next four weeks are critical. The last chance to set up your club's season. Another lengthy international hiatus follows. When we return in late March, the days will be longer and it's very much the business end of the season.
I'd love two away wins in the League to leave us in pole position for the title challenge. That all starts on Sunday afternoon. COYB!
Digg
Delicious
Facebook
Reddit
StumbleuponHEAVENS ABOVE – NORTHAMPTON SAINTS V BATH. Team's up!
Discussion started by Comeonmylovers.co.uk (IP Logged), 03/01/2025 08:19
03/01/2025 08:19
What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:08:10:11:45 by hasta.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:08:10:11:45 by hasta.
Thanks Roko -good write up.
Well done to Roko for stepping up.
We still need an author for the Leinster match (18 Jan), step forward volunteers please!
PG
(hasta -please confirm any other gaps needing filling)
Well done to Roko for stepping up.
We still need an author for the Leinster match (18 Jan), step forward volunteers please!
PG
(hasta -please confirm any other gaps needing filling)
Good report
It is getting intriguing. As Roko says win at Saints and Sale.......two very big asks and we close in on a home play off.
Lose both and we will be in the pack.
In JVG we trust
It is getting intriguing. As Roko says win at Saints and Sale.......two very big asks and we close in on a home play off.
Lose both and we will be in the pack.
In JVG we trust
Hopefully Quirke has turned SBs head and Sale can be without him on 29th Jan...he was excellent vs Bristol, played Randall off the pitch (and maybe / hopefully the England squad?).
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:BathMatt53
Hopefully Quirke has turned SBs head and Sale can be without him on 29th Jan...he was excellent vs Bristol, played Randall off the pitch (and maybe / hopefully the England squad?).
I doubt it Matt, SB doesn't like change unless forced by injury but you are right on Quirke who is also very aware of his weaknesses. Now Andy Farrell's selections for the Lions will be interesting, Who will the Lions 9 be? Could be a surprise on the way.
Team Up (7 forward bench!)
Bath Rugby: 1 Beno Obano, 2 Tom Dunn, 3 Will Stuart, 4 Quinn Roux, 5 Ross Molony, 6 Guy Pepper, 7 Miles Reid, 8 Alfie Barbeary, 9 Ben Spencer, 10 Finn Russell, 11 Will Muir, 12 Max Ojomoh, 13 Ollie Lawrence, 14 Joe Cokanasiga, 15 Orlando Bailey.
Replacements: 16 Kepu Tuipulotu, 17 Francois van Wyk, 18 Thomas du Toit, 19 Charlie Ewels, 20 Sam Underhill, 21 Louis Schreuder, 22 Josh Bayliss, 23 Jaco Coetzee.
PG
Bath Rugby: 1 Beno Obano, 2 Tom Dunn, 3 Will Stuart, 4 Quinn Roux, 5 Ross Molony, 6 Guy Pepper, 7 Miles Reid, 8 Alfie Barbeary, 9 Ben Spencer, 10 Finn Russell, 11 Will Muir, 12 Max Ojomoh, 13 Ollie Lawrence, 14 Joe Cokanasiga, 15 Orlando Bailey.
Replacements: 16 Kepu Tuipulotu, 17 Francois van Wyk, 18 Thomas du Toit, 19 Charlie Ewels, 20 Sam Underhill, 21 Louis Schreuder, 22 Josh Bayliss, 23 Jaco Coetzee.
PG
7-1! Love it!
I love Mojo starting on a fast Franklins Gardens track and have always liked the idea of Orlando at 15- just hope TdG is nothing serious. And Kepu on the bench too.
Should be a fun, open game- of course, would love the W but a bonus point or two wouldn't be the end of the world.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
I love Mojo starting on a fast Franklins Gardens track and have always liked the idea of Orlando at 15- just hope TdG is nothing serious. And Kepu on the bench too.
Should be a fun, open game- of course, would love the W but a bonus point or two wouldn't be the end of the world.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Blimey 7-1 Split!!
Is that the first time in the Premiership?
Widcombe Garçon
Is that the first time in the Premiership?
Widcombe Garçon
Good team
Was hoping we'd see Max start. Josh Bayliss' Kwagga Smith transformation continues
Was hoping we'd see Max start. Josh Bayliss' Kwagga Smith transformation continues
TDG injured? Cover for 9, 10, 12 and 13 with Bailey in the team....but what happens if a back three go off - Schreuder plays in any of those positions I guess. Indicates we're going for a more limited game plan?
15 George Hendy
14 Tommy Freeman
13 Fraser Dingwall (c)
12 Rory Hutchinson
11 James Ramm
10 Fin Smith
9 Alex Mitchell
1 Tom West
2 Curtis Langdon
3 Trevor Davison
4 Temo Mayanavanua
5 Alex Coles
6 Josh Kemeny
7 Tom Pearson
8 Juarno Augustus
Replacements:
16 Henry Walker
17 Tarek Haffar
18 Luke Green
19 Tom Lockett
20 Henry Pollock
21 Angus Scott-Young
22 Archie McParland
23 Ollie Sleightholme
14 Tommy Freeman
13 Fraser Dingwall (c)
12 Rory Hutchinson
11 James Ramm
10 Fin Smith
9 Alex Mitchell
1 Tom West
2 Curtis Langdon
3 Trevor Davison
4 Temo Mayanavanua
5 Alex Coles
6 Josh Kemeny
7 Tom Pearson
8 Juarno Augustus
Replacements:
16 Henry Walker
17 Tarek Haffar
18 Luke Green
19 Tom Lockett
20 Henry Pollock
21 Angus Scott-Young
22 Archie McParland
23 Ollie Sleightholme
Quote:Widcombe boy
Blimey 7-1 Split!!
Is that the first time in the Premiership?
Yes not sure about that. Bayliss into the backs if needed?
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Yes Bayliss is your wing replacement, but one I'd imagine a fresh Sleightholme might relish. Otherwise you'd imagine Spencer covers 15 if the worst happens and Finn is forced off
Very intriguing to see the 7-1 split, whilst I think Bayliss has the raw attributes to do a job in the backline, arguably the prime candidate would be Ted Hill given he's supposedly one of the quickest in the squad (including backs).
Current forecast is looking pretty damp at 3pm on Sunday, so I'm all for a "stuff it up your jumper" style gameplan.
TDT and FVW off the bench could be pivotal.
Current forecast is looking pretty damp at 3pm on Sunday, so I'm all for a "stuff it up your jumper" style gameplan.
TDT and FVW off the bench could be pivotal.
Not a fan tbh. We’ve gone for a huge team even with some absent first choices, so clearly planning on winning away from home. But we are one early injury away from it all going a bit wrong. IMO, Finn and Spencer play too many minutes as it is. Surely we have a backs option? Is Cam out, Butt I think is back fit, Harris - is he back, we could recall Henessey or give one of the young wingers a go? Which makes me think it’s a choice. Are Saints really that big and bruising up front after they lost 3 key men in the pack last year?
I think it's a choice. And the choice gives us the opportunity to bring Bayliss, Coetzee and Underhill off the bench to keep the power on, especially at the breakdown, and win the game in the final quarter.
Of course, an injury in the first 20 MIGHT cause big problems but I think, on the flip side, it's an innovative move that seeks to maximise ever further one of our strengths (back row power). It's very South African- and whilst I'm not a huge fan of theirs at international level, they win big games, and seeing the BB&W borrow from their approach and crank the power up to 11 is, imo, exciting. I also like how it focuses on us (not the opposition) and accentuates the positive, rather than the negative.
Allez Bath. Would be a (another) huge statement win...
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:03:13:30:41 by dr.bath1865.
Of course, an injury in the first 20 MIGHT cause big problems but I think, on the flip side, it's an innovative move that seeks to maximise ever further one of our strengths (back row power). It's very South African- and whilst I'm not a huge fan of theirs at international level, they win big games, and seeing the BB&W borrow from their approach and crank the power up to 11 is, imo, exciting. I also like how it focuses on us (not the opposition) and accentuates the positive, rather than the negative.
Allez Bath. Would be a (another) huge statement win...
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:03:13:30:41 by dr.bath1865.
Saints have gone 6:2 so it's not going to cause that much of a swing
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:03:15:00:45 by by.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:03:15:00:45 by by.
But say Finn goes off after 5 mins...
Schreuder on at 9 > Bailey to 10 > Spencer to 15? Or Spencer to 10? So you would lose 10, have your best 9 not at 9 and / or some other similar mish mash...
Whatever happens, for me its just too disruptive. The benefits of an extra forward on the bench are not greater than the loss of backs continuity from a single injury IMO.
I just hope its not a gamble too far.
as always...COYB!
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Schreuder on at 9 > Bailey to 10 > Spencer to 15? Or Spencer to 10? So you would lose 10, have your best 9 not at 9 and / or some other similar mish mash...
Whatever happens, for me its just too disruptive. The benefits of an extra forward on the bench are not greater than the loss of backs continuity from a single injury IMO.
I just hope its not a gamble too far.
as always...COYB!
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Ted Hill I believe picked up a niggle hence his removal last weekend and TdG has picked up little knocks in the last 2 games - JvG rests players to let their bodies recover which makes a lot of sense - Josh Bayliss is really rapid and given the weather conditions I would not expect a feast of fast flowing rugby - TBF to Saints they have tried to counter Bath's power with the likes of Augustus starting instead of Pollock, and they have gone full bore - no resting players for next weeks Champions Cup - they also know lose this one and effectively their Premiership is run which is never great as defending champions.
The bench will be so important once again. It is that thought of having Van Wyk(who will want to perform against his former club), Tdt, Jaco Coetzee, Sam Underhill, Charlie Ewels and Josh Bayliss coming on would put the fear of god into any set of coaches - and super excited to see Kepu perform in that company. I have to say Louis Schreuder has really impressed me this season.
Just hope the official is up to the contest - Mr Woodthorpe just always looks lost and out of his depth every time I see him officiate - less we forget the fiasco at Quins last season.
The bench will be so important once again. It is that thought of having Van Wyk(who will want to perform against his former club), Tdt, Jaco Coetzee, Sam Underhill, Charlie Ewels and Josh Bayliss coming on would put the fear of god into any set of coaches - and super excited to see Kepu perform in that company. I have to say Louis Schreuder has really impressed me this season.
Just hope the official is up to the contest - Mr Woodthorpe just always looks lost and out of his depth every time I see him officiate - less we forget the fiasco at Quins last season.
TBF I am not sure that was all down to Woodthorpe. It was a timekeeper's error and the 4th official allowed Herbst back on, IIRC overruling Woodthorpe's query.
PG
PG
I get the benefit of an extra forward Ali, but not a single back (who isn't a utility) and only 1 player in the 23 that has played 15 before - and he's really a 10?
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Matt, unless Harris is fit we do not really have another specialist 15 who is not out on loan.
McConnochie could play there I suppose, but he has not featured at 15 for a while.
PG
McConnochie could play there I suppose, but he has not featured at 15 for a while.
PG
Blimey - 7:1 vs 6:2.
I agree with dr.bath - JvG knows a thing or two about the Springboks and if he thinks our squad is good enough to emulate their power game then that's fine by me. Conditions probably aren't going to allow for a lot of free-flowing rugby anyway.
We have two of the best tactical kickers in Europe at 9 an 10. So with that selection of forwards, I'm excited to see how we go (Horse and Joe maybe less so).
I agree with dr.bath - JvG knows a thing or two about the Springboks and if he thinks our squad is good enough to emulate their power game then that's fine by me. Conditions probably aren't going to allow for a lot of free-flowing rugby anyway.
We have two of the best tactical kickers in Europe at 9 an 10. So with that selection of forwards, I'm excited to see how we go (Horse and Joe maybe less so).
I would imagine Matt - JvG, Lee Blackett & Co have looked closely at the weather forecast which has deteriorated during the week, indeed my weather app is stating 100% chance of rain and very cold - this factor may well have decided squad selection, game management and power.
As much as I love seeing us run the ball - the area I would say Finn has really developed and brought to the squad (especially Ben Spencer) is game management, however Matt you are right it is a risk.
As much as I love seeing us run the ball - the area I would say Finn has really developed and brought to the squad (especially Ben Spencer) is game management, however Matt you are right it is a risk.
In JvG we trust, but I really don't get 7:1. Maybe we'll be continuing to say what a genius he is come the final whistle. We'll know on Sunday
If the forecast is correct and it turns out to be a forward dominated game, I think we're more likely to lose backs to hypothermia
If the forecast is correct and it turns out to be a forward dominated game, I think we're more likely to lose backs to hypothermia
Quote:BathMatt53
But say Finn goes off after 5 mins...
Schreuder on at 9 > Bailey to 10 > Spencer to 15? Or Spencer to 10? So you would lose 10, have your best 9 not at 9 and / or some other similar mish mash...
Whatever happens, for me its just too disruptive. The benefits of an extra forward on the bench are not greater than the loss of backs continuity from a single injury IMO.
I just hope its not a gamble too far.
as always...COYB!
I’d guess Muir to 15 and then Schreuder onto the wing is more likely. Spencer would get pummelled with high balls if he were to go back there and Freeman and Hendy are big lads and strong chasers.
Hennessy is already back at Bath from Cardiff in answer to another point.
Quote:If it works out for us, then it's fine, and I absolutely see the logic.redmix
In JvG we trust, but I really don't get 7:1. Maybe we'll be continuing to say what a genius he is come the final whistle. We'll know on Sunday
If the forecast is correct and it turns out to be a forward dominated game, I think we're more likely to lose backs to hypothermia
It's just too high a risk for me - especially in these concussion days where a relatively innocuous event can lose you a player to a failed HIA.
I don't like the 6:2 bench, as it's too risky, I'll never get behind the risk of a 7:1
RAEBURN SHIELD
Quote:Which TylerQuote:If it works out for us, then it's fine, and I absolutely see the logic.redmix
In JvG we trust, but I really don't get 7:1. Maybe we'll be continuing to say what a genius he is come the final whistle. We'll know on Sunday
If the forecast is correct and it turns out to be a forward dominated game, I think we're more likely to lose backs to hypothermia
It's just too high a risk for me - especially in these concussion days where a relatively innocuous event can lose you a player to a failed HIA.
I don't like the 6:2 bench, as it's too risky, I'll never get behind the risk of a 7:1
The Rule of Cool applies here.
I reckon just enjoy JvG’s Orc Army and blissfully ignore the downsides
The 6:2 bench backfired at Chiefs in last year’s Champions Cup when we lost Finn early (but we managed the game ok with OB at 10 & were leading until ……..) then lost Cam early in 2nd half with BS at 10 (& clearly ineffective there).
I hope the coaches have been practicing all scenarios & that LS & Josh have had chance in multiple positions.
Remember Saints have classy half backs & good outer backs.
In JvG we trust 🤞
I hope the coaches have been practicing all scenarios & that LS & Josh have had chance in multiple positions.
Remember Saints have classy half backs & good outer backs.
In JvG we trust 🤞
Quote:BathMatt53
I get the benefit of an extra forward Ali, but not a single back (who isn't a utility) and only 1 player in the 23 that has played 15 before - and he's really a 10?
I may be wrong, but I think Bailey played 15 for Eng U20s?
Quote:SJSQuote:BathMatt53
I get the benefit of an extra forward Ali, but not a single back (who isn't a utility) and only 1 player in the 23 that has played 15 before - and he's really a 10?
I may be wrong, but I think Bailey played 15 for Eng U20s?
Yes, he has played there and 12 when required, but certainly came through as a 10. Even the Bath squad lists him as a 10. This is his first start at 15 in 2 years.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Strangely I have this game down as a draw……in my head, in my heart it’s a bonus point win ! I sincerely hope it’s one or the other 
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Quote:theredseatQuote:Which TylerQuote:If it works out for us, then it's fine, and I absolutely see the logic.redmix
In JvG we trust, but I really don't get 7:1. Maybe we'll be continuing to say what a genius he is come the final whistle. We'll know on Sunday
If the forecast is correct and it turns out to be a forward dominated game, I think we're more likely to lose backs to hypothermia
It's just too high a risk for me - especially in these concussion days where a relatively innocuous event can lose you a player to a failed HIA.
I don't like the 6:2 bench, as it's too risky, I'll never get behind the risk of a 7:1
The Rule of Cool applies here.
I reckon just enjoy JvG’s Orc Army and blissfully ignore the downsides
100%
Its going to be tough.
Conditions (weather) will be horrendous to maintain and keep the momentum going.
FG is a bear pit, Saints support is formidable (nearly as good as a full Rec), and they seem to be coming into form. Sam Vesty formerly of 'this parish' will no doubt have an extra edge to his preparations.
Come on you Bath!
Conditions (weather) will be horrendous to maintain and keep the momentum going.
FG is a bear pit, Saints support is formidable (nearly as good as a full Rec), and they seem to be coming into form. Sam Vesty formerly of 'this parish' will no doubt have an extra edge to his preparations.
Come on you Bath!
[quote Which Tyler][quote redmix]
It's just too high a risk for me - especially in these concussion days where a relatively innocuous event can lose you a player to a failed HIA.
I don't like the 6:2 bench, as it's too risky, I'll never get behind the risk of a 7:1[/quote]
This is where I am with it WT.
I just about got comfortable with the risk 6:2 but 7:1 is a bit insane. So much that can go wrong.
Bad weather doesn't really mean you need a team of forwards- it's more important often that your 9/10/12 control field position.
