PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Cloete: key man?
By PG Tips
April 11 2023
If a recent Shedweb article is to be believed, donkey noises are now banned at Kingsholm. That should mean no chorus of “Eeyore! Eeyore!” at the first Bath fumble on Friday evening. The piece does not say how this edict is to be implemented: regulated by stick or incentivised by carrot? The release date gives a clue to take the order with a pinch of salt and donkeys are obstinate creatures, not easily goaded into cooperation. Whatever the truth, Bath will have to pin down the Cherry & White donkeys to have any chance of a win.
Pinning the tail of these particular donkeys will be no child’s play. In their most recent outing the Cherry & Whites showed a mulish stubbornness in pushing reigning European Champions La Rochelle all the way. The flair and sweeping attack of their backs won the plaudits but it was the work of the beasts of burden up front, so essential to traditional Gloucester DNA, that laid the groundwork for what was so nearly a stunning victory. If that were not enough, the Kingsholm faithful, whatever beastly persona they adopt are bound to greet their visitors with hostility, especially when those visitors are a struggling Bath. Not so much asininity, but acidity, whether braying or not.
For the record, the donkeys Bath are likely to face could include Rapava-Ruskin, Gotovtsev, Ford-Robinson, Alemanno, Reid, Ludlow and Ackermann while the thoroughbreds should be drawn from Varney, the veteran Twelvetrees, Atkinson, Harris, Thorley, May, Rees-Zammit and Carreras. Enough pedigree there to make asses of any opponents if they click on the day.
Bath’s fortunes in recent years suggest they have not won in Kingsholm for donkey’s years. In fact there was a Blue, White and Black purple patch beginning with the “Old Spot” of bother – the infamous “battle of Kingsholm” (2 red cards, 5 yellow and a 1 point last-minute victory), in the Ford-Blackadder years when Bath snatched 5 away wins in a row, proving that they in those days had the kick like a mule of the two.
While last year’s dismal display suggested Bath played like blindfolded children, this Bath squad is a different beast with a stubbornness of their own. Johann van Graan will aim to build on a satisfying triumph in another west country derby three weeks ago to spring another surprise. Injuries permitting, the squad that quelled the chiefs should be rewarded with a vote of confidence. There may be a tweak to the starting lineup-perhaps Lee-Warner to start and if Underhill and Coetzee are recovered from their head injuries, they may win places on the bench to counter the host’s breakdown threat. Key man there though is likely to be Chris Cloete, a close contender for man of the match with his steals and defensive work.
If Bath’s all international front row can put in the plodding graft they did in late March and the lineout stays as solid as against Exeter, Bath’s own donkeys can lay the groundwork for Redpath, Lawrence, Cokanasiga and co to reprise the dash in attack of that derby. Let’s hope they can- and make asses of their opponents.
Possible Teams:
Bath: Obano, Dunn, Stuart, Lee-Warner, McNally, Hill, Cloete, Reid. Spencer (Capt.), Bailey. McConnochie, Redpath, Lawrence, Cokanasiga, Gallagher.
Replacements:, Schoeman, Annett, Rae, Van Velze, Underhill. Schreuder, Ojomoh, De Glanville.
Gloucester: Elrington, Blake, Gotovtsev, Clarke, Alemanno, Reid, Ludlow, Ackermann. Varney, Twelvetrees. May, Atkinson, Harris, Rees- Zammit. Carreras.
Replacements: Rapava-Ruskin, Walker, Ford-Robinson, Jordan, Morgan. Chapman, Seabrook Thorley
PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Comeonmylovers.co.uk (IP Logged)
Date: 11/04/2023 08:52
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 2023:04:18:08:20:02 by P G Tips.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:18:08:20:02 by P G Tips.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Widcombe boy (IP Logged)
Date: 11/04/2023 09:40
Very good PG
Widcombe Garçon
Widcombe Garçon
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 11/04/2023 10:52
We certainly won't be facing Ackermann. He was the victim of a sickening crocodile roll against La Rochelle and has a serious knee injury.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:11:11:34:59 by Malco.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:11:11:34:59 by Malco.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: makeitagem (IP Logged)
Date: 11/04/2023 12:03
Also Rapava Ruskin, out for the season, Gloucester 1/3 with the bookies.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 11/04/2023 13:01
"old spot of bother"
Brilliant PGT. I spent a year working in Glaws and suffered from that affliction more times than can remember!
Brilliant PGT. I spent a year working in Glaws and suffered from that affliction more times than can remember!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: nick holder (IP Logged)
Date: 11/04/2023 15:14
This will be more than an "Old Spot" of bother on Friday night, it really will be Castle Grim for Bath as we will be on the side of a good hammering. Unless we have a "Gem " of a performance in which case I will pay full "Tribute" to the players and coaches and make sure an away derby win is celebrated by the local "Bell ringers" near me.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:11:15:15:29 by nick holder.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:11:15:15:29 by nick holder.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: HK890 (IP Logged)
Date: 11/04/2023 16:21
Quote:nick holder
This will be more than an "Old Spot" of bother on Friday night, it really will be Castle Grim for Bath as we will be on the side of a good hammering. Unless we have a "Gem " of a performance in which case I will pay full "Tribute" to the players and coaches and make sure an away derby win is celebrated by the local "Bell ringers" near me.
Gloucester have won one game since December. I’m afraid I don’t get the narrative that we will be on the side of a good hammering.
They are in a proper rot now missing very key players. Meanwhile we are nearing full strength, had 2 weeks rested and off the back of our best performance of the season.
It should be a close match which I don’t see why we can’t nick.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Clarkey3k (IP Logged)
Date: 11/04/2023 23:01
The 2 week layoff for us bothers me tbh, I hope it proves to be a positive.
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
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Bath Supporter Jack (IP Logged)
Date: 11/04/2023 23:03
I'm with you HK
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Bath Hammer (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 04:53
That unlikely win in which everything went our way was a fortnight away. I hope the players can be giving that match their fixated thoughts day & night as lapsing back to pre Exeter mindsets will lead to disaster not glory.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 10:26
Bar one performance away at la Rochelle Glos have been one of the poorest teams in the prem for a while now (yes along with us). I am fully aware of our ability to capitulate, however on the back of what was a total and comprehensive defeat of a good Chiefs side I fail to see why we should not go to Kingsholm confident and perform - and I know that will be how JVG and his team will be thinking.
If and big if we do find the consistency the coaches and fans crave I would be confident of a good chance of winning - now that is something I have not felt for a few years but is due to a few reasons - as mentioned Glos have some really key players missing (Ackermann and V-Ruskin are key) but they still have a good team - they have a dangerous backline but so do we (that feels good to say that) - 2 weeks off should allow some of our injured players to recover - Glos put so much into that game at La Rochelle to lose as they did will have been absolutely crippling and those type of fixtures can have catastrophic knock on effects - sometimes it is more beneficial to lose by a cricket score than feel hard done by and lose by less than a score.
I am really hopeful that we can end this season on a bang (injuries permitting) and believe me other sides such as Glos, Quins and Sarries will have taken note of that victory over Chiefs. C'Mon Bath.
If and big if we do find the consistency the coaches and fans crave I would be confident of a good chance of winning - now that is something I have not felt for a few years but is due to a few reasons - as mentioned Glos have some really key players missing (Ackermann and V-Ruskin are key) but they still have a good team - they have a dangerous backline but so do we (that feels good to say that) - 2 weeks off should allow some of our injured players to recover - Glos put so much into that game at La Rochelle to lose as they did will have been absolutely crippling and those type of fixtures can have catastrophic knock on effects - sometimes it is more beneficial to lose by a cricket score than feel hard done by and lose by less than a score.
I am really hopeful that we can end this season on a bang (injuries permitting) and believe me other sides such as Glos, Quins and Sarries will have taken note of that victory over Chiefs. C'Mon Bath.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 10:56
Given the state of the two teams at present we should at the very least expect a competitive performance at Castle Grim and I have a funny feeling we might win this one.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 11:13
Gloucester may well have been disappointing by their standards, but they still have 7 wins to our 5 in the PL and 2 wins in the big cup to none for us in the little cup. Suspect we would all have been delighted with their record.
All the optimism is based on one decent performance against Exeter and ignoring much of the dross we've had to put up with this season from Bath.
If the team that played Exeter turns up then Bath should be competitive, if the Bath from most of this season turns up then it's going to be a long and painful evening.
All the optimism is based on one decent performance against Exeter and ignoring much of the dross we've had to put up with this season from Bath.
If the team that played Exeter turns up then Bath should be competitive, if the Bath from most of this season turns up then it's going to be a long and painful evening.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 12:03
I see Christophe Ridley has been appointed referee for this match.
That's Christophe Ridley of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. The same Christophe Ridley who studied to be a referee thanks to a scholarship awarded by the University of Gloucester.
That Christophe Ridley.
That's Christophe Ridley of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. The same Christophe Ridley who studied to be a referee thanks to a scholarship awarded by the University of Gloucester.
That Christophe Ridley.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: nick holder (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 12:07
Quote:HK890Quote:nick holder
This will be more than an "Old Spot" of bother on Friday night, it really will be Castle Grim for Bath as we will be on the side of a good hammering. Unless we have a "Gem " of a performance in which case I will pay full "Tribute" to the players and coaches and make sure an away derby win is celebrated by the local "Bell ringers" near me.
Gloucester have won one game since December. I’m afraid I don’t get the narrative that we will be on the side of a good hammering.
They are in a proper rot now missing very key players. Meanwhile we are nearing full strength, had 2 weeks rested and off the back of our best performance of the season.
It should be a close match which I don’t see why we can’t nick.
Maybe my beer references were too obscure?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: hemington (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 12:22
Quote:Malco
I see Christophe Ridley has been appointed referee for this match.
That's Christophe Ridley of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. The same Christophe Ridley who studied to be a referee thanks to a scholarship awarded by the University of Gloucester.
That Christophe Ridley.
And your point is?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Old Bath Tub (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 12:23
Quote:Malco
I see Christophe Ridley has been appointed referee for this match.
That's Christophe Ridley of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. The same Christophe Ridley who studied to be a referee thanks to a scholarship awarded by the University of Gloucester.
That Christophe Ridley.
He will be in good company with assistant Anthony Woodthorpe (Gloucester Uni.,) then !
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
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 12:26
Quote:hemingtonQuote:Malco
I see Christophe Ridley has been appointed referee for this match.
That's Christophe Ridley of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. The same Christophe Ridley who studied to be a referee thanks to a scholarship awarded by the University of Gloucester.
That Christophe Ridley.
And your point is?
Obvious.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 12:44
Quote:MalcoQuote:hemingtonQuote:Malco
I see Christophe Ridley has been appointed referee for this match.
That's Christophe Ridley of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. The same Christophe Ridley who studied to be a referee thanks to a scholarship awarded by the University of Gloucester.
That Christophe Ridley.
And your point is?
Obvious.
Obvious but not a very good one unfortunately. As it happens Wayne Barnes was also born in Gloucestershire. Karl Dickson was born in Salisbury. Great what you can learn on 'tinternet. No actual importance though unless you think they are all cheats.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 12:52
Quote:BathMatt53Quote:MalcoQuote:hemingtonQuote:Malco
I see Christophe Ridley has been appointed referee for this match.
That's Christophe Ridley of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. The same Christophe Ridley who studied to be a referee thanks to a scholarship awarded by the University of Gloucester.
That Christophe Ridley.
And your point is?
Obvious.
Obvious but not a very good one unfortunately. As it happens Wayne Barnes was also born in Gloucestershire. Karl Dickson was born in Salisbury. Great what you can learn on 'tinternet. No actual importance though unless you think they are all cheats.
I don't think they are cheats at all but I do think that in a high pressure fixture it creates a completely unnecessary extra pressure.
Have a look at Shedweb where I have made the same point. One of the moderators there has immediately responded saying that Gloucester supporters always feel that Barnes is additionally harsh on them to prove there is no bias.
The chances of there being a controversial incident in a derby match are heightened. The referee doesn't need to be under any additional pressure. Supporters and the wider sport will make the correlation. It isn't necessary. Just choose a different referee.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: hemington (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 12:54
Quote:MalcoQuote:hemingtonQuote:Malco
I see Christophe Ridley has been appointed referee for this match.
That's Christophe Ridley of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. The same Christophe Ridley who studied to be a referee thanks to a scholarship awarded by the University of Gloucester.
That Christophe Ridley.
And your point is?
Obvious.
IF - and I repeat - IF your obvious insinuation is correct he's just as likely to be on our side to show that he is not biased. But I find your whole line of reasoning unhealthy and I honestly expected better from you. And it's not even Friday!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 13:17
Quote:Malco
Just choose a different referee.
I don't see any particular pressure from bithplace.
I do agree in relation to players reffing matches for teams that they played for (in some cases for many years). Dickson is one. Frank Murphy is another.
I also wouldn't have commentators used for matches where in some cases they have even been on the board of one of the clubs at the time.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 13:18
I'm pretty sure that there is no insinuation of deliberate bias
What I think is being said is that a) there will be contentious decisions to be made and the fact of some local connection will place the ref unnecessarily under extra scrutiny to ensure the decision is clearly bias free
and b) there is always the possibility of unintended and completely indirect bias arising given the local connection
Either and both factors could be avoided and should be avoided because of the undue pressure it will place on the ref to show complete objectivity which given the emotions of the match is not a good thing
It's a fair point
What I think is being said is that a) there will be contentious decisions to be made and the fact of some local connection will place the ref unnecessarily under extra scrutiny to ensure the decision is clearly bias free
and b) there is always the possibility of unintended and completely indirect bias arising given the local connection
Either and both factors could be avoided and should be avoided because of the undue pressure it will place on the ref to show complete objectivity which given the emotions of the match is not a good thing
It's a fair point
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 13:24
Quote:gaz59
I'm pretty sure that there is no insinuation of deliberate bias
What I think is being said is that a) there will be contentious decisions to be made and the fact of some local connection will place the ref unnecessarily under extra scrutiny to ensure the decision is clearly bias free
and b) there is always the possibility of unintended and completely indirect bias arising given the local connection
Either and both factors could be avoided and should be avoided because of the undue pressure it will place on the ref to show complete objectivity which given the emotions of the match is not a good thing
It's a fair point
That's it entirely.