It is interesting and fun but I think that will dissipate if mojo goes down 2 mins in. Bailey to 12? Muir to 15? Schreuder or bayliss on at wing?
Our wings are out and out wings which doesn't help.
Any injury in the backs will mean huge disruption (unc spencer just cos of how good he is)
It's just too high a risk for me - especially in these concussion days where a relatively innocuous event can lose you a player to a failed HIA.
I don't like the 6:2 bench, as it's too risky, I'll never get behind the risk of a 7:1[/quote]
This is where I am with it WT.
I just about got comfortable with the risk 6:2 but 7:1 is a bit insane. So much that can go wrong.
Bad weather doesn't really mean you need a team of forwards- it's more important often that your 9/10/12 control field position.
It is interesting and fun but I think that will dissipate if mojo goes down 2 mins in. Bailey to 12? Muir to 15? Schreuder or bayliss on at wing?
Our wings are out and out wings which doesn't help.
Any injury in the backs will mean huge disruption (unc spencer just cos of how good he is)
Have to see this as a calculated experiment, afforded by our position in the table, by the fact that Saints, while defending champions, are a way off Top 4, and that we've beaten them already this season. Plus, two of the Top 4 play each other this weekend.
Are we lucky that our squad health is what it is at this stage of the season? Or is there genuine confidence in our attrition rate?
I personally love it. Lose a Spencer or Russell or Lawrence when the bench is 5:3 or 6:2 and we"re taking a step down anyway so why not gamble with the remaining 4.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:04:09:33:20 by A.M 180.
Are we lucky that our squad health is what it is at this stage of the season? Or is there genuine confidence in our attrition rate?
I personally love it. Lose a Spencer or Russell or Lawrence when the bench is 5:3 or 6:2 and we"re taking a step down anyway so why not gamble with the remaining 4.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:04:09:33:20 by A.M 180.
I like the adventure......it either works.......or it doesn't........
IN JVG WE TRUST
IN JVG WE TRUST
JvG has thought this through and is prepared for the risk it seems, from CB's article “It’s the first time we’ve done it and we have a plan for this weekend but it’s not too different from having six forwards on the bench,” explained Van Graan. “We plan for all eventualities and, as a team, we’ve become very fluid. We can adapt to situations and I think games have shown that we are tough to beat.”
Like the way he is challenging players to think and its a plan B. Also might be a plan should a red card arrive in the future mid game.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Like the way he is challenging players to think and its a plan B. Also might be a plan should a red card arrive in the future mid game.
I'm sharing the fears above and, if it were anyone but JvG doing this, would have no confidence in a result. Bailey at 15 does make sense in a 7:1 split - has some experience of playing there and much better cover than forcing Max or Spencer to 10 if Finn goes off early. I'm less against 6:2 than I used to be, as at least it allows a scrum half and utility back (Mconnichie/Harris if fit/Emens or possibly Butt) whilst throwing on a bomb squad into the scrum. Seems a bit of a gamble to place all our eggs in the basket of being able to overwhelm Saints' scrum, which isn't their strength, at the expense of potential chaos at the hands of their decent set of backs and lots of high balls coming our way.
Tom de Glanville - Adopted player 2024-5
Tom de Glanville - Adopted player 2024-5
Presumably the decision was forced by availability somewhat. Is it worth putting a very young, green player on the bench who is unlikely to ever come on, or stack your bench with the best players available.
Quote:by
Presumably the decision was forced by availability somewhat. Is it worth putting a very young, green player on the bench who is unlikely to ever come on, or stack your bench with the best players available.
JvG's policy as stated above is if you are going to do it, surround them with the best and most senior players. Makes sense, to my mind a bit over protective as long as you don't throw these players to the lions week after week I think experiencing top level early is a good thing.
I am v interested to know what back options were available and how much this was forced on us- may never know.
If we were down to likes of emmens and offiah I could understand it.
If any either of butt or rmc are available it just seems a weird , unnecessary risk to me.
On a different note jvgs words on kepu are great. We used to play young guys in injury ridden squads as last options. Great he is calling out that we want to give them the best chance and he will come on with van wyk on one side and tdt on the other- love it.
Similar with sela playing as part of a mega experienced front 5 this season.
If we were down to likes of emmens and offiah I could understand it.
If any either of butt or rmc are available it just seems a weird , unnecessary risk to me.
On a different note jvgs words on kepu are great. We used to play young guys in injury ridden squads as last options. Great he is calling out that we want to give them the best chance and he will come on with van wyk on one side and tdt on the other- love it.
Similar with sela playing as part of a mega experienced front 5 this season.
Quote:Charlieboa1
If any either of butt or rmc are available it just seems a weird , unnecessary risk to me.
Isn't it just an experiment CB? Develop plan B mid season. It's an important game but not vital. proves JvG is pushing the boundaries.
Plus if you aren't going to use the backs they are less exposed to injury!
Agree Charlie - it doesn't feel plausible that these are the only 8 backs available with some experience, so must be a tactical risk. 'Weird' and 'unnecessary' sum it up for me, but let's hope we're proved wrong. In JvG we trust, I think!
Tom de Glanville - Adopted player 2024-5
Tom de Glanville - Adopted player 2024-5
Put it this way if Bath send a similar team to the one who played Saints at the begging of the season they just plan to deal with the strengths they saw that day.
Now they have a different set of players, forward based, for a game in bad weather. Saints strength is in the backs, how do they set up? They have Guy Pepper, Miles Reid, Alfie Barbeary, Sam Underhill, Josh Bayliss patrolling the breakdown in the cold. Let them worry about us, I'm for it.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Now they have a different set of players, forward based, for a game in bad weather. Saints strength is in the backs, how do they set up? They have Guy Pepper, Miles Reid, Alfie Barbeary, Sam Underhill, Josh Bayliss patrolling the breakdown in the cold. Let them worry about us, I'm for it.
Quote:Charlieboa1
I am v interested to know what back options were available and how much this was forced on us- may never know.
If we were down to likes of emmens and offiah I could understand it.
If any either of butt or rmc are available it just seems a weird , unnecessary risk to me.
On a different note jvgs words on kepu are great. We used to play young guys in injury ridden squads as last options. Great he is calling out that we want to give them the best chance and he will come on with van wyk on one side and tdt on the other- love it.
Similar with sela playing as part of a mega experienced front 5 this season.
Fairly certain it is not injury related. Depth is still strong. Grace/RMC/Emens/Offiah all available plus Donoghue.
I also I believe the injury plan will be Bayliss onto the bench no matter which back (bar 9) we lose.
Finn off then - Bailey to 10 Muir to Fullback Bayliss to wing
Centre - Bailey to centres Muir to fullback Bayliss to wing
Wingers - Bayliss straight swap
Fullback - Muir to fullback Bayliss to the wing
With things like these it’s all about looking at the upside and what can be gained from it. 6/2 is now so popular which we have been the front runners of using. With our gameplan locks and Backrow get through so much work and are vital so bringing on a virtual complete new pack just gives that edge.
It was pointed out in The Times this morning that Barbeary played centre in his youth days and after his kicking display last week, could be an option....
Overnight snow 'til 01:00, then light rain at 15:00 - [weather.metoffice.gov.uk]
Suspect JVG will look at the Sale result and feel a little more comfortable about the experiment
If its such a great idea to have lots of forwards and very few backs why not play an 8-0 bench?
As said above, if the backs have no injuries then it will be a genius decision, if they get 2 early ones then it will have looked foolhardy. We will know which in 24 hours!
(Before the large Covid benches in football I seem to remember a couple of teams not picking a goalkeeper because the backup was used so infrequently. I guess JVGs thinking is similar?)
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
As said above, if the backs have no injuries then it will be a genius decision, if they get 2 early ones then it will have looked foolhardy. We will know which in 24 hours!
(Before the large Covid benches in football I seem to remember a couple of teams not picking a goalkeeper because the backup was used so infrequently. I guess JVGs thinking is similar?)
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Given the next 2 games are irrelevant I’m surprised JvG is experimenting tomorrow.
Quote:OutsideBath
Given the next 2 games are irrelevant I’m surprised JvG is experimenting tomorrow.
When is the best time to experiment then OB?
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:OutsideBath
Given the next 2 games are irrelevant I’m surprised JvG is experimenting tomorrow.
When is the best time to experiment then OB?
Personally I’d happy to see it happen against Clermont and Leinster.
Quote:OutsideBathQuote:shipwreckedQuote:OutsideBath
Given the next 2 games are irrelevant I’m surprised JvG is experimenting tomorrow.
When is the best time to experiment then OB?
Personally I’d happy to see it happen against Clermont and Leinster.
Oh, I see, its conditions based though isn't it? Not sure JvG would do it otherwise.
Just looked at BBC weather and it doesn’t look that bad tomorrow. JvG usually makes the correct call, just surprised he’s experimenting in an important game. Maybe injuries have forced his hand?
But JvG makes it very plain that he blocked the games at the start of the season and planned his rotation around those blocks. Barring injuries he doesn't deviate as player welfare is a major focus.
[quote BathMatt53]If its such a great idea to have lots of forwards and very few backs why not play an 8-0 bench?
As said above, if the backs have no injuries then it will be a genius decision, if they get 2 early ones then it will have looked foolhardy. We will know which in 24 hours!
/quote]
Not been convinced by any arguments yet..
All HK890's scenarios are really disruptive/ not v good imho (not that i disagree with the thinking)...mainly involve someone moving to 15 who has never played there before in an away game against the champions.
As you say matt we shall see.... but in my head if it goes well all it proves to me is we got lucky and dodged a bullet.
Good it's sparked a debate I guess. I just don't get it personally.
As said above, if the backs have no injuries then it will be a genius decision, if they get 2 early ones then it will have looked foolhardy. We will know which in 24 hours!
/quote]
Not been convinced by any arguments yet..
All HK890's scenarios are really disruptive/ not v good imho (not that i disagree with the thinking)...mainly involve someone moving to 15 who has never played there before in an away game against the champions.
As you say matt we shall see.... but in my head if it goes well all it proves to me is we got lucky and dodged a bullet.
Good it's sparked a debate I guess. I just don't get it personally.
Quote:Charlieboa1
Not been convinced by any arguments yet..
All HK890's scenarios are really disruptive/ not v good imho (not that i disagree with the thinking)...mainly involve someone moving to 15 who has never played there before in an away game against the champions.
As you say matt we shall see.... but in my head if it goes well all it proves to me is we got lucky and dodged a bullet.
The only risky bit is if the weather isn't cold and wet CB.
Look how when the bomb squad came on how many points we scored in the last quarter!
You are only going to be troubled in the backs if they are being given the ball. Its clear we will kick for territory than use a power game for 5m line outs and pick and gos.
If we do get injuries Bailey is quite a physical 10/15 and running over Bayliss is not going to happen. It will be a set of backs lined up to defend.
Saints may have won last year but it's not the same squad and certainly not the same form.
The same game strategy always gets found out in the end, we need a plan B, this is it.
Just go for it ………go big or go home ! 
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
If it’s an ‘experiment’ to see if 7:1 ‘works’, then it’s doubly ridiculous. Say we get through the game without a fiasco and nab a win. What do you learn? That, if your luck is in injury-wise, 7-1 can work. But the more often you do it, the more you increase the odds of an injury-related, embarrassingly unbalanced line-up. At that point, any ‘learning’ is obsolete.
Frankly, Saints’ coaches/strategists/tacticians must be licking their lips at the opportunities such a transparent gameplan provides. They should be embarrassed if they can’t expose it. There have been some weirdly contradictory back-to-backs recently - Bristol and Sarries in particular. An early Russell injury will make us very vulnerable to a late-game implosion.
Frankly, Saints’ coaches/strategists/tacticians must be licking their lips at the opportunities such a transparent gameplan provides. They should be embarrassed if they can’t expose it. There have been some weirdly contradictory back-to-backs recently - Bristol and Sarries in particular. An early Russell injury will make us very vulnerable to a late-game implosion.
I'd just repeat its only unbalanced if you actually need to use the backs! Have you forgotten Saracens at their height where Wigglesworth box kicked the pack won penalties and Farrell kicked them?
It's a one off game plan based on the conditions.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
It's a one off game plan based on the conditions.
But you are only thinking one side of the ball SW.
We wont be flinging the ball around the backline with gay abandon in attack but we will need our backs if they are kicking loads to our back 3( actually think bayliss mat cope better than someone like emmens)
If any of 10/12/13/15 get injured we will have a 15 who has never played there.... on a day when the opposition will ask all kinds of questions of our back 3 with their kicking game.
I am with opti, I don't even see the experiment will prove much either way.
As I say it's interesting and different, has generated some debate and that's no bad thing.
If rmc or butt are fit I definitely would have picked them- rmc personally aa he's a good 15 when called upon.
Hoping we do pulverise them physically and build up a lead which means even if we hit a problem later we will be OK.
Apologies for the focus on 7:1 as there is so much to like and be excited about in that squad- the only reason it's an option is the insane pack depth we have. Hill/ richards/ staddon aren't even in the 23 when we have 9 back 5 scrum players!
We wont be flinging the ball around the backline with gay abandon in attack but we will need our backs if they are kicking loads to our back 3( actually think bayliss mat cope better than someone like emmens)
If any of 10/12/13/15 get injured we will have a 15 who has never played there.... on a day when the opposition will ask all kinds of questions of our back 3 with their kicking game.
I am with opti, I don't even see the experiment will prove much either way.
As I say it's interesting and different, has generated some debate and that's no bad thing.
If rmc or butt are fit I definitely would have picked them- rmc personally aa he's a good 15 when called upon.
Hoping we do pulverise them physically and build up a lead which means even if we hit a problem later we will be OK.
Apologies for the focus on 7:1 as there is so much to like and be excited about in that squad- the only reason it's an option is the insane pack depth we have. Hill/ richards/ staddon aren't even in the 23 when we have 9 back 5 scrum players!
I'm definitely in the 7:1 is utter madness camp. I've said so when the Saffas have done it. You are a backs injury away from disaster. What if Finn and OB have to depart the field? 6:2 is risky enough, 7:1 is just off the scale.
Personally think JvG has earned this right to 'experiment'. Fans have the right to disagree of course but pick your battles - we are currently clear at the top of the league and it's not as if we've thrown the towel in with wholesale changes.
It's also a much-needed talking point for the domestic game; a parallel between us and a double RWC-winning phenomenon. Doing this in a game - away at the current Champions (regardless of current position) - is a real statement of intent. Not exactly a game we would've picked out as a banker at the start of the season.
Yes a gamble, but if it comes off we are 8/9 clear at the top of the Prem with a Plan B straight out the Springboks' playbook. I think it's well worth a go.
It's also a much-needed talking point for the domestic game; a parallel between us and a double RWC-winning phenomenon. Doing this in a game - away at the current Champions (regardless of current position) - is a real statement of intent. Not exactly a game we would've picked out as a banker at the start of the season.
Yes a gamble, but if it comes off we are 8/9 clear at the top of the Prem with a Plan B straight out the Springboks' playbook. I think it's well worth a go.
I really do see this as unnecessary concern, storm in a tea cup even, it is a one off, I like the fact that JvG is picking teams depending on circumstances, proves he isn't system based.
Is it even JvGs idea? He takes ownership but I agree with Barboy he has earned the right. We will see at 3.00.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Is it even JvGs idea? He takes ownership but I agree with Barboy he has earned the right. We will see at 3.00.
I understand all the concerns regarding 7/1 and I guess alot of it stems back to Exeter last season. Of course it is a gamble but as others have said , this is a plan for Northampton only. Losing Lawes, Ludlam, Moon and Waller has affected Saints massively. How will they feel if it's tight at 50 mins and we unload all 7?
adopted player, 24/25 Hame Faiva. 23/24 Ted Hill. 22/23 Cam Redpath. 21/22 Max Clark. 20/21 Henry Thomas. 19/20 Max Wright. 18/19 Cooper Vuna.
adopted player, 24/25 Hame Faiva. 23/24 Ted Hill. 22/23 Cam Redpath. 21/22 Max Clark. 20/21 Henry Thomas. 19/20 Max Wright. 18/19 Cooper Vuna.
Is it your best team available today ?
ASM Clermont Auvergne supporter
ASM Clermont Auvergne supporter
Question for me is after how many minutes of Obano, Dunn and Stuart does the trio of Tuipulotu, Van Wyk and T du Toit arrive on the pitch?
Childish I know but I'm sort of excited by this!
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Childish I know but I'm sort of excited by this!
Quote:Barfboy
It's also a much-needed talking point for the domestic game.
If you over-hear a single unconverted/football/cricket/RL/no-sport fan talking about this, I will eat my hat.
On 7-1, it’s not as if every single sub automatically makes a difference anyway. Many struggle to get into the game or make any meaningful impact - how many times do the ‘player ratings’ simply list the subs as n/a.
Saying that JVG has ‘earned the right to do this’ , is basically saying ‘JVG won’t get sacked if this goes ****s up’, which of course he won’t. But no coach ‘earns the right’ to play fast and loose with players’ fitness, and this has the potential to go horribly wrong.
Plus, the notion that, when there’s a bit of rain about, all you can hope to do is stick it up your jumper feels a bit ‘Richards-Teague-Skinner’ to me.
Quote:Optimist
Saying that JVG has ‘earned the right to do this’ , is basically saying ‘JVG won’t get sacked if this goes ****s up’, which of course he won’t. But no coach ‘earns the right’ to play fast and loose with players’ fitness, and this has the potential to go horribly wrong.
That's a bit over the top Opti, JvG does exactly the opposite with players fitness which is what his rotation policy, something else that seems to annoy many on here, is all about.
He's simply made a call, a decision on selection, its what we pay HC's for. Time to destress I'd suggest respectfully.
Quote:I think this was true 10 years ago, where subs were very much 'after 65 minutes'. Now you get tactical subs within minutes of the second half kicking off (ones where it's not clear why it wasn't made at half time)Optimist
On 7-1, it’s not as if every single sub automatically makes a difference anyway. Many struggle to get into the game or make any meaningful impact - how many times do the ‘player ratings’ simply list the subs as n/a.
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect an Underhill or Du Toit or Coetzee to make an impact, especially when surrounded by basically a fresh new pack
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:05:12:53:29 by A.M 180.
Quote:Optimist
You may well be right Shipwrecked!
You can call me Shippy if you want as long as I can call you Opti, someone with 18 years of posting history is fully entitled to comment, even if you are wrong in this instance.
Chamomile tea works well I find, calms the nervous system!
Still on the bus. We are absolutely awful defensively
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Nice training ground move and Big Joe gets over
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Wow! Sensational from Bailey and Finn
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Brilliant from Bailey !
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
..and we immediately mess up a simple exit drill
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Quote:Yeah this is a class performanceJK7
Fin Smith is really staking his 6N claim here.
Don’t understand where our defensive intensity has gone
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Quote:A.M 180Quote:Yeah this is a class performanceJK7
Fin Smith is really staking his 6N claim here.
Love Marcus but he couldn't do that to Miles Reid. Wow.
Err not sure why that was a penalty- looked like Reid put that back nicely?
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Just feels like we need to stay in their half and we can get something out of this game. Lack of precision atm but eventually something will stick
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Just a silly shot from Lawrence, and to put Hendy out of the game like that leaves a bad taste
Wow some real rockets required at half time- Saints have done some great stuff but be god have we helped them!
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
A yellow card could turn this game
Keep pressure close to their line and we will earn that
Keep pressure close to their line and we will earn that
Frustrating how inefficient we’ve been more than anything there. Saints attack has had brilliant moments but we’ve given ourselves more opportunities for points and haven’t taken them. Poor Spencer pass, Barbeary getting in the way of Spencer’s support both especially annoying
It will be some game if we come back to win this one !
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Quote:A.M 180
Just a silly shot from Lawrence, and to put Hendy out of the game like that leaves a bad taste
Na, it’s what the game needed. Some niggle. Payback from the shot on Finn. Got to look after your mates.
Fix bayonets and into the trenches for the second half.
Keep it up front and grind them down with our Saffas stacked bench.
J
Really odd game. Far too loose for our liking. Smith has been class and Saints with ball in hand have been superb. Their scramble D has been amazing too. Hope he’s ok- but delighted Hendy is off!
We haven’t been bad and we’re not out of it. We’ve won a lot of games in the last quarter this year. Think we’re beginning to physically grind them down a bit and just need to keep our heads in their 22.
First score in the second half will be huge.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
We haven’t been bad and we’re not out of it. We’ve won a lot of games in the last quarter this year. Think we’re beginning to physically grind them down a bit and just need to keep our heads in their 22.
First score in the second half will be huge.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Being out tackled! Bath are bottom of 'tackles won' stats We just slip off them!
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Fair play to Saints if they can keep this intensity up for 80 mins then they deserve everything they get. Injury to Muir was always the risk but we still have some serious power to come off the bench and hopefully they will turn the game , we need to be more ruthless in their 22 though. Come on Bath .
Quote:A.M 180
A yellow card could turn this game
Keep pressure close to their line and we will earn that
Yeah that would be my one criticism of the ref - at the very least he should have given Saints a warning after multiple penalties
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Quote:shipwrecked
Being out tackled! Bath are bottom of 'tackles won' stats We just slip off them!
Is that due to our system? Surprise stat that, doesn’t feel like we’re (normally) a poor defensive side
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Line out not going well again
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
More penalties ……No yellow card ?
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Looks like we are starting to outmatch them physically which makes soft penalties even more frustrating
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Super score - about time people recognised just how much Underhill has added to his game, that pass was superb
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
We’ve blown yet another great position due to a malfunctioning line out
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
They have just run into each other- a lot of refs would feel pressured to give something there
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Well done ref - put the TMO back in his box for that nonsense. Somebody should be having a word with him about that later.
Quote:A.M 180
It's a forward pass to Langdon for goodness sake
Thought I was going mad or blind - I thought that
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
I was about to say our comeback has been hamstrung by TdT and Coetzee going off (Alfie looks knackered) but Miles and Joe to the rescue!
Another utterly dull not needed penalty when Saints are going backwards
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Quote:and simultaneously, were the best in the league for tries scored against, and the best in the league for points scored against.shipwrecked
Being out tackled! Bath are bottom of 'tackles won' stats We just slip off them!
Pick your stat.
Is the best defence the best tackle completion rate? Or the best at stopping opponents from scoring?
RAEBURN SHIELD
Quote:It's mad really.Toast and Marmite
Finn fgs!!
The thing is, you back him in a final
Again an unforced error- Finn has been hit and miss with his boots today
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
We have conspired to lose this game with multiple unforced errors
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Long and chase till your lungs burn
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Please don’t cock up the restart, please please please
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Ah well. Great game, and honestly I feel pretty good about the performance, first 15 mins aside. Frustrating to go so close and a few dopey moments have cost us but all in all happy enough.
Well done Saints.
Well done Saints.
Livid. How many times did we let Saints maintain a foothold through our own unforced errors, dozy penalties and poor kicking.
Ironically I would have been happy with 2 points prior but we had more than enough chances to put this game to bed.
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Ironically I would have been happy with 2 points prior but we had more than enough chances to put this game to bed.
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Quote:Old Bath Tub
Strangely I have this game down as a draw……in my head, in my heart it’s a bonus point win ! I sincerely hope it’s one or the other
Close !
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Quote:JK7
Ah well. Great game, and honestly I feel pretty good about the performance, first 15 mins aside. Frustrating to go so close and a few dopey moments have cost us but all in all happy enough.
Well done Saints.
Yeah agreed. Frustrating not to win after dragging ourselves back into it but considering we looked out of it after quarter of an hour and not too much was clicking it’s a positive outcome in the big picture
After all the bad weather talk turns out it was perfect for running rugby with nearly 70 points shared!
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Grrrr. Take the two points. Thought we’d nick it- but fair play to Saints.
It was our turn this week to get a bit of bad luck. The bomb squad approach, which very nearly worked, was nullified by injuries to Muir, TDT (who did come back on) and then Coetzee, who didn’t even get to make a carry before going off.
A word for the ref- thought he did well and got the big calls right, most importantly overruling his TMO who wanted to penalise Coetzee.
Oh and Roux excellent again imo. Onwards!
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
It was our turn this week to get a bit of bad luck. The bomb squad approach, which very nearly worked, was nullified by injuries to Muir, TDT (who did come back on) and then Coetzee, who didn’t even get to make a carry before going off.
A word for the ref- thought he did well and got the big calls right, most importantly overruling his TMO who wanted to penalise Coetzee.
Oh and Roux excellent again imo. Onwards!
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
2 points from the Gardens is not to be sniffed at. You simply can't start the way we did
Saints can be brilliant, but I think they'll fall short of Top 4.
Saints can be brilliant, but I think they'll fall short of Top 4.
Well, 2 league points a much better return than the doom and gloom predicted by some on here on Friday afternoon.
PG
PG
Quote:shipwrecked
After all the bad weather talk turns out it was perfect for running rugby with nearly 70 points shared!
Weirdly, Saints didn’t really test Baylis.
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
If Ollie could have got a fend on Mitchell on that break I think he's under the posts. The eyes on Mojo for the pass to OL were glorious.
2 points and a feeling that Saints are going to take a few points off our chasing pack. That was more like the Saints from last season. Thought Bailey did well at full back. We do need someone to dominate the air at restarts though.
Quote:JK7
Yes, Bailey deserves praise. Very competent back there.
The Bailey at fullback thing is a bit odd, apparently only had 2 games there but I'm sure I've seen him play there more than that.
Quote:JK7
Yes, Bailey deserves praise. Very competent back there.
Genuinely looked like he’d been playing there for years.
Wonder if JvG is looking at switching him there…
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
I was outraged by the TMO's suggestion that Coetzee might be at fault for that head clash - and if anything, it was the defender's obligation to tackle safely. Not sure what the TMO was going on about there and glad the ref shut him down.
Does make me worry for Coetzee though - he's already had multiple serious head injuries and didn't look like he knew where he was when he stood up - I wouldn't at all be surprised to see him with a very long lay off and potentially retirement, which would be a real blow (not only to him) but the team - he's been amazing when fit. I hope he's okay!
Does make me worry for Coetzee though - he's already had multiple serious head injuries and didn't look like he knew where he was when he stood up - I wouldn't at all be surprised to see him with a very long lay off and potentially retirement, which would be a real blow (not only to him) but the team - he's been amazing when fit. I hope he's okay!
Great game. I thought we'd struggle when we lost two big ball carriers and defensive hitters when they collided into each other. Coles is also a lineout caller.
Credit to Bath, you took full advantage of it in the second half and we just about managed to hang in there.
Credit to Bath, you took full advantage of it in the second half and we just about managed to hang in there.
He played there quite a bit for England U20s I think. He was excellent.
Finn + Mojo + Lawrence was fun, too. JCok looked super sharp also.
Now I’ve calmed down a touch, hard to fault any of our guys. Line out went awry at a couple of crucial moments- but I’ll allow Dunny that as he was otherwise excellent, especially THAT hit on Dingwall.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Finn + Mojo + Lawrence was fun, too. JCok looked super sharp also.
Now I’ve calmed down a touch, hard to fault any of our guys. Line out went awry at a couple of crucial moments- but I’ll allow Dunny that as he was otherwise excellent, especially THAT hit on Dingwall.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Quote:A.M 180
It's a forward pass to Langdon for goodness sake
Said that to my son. Very surprised it wasn’t looked at.
J
Pleasing 2nd half, Saints didn't get much of a look in. 2 points hard earned, will take that.
Funny how different people view things. I didn't think that Bailey looked solid in his 'things a 15 should do' at all. His kicks were not up to his standard and his defensive positioning was awful in that first 20. The things he did well were 'things a 10 / 12 should do' - powerful running and good passing in attack for at least 2 of the tries. Understandable given that it isn't his main position.
SW I think thats 2 starts at 15. IIRC I have seen him start at 10 / 12 and shift back there when subs are made? Hard to believe he is 23.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Funny how different people view things. I didn't think that Bailey looked solid in his 'things a 15 should do' at all. His kicks were not up to his standard and his defensive positioning was awful in that first 20. The things he did well were 'things a 10 / 12 should do' - powerful running and good passing in attack for at least 2 of the tries. Understandable given that it isn't his main position.
SW I think thats 2 starts at 15. IIRC I have seen him start at 10 / 12 and shift back there when subs are made? Hard to believe he is 23.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:SJS
I was outraged by the TMO's suggestion that Coetzee might be at fault for that head clash - and if anything, it was the defender's obligation to tackle safely. Not sure what the TMO was going on about there and glad the ref shut him down.
Does make me worry for Coetzee though - he's already had multiple serious head injuries and didn't look like he knew where he was when he stood up - I wouldn't at all be surprised to see him with a very long lay off and potentially retirement, which would be a real blow (not only to him) but the team - he's been amazing when fit. I hope he's okay!
100%. Lots of knocks (bad ones).
Agree it was a bizarre call by the TMO (made e think of the Arsenal pen yesterday). Genuine accident on the part of both players, just not looking and ran into each other.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:Which TylerQuote:and simultaneously, were the best in the league for tries scored against, and the best in the league for points scored against.shipwrecked
Being out tackled! Bath are bottom of 'tackles won' stats We just slip off them!
Pick your stat.
Is the best defence the best tackle completion rate? Or the best at stopping opponents from scoring?
I'm not referring to defence WT, I'm referring to tackles, we make them but often don't complete them. It's been like that for a while. We seem to prefer to get back on our feet and back in position.
It's as though we conceded the dominant tackle on purpose. Except for Sam Underhill of course who just cuts people in half! Look out for it next game.
Quote:BathMatt53
Funny how different people view things. I didn't think that Bailey looked solid in his 'things a 15 should do' at all. His kicks were not up to his standard and his defensive positioning was awful in that first 20.
Wasn't just about everyone out of sorts in the first quarter? His positioning was very good after that, if I'm remembering correctly.
Great resilience by Bath to come back into it, and equally good resilience by Saints to nick it.
Nothing proved either way on 7-1, but dodged a bullet or 3 a/ Lawrence inches away from YC end of first-half and put one of their stand-out players out of the game, b/ Sleightholme could have exposed us, c/ no more backs injured after Muir.
Deeply unimpressed by Lawrence’s play-act - caught on camera smiling after reminded me of the infamous Ronaldo wink.
Massively impressed with Bailey and Ojomoh (more than one no-look pass) and the temperament to come back from a pretty horrific start.
Nothing proved either way on 7-1, but dodged a bullet or 3 a/ Lawrence inches away from YC end of first-half and put one of their stand-out players out of the game, b/ Sleightholme could have exposed us, c/ no more backs injured after Muir.
Deeply unimpressed by Lawrence’s play-act - caught on camera smiling after reminded me of the infamous Ronaldo wink.
Massively impressed with Bailey and Ojomoh (more than one no-look pass) and the temperament to come back from a pretty horrific start.
I'm not sure what 'tackles won' actually means? Does it mean completed or just dominant? Without knowing tackle numbers as well as missed I don't think it tells us much - Bath could attempt twice as many as anyone else so have more completed but a lower %?
Same as defenders beaten - isn't this just running against oppo? If Finn puts someone into tonnes of space for a clear run in is that a defender beaten? Same for a X-field kick.
Metres gained stats are always dominated by teams that run kick returns back (hence Bristol by a mile) rather than clearance kicking.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Same as defenders beaten - isn't this just running against oppo? If Finn puts someone into tonnes of space for a clear run in is that a defender beaten? Same for a X-field kick.
Metres gained stats are always dominated by teams that run kick returns back (hence Bristol by a mile) rather than clearance kicking.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
After the fog from the fireworks it seemed to affect our defence in the first 30 mins. There were comments the we were being blown away and the real Saints have turned up. So it was pleasing to see the fight back and two bonus points is priceless in this tight league.
Disappointing not to get the W but proud of our effort in the second half the 4 tries conceded in the first half were a point too far!
Disappointing not to get the W but proud of our effort in the second half the 4 tries conceded in the first half were a point too far!
Quote:JK7Quote:BathMatt53
Funny how different people view things. I didn't think that Bailey looked solid in his 'things a 15 should do' at all. His kicks were not up to his standard and his defensive positioning was awful in that first 20.
Wasn't just about everyone out of sorts in the first quarter? His positioning was very good after that, if I'm remembering correctly.
Yes, his was better and the 10-12-13 link was also better leaving him with fewer 1 on 1s.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:Optimist
Deeply unimpressed by Lawrence’s play-act - caught on camera smiling after reminded me of the infamous Ronaldo wink.
Do you mean the Mitchell yellow, Opti? Can't be sure either way but that might be unfair - he must have impacted by the collision as I think instinctively he would have wanted to play on from a promising position. I was more let down by the bump on Hendy.
Sounds like it was a decent effort, now rest most of the 1st team for 2 weeks and get ready for Sale.
Another one for the Langdon forward pass. But you get those every week.
Main differences were: defence was pants and we were woefully inefficient in their red zone. Plus Finn indifferent off the tee. On a more clinical day we win that comfortably but credit to Saints for their brilliant start and indeed finish.
Thought Bailey, Reid and Roux were great. Underhill too. Last pen very harsh.
Hope Pepper, Horse and Coetzee are ok. Latter two look like lengthy ones.
Fair play Saints. Reminded everyone why they're champions.
Main differences were: defence was pants and we were woefully inefficient in their red zone. Plus Finn indifferent off the tee. On a more clinical day we win that comfortably but credit to Saints for their brilliant start and indeed finish.
Thought Bailey, Reid and Roux were great. Underhill too. Last pen very harsh.
Hope Pepper, Horse and Coetzee are ok. Latter two look like lengthy ones.
Fair play Saints. Reminded everyone why they're champions.
Quote:Think Opti is referring to the Hendy oneJK7Quote:Optimist
Deeply unimpressed by Lawrence’s play-act - caught on camera smiling after reminded me of the infamous Ronaldo wink.
Do you mean the Mitchell yellow, Opti? Can't be sure either way but that might be unfair - he must have impacted by the collision as I think instinctively he would have wanted to play on from a promising position. I was more let down by the bump on Hendy.
I don't remember him smiling after the head collision
The Mitchell one. When he went down the ref seemed to stop play because it looked so serious. Should be a mandatory HIA. Can’t have it both ways.
I think it was the Mitchell incident. If you stop playing because you’ve been hit in the head, you should be going off for an HIA - it’s going to lead to bad behaviours otherwise.
Great to see Joe C running at top speed for his try, after a juggle to keep the ball. His hands were decent today.
Really worrying for Jaco, feel like he’s had a lot of concussions in a Bath shirt, he’s been in great form.