All of the focus should be on one of the biggest occasions in our sporting calendar. There should be no additional pressure, in what is already a highly emotive occasion. It is simple to avoid this and it's silly that it has not been avoided.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: woodpecker (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 13:26
Ive noticed at age grade it often goes the other way when a coach has to ref, sometimes its ridiculous how unbiased they try to be!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 13:39
Quote:woodpecker
Ive noticed at age grade it often goes the other way when a coach has to ref, sometimes its ridiculous how unbiased they try to be!
Yes my son hates it, he gets absolutely nothing from me...assuming he stays on the pitch and isn't carded of course!
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 15:26
I am sure it used to be that referees affiliated to an area or club were not allowed to referee that team - Chris White never seemed to officiate Gloucester (unfortunately we seemed to get that pleasure), Tony Spreadbury never refereed Bath and Ed Morrison with Bristol - you certainly don't get International referees officiating in their own nations matches or even European Officials.
The problem with using officials with an affiliation to an area/club is for instance - Karl Dickson officiating Quins v Bristol (Marler incident) stated clearly he did not hear what Marler said yet at the hearing it was clear members of both backrows and scrum halves heard it - so it question how Dickson did not especially when he was stood closer to Marler than many of those who did hear it.
I would never insinuate that an official would cheat or show deliberate bias however when you have grown up in area with such passions surrounding a club and hatred to another that has to taint you with a sub conscious bias which is uncontrollable - The other argument as Malco alluded to is that the official is fully aware of the situation and goes the other way to ensure they are not accused of home bias.
So the simple solution is not to appoint an official with affiliation to either club and with that there can be no accusations made and allow the official to concentrate on the game.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:12:15:28:31 by Ali1969.
The problem with using officials with an affiliation to an area/club is for instance - Karl Dickson officiating Quins v Bristol (Marler incident) stated clearly he did not hear what Marler said yet at the hearing it was clear members of both backrows and scrum halves heard it - so it question how Dickson did not especially when he was stood closer to Marler than many of those who did hear it.
I would never insinuate that an official would cheat or show deliberate bias however when you have grown up in area with such passions surrounding a club and hatred to another that has to taint you with a sub conscious bias which is uncontrollable - The other argument as Malco alluded to is that the official is fully aware of the situation and goes the other way to ensure they are not accused of home bias.
So the simple solution is not to appoint an official with affiliation to either club and with that there can be no accusations made and allow the official to concentrate on the game.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:12:15:28:31 by Ali1969.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Francis Allen (IP Logged)
Date: 12/04/2023 17:48
Quote:nick holderQuote:HK890Quote:nick holder
This will be more than an "Old Spot" of bother on Friday night, it really will be Castle Grim for Bath as we will be on the side of a good hammering. Unless we have a "Gem " of a performance in which case I will pay full "Tribute" to the players and coaches and make sure an away derby win is celebrated by the local "Bell ringers" near me.
Gloucester have won one game since December. I’m afraid I don’t get the narrative that we will be on the side of a good hammering.
They are in a proper rot now missing very key players. Meanwhile we are nearing full strength, had 2 weeks rested and off the back of our best performance of the season.
It should be a close match which I don’t see why we can’t nick.
Maybe my beer references were too obscure?
I admire your Courage, you did a Proper Job of it.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: theredseat (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 08:53
To go back to selection I do hope - as ever - that FLW will start but recent evidence makes it seem frustratingly unlikely
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 09:06
Quote:theredseat
To go back to selection I do hope - as ever - that FLW will start but recent evidence makes it seem frustratingly unlikely
Strange isn't it, I wonder if van velze will start again....and if that is an indicator he is staying next season (and as long rumoured flw is off)
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 09:26
Quote:theredseat
To go back to selection I do hope - as ever - that FLW will start but recent evidence makes it seem frustratingly unlikely
I am not sure it is an indicator as to whether FLW is staying or going - personally I hope we find a way to keep him especially with the players coming in (including hopefully a fit Alfie B ). I personally believe JVG is a real tactician and will always put his strongest team for the opposition we are facing.
It may come down to the fact that Van Velze's leadership is that vital - he has been there and experienced most things in rugby and he may be the steadying hand the pack and team need and keep FLW on the bench to cover 2nd/Backrow.
The game has changed so much in recent years and coaches now view and the bench/run ons/finishers as being so key almost as much as the starting XV - if you can keep some kind of parity with your starters to say 50 mins - bring on the bench who are packed with key players and more often than not the result is turned on it's head.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: theredseat (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 12:02
Quote:Ali1969Quote:theredseat
To go back to selection I do hope - as ever - that FLW will start but recent evidence makes it seem frustratingly unlikely
I am not sure it is an indicator as to whether FLW is staying or going - personally I hope we find a way to keep him especially with the players coming in (including hopefully a fit Alfie B ). I personally believe JVG is a real tactician and will always put his strongest team for the opposition we are facing.
It may come down to the fact that Van Velze's leadership is that vital - he has been there and experienced most things in rugby and he may be the steadying hand the pack and team need and keep FLW on the bench to cover 2nd/Backrow.
The game has changed so much in recent years and coaches now view and the bench/run ons/finishers as being so key almost as much as the starting XV - if you can keep some kind of parity with your starters to say 50 mins - bring on the bench who are packed with key players and more often than not the result is turned on it's head.
I’d like to believe that but hard to when FLW has played so little rugby over the last few months. Unless there was an injury that wasn’t disclosed JvG has not given the impression that he sees him as a key bench option with the amount of game time he’s had since Xmas or so.
I get their feeling that more than a lot of factors JVG has notable favourites who tend to be the ‘good soldier’ type: Gallagher, van Velze, Francis and so on
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 12:02
Apparently Redpath is injured and won't feature. Ojomoh at 12, Gallagher to wing and De Glanville at 15.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 12:05
Confirmed.
Team:
Starting XV: 15 Tom de Glanville, 14 Joe Cokanasiga, 13 Ollie Lawrence, 12 Max Ojomoh, 11 Matt Gallagher, 10 Orlando Bailey, 9 Ben Spencer ©; 1 Beno Obano, 2 Tom Dunn, 3 Will Stuart, 4 Josh McNally, 5 GJ van Velze, 6 Ted Hill, 7 Chris Cloete, 8 Miles Reid
Impact players: 16 Niall Annett, 17 Valeriy Morozov, 18 D’Arcy Rae, 19 Fergus Lee-Warner, 20 Sam Underhill, 21 Max Green, 22 Piers Francis, 23 Josh Bayliss
P G Tips
Jaco Coetzee: my adopted Player, 2023-24.
Team:
Starting XV: 15 Tom de Glanville, 14 Joe Cokanasiga, 13 Ollie Lawrence, 12 Max Ojomoh, 11 Matt Gallagher, 10 Orlando Bailey, 9 Ben Spencer ©; 1 Beno Obano, 2 Tom Dunn, 3 Will Stuart, 4 Josh McNally, 5 GJ van Velze, 6 Ted Hill, 7 Chris Cloete, 8 Miles Reid
Impact players: 16 Niall Annett, 17 Valeriy Morozov, 18 D’Arcy Rae, 19 Fergus Lee-Warner, 20 Sam Underhill, 21 Max Green, 22 Piers Francis, 23 Josh Bayliss
P G Tips
Jaco Coetzee: my adopted Player, 2023-24.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 12:07
Quote:P G Tips
Confirmed.
Team:
Starting XV: 15 Tom de Glanville, 14 Joe Cokanasiga, 13 Ollie Lawrence, 12 Max Ojomoh, 11 Matt Gallagher, 10 Orlando Bailey, 9 Ben Spencer ©; 1 Beno Obano, 2 Tom Dunn, 3 Will Stuart, 4 Josh McNally, 5 GJ van Velze, 6 Ted Hill, 7 Chris Cloete, 8 Miles Reid
Impact players: 16 Niall Annett, 17 Valeriy Morozov, 18 D’Arcy Rae, 19 Fergus Lee-Warner, 20 Sam Underhill, 21 Max Green, 22 Piers Francis, 23 Josh Bayliss
Gloucester are missing significant names in the pack. We need to get stuck into them up front and keep the ball away from their outside backs.
We can win this.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 12:09
The opposition:
Gloucester Rugby team news
15. Santi Carreras, 14. Louis Rees-Zammit*, 13. Chris Harris, 12. Seb Atkinson,11. Ollie Thorley*.
10 Billy Twelvetrees, 9. Stephen Varney*.
1. Mayco Vivas, 2. Seb Blake*, 3. Jamal Ford-Robinson, 4. Freddie Clarke*, 5. Matias Alemanno, 6. Jack Clement*, 7. Lewis Ludlow* (c), 8. Ben Morgan.
Replacements
16. Henry Walker*, 17. Harry Elrington, 18. Ciaran Knight*, 19. Cam Jordan*, 20. Freddie Thomas*.
21. Charlie Chapman*, 22. George Barton*, 23. Jonny May*.
P G Tips
Jaco Coetzee: my adopted Player, 2023-24.
Gloucester Rugby team news
15. Santi Carreras, 14. Louis Rees-Zammit*, 13. Chris Harris, 12. Seb Atkinson,11. Ollie Thorley*.
10 Billy Twelvetrees, 9. Stephen Varney*.
1. Mayco Vivas, 2. Seb Blake*, 3. Jamal Ford-Robinson, 4. Freddie Clarke*, 5. Matias Alemanno, 6. Jack Clement*, 7. Lewis Ludlow* (c), 8. Ben Morgan.
Replacements
16. Henry Walker*, 17. Harry Elrington, 18. Ciaran Knight*, 19. Cam Jordan*, 20. Freddie Thomas*.
21. Charlie Chapman*, 22. George Barton*, 23. Jonny May*.
P G Tips
Jaco Coetzee: my adopted Player, 2023-24.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: theredseat (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 12:10
As good a team as we could realistically hope for given what we know JVG likes to go with.
The front row could really give us an advantage given the teams are fairly well matched elsewhere.
Surprised Glos have Twelvetrees at 10 instead of reshuffling to play Carreras there. Doesn’t seem the obvious route to unlocking their back three even if Carreras will step in at receiver a fair bit.
The front row could really give us an advantage given the teams are fairly well matched elsewhere.
Surprised Glos have Twelvetrees at 10 instead of reshuffling to play Carreras there. Doesn’t seem the obvious route to unlocking their back three even if Carreras will step in at receiver a fair bit.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: woodpecker (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 12:11
I was impressed with Varney in 6N good to see him getting more game time
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: HK890 (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 12:16
Quote:P G Tips
The opposition:
Gloucester Rugby team news
15. Santi Carreras, 14. Louis Rees-Zammit*, 13. Chris Harris, 12. Seb Atkinson,11. Ollie Thorley*.
10 Billy Twelvetrees, 9. Stephen Varney*.
1. Mayco Vivas, 2. Seb Blake*, 3. Jamal Ford-Robinson, 4. Freddie Clarke*, 5. Matias Alemanno, 6. Jack Clement*, 7. Lewis Ludlow* (c), 8. Ben Morgan.
Replacements
16. Henry Walker*, 17. Harry Elrington, 18. Ciaran Knight*, 19. Cam Jordan*, 20. Freddie Thomas*.
21. Charlie Chapman*, 22. George Barton*, 23. Jonny May*.
I look at that team and really think we should get at that some very good battles also.
Scrum time is going to be massive for us we should be winning that and the pack in general for us should find lots of success.
Both ours and their Halfback partnership have a very experienced head and a younger live wire player so interesting to see how it plans out.
Frustrating for Redpath to get injured but before Exeter I think Ojomoh had deserved his place and I think his passing game will open up Glos at points. Underhill back aswell things are coming together
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 12:17
Disappointing that we have gone back to a 6/2 split. Assume McConnochie must also be injured, although that could be tactical. Not happy with the lash up that will be necessary if we lose one of the back three to injury early on.
Shame about Redpath, whenever he gets back to fitness he shows real signs of his massive potential, only then to immediately go down again. Very frustrating.
Shame about Redpath, whenever he gets back to fitness he shows real signs of his massive potential, only then to immediately go down again. Very frustrating.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 15:54
Carreras is back at 15 primarily to counter from our kick game I reckon. If our kick chase and defence line isn't quick and good we could ship some spectacular tries with that glaws back three
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Dickie_S (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 16:09
In commentary for the Glaws v La Rochelle game that Skivington said that Carreras English isn't good enough to effectively run the back line from 10.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 17:00
Quote:Dickie_S
In commentary for the Glaws v La Rochelle game that Skivington said that Carreras English isn't good enough to effectively run the back line from 10.
He doesn't need to speak any verbal language, he talks with his feet.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 13/04/2023 18:20
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:Dickie_S
In commentary for the Glaws v La Rochelle game that Skivington said that Carreras English isn't good enough to effectively run the back line from 10.
He doesn't need to speak any verbal language, he talks with his feet.
Eloquently!
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 08:02
Decent 23 and should definitely be competitive- could be a close game.
Interesting to start getting a real feel of the jvg pecking order of players and his style.
Cam is class but never said to see mojo in the xv, esp alongside Orlando.
Shame about going back to 6:2 split.
Interesting to start getting a real feel of the jvg pecking order of players and his style.
Cam is class but never said to see mojo in the xv, esp alongside Orlando.