Underhill’s tackle on Pollock was a highlight, a bit of assistance from Alfie, but a proper hit, which I suspect he enjoyed on the new kid on the block. Always disappointing to lose a close game, but two points, extend our lead in the table…. Just the injuries that are really concerning,
Great to see Joe C running at top speed for his try, after a juggle to keep the ball. His hands were decent today.
Really worrying for Jaco, feel like he’s had a lot of concussions in a Bath shirt, he’s been in great form.
Underhill’s tackle on Pollock was a highlight, a bit of assistance from Alfie, but a proper hit, which I suspect he enjoyed on the new kid on the block. Always disappointing to lose a close game, but two points, extend our lead in the table…. Just the injuries that are really concerning,
Quote:Optimist
The Mitchell one. When he went down the ref seemed to stop play because it looked so serious. Should be a mandatory HIA. Can’t have it both ways.
There was plenty of talk of s%!thousery from Lawrence in my WhatsApps. Definite HIA and baffling why it wasn't.
The Hendy late hit too...Not a great look.
Quote:hear hearOptimist
The Mitchell one. When he went down the ref seemed to stop play because it looked so serious. Should be a mandatory HIA. Can’t have it both ways.
RAEBURN SHIELD
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:05:18:14:08 by Which Tyler.
Quote:A.M 180
Just a silly shot from Lawrence, and to put Hendy out of the game like that leaves a bad taste
Cheap shot.
Quote:BarfboyQuote:Optimist
The Mitchell one. When he went down the ref seemed to stop play because it looked so serious. Should be a mandatory HIA. Can’t have it both ways.
There was plenty of talk of s%!thousery from Lawrence in my WhatsApps. Definite HIA and baffling why it wasn't.
The Hendy late hit too...Not a great look.
People making something out of nothing - no way Lawrence just stops dead in his tracks for no reason after busting the first line.
Edit to add: Agree weird call from ref not to insist on HIA.
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:05:18:15:34 by Toast and Marmite.
Quote:A.M 180
Surely Lawrence has to go off for an HIA?
Nope, not until he has been turned down for an Oscar. That was disgraceful
After we gave tehm a 19 point start, to lose to the last kick of the match was quite incredible. Also scoring 5 tries away from home and still losing is frustrating. We were all over the place in that first quarter, and then butchered probably 4 golden try scoring opportunities, in addition to the 5 we scored. Very poor red zone efficiency today.
I thought Woodthorpe generally very good bar warning Saints for repeated penalties on their own line, and thought we'd done enough at the death to win 2 turnover penalties, but so many of those are 50:50s.
We got lucky with the 7:1 as Saints never got to test out Josh the winger.
Would possibly also have won if Finn has his kicking boot on.
Still 2 points is better than none.
I thought Woodthorpe generally very good bar warning Saints for repeated penalties on their own line, and thought we'd done enough at the death to win 2 turnover penalties, but so many of those are 50:50s.
We got lucky with the 7:1 as Saints never got to test out Josh the winger.
Would possibly also have won if Finn has his kicking boot on.
Still 2 points is better than none.
Quote:Sans CulottesQuote:A.M 180
Surely Lawrence has to go off for an HIA?
Nope, not until he has been turned down for an Oscar. That was disgraceful
Wow I’ve heard of salty losers, salty winners much rarer.
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Quote:BarfboyQuote:Optimist
The Mitchell one. When he went down the ref seemed to stop play because it looked so serious. Should be a mandatory HIA. Can’t have it both ways.
There was plenty of talk of s%!thousery from Lawrence in my WhatsApps. Definite HIA and baffling why it wasn't.
The Hendy late hit too...Not a great look.
Thanks guys, it's good to see you recognising the unacceptable behaviour. It was a great game, but those two incidents, both involving Lawrence leave a bad taste in the mouth. I think you will top the league, but keep an eye over your shoulder, Saints will be coming up fast!.....I live in hope :-)
Quote:Toast and MarmiteQuote:Sans CulottesQuote:A.M 180
Surely Lawrence has to go off for an HIA?
Nope, not until he has been turned down for an Oscar. That was disgraceful
Wow I’ve heard of salty losers, salty winners much rarer.
Ignore him, obviously a bit of a dick and trying to get a reaction.
I agree OL should have gone for an HIA, but that's obviously a separate issue to whether he was play acting or not. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt that he wasn't. The Hendy bump slightly undermines this but generally he's not demonstrated poor conduct before.
Woodthorpe did say in the game that it's not up to him whether HIAs happen so again, we can't blame him for that decision (until refs are empowered that way he can't take it upon himself, in the way the TMO seemed to want to with Jaco). An independent doctor has presumably said there was no need?
Incidentally, Alfie at one point briefly stopped and touched his head as if it'd been hit - nothing happened there either.
Woodthorpe did say in the game that it's not up to him whether HIAs happen so again, we can't blame him for that decision (until refs are empowered that way he can't take it upon himself, in the way the TMO seemed to want to with Jaco). An independent doctor has presumably said there was no need?
Incidentally, Alfie at one point briefly stopped and touched his head as if it'd been hit - nothing happened there either.
Quote:Toast and MarmiteQuote:Sans CulottesQuote:A.M 180
Surely Lawrence has to go off for an HIA?
Nope, not until he has been turned down for an Oscar. That was disgraceful
Wow I’ve heard of salty losers, salty winners much rarer.
Not "salty" T & M, just not happy to see round ball behaviour in what was a great game of rugby.
I trust you don't condone either the cheap late hit that took Hendy out of the game, or the play acting.
HIA is for signs of concussion, not for being hit in the head. Which... He definitely was hit in the head I don't really know what anyone's talking about.
Quote:Sans CulottesQuote:Toast and MarmiteQuote:Sans CulottesQuote:A.M 180
Surely Lawrence has to go off for an HIA?
Nope, not until he has been turned down for an Oscar. That was disgraceful
Wow I’ve heard of salty losers, salty winners much rarer.
Not "salty" T & M, just not happy to see round ball behaviour in what was a great game of rugby.
I trust you don't condone either the cheap late hit that took Hendy out of the game, or the play acting.
Every game sees late hits. It's not great but it happens.
As for suggesting play acting for the yellow - grow up. OL had made the line break and we were likely to score and put you out of the game. No way he stops like that if not hurt. It's then up to the independent doctor and the medics to decide on the HIA. Did Dingwall go off for one in the Cotzee clash?
So for those who watched the game, what’s the verdict on the 7-1 bench split? Costly mistake or worth another go if the conditions merit?
Quote:Difficult to say due to injuries to both sides, players going off and coming back on. Also, Saints never really tested Baylis on the wing so we don’t know if that is a worthwhile risk…OutsideBath
So for those who watched the game, what’s the verdict on the 7-1 bench split? Costly mistake or worth another go if the conditions merit?
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
Quote:IMO It's not why we lost, equally it's not why we were in a position to win.OutsideBath
So for those who watched the game, what’s the verdict on the 7-1 bench split? Costly mistake or worth another go if the conditions merit?
We got away with it, through luck and Saints not exploiting it, than any judgement on Baths end.
It's a high risk, low reward strategy.
RAEBURN SHIELD
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:05:19:14:41 by Which Tyler.
OK thank TandM/WT, would be interested to hear the coaches take on the reasons for 7-1 bench.
At the end of the day 2 points away to Saints isn’t a bad result.
At the end of the day 2 points away to Saints isn’t a bad result.
Quote:Agreed, 6:2 feels like enough to play an abrasive forward game and give cover for the backs should something happen.Which TylerQuote:IMO It's not why we lost, equally it's not why we were in a position to win.OutsideBath
So for those who watched the game, what’s the verdict on the 7-1 bench split? Costly mistake or worth another go if the conditions merit?
We got away with it, through luck and Saints not exploiting it, than any judgement on Baths end.
It's a high risk, low reward strategy.
A shame to miss out on the win, impressive to get back in a winning position from that start. At 19-0 interestingly I was fairly confident we could get back in contention, but would probably still have taken the 2 points in exchange for no injuries… hope Muir is ok.
Quote:hasta
HIA is for signs of concussion, not for being hit in the head. Which... He definitely was hit in the head I don't really know what anyone's talking about.
I think it comes down to the play acting issue. If a player is signaling that they've taken a hit to the head and it's bothering them in some way, go off an get it checked. Either they've really got a problem or they're impacting their own team through play acting and trying to get the opp a card, which should deter them from doing it in the first place.
Being clear, I don't think Ollie was acting.
Quote:Sans CulottesQuote:Toast and MarmiteQuote:Sans CulottesQuote:A.M 180
Surely Lawrence has to go off for an HIA?
Nope, not until he has been turned down for an Oscar. That was disgraceful
Wow I’ve heard of salty losers, salty winners much rarer.
Not "salty" T & M, just not happy to see round ball behaviour in what was a great game of rugby.
I trust you don't condone either the cheap late hit that took Hendy out of the game, or the play acting.
The late hit wasn't great but I imagine Hendy wouldn't have been coming back out for the second half anyway. He took himself out with his tackle on Finn - the Lawrence impact was relatively soft.
On 7:1, despite having Finn, Blackett etc, our overriding style is territory and collision dominance. We score great tries, and play some lovely rugby, but it’s based on playing in the right parts of the field (we kick a lot) and dominating gain line (we love running hard into people).
And collision dominance is so important that I reckon it’s why JvG ‘gambles’ with the 6:2 / 7:1, because of the impact that carriers like of VV, TDT/Stuart, Underhill and Coetzee have off the bench. JvG is placing his chips on the benefit of the yards Coetzee makes through contact in the final quarter, against a weary oppo pack, as worth the chance of Muir pulling a hammy.
You could see it today and to a certain extent last week. Our big guys, like Obano, Reid and Barbeary, just run straight, with one or two tip ons or flat balls from Finn, and it grinds a defence down, sapping them. Then the upside of having yet more big carriers off the bench pays even bigger dividends. So I see the logic given our game plan. I think some are fooled by Finn and Blackett etc but we’re massively confrontational and become even more so with that extra carrier in the 21 shirt. I think that’s our strategy to win the Prem (Europe different kettle de poissons) and it seems to be working.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
And collision dominance is so important that I reckon it’s why JvG ‘gambles’ with the 6:2 / 7:1, because of the impact that carriers like of VV, TDT/Stuart, Underhill and Coetzee have off the bench. JvG is placing his chips on the benefit of the yards Coetzee makes through contact in the final quarter, against a weary oppo pack, as worth the chance of Muir pulling a hammy.
You could see it today and to a certain extent last week. Our big guys, like Obano, Reid and Barbeary, just run straight, with one or two tip ons or flat balls from Finn, and it grinds a defence down, sapping them. Then the upside of having yet more big carriers off the bench pays even bigger dividends. So I see the logic given our game plan. I think some are fooled by Finn and Blackett etc but we’re massively confrontational and become even more so with that extra carrier in the 21 shirt. I think that’s our strategy to win the Prem (Europe different kettle de poissons) and it seems to be working.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Quote:OutsideBath
So for those who watched the game, what’s the verdict on the 7-1 bench split? Costly mistake or worth another go if the conditions merit?
That's the point exactly OB. Its was a plan for a set of conditions that were never realised, as JvG said “It’s the first time we’ve done it and we have a plan for this weekend", had it been a wet, sticky, boggy pitch 7-1 would have had a far greater impact but conditions actually favoured a running game.
That being said I expect 6-2 to be more common. JvG knows I think that these games and their results are actually irrelevant as long as we get a home semi. That and the Final are the only games that matter.
Quote:dr.bath1865
On 7:1, despite having Finn, Blackett etc, our overriding style is territory and collision dominance. We score great tries, and play some lovely rugby, but it’s based on playing in the right parts of the field (we kick a lot) and dominating gain line (we love running hard into people).
And collision dominance is so important that I reckon it’s why JvG ‘gambles’ with the 6:2 / 7:1, because of the impact that carriers like of VV, TDT/Stuart, Underhill and Coetzee have off the bench. JvG is placing his chips on the benefit of the yards Coetzee makes through contact in the final quarter, against a weary oppo pack, as worth the chance of Muir pulling a hammy.
You could see it today and to a certain extent last week. Our big guys, like Obano, Reid and Barbeary, just run straight, with one or two tip ons or flat balls from Finn, and it grinds a defence down, sapping them. Then the upside of having yet more big carriers off the bench pays even bigger dividends. So I see the logic given our game plan. I think some are fooled by Finn and Blackett etc but we’re massively confrontational and become even more so with that extra carrier in the 21 shirt. I think that’s our strategy to win the Prem (Europe different kettle de poissons) and it seems to be working.
All of this
Quote:JK7Quote:hasta
HIA is for signs of concussion, not for being hit in the head. Which... He definitely was hit in the head I don't really know what anyone's talking about.
I think it comes down to the play acting issue. If a player is signaling that they've taken a hit to the head and it's bothering them in some way, go off an get it checked. Either they've really got a problem or they're impacting their own team through play acting and trying to get the opp a card, which should deter them from doing it in the first place.
Being clear, I don't think Ollie was acting.
He reached up to touch his face and slowed down having been very clearly hit in the head. He didn't throw himself to the floor. Ridiculous.
Quote:hasta
He reached up to touch his face and slowed down having been very clearly hit in the head. He didn't throw himself to the floor.
+1
Equally the Hendy late was a pretty cynical I thought.
In relation to the 7-1 I would be surprised if we see it again. IMO only works where your wingers play multiple positions etc. Saints could probably get away with it with Freeman and Furbank on the field, for example. I don't think that Bath can.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:hastaQuote:JK7Quote:hasta
HIA is for signs of concussion, not for being hit in the head. Which... He definitely was hit in the head I don't really know what anyone's talking about.
I think it comes down to the play acting issue. If a player is signaling that they've taken a hit to the head and it's bothering them in some way, go off an get it checked. Either they've really got a problem or they're impacting their own team through play acting and trying to get the opp a card, which should deter them from doing it in the first place.
Being clear, I don't think Ollie was acting.
He reached up to touch his face and slowed down having been very clearly hit in the head. He didn't throw himself to the floor. Ridiculous.
That’ll be why he has apologised for his behaviour on. X.
Quote:hastaQuote:JK7Quote:hasta
HIA is for signs of concussion, not for being hit in the head. Which... He definitely was hit in the head I don't really know what anyone's talking about.
I think it comes down to the play acting issue. If a player is signaling that they've taken a hit to the head and it's bothering them in some way, go off an get it checked. Either they've really got a problem or they're impacting their own team through play acting and trying to get the opp a card, which should deter them from doing it in the first place.
Being clear, I don't think Ollie was acting.
That's exactly how I saw it at the time and even watching it back it never looked liked a Ronaldo smirky wink. Ollie just isn't that kind of player
He reached up to touch his face and slowed down having been very clearly hit in the head. He didn't throw himself to the floor. Ridiculous.
Quote:OutsideBath
So for those who watched the game, what’s the verdict on the 7-1 bench split? Costly mistake or worth another go if the conditions merit?
A very good match to experiment with. Everything for the coaching team to evaluate and learn from. Nothing that I can say that will be of any significance other than what JvG and his team make of it will make us a stronger team going forward
Looked like Bath were making an effort to make a tackle, even if late. Presumably because Northampton's backs are good at getting second touches following a line break.
Quote:Sans CulottesQuote:hastaQuote:JK7Quote:hasta
HIA is for signs of concussion, not for being hit in the head. Which... He definitely was hit in the head I don't really know what anyone's talking about.
I think it comes down to the play acting issue. If a player is signaling that they've taken a hit to the head and it's bothering them in some way, go off an get it checked. Either they've really got a problem or they're impacting their own team through play acting and trying to get the opp a card, which should deter them from doing it in the first place.
Being clear, I don't think Ollie was acting.
He reached up to touch his face and slowed down having been very clearly hit in the head. He didn't throw himself to the floor. Ridiculous.
That’ll be why he has apologised for his behaviour on. X.
Not clear what he was apologising for - could easily be the Hendy one.
I wonder if it wasn’t for the soccer play acting that followed the tackle by Mitchell
Got the penalty and Mitchell sent off
Amazing recovery followed by laughing and jeering
Watch the play back on TV
Brings the game down another level
Absolute moron
Got the penalty and Mitchell sent off
Amazing recovery followed by laughing and jeering
Watch the play back on TV
Brings the game down another level
Absolute moron
If you're going to pop in and be so charming you might take 5 mins to scan the posts above where we've clearly been discussing it. Lovely contribution to the board though, thanks.
Fixed it for you:
I wonder for the maturity of the soccerplay acting fan posting after the game that followed included the illegal tackle by Mitchell, which got the penalty and Mitchell quite rightly sent off yellow carded, during an amazing recovery match followed by laughing and jeering cheering by rugby supporters from both sides.
Watch the play back on TV. It’s a great game.
Posters like the above bring the game down another level. He’s clearly an absolute moron.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
I wonder for the maturity of the soccer
Watch the play back on TV. It’s a great game.
Posters like the above bring the game down another level. He’s clearly an absolute moron.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
“had it been a wet, sticky, boggy pitch 7-1 would have had a far greater impact but conditions actually favoured a running game”
I honestly can’t remember seeing a pitch like that in the Prem for about 5 years.
This is how the Guardian reporter saw the Kawrence/Mitchell clash: ‘Ollie Lawrence’s response to a high tackle from Alex Mitchell appeared somewhat delayed’
I honestly can’t remember seeing a pitch like that in the Prem for about 5 years.