Shame about going back to 6:2 split.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 08:30
Interesting comment from JvG on the BBC.
"We're still a few years behind them in our development."
That really isn't an encouraging statement.
"We're still a few years behind them in our development."
That really isn't an encouraging statement.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 08:36
Quote:OutsideBath
Interesting comment from JvG on the BBC.
"We're still a few years behind them in our development."
That really isn't an encouraging statement.
Seems obvious to me - Skivington joined Gloucester in June 2020 so has had longer to mould his team than JvG has?
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 09:08
Quote:BathMatt53Quote:OutsideBath
Interesting comment from JvG on the BBC.
"We're still a few years behind them in our development."
That really isn't an encouraging statement.
Seems obvious to me - Skivington joined Gloucester in June 2020 so has had longer to mould his team than JvG has?
Seems reasonable yep , though I am sure he harbours ambitions for next season to be a big improvement.... think he has learnt to underplay our chances after realising what a basket case he inherited.
Think next season is fairer to start judging his impact and by 2024/25 season all the players and coaches should be 'his' so v firmly in no excuses territory (tbf I don't think there is an excuse next season to not be comfortably away from 11th when you look at the investment in the squad, backroom staff, facilities etc- couldnt ask for much more from bruce)
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 09:11
Quote:charlieboaQuote:BathMatt53Quote:OutsideBath
Interesting comment from JvG on the BBC.
"We're still a few years behind them in our development."
That really isn't an encouraging statement.
Seems obvious to me - Skivington joined Gloucester in June 2020 so has had longer to mould his team than JvG has?
Seems reasonable yep , though I am sure he harbours ambitions for next season to be a big improvement.... think he has learnt to underplay our chances after realising what a basket case he inherited.
Think next season is fairer to start judging his impact and by 2024/25 season all the players and coaches should be 'his' so v firmly in no excuses territory (tbf I don't think there is an excuse next season to not be comfortably away from 11th when you look at the investment in the squad, backroom staff, facilities etc- couldnt ask for much more from bruce)
Agree with that view, its a pretty damning comment on the previous administration though.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 09:29
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:charlieboaQuote:BathMatt53Quote:OutsideBath
Interesting comment from JvG on the BBC.
"We're still a few years behind them in our development."
That really isn't an encouraging statement.
Seems obvious to me - Skivington joined Gloucester in June 2020 so has had longer to mould his team than JvG has?
Seems reasonable yep , though I am sure he harbours ambitions for next season to be a big improvement.... think he has learnt to underplay our chances after realising what a basket case he inherited.
Think next season is fairer to start judging his impact and by 2024/25 season all the players and coaches should be 'his' so v firmly in no excuses territory (tbf I don't think there is an excuse next season to not be comfortably away from 11th when you look at the investment in the squad, backroom staff, facilities etc- couldnt ask for much more from bruce)
Agree with that view, its a pretty damning comment on the previous administration though.
I look forward to Bath being in 9th position in 2 years time then...
![[:wor kid:]](/phorum-5.1.15/mods/smileys/images/13.gif "[:wor kid:]")
The squad JvG inherited wasn't top 4 material, but it's way better than 11th/12th place.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 09:46
Nature of a salary capped league is its v v competitive.
We should finish above Newcastle based on them assumingly spending significantly less than the cap.
V hard to call the rest I think. We can all say we should be top 6 next season and top 4 the season after but that's actually v difficult to achieve what with lots of other good teams spending pretty much the same money trying to achieve the same thing.
Improvement in performance and league position season on season would do for me tbh, top 4 finish by 24/25 would be a bonus and certainly achievable with a bit of luck.
We should finish above Newcastle based on them assumingly spending significantly less than the cap.
V hard to call the rest I think. We can all say we should be top 6 next season and top 4 the season after but that's actually v difficult to achieve what with lots of other good teams spending pretty much the same money trying to achieve the same thing.
Improvement in performance and league position season on season would do for me tbh, top 4 finish by 24/25 would be a bonus and certainly achievable with a bit of luck.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 09:54
All those people who think that injuries are somehow not relevant to performance.
Gloucester's injury toll for this match is almost on a level to what ours has been on a continual basis for the last two or three seasons.
Missing for them:
Ackermann
Atkinson
Balmain
Evans
Gotovtsev
Hastings
Kveseladze
McGuigan
Meehan
Polledri
Rapava-Ruskin
Reid
Seabrook
Seville
Singleton
Socino
Tuisue
By contrast we now have many of our best players back and have had two weeks of rest followed by a week of training. We are really only missing Attwood, Barbeary, Coetzee, Ewels, Muir and Redpath.
We have a significant advantage in the strength of our squad and there is nowhere to hide if the players don't perform to the required level. If this team cannot turn up and play to their potential in a Premiership derby against that Gloucester team, which is absolutely stripped to the bare bones in the front row and the back row, then it gives some very clear information about them.
We should beat Gloucester up in the forwards and win this match comfortably.
Gloucester's injury toll for this match is almost on a level to what ours has been on a continual basis for the last two or three seasons.
Missing for them:
Ackermann
Atkinson
Balmain
Evans
Gotovtsev
Hastings
Kveseladze
McGuigan
Meehan
Polledri
Rapava-Ruskin
Reid
Seabrook
Seville
Singleton
Socino
Tuisue
By contrast we now have many of our best players back and have had two weeks of rest followed by a week of training. We are really only missing Attwood, Barbeary, Coetzee, Ewels, Muir and Redpath.
We have a significant advantage in the strength of our squad and there is nowhere to hide if the players don't perform to the required level. If this team cannot turn up and play to their potential in a Premiership derby against that Gloucester team, which is absolutely stripped to the bare bones in the front row and the back row, then it gives some very clear information about them.
We should beat Gloucester up in the forwards and win this match comfortably.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 09:57
Next season could be RWC disrupted anyway so particularly tough to call, but as per most seasons there isn't a huge margin between 3rd and 9th so actually we just need to improve enough to be in the 'pack' then we have as much chance as anyone really - just see Quins in 8th and Irish in 4th at the moment.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:00
I think we could almost look at the remaining three fixtures as a mini-season. None of them easy. All of them we should have some shot at.
Lose all three - serious problems
Win one - as expected
Win two - progress
Win three - extremely unlikely
Lose all three - serious problems
Win one - as expected
Win two - progress
Win three - extremely unlikely
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: RagingBull5 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:02
Mcconnochie not injured, just a selection. Although Bayliss has withdrawn with injury so Mcconnochie will now slot in on the bench at 23.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:12
Quote:RagingBull5
Mcconnochie not injured, just a selection. Although Bayliss has withdrawn with injury so Mcconnochie will now slot in on the bench at 23.
Interesting, thanks.
Wonder if rmc will still be here next season- I love him personally but been injury ravaged and underwhelming this season.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:14
Quote:BathMatt53
Next season could be RWC disrupted anyway so particularly tough to call, but as per most seasons there isn't a huge margin between 3rd and 9th so actually we just need to improve enough to be in the 'pack' then we have as much chance as anyone really - just see Quins in 8th and Irish in 4th at the moment.
Exactly matt- improve from dreadful and we are firmly in the mix
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:16
Quote:hasta
I think we could almost look at the remaining three fixtures as a mini-season. None of them easy. All of them we should have some shot at.
Lose all three - serious problems
Win one - as expected
Win two - progress
Win three - extremely unlikely
Yep hard to call- as you say one win probably the most likely scenario.
I think tonight is the most winnable but have a shot in all 3. As you say if we find a way to lose all 3 that's a major concern as to our inability to ever build on any shreds of positivity
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: by (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:19
Where is Coetzee?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:23
Quote:by
Where is Coetzee?
Best guess would be injured again.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:33
Quote:OutsideBathQuote:by
Where is Coetzee?
Best guess would be injured again.
Hope it's not still his head, that would be really concerning after this long (4 weeks or so?).
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:36
Quote:by
Where is Coetzee?
Possibly JVG is allowing him to heal given our resources in the back row at present to allow his body to fully recover and with a full pre-season will be like getting another new signing.
In keeping with his comments concerning Alfie B potentially being fit prior to the end of the season however not rushing him back to sustain another potentially more serious injury.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 10:43
No point in rushing Barbeary back. Let him recover and have a full (elongated) pre-season.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: RagingBull5 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 11:06
Quote:charlieboaQuote:RagingBull5
Mcconnochie not injured, just a selection. Although Bayliss has withdrawn with injury so Mcconnochie will now slot in on the bench at 23.
Interesting, thanks.
Wonder if rmc will still be here next season- I love him personally but been injury ravaged and underwhelming this season.
Yes he will be. 1 more year on contract.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: HK890 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 11:19
I know people always bang on about comments regarding letting players go. But for me Keeping RMC and letting go Roko is showing to be a really poor decision.
Roko would have started a good chunk of the season for us and as said RMC has been very underwhelming. Personally I would have Hamer-Webb ahead of him and maybe even Butt.
Roko would have started a good chunk of the season for us and as said RMC has been very underwhelming. Personally I would have Hamer-Webb ahead of him and maybe even Butt.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Rawce (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 11:23
Quote:The issue is that that would be the third(?) time we’ve done that, hoping for a fresh start only for a season to be curtailed heavily by injury. Here’s hoping for third time lucky and we get to see his carrying for more than brief flashes.Ali1969Quote:by
Where is Coetzee?
Possibly JVG is allowing him to heal given our resources in the back row at present to allow his body to fully recover and with a full pre-season will be like getting another new signing.
In keeping with his comments concerning Alfie B potentially being fit prior to the end of the season however not rushing him back to sustain another potentially more serious injury.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 11:36
Quote:HK890
I know people always bang on about comments regarding letting players go. But for me Keeping RMC and letting go Roko is showing to be a really poor decision.
Roko would have started a good chunk of the season for us and as said RMC has been very underwhelming. Personally I would have Hamer-Webb ahead of him and maybe even Butt.
Roko is 35, 36 in August. Whether he could have made the difference for another year at Bath is an interesting point of debate, but certainly wouldn't begrudge him a year or two in the sun of Montauban (and being well paid for it). It was the correct decision for both I think.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 11:40
Quote:HK890
I know people always bang on about comments regarding letting players go. But for me Keeping RMC and letting go Roko is showing to be a really poor decision.
Roko would have started a good chunk of the season for us and as said RMC has been very underwhelming. Personally I would have Hamer-Webb ahead of him and maybe even Butt.
Easy to say in hindsight. RMc was excellent a couple of years back and has just had rotten injury luck. GHW has also had really bad injury luck. Butt has promise but makes a lot of mistakes. Bear in mind that Coka and Muir are really our two first choice wingers, Gallagher has been superb and getting him and TdG on the field together is very useful, we're really talking about 3rd/4th choice winger. I'm not gonna spend too much time on the rights or wrongs of that call - particularly as it's a position that is not seeing a lot of ball at the moment.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 11:46
Quote:BathMatt53Quote:OutsideBath
Interesting comment from JvG on the BBC.
"We're still a few years behind them in our development."
That really isn't an encouraging statement.
Seems obvious to me - Skivington joined Gloucester in June 2020 so has had longer to mould his team than JvG has?
And add in the seriously impressive performance by Gloucester against La Rochelle
Even in my wildest optimism I can't see us close to that for another two seasons
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 12:00
Quote:RagingBull5Quote:charlieboaQuote:RagingBull5
Mcconnochie not injured, just a selection. Although Bayliss has withdrawn with injury so Mcconnochie will now slot in on the bench at 23.
Interesting, thanks.
Wonder if rmc will still be here next season- I love him personally but been injury ravaged and underwhelming this season.
Yes he will be. 1 more year on contract.
Thanks raging bull.
Hope he has better luck as was utterly brilliant on the wing and on rare occasions at 15 for a couple of seasons.
Him and muir a joy to watch when fit and firing.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: HK890 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 12:38
Quote:hastaQuote:HK890
I know people always bang on about comments regarding letting players go. But for me Keeping RMC and letting go Roko is showing to be a really poor decision.
Roko would have started a good chunk of the season for us and as said RMC has been very underwhelming. Personally I would have Hamer-Webb ahead of him and maybe even Butt.
Easy to say in hindsight. RMc was excellent a couple of years back and has just had rotten injury luck. GHW has also had really bad injury luck. Butt has promise but makes a lot of mistakes. Bear in mind that Coka and Muir are really our two first choice wingers, Gallagher has been superb and getting him and TdG on the field together is very useful, we're really talking about 3rd/4th choice winger. I'm not gonna spend too much time on the rights or wrongs of that call - particularly as it's a position that is not seeing a lot of ball at the moment.
I said it at the time and I think age has showed to not be any sort of deterrent for Roko. Yes agreed Rmc was incredible many seasons ago but the last 2 he hasn’t been anywhere near and he has had a run of games but still just does not offer anything. Roko has that finishing ability shown last season and again this season which is exactly what we’ve needed for our few chances.
Agreed Cokanasiga and Muir are clear first choice, not a fan of Gallagher on the wing. I rate Butt and GHW highly for their age and think they’ll push on next year. Aswell as being no doubt cheaper that last point is the exact reason I’d prefer Roko, he doesn’t need a lot of the ball to create something.
Muir back next year is going to be like a new signing, absolutely incredible player who will suit JVG down to a tee.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 13:06
I want Butt and GHW to be good. But if I compare them to the likes of Cadan Murley, any of the Irish or Falcons back three I'm really not seeing the evidence there.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 13:10
Quote:hasta
I want Butt and GHW to be good. But if I compare them to the likes of Cadan Murley, any of the Irish or Falcons back three I'm really not seeing the evidence there.
I think that's because he is a centre who fills in on the wing when there's nobody else available.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 13:16
Quote:MalcoQuote:hasta
I want Butt and GHW to be good. But if I compare them to the likes of Cadan Murley, any of the Irish or Falcons back three I'm really not seeing the evidence there.