This is how the Guardian reporter saw the Kawrence/Mitchell clash: ‘Ollie Lawrence’s response to a high tackle from Alex Mitchell appeared somewhat delayed’
I didn't see any play acting. Ollie got hit on the cheek/eye which clearly hurt him. It was though a glancing blow which neither knocked him out or caused a big impact. It was high though and penalty and yellow card was the right decision. The late hit wasn't great but it's not the worst thing I have seen on a rugby pitch and I don't really know why anyone is suggesting otherwise
It was an incredible game. I am pretty happy with 2 points especially as we were far from our best and saints played really well.
I wouldn't really want to play Northampton in a play off match. I think we do struggle against the Northampton/Bristol style. I'd much prefer to play against a team more structured like Leicester
It was an incredible game. I am pretty happy with 2 points especially as we were far from our best and saints played really well.
I wouldn't really want to play Northampton in a play off match. I think we do struggle against the Northampton/Bristol style. I'd much prefer to play against a team more structured like Leicester
If you are running flat out and take a glancing blow to the nose from Mitchell head(see pic) Lawrence's actions are exactly as expected. No winking, or laughing or jeering in the footage I've seen. if so please state time.
Clearly Deesaint has never taken such a blow to the face by accident or design. Blinking is actually involuntary in that situation.
The ref was close to the incident, the TMO reviewed it and the commentary team had no doubt it was a real incident.
The main discussion was was is it foul play?
Viewed from the side:
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Clearly Deesaint has never taken such a blow to the face by accident or design. Blinking is actually involuntary in that situation.
The ref was close to the incident, the TMO reviewed it and the commentary team had no doubt it was a real incident.
The main discussion was was is it foul play?
Viewed from the side:
Quote:gaz59
Ollie's twitter fess up surprised me hts
It comes at the end of a discussion about the Henry incident. I don't think it is anything to do with Mitchell.
SW, there is what could be described as a smirk just after Mitchell walks off but maybe someone said something funny, we don't know.
I have to say on reflection I’m quite surprised about the outcome of the Dingwall/Coetzee incident.
Watching it again, it’s a tackle off the ball by Dingwall (i.e. foul play) which resulted in direct head contact with a high degree of danger (ie he was upright, direct contact, high speed).
I think on balance the bizarre TMO intervention meant it wasn’t properly considered as such. I understand the view the commentary team (and ultimately the ref) that it was an accident, but if Dingwall went low then it’s just a pen, play on. What are others’ views on this?
Watching it again, it’s a tackle off the ball by Dingwall (i.e. foul play) which resulted in direct head contact with a high degree of danger (ie he was upright, direct contact, high speed).
I think on balance the bizarre TMO intervention meant it wasn’t properly considered as such. I understand the view the commentary team (and ultimately the ref) that it was an accident, but if Dingwall went low then it’s just a pen, play on. What are others’ views on this?
I don't know what the TMO was playing at there. with Coetzee.
Lawrence's first half hit was marginally late, but no more so than the one on Finn a minute earlier.
If Mitchell wants to not get yellow carded he should try not tackling people with his face.
Lawrence's first half hit was marginally late, but no more so than the one on Finn a minute earlier.
If Mitchell wants to not get yellow carded he should try not tackling people with his face.
Quote:JK7
SW, there is what could be described as a smirk just after Mitchell walks off but maybe someone said something funny, we don't know.
If you mean this, I'm not sure that's a smirk, he has just swallowed after replacing his gum shield, you always drop your jaw slightly if you aren't running.
If Lawrence continues after the head clash having broken the line Saints are in big problems with Finn and Orlando in support and Joe C free on the wing. He actually has no reason to feign injury.
Just watched the game. Two well matched sides playing adventurous rugby - what's not to like? Once the optionality of our defensive tackling settled down we looked competitive without actually playing that fluently. The Saints forwards stood up much better than I thought they would and the conditions levelled things out a bit so our more "off the cuff" backs didn't quite fire but a very interesting game. Not sure Saints have enough to get back to the play off positions from where they are but it would be nice to be playing them again at HQ on a sunny day in June. Hope Horse is OK.
My MotM - Orlando Bailey. Horrible day, the very highest class of opposition backs and only his second start at 15 and did not look out of place. Very impressive.
A word for the ref - excellent. Clear, terse and happy to go with his own opinion rather than be led by the TMO. Got the close calls right, I thought. Good show!
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:06:06:08:42 by joethefanatic.
My MotM - Orlando Bailey. Horrible day, the very highest class of opposition backs and only his second start at 15 and did not look out of place. Very impressive.
A word for the ref - excellent. Clear, terse and happy to go with his own opinion rather than be led by the TMO. Got the close calls right, I thought. Good show!
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:06:06:08:42 by joethefanatic.
According to AllRugby, Bailey has started at 15 twice before for Bath against Glasgow and Leicester plus as pointed out earlier played there for England U20s.
[all.rugby]
[all.rugby]
Watching yesterdays game my first impression was of almost complete enjoyment, certainly there were mistakes, but every player gave 100% and I was impressed both by how Bath do not seem to falter if they go couple of tries down and equally how Saints managed to hold upon in the face of the Bath pressure in the second half. Any team can get beaten on the day, Bath left at least three tries out there in the first half and with a better line out would probably have had a couple more in the second half, but overall either home or away Bath are looking a very accomplished and confident team who fully deserve to be top of the league.
No complaints just can't afford to give the opposition a 3 zip start good comeback good game for rugby overall.
That was a nuts game- so much happening it was really hard to make much sense of it.
Feels like an opp missed to me- I agree with ugo that it felt like a 6.5/10 performance by us which wasn't quite good enough.
Being disappointed with 2 points away and a last kick of game defeat away to saints shows how far we have come but felt we could and maybe should have won.
Thought saints played well- looked like they had good cutting edge and their intensity was fitting of a team that needed to win to stay in the mix.
Not ideal to pick up injuries to pepper/ coetzee / muir but could be worse positions to lose players tbh.
Thought officials were broadly fine though trying to ping coetzee was utterly bizarre by the tmo. He looked in a right tangle
Feels like an opp missed to me- I agree with ugo that it felt like a 6.5/10 performance by us which wasn't quite good enough.
Being disappointed with 2 points away and a last kick of game defeat away to saints shows how far we have come but felt we could and maybe should have won.
Thought saints played well- looked like they had good cutting edge and their intensity was fitting of a team that needed to win to stay in the mix.
Not ideal to pick up injuries to pepper/ coetzee / muir but could be worse positions to lose players tbh.
Thought officials were broadly fine though trying to ping coetzee was utterly bizarre by the tmo. He looked in a right tangle
Quote:hasta
I don't know what the TMO was playing at there. with Coetzee.
Lawrence's first half hit was marginally late, but no more so than the one on Finn a minute earlier.
If Mitchell wants to not get yellow carded he should try not tackling people with his face.
Are you really trying to compare these two? Tackle on Russell was legal. Tackle committed to and arms wrapped. Hendy suffered a shoulder injury and soon after Lawrence makes a deliberate and late shoulder charge on him, targeting the same shoulder. Unsurprisingly, mission accomplished and Hendy is out of the game.
Lawrence knew exactly what he was doing, and the smirk after gave it away. Should have been at least a yellow
His playacting later just sealed the deal . . .
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
I don't know what the TMO was playing at there. with Coetzee.
Lawrence's first half hit was marginally late, but no more so than the one on Finn a minute earlier.
If Mitchell wants to not get yellow carded he should try not tackling people with his face.
Are you really trying to compare these two? Tackle on Russell was legal. Tackle committed to and arms wrapped. Hendy suffered a shoulder injury and soon after Lawrence makes a deliberate and late shoulder charge on him, targeting the same shoulder. Unsurprisingly, mission accomplished and Hendy is out of the game.
Lawrence knew exactly what he was doing, and the smirk after gave it away. Should have been at least a yellow
His playacting later just sealed the deal . . .
Quote:SJS
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
I don't know what the TMO was playing at there. with Coetzee.
Lawrence's first half hit was marginally late, but no more so than the one on Finn a minute earlier.
If Mitchell wants to not get yellow carded he should try not tackling people with his face.
Are you really trying to compare these two? Tackle on Russell was legal. Tackle committed to and arms wrapped. Hendy suffered a shoulder injury and soon after Lawrence makes a deliberate and late shoulder charge on him, targeting the same shoulder. Unsurprisingly, mission accomplished and Hendy is out of the game.
Lawrence knew exactly what he was doing, and the smirk after gave it away. Should have been at least a yellow
His playacting later just sealed the deal . . .
So no response then?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:06:09:13:22 by KingoftheHill.
Get a grip, late shots happen all the time, at all levels of the game. The injury to Hendy's shoulder had already happened a few minutes prior, it was a matter of time before he went off.
Personally I didn't think it was playacting, looked like Ollie thought he had broken his nose and he smiled out of embarrassment. Frustratingly if he held onto the ball, Bath might have manufactured a try rather than 3 points.
I also believe that players should go off for a mandatory HIA following a card *but* I do recall Augustus staying on the pitch after Beno was red carded in the final last year.
Personally I didn't think it was playacting, looked like Ollie thought he had broken his nose and he smiled out of embarrassment. Frustratingly if he held onto the ball, Bath might have manufactured a try rather than 3 points.
I also believe that players should go off for a mandatory HIA following a card *but* I do recall Augustus staying on the pitch after Beno was red carded in the final last year.
Fair play Saints - but let us all take stock - we gave the current Premiership champions a 19-0 lead on their own turf with their very vociferous and great supporters and lost on a contentious last second penalty.
Being at the game - and for me this is the real positive for our great club - even at 19-0 lead I just did not feel the game was done and that is the greatest testament to JvG & the coaching team - the calmness on the pitch was clear to see and many of the Saints supporters sat by me commented on just how good this Bath team is.
My biggest concerns were Will Muir's injury hopefully caught early enough to have prevented a fully torn hamstring and obviously Jaco's head injury - he was out cold and having only recently returned from a serious head injury I wish him a speedy recovery.
Overall it was a great game in pretty poor conditions and the Mr Woodthorpe handled it pretty well especially the ridiculous TMO trying to get Jaco sent off!!
In real time the Ollie Lawrence challenge on Hendy was slightly late but nowhere near as bad as the Saints supporters are trying to suggest - Hendy had damaged his shoulder diving at Finn in the previous tackle and should have been taken off at that point - again ridiculous to suggest Ollie caused the injury.
On a final note and again I am not a medical professional - all of us sat where we were - Bath & Saints supporters alike echoed the same sentiment - Dingwell that head on head collision with Jaco was huge - Jaco out cold - the side of Dingwell's eye and head swolllen immediately yet he was not removed at all not even for a HIA?
Being at the game - and for me this is the real positive for our great club - even at 19-0 lead I just did not feel the game was done and that is the greatest testament to JvG & the coaching team - the calmness on the pitch was clear to see and many of the Saints supporters sat by me commented on just how good this Bath team is.
My biggest concerns were Will Muir's injury hopefully caught early enough to have prevented a fully torn hamstring and obviously Jaco's head injury - he was out cold and having only recently returned from a serious head injury I wish him a speedy recovery.
Overall it was a great game in pretty poor conditions and the Mr Woodthorpe handled it pretty well especially the ridiculous TMO trying to get Jaco sent off!!
In real time the Ollie Lawrence challenge on Hendy was slightly late but nowhere near as bad as the Saints supporters are trying to suggest - Hendy had damaged his shoulder diving at Finn in the previous tackle and should have been taken off at that point - again ridiculous to suggest Ollie caused the injury.
On a final note and again I am not a medical professional - all of us sat where we were - Bath & Saints supporters alike echoed the same sentiment - Dingwell that head on head collision with Jaco was huge - Jaco out cold - the side of Dingwell's eye and head swolllen immediately yet he was not removed at all not even for a HIA?
Quote:by
Get a grip, late shots happen all the time, at all levels of the game. The injury to Hendy's shoulder had already happened a few minutes prior, it was a matter of time before he went off.
Personally I didn't think it was playacting, looked like Ollie thought he had broken his nose and he smiled out of embarrassment. Frustratingly if he held onto the ball, Bath might have manufactured a try rather than 3 points.
I also believe that players should go off for a mandatory HIA following a card *but* I do recall Augustus staying on the pitch after Beno was red carded in the final last year.
You know that the hit on Hendy was a shoulder charge and not just a late hit - it was petulance at best. Try watching it again. He smiled after that so nothing to do with the alleged head contact with Mitchell which was later in the game.
I think JvG has overplayed Guy Pepper this season and wasn't surprised he was injured yesterday. I haven't seen any news on the problem yet but he'll get a rest now. I'm baffled by the non selection of Coetzee as a starting #8 with Reid getting his shirt. Reid at #7 and Coetzee at #8 with Pepper off the bench occasionally would offer more go forward. Not a criticism just an observation...
Adopted players: 24/25 J Bayliss; [24] O Lawrence; [23] J Cokanasiga; [22] M Green; [21] A Watson; [20] T Faletau; [19] M V Vuuren; [18] T Faletau; [17] D Denton; [16] H. Agulla; [15] L Houston; [14] W Spencer; [13] F. Louw
Family . Community . Nation - [sdp.org.uk]
My mind's been going places without me lately - Bushfire The B52's
Adopted players: 24/25 J Bayliss; [24] O Lawrence; [23] J Cokanasiga; [22] M Green; [21] A Watson; [20] T Faletau; [19] M V Vuuren; [18] T Faletau; [17] D Denton; [16] H. Agulla; [15] L Houston; [14] W Spencer; [13] F. Louw
Family . Community . Nation - [sdp.org.uk]
My mind's been going places without me lately - Bushfire The B52's
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:by
Get a grip, late shots happen all the time, at all levels of the game. The injury to Hendy's shoulder had already happened a few minutes prior, it was a matter of time before he went off.
Personally I didn't think it was playacting, looked like Ollie thought he had broken his nose and he smiled out of embarrassment. Frustratingly if he held onto the ball, Bath might have manufactured a try rather than 3 points.
I also believe that players should go off for a mandatory HIA following a card *but* I do recall Augustus staying on the pitch after Beno was red carded in the final last year.
You know that the hit on Hendy was a shoulder charge and not just a late hit - it was petulance at best. Try watching it again. He smiled after that so nothing to do with the alleged head contact with Mitchell which was later in the game.
I think you are the one misremembering it. It was reviewed by the TMO as well with the same outcome. Yellow card would have been harsh.
Why can't you just appreciate that it was an entertaining game of rugby, and for you Northampton got 5 points from it.
Quote:by
Get a grip, late shots happen all the time, at all levels of the game
Oh - well, that's all fine then!
If it was a bit of 'payback' for the hit on Russell, then I very much doubt JVG would have been praising him for it. It was shortly after Muir had gone off - if he'd been carded at that point our backline and 7-1 strategy would have been absolute chaos.
Quote:byQuote:KingoftheHillQuote:by
Get a grip, late shots happen all the time, at all levels of the game. The injury to Hendy's shoulder had already happened a few minutes prior, it was a matter of time before he went off.
Personally I didn't think it was playacting, looked like Ollie thought he had broken his nose and he smiled out of embarrassment. Frustratingly if he held onto the ball, Bath might have manufactured a try rather than 3 points.
I also believe that players should go off for a mandatory HIA following a card *but* I do recall Augustus staying on the pitch after Beno was red carded in the final last year.
You know that the hit on Hendy was a shoulder charge and not just a late hit - it was petulance at best. Try watching it again. He smiled after that so nothing to do with the alleged head contact with Mitchell which was later in the game.
I think you are the one misremembering it. It was reviewed by the TMO as well with the same outcome. Yellow card would have been harsh.
Why can't you just appreciate that it was an entertaining game of rugby, and for you Northampton got 5 points from it.
You are happy with that TMO decision, but not happy with his view of the Coetze incident? Ironic
I see that Lawrence has apologised for his behaviour!
Not a Saints fan BTW - just looking for consistency from officials
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
I don't know what the TMO was playing at there. with Coetzee.
Lawrence's first half hit was marginally late, but no more so than the one on Finn a minute earlier.
If Mitchell wants to not get yellow carded he should try not tackling people with his face.
Are you really trying to compare these two? Tackle on Russell was legal. Tackle committed to and arms wrapped. Hendy suffered a shoulder injury and soon after Lawrence makes a deliberate and late shoulder charge on him, targeting the same shoulder. Unsurprisingly, mission accomplished and Hendy is out of the game.
Lawrence knew exactly what he was doing, and the smirk after gave it away. Should have been at least a yellow
His playacting later just sealed the deal . . .
Can you please confirm if you think any late or no arms tackles should be yellow cards? Or do you want all decisions made based on whether a player gets injured? Does it have to be a new injury or is it different if they already hurt themselves a bit earlier?
I assume you don’t want yellow cards given for smirking but otherwise I don’t follow what law you think was either wrongly applied or should be changed as a result of this
A Briz fan btw, bringing some much needed objectivity to the discussion...
Quote:theredseatQuote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
I don't know what the TMO was playing at there. with Coetzee.
Lawrence's first half hit was marginally late, but no more so than the one on Finn a minute earlier.
If Mitchell wants to not get yellow carded he should try not tackling people with his face.
Are you really trying to compare these two? Tackle on Russell was legal. Tackle committed to and arms wrapped. Hendy suffered a shoulder injury and soon after Lawrence makes a deliberate and late shoulder charge on him, targeting the same shoulder. Unsurprisingly, mission accomplished and Hendy is out of the game.