I think that's because he is a centre who fills in on the wing when there's nobody else available.
That is fair (tho not convinced he is, or will become, a good centre- hope I am wrong)
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 13:54
Both Butt and GHW look like they should make it. But yet to be demonstrated.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 13:56
Quote:hasta
Both Butt and GHW look like they should make it. But yet to be demonstrated.
I'm not convinced that Butt is a winger mind you - he would be ahead of Max O at 12 (but after Cam) for me. GHW needs a lot of luck with injuries, he hasn't been getting much.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 14:03
Butt should be focussed on backing up Lawrence for me.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 14:05
A combination of a very good Bath team sheet and a Glaws team that have lost their way a bit and are missing some key players. I'm going for a famous away win for Bath at Glaws!
I think that set of backs look incredible and I recall how well Lawrence (plus the threat of Coka) did against Sarries. Interested to see Ojomoh at 12 too. What a difference it makes to have the majority of your players available, that pack looks quality.
I think that set of backs look incredible and I recall how well Lawrence (plus the threat of Coka) did against Sarries. Interested to see Ojomoh at 12 too. What a difference it makes to have the majority of your players available, that pack looks quality.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 14:34
Quote:hasta
Butt should be focussed on backing up Lawrence for me.
That is prob the right pecking order for now but wonder (and hope) venter and hennessy have a higher ceiling but v limiter sample size as only seen both a handful of times if that...
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: HK890 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 17:11
Quote:BathMatt53Quote:hasta
Both Butt and GHW look like they should make it. But yet to be demonstrated.
I'm not convinced that Butt is a winger mind you - he would be ahead of Max O at 12 (but after Cam) for me. GHW needs a lot of luck with injuries, he hasn't been getting much.
That’s ridiculous imo not a chance is Butt ahead of Ojomoh at 12. Ojomoh been a standout for the last 2 seasons more than proved himself last season and has massively improved his defence.
To me the fact that Butt has played all his best games on the wing shows where he should be played. Sale last season then Tigers and Quins this season have all been very good games for him. His kick chase is very good I remember last season watching him smash Leinster with his kick chase.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 18:35
Quote:HK890Quote:BathMatt53Quote:hasta
Both Butt and GHW look like they should make it. But yet to be demonstrated.
I'm not convinced that Butt is a winger mind you - he would be ahead of Max O at 12 (but after Cam) for me. GHW needs a lot of luck with injuries, he hasn't been getting much.
That’s ridiculous imo not a chance is Butt ahead of Ojomoh at 12. Ojomoh been a standout for the last 2 seasons more than proved himself last season and has massively improved his defence.
To me the fact that Butt has played all his best games on the wing shows where he should be played. Sale last season then Tigers and Quins this season have all been very good games for him. His kick chase is very good I remember last season watching him smash Leinster with his kick chase.
Well thats the fun of rugby isn't it - differing opinions! I'm not convinced by Max O at all. Any improvement in defence was coming from a pretty low baseline - of being a revolving door. Either way both are miles behind Cam R.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Clarkey3k (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 19:42
The bookies have Glaws 1/2 and Bath c2/1 last time I looked...
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
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: ilovebathtime (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:10
So far the penalties are killing us. Other than that the game would be pretty even although Gloucester look a lot more dangerous than us
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:15
Siiiigh
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Old Bath Tub (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:16
Gloucester running rings ………around Bath 
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
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:20
Some attack! Nice one Mojo.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:30
Good use of the extra man. Back in it.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:40
We'd be ahead if it wasn't for Dunn's white line fever.
Need to cut down the penalties and stop kicking ball to their back three.
Need to cut down the penalties and stop kicking ball to their back three.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: dr.bath1865 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:42
Cut out the individual dumb penalties and we might just have this. More power up front at the mo and hopefully more to come off the bench.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:46
Lol at the official account subtweeting BT Sport: [twitter.com]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: dr.bath1865 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:52
Dumb penalties. Gloucester try.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Old Bath Tub (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:56
Has Joe C actually touched the ball yet ?
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
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 20:59
Lineout! ARARGARgh
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:03
Quote:Old Bath Tub
Has Joe C actually touched the ball yet ?
He has now!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:08
4th try! Reid. Nice move off the lineout.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:17
Underhill!!! Yesss.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: A.M 180 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:19
Ollie Lawrence is different gravy - what a pleasure to have him with us
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: A.M 180 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:22
I am enjoying every scrum
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: A.M 180 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:28
Stupid card for Francis
Need to calm things down here
Need to calm things down here
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:29
Good grief we cannot win easy can we?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:29
Oh he's missed it!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: A.M 180 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:30
Well that is a let off - now slow it down boys
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: A.M 180 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:33
That's enough now surely!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:35
YESSSSS!!! You beauty.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: A.M 180 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:35
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: A.M 180 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:36
A really minor footnote considering, but what planet is Carreras on!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Barnoid (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:36
My favourite part of this is the fella on co-commentary having to suck down a nice big cup of sit down and shut up. Lovely stuff.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:38
Well done Bath 
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: liquidmonkey (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:39
Quote:This^ Annoying wasn’t heBarnoid
My favourite part of this is the fella on co-commentary having to suck down a nice big cup of sit down and shut up. Lovely stuff.
Horatio Nelson
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: JK7 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:44
What do we reckon then, battling against the Leinsters and Toulouses this sort of time next year? 
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: dr.bath1865 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:49
Well done all involved. Still thought we’d find a way to lose it with 30 seconds left - but maybe we don’t do that anymore?!
Starting pack superb, esp the almighty front row and Reid, and Spencer managed the game superbly. Huge impact from Underhill.
Also nice to see some green shoots in attack with a smart tap pen move and invention off the back of the line out and scrum.
Fantastic Friday fun.
Starting pack superb, esp the almighty front row and Reid, and Spencer managed the game superbly. Huge impact from Underhill.
Also nice to see some green shoots in attack with a smart tap pen move and invention off the back of the line out and scrum.
Fantastic Friday fun.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: ilovebathtime (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 21:50
Really enjoyed that. I thought we were very good, and once we took the lead we didn't really look like giving it away. I thought Dunn was immense (I can forgive 1 or 2 lost lineouts)
You can now see what we are trying to do, and when our best players are fit we do look like a good side.
Well worth the £5 to watch it on prtv, the one eyed co commentator only made the victory sweeter
You can now see what we are trying to do, and when our best players are fit we do look like a good side.
Well worth the £5 to watch it on prtv, the one eyed co commentator only made the victory sweeter
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Rawce (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 22:12
What little viewing I snuck in cheered up an otherwise testing day. Always good to get one over on Glaws in their own back yard, no matter their injury status.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Kidney Stone (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 22:24
Echo most of above sentiments. Was good to see us digging in right through to the end, especially after Piers got binned. Seemed far more purpose once we got past the awful first 30.