Lawrence knew exactly what he was doing, and the smirk after gave it away. Should have been at least a yellow
His playacting later just sealed the deal . . .
Can you please confirm if you think any late or no arms tackles should be yellow cards? Or do you want all decisions made based on whether a player gets injured? Does it have to be a new injury or is it different if they already hurt themselves a bit earlier?
I assume you don’t want yellow cards given for smirking but otherwise I don’t follow what law you think was either wrongly applied or should be changed as a result of this
A late, no arms tackle should be a yellow. If you need a reference to the laws, then multiple infringements under the section for Dangerous Play.
Question: Why has Lawrence apologised?
I get the objection to the late challenge by Lawrence, I also get that it might not have been legal but are people suggesting that you should not target a weakness, lack of experience or injury that an opposition player might have?
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
It wasn't a no-arms tackle, his right arm was clearly out wrapping. It wasn't high. It was arguably late, but so was the one on Finn two minutes earlier and that comes down to ref interpretation. What doesn't come down to interpretation is that he was hit in the head by Alex Mitchell's head. Which was high and was illegal.
Bristool fan asking for consistency when theyt have regularly benefitted massively from inconsisentency of officiating?! LoL!
The OL hit on Hendy was correctly a penalty, and not worthy of anything more.
The OL hit on Hendy was correctly a penalty, and not worthy of anything more.
Quietly fairly content with that performance. Fustrating to not win but we’ve put ourselves in a position to be able to afford to drop a few points. Some really promising performances.
That took saints best performance in the last year to win that. Think both teams missed opportunities that could have won them the game so no point trying to trade what ifs.
On an individual level thought Barbeary was fantastic and asked exactly what people wanted. Which was find that old form back. Bowling ball. Ojomoh quality and we’re back in the time when you could have either of 3 12s all offering different types of game. Underhill big off the bench, looking forward to the Hill Barbs Underhill combo to be back in full swing. Joe also has really just flicked a switch and is back in try scoring mode. Just finishing things again. Which is amazing to see.
Hopefully see some rotation but not too much for Clermont, then maybe sneak a few points in Leinster. Exciting times can’t help but get sucked in
That took saints best performance in the last year to win that. Think both teams missed opportunities that could have won them the game so no point trying to trade what ifs.
On an individual level thought Barbeary was fantastic and asked exactly what people wanted. Which was find that old form back. Bowling ball. Ojomoh quality and we’re back in the time when you could have either of 3 12s all offering different types of game. Underhill big off the bench, looking forward to the Hill Barbs Underhill combo to be back in full swing. Joe also has really just flicked a switch and is back in try scoring mode. Just finishing things again. Which is amazing to see.
Hopefully see some rotation but not too much for Clermont, then maybe sneak a few points in Leinster. Exciting times can’t help but get sucked in
Quote:HK890
Quietly fairly content with that performance. Fustrating to not win but we’ve put ourselves in a position to be able to afford to drop a few points. Some really promising performances.
That took saints best performance in the last year to win that. Think both teams missed opportunities that could have won them the game so no point trying to trade what ifs.
On an individual level thought Barbeary was fantastic and asked exactly what people wanted. Which was find that old form back. Bowling ball. Ojomoh quality and we’re back in the time when you could have either of 3 12s all offering different types of game. Underhill big off the bench, looking forward to the Hill Barbs Underhill combo to be back in full swing. Joe also has really just flicked a switch and is back in try scoring mode. Just finishing things again. Which is amazing to see.
Hopefully see some rotation but not too much for Clermont, then maybe sneak a few points in Leinster. Exciting times can’t help but get sucked in
100% agreed.
Quote:Dorset Boy
Bristool fan asking for consistency when theyt have regularly benefitted massively from inconsisentency of officiating?! LoL!
The OL hit on Hendy was correctly a penalty, and not worthy of anything more.
Barf fan . . . what has Lawrence apologised for if he did nothing wrong?
Quote:hasta
It wasn't a no-arms tackle, his right arm was clearly out wrapping. It wasn't high. It was arguably late, but so was the one on Finn two minutes earlier and that comes down to ref interpretation. What doesn't come down to interpretation is that he was hit in the head by Alex Mitchell's head. Which was high and was illegal.
As was Coetze's head contact, but nothing given on that . . . Barf benefiting from inconsistent reffing yet again
We actually extended our lead yesterday, Unnderhill might have started to counter Saints first 20, Max Ojomoh got his defence wrong at first then sorted it. Bailey really grew into the 15 role particularly in attack, is he better there than at 10?
I look at these games with Saracens, Saints, Bristol etc thinking are the beatable in a semi or final?
However we set up I don't think any of them are invincible.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
I look at these games with Saracens, Saints, Bristol etc thinking are the beatable in a semi or final?
However we set up I don't think any of them are invincible.
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
It wasn't a no-arms tackle, his right arm was clearly out wrapping. It wasn't high. It was arguably late, but so was the one on Finn two minutes earlier and that comes down to ref interpretation. What doesn't come down to interpretation is that he was hit in the head by Alex Mitchell's head. Which was high and was illegal.
As was Coetze's head contact, but nothing given on that . . . Barf benefiting from inconsistent reffing yet again
Any chance you could take your trolling elsewhere?
Quote:OutsideBathQuote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
It wasn't a no-arms tackle, his right arm was clearly out wrapping. It wasn't high. It was arguably late, but so was the one on Finn two minutes earlier and that comes down to ref interpretation. What doesn't come down to interpretation is that he was hit in the head by Alex Mitchell's head. Which was high and was illegal.
As was Coetze's head contact, but nothing given on that . . . Barf benefiting from inconsistent reffing yet again
Any chance you could take your trolling elsewhere?
Great response
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:OutsideBathQuote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
It wasn't a no-arms tackle, his right arm was clearly out wrapping. It wasn't high. It was arguably late, but so was the one on Finn two minutes earlier and that comes down to ref interpretation. What doesn't come down to interpretation is that he was hit in the head by Alex Mitchell's head. Which was high and was illegal.
As was Coetze's head contact, but nothing given on that . . . Barf benefiting from inconsistent reffing yet again
Any chance you could take your trolling elsewhere?
Great response
That’ll be a no then?
Quote:hastaQuote:HK890
Quietly fairly content with that performance. Fustrating to not win but we’ve put ourselves in a position to be able to afford to drop a few points. Some really promising performances.
That took saints best performance in the last year to win that. Think both teams missed opportunities that could have won them the game so no point trying to trade what ifs.
On an individual level thought Barbeary was fantastic and asked exactly what people wanted. Which was find that old form back. Bowling ball. Ojomoh quality and we’re back in the time when you could have either of 3 12s all offering different types of game. Underhill big off the bench, looking forward to the Hill Barbs Underhill combo to be back in full swing. Joe also has really just flicked a switch and is back in try scoring mode. Just finishing things again. Which is amazing to see.
Hopefully see some rotation but not too much for Clermont, then maybe sneak a few points in Leinster. Exciting times can’t help but get sucked in
100% agreed.
Absolutely all of this. It is exciting! Amazing to think how far we’ve come given that we can be that frustrated by that loss.
Agree on Barbeary. Comms said he made something crazy like 140m from 13 carries. Love that pick and go he does through the middle of rucks. Bet his head knocks slowed him for a few months- but he looks right back ‘at it’. The over and under for us winning was perhaps Coetzee’s knock. Barbs emptied himself, and gave way for Coetz to get us over the line, as he’s done often this season. His impact likely worth 2 points! Still, just a minor frustration following a majorly positive performance.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:Dorset Boy
Bristool fan asking for consistency when theyt have regularly benefitted massively from inconsisentency of officiating?! LoL!
The OL hit on Hendy was correctly a penalty, and not worthy of anything more.
Barf fan . . . what has Lawrence apologised for if he did nothing wrong?
Err, reading difficult for you? Try again:
The OL hit on Hendy was correctly a penalty, and not worthy of anything more.
It put an already injured player off the pitch. It was late, it was a penalty. Generally, players don't like injuring (or compounding an existing injury) another player.
Quote:KingoftheHill
. . . Barf benefiting from inconsistent reffing yet again
You must be fantastic fun at parties.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:OutsideBathQuote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
It wasn't a no-arms tackle, his right arm was clearly out wrapping. It wasn't high. It was arguably late, but so was the one on Finn two minutes earlier and that comes down to ref interpretation. What doesn't come down to interpretation is that he was hit in the head by Alex Mitchell's head. Which was high and was illegal.
As was Coetze's head contact, but nothing given on that . . . Barf benefiting from inconsistent reffing yet again
Any chance you could take your trolling elsewhere?
Great response
But spot on for all that, why moan about an incident that occurred between two clubs you don't even support. Trolling is posting for effect, these posts are perfect examples.
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:OutsideBathQuote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
It wasn't a no-arms tackle, his right arm was clearly out wrapping. It wasn't high. It was arguably late, but so was the one on Finn two minutes earlier and that comes down to ref interpretation. What doesn't come down to interpretation is that he was hit in the head by Alex Mitchell's head. Which was high and was illegal.
As was Coetze's head contact, but nothing given on that . . . Barf benefiting from inconsistent reffing yet again
Any chance you could take your trolling elsewhere?
Great response
But spot on for all that, why moan about an incident that occurred between two clubs you don't even support. Trolling is posting for effect, these posts are perfect examples.
The answers you seek are covered in the responses above.
There's no question that Mitchell and Lawrence clashed heads, and I would guess that, whatever, happened - eg Ollie had carried on all the way to the line, it would have been looked at and resulted in a YC - so I don't think anything Ollie did influenced either the ref decision or the result of the game. In that sense, it's irrelevant. But both the Guardian and Telegraph writers interpreted it that Ollie 'went down late', and it certainly looked that way to me at the time. The fact that he's immediately apologised puts it to bed for me, and ultimately reflects really well on him.
Also - it was an absolutely fantastic game of rugby. I love Saints' approach, and I love the fact that, as others have stated above, at no stage did it ever feel that we were out of it.
I very much like HK890's comment of: 'no point trying to trade what ifs', and as Shipwrecked points out, we actually extended our lead at the top of the table. We have won 80% of our games, and the next best is 60%, so what's not to like!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:06:11:12:12 by Optimist.
Also - it was an absolutely fantastic game of rugby. I love Saints' approach, and I love the fact that, as others have stated above, at no stage did it ever feel that we were out of it.
I very much like HK890's comment of: 'no point trying to trade what ifs', and as Shipwrecked points out, we actually extended our lead at the top of the table. We have won 80% of our games, and the next best is 60%, so what's not to like!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:06:11:12:12 by Optimist.
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
It wasn't a no-arms tackle, his right arm was clearly out wrapping. It wasn't high. It was arguably late, but so was the one on Finn two minutes earlier and that comes down to ref interpretation. What doesn't come down to interpretation is that he was hit in the head by Alex Mitchell's head. Which was high and was illegal.
As was Coetze's head contact, but nothing given on that . . . Barf benefiting from inconsistent reffing yet again
Coetzee was in a legal position to take an offload and was looking directly at the ball. Him and Dingwall hit each other. Unfortunate, but a rugby incident.
Quote:KingoftheHillQuote:theredseatQuote:KingoftheHillQuote:hasta
I don't know what the TMO was playing at there. with Coetzee.
Lawrence's first half hit was marginally late, but no more so than the one on Finn a minute earlier.
If Mitchell wants to not get yellow carded he should try not tackling people with his face.
Are you really trying to compare these two? Tackle on Russell was legal. Tackle committed to and arms wrapped. Hendy suffered a shoulder injury and soon after Lawrence makes a deliberate and late shoulder charge on him, targeting the same shoulder. Unsurprisingly, mission accomplished and Hendy is out of the game.
Lawrence knew exactly what he was doing, and the smirk after gave it away. Should have been at least a yellow
His playacting later just sealed the deal . . .
Can you please confirm if you think any late or no arms tackles should be yellow cards? Or do you want all decisions made based on whether a player gets injured? Does it have to be a new injury or is it different if they already hurt themselves a bit earlier?
I assume you don’t want yellow cards given for smirking but otherwise I don’t follow what law you think was either wrongly applied or should be changed as a result of this
A late, no arms tackle should be a yellow. If you need a reference to the laws, then multiple infringements under the section for Dangerous Play.
Question: Why has Lawrence apologised?
I get you’re not happy that your player is injured and that Lawrence was probably targeting him as a result of the bad shoulder but the idea that anything late and no arms is an automatic yellow because of one incident just doesn’t make sense. There has to be some element of danger or obvious foul play and late and no arms can also include some pretty innocuous ‘bumps’ for example where a player tries to pull out and can’t in time.
From your answer I presume you agree that actually the right decision was made at the time and what you’re after is a law change. Personally I think rugby has enough of those going on for various things but your mileage may vary.
As for why he has apologised we can speculate but it’s written in a way that it could be for either or both incidents we’re talking about.
Quote:Optimist
There's no question that Mitchell and Lawrence clashed heads, and I would guess that, whatever, happened - eg Ollie had carried on all the way to the line, it would have been looked at and resulted in a YC - so I don't think anything Ollie did influenced either the ref decision or the result of the game. In that sense, it's irrelevant. But both the Guardian and Telegraph writers interpreted it that Ollie 'went down late', and it certainly looked that way to me at the time. The fact that he's immediately apologised puts it to bed for me, and ultimately reflects really well on him.
Also - it was an absolutely fantastic game of rugby. I love Saints' approach, and I love the fact that, as others have stated above, at no stage did it ever feel that we were out of it.
I very much like HK890's comment of: 'no point trying to trade what ifs', and as Shipwrecked points out, we actually extended our lead at the top of the table. We have won 80% of our games, and the next best is 60%, so what's not to like!
Totally agree
Quote:theredseat
I get you’re not happy that your player is injured
He is a Bristol fan, so he isn't his player. Just bored on a monday morning I expect.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Just a thought...... perhaps Ollie was advised to apologise ?
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Adopted Player 2018/19 Ross Batty
Adopted Player 2019/20 Jack Davies
Adopted Player 2020/21 Cam Redpath
Adopted Player 2021/22 Darren Atkins
Adopted Player 2022/23 Gabriel Hamer-Webb
Adopted Player 2023/24 Tom Carr-Smith
Adopted Player 2024/25 Max Ojomoh
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Just watched it, think he needed to apologise for the shoulder, but nothing wrong with the head clash on his part.
We all see things differently WP! I thought it would be easy to interpret the 'shoulder' as simply standing his ground. I did think he was going to get Yellow for it, but mostly because i was already in a heightened state of anxiety about the whole 7-1 split, exacerbated by Muir's injury.
On the head clash, when he hit the deck I was convinced that he'd got a really serious injury, possibly to his eye. When he got up without - as far as one could see - so much as a mark on him, it felt much more as though he'd realised Mitchell had come in high, that their heads had met, and that this would be a very fine way to guarantee a penalty.
Incidentally, was I the only one that thought Bayliss for Pepper was a very odd choice of substitution given the bench split? Felt like JVG was really doubling down!
On the head clash, when he hit the deck I was convinced that he'd got a really serious injury, possibly to his eye. When he got up without - as far as one could see - so much as a mark on him, it felt much more as though he'd realised Mitchell had come in high, that their heads had met, and that this would be a very fine way to guarantee a penalty.
Incidentally, was I the only one that thought Bayliss for Pepper was a very odd choice of substitution given the bench split? Felt like JVG was really doubling down!
Pepper picked up a hamstring injury- so it was going to be either Bayliss or Underhill to come on.
Interestingly, Flats on comms noted that perhaps JvG had gone for Bayliss over Underhill because of the potential greater impact that Underhill would have later in the game. And this turned out to be a good choice, as Underhill had an incredible, high-energy 30 minutes that almost won us the game single handedly (up until the last play of the game!).
Out of interest- and I can't really be bothered to debate the fine points of what was a terrific game- but was the final penalty against Underhill nailed on? Can't find a replay anywhere of whether it was a certain penalty to Saints or one that could have gone the other way. Obviously, with hindsight, because it was such an easy kick, I wish Underhill hadn't competed on the floor as I think we had their attack under pretty good control- but he clearly had a reason to go for the jackal.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Interestingly, Flats on comms noted that perhaps JvG had gone for Bayliss over Underhill because of the potential greater impact that Underhill would have later in the game. And this turned out to be a good choice, as Underhill had an incredible, high-energy 30 minutes that almost won us the game single handedly (up until the last play of the game!).
Out of interest- and I can't really be bothered to debate the fine points of what was a terrific game- but was the final penalty against Underhill nailed on? Can't find a replay anywhere of whether it was a certain penalty to Saints or one that could have gone the other way. Obviously, with hindsight, because it was such an easy kick, I wish Underhill hadn't competed on the floor as I think we had their attack under pretty good control- but he clearly had a reason to go for the jackal.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
I think Baylis on for Pepper might have been about pace given the way the game started. Sorry to stress you Opti but JvG's comments are as follows:
“I thought Josh Bayliss was excellent on the wing. His aerial skills, his chasing. We don’t see naming a 7-1 split on the bench as a risk, it is a calculated decision.”
Seems to me it's not dead but that it clearly depends on circumstances. I just wonder if JvG is looking to widen some of the players skill sets as well.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
“I thought Josh Bayliss was excellent on the wing. His aerial skills, his chasing. We don’t see naming a 7-1 split on the bench as a risk, it is a calculated decision.”
Seems to me it's not dead but that it clearly depends on circumstances. I just wonder if JvG is looking to widen some of the players skill sets as well.
Quote:dr.bath1865
Out of interest- and I can't really be bothered to debate the fine points of what was a terrific game- but was the final penalty against Underhill nailed on? Can't find a replay anywhere of whether it was a certain penalty to Saints or one that could have gone the other way.
Do you mean the high tackle? If so I thought that was a pretty harsh penalty to give.
He's running at full tilt and mitchell's head hits him in the face, he starts to spin out of it but is immediately reaching for his face and then goes down on his knee. I don't really know what you're looking at Opti.
On the Underhill pen you can hear the ref clearly shouting 'No Sam, no!' before he gives it.
On the Underhill pen you can hear the ref clearly shouting 'No Sam, no!' before he gives it.
Quote:Optimist
We all see things differently WP! I thought it would be easy to interpret the 'shoulder' as simply standing his ground. I did think he was going to get Yellow for it, but mostly because i was already in a heightened state of anxiety about the whole 7-1 split, exacerbated by Muir's injury.
On the head clash, when he hit the deck I was convinced that he'd got a really serious injury, possibly to his eye. When he got up without - as far as one could see - so much as a mark on him, it felt much more as though he'd realised Mitchell had come in high, that their heads had met, and that this would be a very fine way to guarantee a penalty.
Incidentally, was I the only one that thought Bayliss for Pepper was a very odd choice of substitution given the bench split? Felt like JVG was really doubling down!
Yes agree about different opinions. I watched the head clash a few times, it looked pretty natural to me, but maybe he does have reactions that quick. When you bang your head or aything it takes a couple of seconds for you to feel it
Quote:dr.bath1865
Interestingly, Flats on comms noted that perhaps JvG had gone for Bayliss over Underhill because of the potential greater impact that Underhill would have later in the game.
Think Flats also added that it was likely Bayliss could end up on the wing at some point so was sensible for him to come on first.
Quote:tigersimonQuote:dr.bath1865
Interestingly, Flats on comms noted that perhaps JvG had gone for Bayliss over Underhill because of the potential greater impact that Underhill would have later in the game.
Think Flats also added that it was likely Bayliss could end up on the wing at some point so was sensible for him to come on first.
But then you risk your last remaining 'wing' getting injured playing in the back row when Underhill could have done the job...
I guess Schreuder could have gone out there if Bayliss got hurt.
Quote:tigersimonQuote:dr.bath1865
Interestingly, Flats on comms noted that perhaps JvG had gone for Bayliss over Underhill because of the potential greater impact that Underhill would have later in the game.
Think Flats also added that it was likely Bayliss could end up on the wing at some point so was sensible for him to come on first.
Literally no logic in either of those points. Flats should stick to explaining what’s going on in the front row in such a way that hardly anyone knows what he’s talking about, and making breathlessly excited comments about how strong xyz player is.
Quote:… or the actual people who are literally paid to watch rugby for the Telegraph or the Guardian, or actual rugby player Ollie Lawrence, who has apologised for the thing that you can’t see.hasta
I don't really know what you're looking at Opti.
OL’s actual wording: “my actions today offended anyone. On review, I understand the frustration voiced! I’ll be better” - does that really sound like an apology for giving away a penalty? If so, I assume Sam, Finn, Will, Dunny, Beno, Alfie, Sam and indeed, every rugby player who has ever played the game, will be issuing a blanket apology next.
"I'm sorry you got offended" isn't the most fulsome of apologies.
The rugby journos from the telegraph and guardian just watched it live and filed copy immediately. Watch it on TV, it's basically immediate. And again, he was clearly hit in the face. Like... that clearly happened. Why is his instinctive reaction worse than being clearly hit in the face?
The rugby journos from the telegraph and guardian just watched it live and filed copy immediately. Watch it on TV, it's basically immediate. And again, he was clearly hit in the face. Like... that clearly happened. Why is his instinctive reaction worse than being clearly hit in the face?
And it wasn’t the worst of crimes. As I’ve noted above it was a clear penalty - not inconceivably a red card and Ollie’s action probably had no bearing on the ref’s decision or the match result. But his apology makes it pretty clear, he, or someone in management/comms, felt it contravened rugby’s own unwritten code - that’s all I’ve ever said.
And do you seriously think rugby journos file their reports without so much as re-watching incidents that require interpretation?
And do you seriously think rugby journos file their reports without so much as re-watching incidents that require interpretation?
God, what a storm in a teacup. He got hit in the face - it took a moment to register and he goes down after the impact. When he’s getting up he clearly then touches his face to see if there’s blood.
He’s probably smiling afterwards because the reckless challenge was (properly) penalised and he escaped serious injury.
Players get absolutely mullered on the pitch. I mean, even if you play/played in the past, the force of impact in the professional game is SO much greater than you or I would manage, just in open play, let alone an actual head clash or being on the receiving end of a dominant tackle (I seriously think I would be out and out killed if Sam Underhill hit me with one of his rib ticklers!)
The thought that after dealing with all that for 75 mins, a player would then feign injury to win a penalty just seems absurd.
If people want to start policing players’ facial reactions they could do a damn sight worse than starting with Ben Earl and his constant whooping!
He’s probably smiling afterwards because the reckless challenge was (properly) penalised and he escaped serious injury.
Players get absolutely mullered on the pitch. I mean, even if you play/played in the past, the force of impact in the professional game is SO much greater than you or I would manage, just in open play, let alone an actual head clash or being on the receiving end of a dominant tackle (I seriously think I would be out and out killed if Sam Underhill hit me with one of his rib ticklers!)
The thought that after dealing with all that for 75 mins, a player would then feign injury to win a penalty just seems absurd.
If people want to start policing players’ facial reactions they could do a damn sight worse than starting with Ben Earl and his constant whooping!
Yes I'm surprised the amount of press / debate this 5 seconds of the match has received given what a cracker it was and all the rugby related talking points.
Great hands by JC from MRs (not sympathetic!) pass for the try btw. He is a scary sight at full pace, think I would go down with 'cramp' if I saw him coming at me.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Great hands by JC from MRs (not sympathetic!) pass for the try btw. He is a scary sight at full pace, think I would go down with 'cramp' if I saw him coming at me.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Play acting probably not, milked it slightly, yes maybe. Penalty yes, yellow card, no. That being said if Lawrence was totally innocent then why the public apology. Move on.
Two other things did irk a little. Yes,I know that Russell is entitled to use up his time to kick at goal ( let’s be honest it’s too long anyway ) but the way he does it is sure to wind up the opposition crowd a little - sure, take a swig, tie up a shoelace but don’t stand there preening yourself - we had to endure Dan Biggars rituals of course ! Secondly, players waving their hands to try and put off the last kick of the match is not on - it’s a penalty and had Smith fluffed it, I wonder if the referee would have had the guts to order it retaken.
Overall, great game to watch, we needed the points more than you guys and are still marooned in eighth place - best we can hope for is to sneak in fourth so maybe we shall meet again ?
Two other things did irk a little. Yes,I know that Russell is entitled to use up his time to kick at goal ( let’s be honest it’s too long anyway ) but the way he does it is sure to wind up the opposition crowd a little - sure, take a swig, tie up a shoelace but don’t stand there preening yourself - we had to endure Dan Biggars rituals of course ! Secondly, players waving their hands to try and put off the last kick of the match is not on - it’s a penalty and had Smith fluffed it, I wonder if the referee would have had the guts to order it retaken.
Overall, great game to watch, we needed the points more than you guys and are still marooned in eighth place - best we can hope for is to sneak in fourth so maybe we shall meet again ?
Quote:NGSB
Play acting probably not, milked it slightly, yes maybe. Penalty yes, yellow card, no. That being said if Lawrence was totally innocent then why the public apology. Move on.
Two other things did irk a little. Yes,I know that Russell is entitled to use up his time to kick at goal ( let’s be honest it’s too long anyway ) but the way he does it is sure to wind up the opposition crowd a little - sure, take a swig, tie up a shoelace but don’t stand there preening yourself - we had to endure Dan Biggars rituals of course ! Secondly, players waving their hands to try and put off the last kick of the match is not on - it’s a penalty and had Smith fluffed it, I wonder if the referee would have had the guts to order it retaken.
Overall, great game to watch, we needed the points more than you guys and are still marooned in eighth place - best we can hope for is to sneak in fourth so maybe we shall meet again ?
Third, the crowd trying (but failing) to put Finn off his kick? 'Respect the kicker' and all that...
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:NGSB
Play acting probably not, milked it slightly, yes maybe. Penalty yes, yellow card, no. That being said if Lawrence was totally innocent then why the public apology. Move on.
This argument has been mentioned several times now, what is not clear is what Ollie is actually apologising about. Isn't there a suggestion to be made that targeting another players injury with a late tackle is the more damaging than the Mitchell incident?
Great game - Next game - If we and Saints make the play offs it would be great to play them again - hopefully at the Rec, however there is literally an ocean to cross before that prospect even becomes a possibility.
We have 2 big European games and then Sale away before the 6 Nations. That is where our focus is and what will be will be.
JvG will be keen to rest some key players and as usual Injuries will have an enormous say in who is successful come the end of the season.
We have 2 big European games and then Sale away before the 6 Nations. That is where our focus is and what will be will be.
JvG will be keen to rest some key players and as usual Injuries will have an enormous say in who is successful come the end of the season.
Quote:NGSB
Play acting probably not, milked it slightly, yes maybe. Penalty yes, yellow card, no. That being said if Lawrence was totally innocent then why the public apology. Move on.
Two other things did irk a little. Yes,I know that Russell is entitled to use up his time to kick at goal ( let’s be honest it’s too long anyway ) but the way he does it is sure to wind up the opposition crowd a little - sure, take a swig, tie up a shoelace but don’t stand there preening yourself - we had to endure Dan Biggars rituals of course ! Secondly, players waving their hands to try and put off the last kick of the match is not on - it’s a penalty and had Smith fluffed it, I wonder if the referee would have had the guts to order it retaken.
Overall, great game to watch, we needed the points more than you guys and are still marooned in eighth place - best we can hope for is to sneak in fourth so maybe we shall meet again ?
Why not a yellow? Mitchell was upright, at pace, and a clear head on head. Under the protocols it is a definite yellow, and we (Charlie Ewels) have had 2 reds in recent seasons for similar.
And Saints fans waived the right to criticise any kicker with their noise (at a normally very, very silent ground) for Finn's final penalty.
Must admit I saw Alfie waving his hands in the air on the last penalty. Not a good look.
BTW Finn has said he prefers some noise but is used to that in France
Widcombe Garçon
BTW Finn has said he prefers some noise but is used to that in France
Widcombe Garçon
[quote Dorset Boy]And Saints fans waived the right to criticise any kicker with their noise (at a normally very, very silent ground) for Finn's final penalty.[/quote]
.... maybe they were disgruntled at something in the lead up to the penalty kick?
[quote SJS]The thought that .... a player would then feign injury to win a penalty just seems absurd.[SJS]
I don't think he was feigning injury as much as he was just ensuring that the ref looked at it - which happens quite a lot now.
[quote Shipwrecked]what is not clear is what Ollie is actually apologising about. [shipwrecked]
The other incident was given as no more than a penalty. Why on earth would he feel the need to apologise for giving away a penalty?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:07:10:02:02 by Optimist.
.... maybe they were disgruntled at something in the lead up to the penalty kick?
[quote SJS]The thought that .... a player would then feign injury to win a penalty just seems absurd.[SJS]
I don't think he was feigning injury as much as he was just ensuring that the ref looked at it - which happens quite a lot now.
[quote Shipwrecked]what is not clear is what Ollie is actually apologising about. [shipwrecked]
The other incident was given as no more than a penalty. Why on earth would he feel the need to apologise for giving away a penalty?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:07:10:02:02 by Optimist.
Quote:Optimist
And it wasn’t the worst of crimes. As I’ve noted above it was a clear penalty - not inconceivably a red card and Ollie’s action probably had no bearing on the ref’s decision or the match result. But his apology makes it pretty clear, he, or someone in management/comms, felt it contravened rugby’s own unwritten code - that’s all I’ve ever said.
And do you seriously think rugby journos file their reports without so much as re-watching incidents that require interpretation?
Yes, as someone who knew a bunch of them (RIP Steve Bale) they are on insane deadlines to file asap after the match.
Quote:OptimistQuote:Shipwrecked
what is not clear is what Ollie is actually apologising about.
The other incident was given as no more than a penalty. Why on earth would he feel the need to apologise for giving away a penalty?
Because as a player he might feel guilty about potentially affecting the career of another player. I just don't know Opti it's not clear. I'm in the 'storm in a tea cup' camp.
100% agree with SJS' post above. Storm in a teacup, although seems to be quite a big brew.
Quite nice to have a bit more heated debate, borderline vitriol and lite trolling after a game. Seems a while since we've attracted such interest and picked over a game in such a way, likely because there's only so many ways you can write "yay another 5 points".
(I joke- Please rugby karma gods don't come back to bite me!).
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Quite nice to have a bit more heated debate, borderline vitriol and lite trolling after a game. Seems a while since we've attracted such interest and picked over a game in such a way, likely because there's only so many ways you can write "yay another 5 points".
(I joke- Please rugby karma gods don't come back to bite me!).
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
I don't think it's a 'storm in a teacup' because there very clearly isn't a 'storm' raging about it. It's just an interesting bit of minutiae within the match, made more interesting by the same thing being interpreted in different ways, and trying to unpick that.
It's also of (mild) interest to me that people on ERE just seem to be in a bit of denial about what plenty of dispassionate observers felt they saw.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:07:11:15:48 by Optimist.
It's also of (mild) interest to me that people on ERE just seem to be in a bit of denial about what plenty of dispassionate observers felt they saw.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:07:11:15:48 by Optimist.
Firstly, what a great match planned and played by two excellent teams. Top marks to FG mgt for the pitch being in such good nick (apparently they have a heated tent which covers the whole pitch if v inclement weather forecast). They have some very good and promising younger players, but still miss the Waller bros. 
. There's no need for me to comment further as it all been done to death above..........................................................
Secondly, I do hope Hendy was not seriously injured. He was obviously a targetted player, fair enough. As for the booing when Finn kicked, I asssumed at the time it was over enthusiastic very occasional Saints supporters - as (having been to many matches at Saints over the years) its not normal. As for Lawrence, he needs to stay aware that he is on the telly, let alone being videoeeeed.
Next up = fanatical and knowledgeable Clermont supporters at the Rec. Anyone else recall many moons ago at the Stoop in a ?european final? the many hundreds of them, blue and yellow everything. Borthwick was our Captain at the time?
. There's no need for me to comment further as it all been done to death above..........................................................
Secondly, I do hope Hendy was not seriously injured. He was obviously a targetted player, fair enough. As for the booing when Finn kicked, I asssumed at the time it was over enthusiastic very occasional Saints supporters - as (having been to many matches at Saints over the years) its not normal. As for Lawrence, he needs to stay aware that he is on the telly, let alone being videoeeeed.
Next up = fanatical and knowledgeable Clermont supporters at the Rec. Anyone else recall many moons ago at the Stoop in a ?european final? the many hundreds of them, blue and yellow everything. Borthwick was our Captain at the time?
Quote:annie blackthorn
Firstly, what a great match planned and played by two excellent teams. Top marks to FG mgt for the pitch being in such good nick (apparently they have a heated tent which covers the whole pitch if v inclement weather forecast). They have some very good and promising younger players, but still miss the Waller bros.
Secondly, I do hope Hendy was not seriously injured. He was obviously a targetted player, fair enough. As for the booing when Finn kicked, I asssumed at the time it was over enthusiastic very occasional Saints supporters - as (having been to many matches at Saints over the years) its not normal. As for Lawrence, he needs to stay aware that
he is on the telly, let alone being videoeeeed.
Next up = fanatical and knowledgeable Clermont supporters at the Rec. Anyone else recall many moons ago at the Stoop in a ?european final? the many hundreds of them, blue and yellow everything. Borthwick was our Captain at the time?
Yes, remember that fondly. They outclassed us but Maddock scored a great individual try right in front of our seats!
I remember it well... sort of
I think their classy winger (Malzieu? sp? who got ridiculously few French caps despite being almost utterly unplayable) scored a few for them, Maddock hit back and then Grewy got held up over the line or somesuch in the final minutes. We had Davide Bory on the wing- what a player!
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
I think their classy winger (Malzieu? sp? who got ridiculously few French caps despite being almost utterly unplayable) scored a few for them, Maddock hit back and then Grewy got held up over the line or somesuch in the final minutes. We had Davide Bory on the wing- what a player!
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Rougerie was still with Clermont then, what a player.
We were second best but were still in with a chance in the last play of the game, except Borthwick butchered an overlap. He then came out after the game and slagged off Brownsword for not investing - even though we'd already signed Claasens and Butch.
We were second best but were still in with a chance in the last play of the game, except Borthwick butchered an overlap. He then came out after the game and slagged off Brownsword for not investing - even though we'd already signed Claasens and Butch.
I didn’t like the noise when Russell took what he thought was the match winning penalty - Saints fans are usually better than that but unfortunately too much beer has that effect - I don’t like it and it’s a lot worse elsewhere but that does not excuse it. Mitchell tried to back out of contact, no intent and not reckless so in my view penalty only but we can agree to disagree !
Quote:NGSB
Mitchell tried to back out of contact, no intent and not reckless so in my view penalty only but we can agree to disagree !
That's not how the framework goes.
[passport.world.rugby]
Whether or not you / we like it, anything along the lines of intent and not reckless is all irrelevant if its head to head and not accidental unless you are saying that it wasn't foul play at all (in which case play on). Only if he saw it as a low degree of danger would it have been a PK, Mitchell was coming at speed so that wasn't going to happen. Luckly it was glancing only.
On head knocks, I hope that the two Saints locks are OK, that was a horrible coming together.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:07:12:25:34 by BathMatt53.
Quote:BathMatt53Quote:NGSB
Mitchell tried to back out of contact, no intent and not reckless so in my view penalty only but we can agree to disagree !
That's not how the framework goes.
[passport.world.rugby]
Whether or not you / we like it, anything along the lines of intent and not reckless is all irrelevant if its head to head and not accidental unless you are saying that it wasn't foul play at all (in which case play on). Only if he saw it as a low degree of danger would it have been a PK, Mitchell was coming at speed so that wasn't going to happen. Luckly it was glancing only.
Accepting that is at the time of the offence how does that marry with this Matt?:
In assessing the entry point within the range Disciplinary Panels are likely to give significant weight to RFU Regulations 19.4.49(a), 19.4.49(g) and 19.4.49(h) as follows:
19.4.49(a) – intent. If the Disciplinary Panel concludes that the offending Player intended to commit the offence and also that they intended to injure the victim, then the entry point would move higher up the range.
19.4.49(g) – effect on the victim. If the Player needs no treatment and continues to play the entry point will be towards the bottom end of the range. The point will move higher up the range depending on the level of treatment on the pitch, whether they continue to play and the extent of any injury. The more severe the injury the higher up the range will be the starting point.
Quote:hasta
were still in with a chance in the last play of the game, except Borthwick butchered an overlap
....my memory says that Grewcock dropped the ball close to their line???
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:BathMatt53Quote:NGSB
Mitchell tried to back out of contact, no intent and not reckless so in my view penalty only but we can agree to disagree !
That's not how the framework goes.
[passport.world.rugby]
Whether or not you / we like it, anything along the lines of intent and not reckless is all irrelevant if its head to head and not accidental unless you are saying that it wasn't foul play at all (in which case play on). Only if he saw it as a low degree of danger would it have been a PK, Mitchell was coming at speed so that wasn't going to happen. Luckly it was glancing only.
Accepting that is at the time of the offence how does that marry with this Matt?:
In assessing the entry point within the range Disciplinary Panels are likely to give significant weight to RFU Regulations 19.4.49(a), 19.4.49(g) and 19.4.49(h) as follows:
19.4.49(a) – intent. If the Disciplinary Panel concludes that the offending Player intended to commit the offence and also that they intended to injure the victim, then the entry point would move higher up the range.
19.4.49(g) – effect on the victim. If the Player needs no treatment and continues to play the entry point will be towards the bottom end of the range. The point will move higher up the range depending on the level of treatment on the pitch, whether they continue to play and the extent of any injury. The more severe the injury the higher up the range will be the starting point.
Those are questions for the Citing panels SW, not the ref. The framework is just a simple screening proceedure to help refs with some repeatable structure (albeit with the final one - mitigation - being a matter of judgement).
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Yes Matt, my point was though that intent doesn't affect the decision on the pitch but it does affect subsequent injury in terms of length of sanction. Isn't that a contradiction?
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Quote:OptimistQuote:hasta
were still in with a chance in the last play of the game, except Borthwick butchered an overlap
....my memory says that Grewcock dropped the ball close to their line???
Yep.
An overlap loomed on the right but Danny Grewcock fumbled, poetic justice perhaps given the England lock's unpunished punch earlier in the game.
[www.theguardian.com]
Find it hard to believe that Danny G would have punched anyone?!
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:shipwrecked
Yes Matt, my point was though that intent doesn't affect the decision on the pitch but it does affect subsequent injury in terms of length of sanction. Isn't that a contradiction?
It does feed into the 'was there foul play'.
So the Coetzee knock for example: Has head contact occurred - yes, was it intentional - no...play on (i.e. not even a pen).
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:BathMatt53Quote:shipwrecked
Yes Matt, my point was though that intent doesn't affect the decision on the pitch but it does affect subsequent injury in terms of length of sanction. Isn't that a contradiction?
It does feed into the 'was there foul play'.
So the Coetzee knock for example: Has head contact occurred - yes, was it intentional - no...play on (i.e. not even a pen).
Ok I understand, so if intentional then when sanction is applied then 19.4.49 gets its say. I've not seen that applied in head knocks. That is a player with a poor concussion history getting a longer recovery time mirrored in the sanction. Perhaps it's new.
Quote:BathMatt53Quote:shipwrecked
Yes Matt, my point was though that intent doesn't affect the decision on the pitch but it does affect subsequent injury in terms of length of sanction. Isn't that a contradiction?
It does feed into the 'was there foul play'.
So the Coetzee knock for example: Has head contact occurred - yes, was it intentional - no...play on (i.e. not even a pen).
I don’t quite see it like that - there was foul play because there was (an entirely understandable) tackle off the ball. Dingwall was upright into a potential tackle. Dingwall was going to (and indeed had to ) tackle Coetzee in the expectation he would get the ball. Had there not have been the head clash it could have been a simple pen or just Dingwall holding his ground.
As I said above, the TMO made a right hash of it and had it been looked at properly might have resulted in a card IMHO.
Quote:SJSQuote:BathMatt53Quote:shipwrecked
Yes Matt, my point was though that intent doesn't affect the decision on the pitch but it does affect subsequent injury in terms of length of sanction. Isn't that a contradiction?
It does feed into the 'was there foul play'.
So the Coetzee knock for example: Has head contact occurred - yes, was it intentional - no...play on (i.e. not even a pen).
I don’t quite see it like that - there was foul play because there was (an entirely understandable) tackle off the ball.
That doesn't make sense though. Neither Dingwall nor Coetzee were tackler nor ball carrier, Neither Dingwall nor Coetzee changed direction in any way and neither Dingwall nor Coetzee were looking where they were going. They simply bumped into each other how can that be foul play?
Quote:NGSB
I didn’t like the noise when Russell took what he thought was the match winning penalty - Saints fans are usually better than that but unfortunately too much beer has that effect...
Rugby of course was famous for it's puritanical abstention from alcohol until professionalism...
(Also, silence during kicking isn't some long held tradition across Rugby - it was something that a few years ago Munster prided themselves on as something that only happened there.)
Quote:shipwrecked
[
That doesn't make sense though. Neither Dingwall nor Coetzee were tackler nor ball carrier, Neither Dingwall nor Coetzee changed direction in any way and neither Dingwall nor Coetzee were looking where they were going. They simply bumped into each other how can that be foul play?
I disagree, seemed pretty clear to me at the time: Coetzee was on the shoulder of the ball carrier. Dingwall was rushing up presumably to tackle Coetzee when he got the ball. He didn’t get the ball, Dingwall ran straight into him.
Defenders anticipate where the ball is going to be all the time and position accordingly. Dingwall got it wrong is all.
As I said, my personal view is that it was foul play which would probably have warranted a card, the ref didn’t and called play on. Arguably given Coetzee’s destructive bouts when he comes on as ‘finisher’ we were more hindered by that than Saints were by the conduct Lawrence was accused of, but I think on the whole we’ve taken it with a bit more grace that some of the home fans! (Take a look at the BBC comments if you want some idea…
)Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025:01:07:23:04:38 by SJS.
World Rugby Passport.
Under World Rugby Regulation 17 (the Regulation which deals with Foul Play, see further below), an action is only Foul Play if it is:
intentional; or
reckless.
If an action is an accident, it is not Foul Play. Source
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Under World Rugby Regulation 17 (the Regulation which deals with Foul Play, see further below), an action is only Foul Play if it is:
intentional; or
reckless.
If an action is an accident, it is not Foul Play. Source
Quote:hasta
they are on insane deadlines to file asap after the match.
I wonder if Gerald Meagher had time to watch the incident through again before filing 500 words on the subject hasta?
[www.theguardian.com]
Couldn’t disagree more with his take, btw.
Quote:shipwrecked
World Rugby Passport.
Under World Rugby Regulation 17 (the Regulation which deals with Foul Play, see further below), an action is only Foul Play if it is:
intentional; or
reckless.
If an action is an accident, it is not Foul Play. Source
What, and running upright at full tilt into a player without the ball isn’t reckless?
Quote:SJSQuote:shipwrecked
World Rugby Passport.
Under World Rugby Regulation 17 (the Regulation which deals with Foul Play, see further below), an action is only Foul Play if it is:
intentional; or
reckless.
If an action is an accident, it is not Foul Play. Source
What, and running upright at full tilt into a player without the ball isn’t reckless?
Not if accidentally and I thought it was very obviously an accidental collision.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Quote:SJS
What, and running upright at full tilt into a player without the ball isn’t reckless?
Well yes, by both players. Could have yellowed both I suppose as neither were looking and both ran into each other. Personally I think that Anthony Woodthorpe got it spot on with 'rugby incident' / accident.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:BathMatt53Quote:SJS
What, and running upright at full tilt into a player without the ball isn’t reckless?
Well yes, by both players. Could have yellowed both I suppose as neither were looking and both ran into each other.
I think this is the part I don't agree with - Coetzee was perfectly entitled to be running alongside as potential receiver. He had no obligation to dip or take any evasive action, or dip into contact etc, which is what made the whole TMO intervention so nonsensical.
Dingwall, on the other hand as the defender, had the onus on him to (potentially) make a safe (i.e. not upright) tackle or not to impede a non-ball-carrying player if Coetzee didn't get the ball.
Quote:Personally I think that Anthony Woodthorpe got it spot on with 'rugby incident' / accident.
Yep - the point I was making was that following the WR head contact process it should IMVHO have been looked at, and we lost an effective ball carrier who could have impacted the game.
Compare that to the faux-outrage over Lawrence/Hendy and Lawrence/Oscar for Best Actor and it all seems a bit strange.
I don't find it that strange. One was an accident and unintentional so not foul play IMO (I am aware that you disagree). OLs late shot on Hendy was neither an accident or unintentional hence penalised.
The Mitchell one on OL was clearly a yellow but its the perception that he made the most of it, which isn't an offence unless you class it under 9.7c or 9.27. I can't see that 9.7c would stick as there was an actual offence.
As I say, I think that Sir had a great game.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
The Mitchell one on OL was clearly a yellow but its the perception that he made the most of it, which isn't an offence unless you class it under 9.7c or 9.27. I can't see that 9.7c would stick as there was an actual offence.
As I say, I think that Sir had a great game.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Quote:
Having watched the video (linked in the article), he seems to keep digging holes for himself. First the vague apology that drew more attention, now an explanation that he was within his rights to go down...eh? Sounds very much like the diving that he's saying it isn't.
Lots of apologising but it doesn't sound very genuine tbh. Would have been better off keeping quiet altogether.
He was 100% hit in the face. At worst, he milked it, rather than diving. Anyone who knows that people don't take a second or so to assess whether they've been badly hurt after a significant to the face... hasn't taken a hit to the face.
If I had to suspect anything there, it would be that he stopped to work out if he was badly hurt, and MAY have milked it a bit once he'd already stopped running, but even that isn't clear cut to me,
I'm far more upset by his late hit on Hendy than his reaction to being hit in the face. If we want to stop "milking it" from coming into rugby, then we're 20 years too late
A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything
RAEBURN SHIELD
If I had to suspect anything there, it would be that he stopped to work out if he was badly hurt, and MAY have milked it a bit once he'd already stopped running, but even that isn't clear cut to me,
I'm far more upset by his late hit on Hendy than his reaction to being hit in the face. If we want to stop "milking it" from coming into rugby, then we're 20 years too late
RAEBURN SHIELD
Is it anything significantly different to a situation where a team has a pen advantage and the scrum half in possession sees nothing obvious on and 'accidentally' drops the ball?
Ollie believing he was hit in face and in possession basically saying to ref, can we take the pen?
Had it been the other way round I really wouldn't have complained
Ollie believing he was hit in face and in possession basically saying to ref, can we take the pen?
Had it been the other way round I really wouldn't have complained
I do love the faux outrage on Social Media, there are late hits and hithousery on every rugby field every weekend probably everywhere in the world (certainly in deepest Somerset). If any of those people actually played I would be amazed if they never did anything on the edge of acceptability on a rugby field...
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
one of the most famous 'dives' of all is from 1978. [www.youtube.com] at about 5:02
Andy Haden throws himself out of the lineout to get a match winning penalty.
Even if OL made the most of it the was head contact and it was the slow mo review that led to the pen and yell not the ref seeing OL clutch his face.
I AM had tackled legally there would have been nothing done.
As an aside earlier in the clip Bill Maclaren refers to the big packs of forwards who Averaged about 15 stone 8.
Andy Haden throws himself out of the lineout to get a match winning penalty.
Even if OL made the most of it the was head contact and it was the slow mo review that led to the pen and yell not the ref seeing OL clutch his face.
I AM had tackled legally there would have been nothing done.
As an aside earlier in the clip Bill Maclaren refers to the big packs of forwards who Averaged about 15 stone 8.
It's not so much what he did, although I don't love it, more that he keeps drawing attention to it. They're called the dark arts for a reason.
(even though the smile was almost certainly absolutely nothing to do with anything)
If Lawrence wasn't caught smiling on camera, this incident wouldn't have been mentioned since. There was head contact. He went down. Mitchell went to the bin. Russell kicked the penalty. End of.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
If Lawrence wasn't caught smiling on camera, this incident wouldn't have been mentioned since. There was head contact. He went down. Mitchell went to the bin. Russell kicked the penalty. End of.
2024/25 adoptee: Guy Pepper
Quote:BathMatt53
I do love the faux outrage on Social Media, there are late hits and hithousery on every rugby field every weekend probably everywhere in the world (certainly in deepest Somerset). If any of those people actually played I would be amazed if they never did anything on the edge of acceptability on a rugby field...
I'm astonished there's enough people to generate enough outrage that a professional player feels the need to clarify their position on social media.
In terms of ex-twitter, or Instagram or whatever it must constitute an infitesimally small number of it's actual traffic.
I do love the faux outrage on Social Media, there are late hits and hithousery on every rugby field every weekend probably everywhere in the world (certainly in deepest Somerset). If any of those people actually played I would be amazed if they never did anything on the edge of acceptability on a rugby field...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely this! In the "bad old days" when I was playing, it was well known that if you were subject to a "foul", then you made sure the ref knew there was an issue! If you got the penalty, fine and a smile, if you didn't, play on.
As others have said it was only the smile on film that has created this storm in a teacup...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely this! In the "bad old days" when I was playing, it was well known that if you were subject to a "foul", then you made sure the ref knew there was an issue! If you got the penalty, fine and a smile, if you didn't, play on.
As others have said it was only the smile on film that has created this storm in a teacup...
Quote:The Bear
I'm astonished there's enough people to generate enough outrage that a professional player feels the need to clarify their position on social media.
There isn't - and so, he could easily have left it at the enigmatic apology. I've only seen 'outrage' from a few opposition fans - which means one can automatically reduce its relevance by 90%.
Quote:The Bear
In terms of ex-twitter, or Instagram or whatever it must constitute an infitesimally small number of it's actual traffic.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
Quote:OptimistQuote:The Bear
I'm astonished there's enough people to generate enough outrage that a professional player feels the need to clarify their position on social media.
There isn't - and so, he could easily have left it at the enigmatic apology. I've only seen 'outrage' from a few opposition fans - which means one can automatically reduce its relevance by 90%.
Quote:The Bear
In terms of ex-twitter, or Instagram or whatever it must constitute an infitesimally small number of it's actual traffic.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
People are still banging on about it today, and saying straight faced that Mitchell shouldn’t have been yellow carded. I guess Bath are there to be shot at now and we should take it as a compliment. I’m old enough to remember how often Jack Rowell’s sides were accused of cheating and bending the rules.
’’Paint the whole world with a rainbow”
It's boredom T&M, nobody is watching the the European rugby any more so it's the only thing to talk about.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Tell you what, Mitchell can have the yellow card back if Beno gets the red back.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Bath News 24/7
More Bath headlines
- LEARNINGS FOR NEXT SEASON. SEASON REVIEW CONTINUED.
- World Rugby Junior World Championship 2026 Preview
- FAILURE, FRUSTRATION OR FLATLINE? 2026 SEASON REVIEW
- "IT'S IN OUR HANDS”...BATH V EXETER.
- NOW OR NEVER: BATH V LEICESTER
- BOUNCEBACKABILITY: EXETER CHIEFS V BATH RUGBY
- LE HANDICAP? BORDEAUX v BATH ECC SEMI FINAL
- “MAY YOUR CHOICES REFLECT YOUR HOPES NOT YOUR FEARS”.
- EYES BACK ON THE OTHER PRIZE! BATH v HARLEQUINS
Bath latest threads
- O/T Postcards from the Past No 4 – Naples 2010
- Injury latest on forgotten Bath Rugby wrecking ball Jaco Coetzee
- OT / Prostate
- OT - Fox wins the Open at Birkdale
- O/T Postcards from the Past No 3 Théoule-sur-Mer – May 2017
- OT/ Site advertising
- Will Roue Signed ahead of the 2026/27 season
- Bath Rugby's confirmed 2026/27 incoming signings and outgoings
- 2026/27 PREM Rugby Cup fixtures confirmed
- O/T Postcards from the Past No2 Cordoba 2015