Beno motm for me, but the tight 5 were excellent, best from JMcN for ages. Ollie Lawrence shone, as did Sam. Another glimpse of what could be to come.
Interesting eemark from JvG afterwards, about lots of people getting off the train when it stops at the end of the season.
Beno motm for me, but the tight 5 were excellent, best from JMcN for ages. Ollie Lawrence shone, as did Sam. Another glimpse of what could be to come.
Interesting eemark from JvG afterwards, about lots of people getting off the train when it stops at the end of the season.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 22:24
Quote:JK7
What do we reckon then, battling against the Leinsters and Toulouses this sort of time next year?
Not possible, we will be in the Challenge Cup and def not desirable either
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 22:31
Well well just seen the game as stopped the match at 17-0 down, for dinner and rejoined a few wine glasses later. What a turn round and well done to the whole squad. What a great fight back and shows there is life in our club. I thought my tv sound was faulty couldn’t hear the shed! Ted Hill immense, Sam influential and a big clap to our forwards for the platform for the victory.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: by (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 22:32
Mark Atkinson was commentating.
Good win for us. Gloucester clearly struggling with injuries, as were we not too long ago. With the reduced salary cap, it feels as though luck is an increasingly important factor.
Brilliant games from a few, but also some pretty mediocre performances from others. Always a good sign winning despite playing badly.
Onwards to next week!
Good win for us. Gloucester clearly struggling with injuries, as were we not too long ago. With the reduced salary cap, it feels as though luck is an increasingly important factor.
Brilliant games from a few, but also some pretty mediocre performances from others. Always a good sign winning despite playing badly.
Onwards to next week!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 22:55
Well that was a nice score to come home to.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 23:03
And to add to the feelgood factor tonight, Briz were rubbish tonight. Miles away from play offs. Sale played a very safe game given the conditions and won comfortably
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Rawce (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 23:10
Mojo looked very good from the limited amount I could see.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: copester (IP Logged)
Date: 14/04/2023 23:19
Enjoyed that. Will Stuart immense, massive pen try desicion which turned the game.
Did someone say something to Joe as the teams came out for the second half? He looked very annoyed?
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.
Did someone say something to Joe as the teams came out for the second half? He looked very annoyed?
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.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 00:12
Just watched the game. My word having your first choice front row available does make a difference, doesn't it? I feared for us at the beginning but we got ourselves back in the game and, until the last 10 minutes, looked comfortable. But we gave Glaws too many chances in the last 10 and we're getting back to giving away dumb penalties again but overall a very satisfying performance. Our backs were cruelly underused - I don't think either OB2 or JC4 got an actual pass all game (and one of those is our starting 10!) but out muscling Glaws up front is always nice.
My MotM - Will Stuart. Front foot ball personified.
A word for the Christophe Ridley. The penalty try call was correct but it was brave to give it. Far too often we see that sort of thing bottled. VG, tick, tick (as my teacher used to say).
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
My MotM - Will Stuart. Front foot ball personified.
A word for the Christophe Ridley. The penalty try call was correct but it was brave to give it. Far too often we see that sort of thing bottled. VG, tick, tick (as my teacher used to say).
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Francis Allen (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 00:42
Received a couple of mocking comments from Gloucester "fans" on the train up, they haven't forgotten last seasons game. Settled into my seat early and chatted with some genuine and knowledgeable Glos fans who were not at all as confident as the pratts on the train. Unimpressed by the booing Bath got as they entered the pitch nor a lot of stuff coming from the shed throughout the game. I've heard it all before but seemed worse tonight. Shame as the vast majority of the crowd are a credit to the club. The sell out crowd were vociferous as Glos racked up the score in the first half but what a fantastic comeback from Bath. That was an impressive performance. I sat with a sense of smugness on the train back but things I heard tonight reminded me of why I boycotted the place for several seasons.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: HK890 (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 01:19
Quote:BathMatt53
Well thats the fun of rugby isn't it - differing opinions! I'm not convinced by Max O at all. Any improvement in defence was coming from a pretty low baseline - of being a revolving door. Either way both are miles behind Cam R.
Well I hope now you’ve changed your mind on that !
Once again a very good performance from him. Quality quality player
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Rokobilly (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 07:56
We are away, a few hours ahead time-wisw. I was following initially on Bath Live but went to bed at 17-0 expecting a repeat of last year. Wonderful surprise to wake up to.
Just managed to watch the replay. Excellent 2nd half. Echo much of what's been said above. Chapeau to the pack. Beating up Glaws at Castle Grim is a rare treat. The front 3 especially were fantastic.
Well done lads. Let's have 2 more of those to finish the season on a high.
Just managed to watch the replay. Excellent 2nd half. Echo much of what's been said above. Chapeau to the pack. Beating up Glaws at Castle Grim is a rare treat. The front 3 especially were fantastic.
Well done lads. Let's have 2 more of those to finish the season on a high.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: dannyf2 (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 08:02
Well well well
A ruthless desire to win that we haven't seen for quite some time
On the up!
COYB
A ruthless desire to win that we haven't seen for quite some time
On the up!
COYB
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 08:04
Quote:Rokobilly
We are away, a few hours ahead time-wisw. I was following initially on Bath Live but went to bed at 17-0 expecting a repeat of last year. Wonderful surprise to wake up to.
Just managed to watch the replay. Excellent 2nd half. Echo much of what's been said above. Chapeau to the pack. Beating up Glaws at Castle Grim is a rare treat. The front 3 especially were fantastic.
Well done lads. Let's have 2 more of those to finish the season on a high.
My worry is that we do just that and somehow up back in the Heine, inevitably having to play Ireland A and Toulouse over and over again until the crack of doom.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 08:33
It would all feel considerably sweeter this morning if Gloucester hadn't been missing all these players.
We've suffered a lot worse and for an extended period of time. With a lower salary cap teams simply can't compete when faced with this level of injury crisis, as we know only too well from our own experience.
That makes a farce of what is supposed to be the premium domestic club competition in world rugby and it is the spectators who are short changed, paying large sums of money to see mix and match teams get beaten up.
It is not sustainable.
We've suffered a lot worse and for an extended period of time. With a lower salary cap teams simply can't compete when faced with this level of injury crisis, as we know only too well from our own experience.
That makes a farce of what is supposed to be the premium domestic club competition in world rugby and it is the spectators who are short changed, paying large sums of money to see mix and match teams get beaten up.
It is not sustainable.
Quote:Malco
All those people who think that injuries are somehow not relevant to performance.
Gloucester's injury toll for this match is almost on a level to what ours has been on a continual basis for the last two or three seasons.
Missing for them:
Ackermann
Atkinson
Balmain
Evans
Gotovtsev
Hastings
Kveseladze
McGuigan
Meehan
Polledri
Rapava-Ruskin
Reid
Seabrook
Seville
Singleton
Socino
Tuisue
By contrast we now have many of our best players back and have had two weeks of rest followed by a week of training. We are really only missing Attwood, Barbeary, Coetzee, Ewels, Muir and Redpath.
We have a significant advantage in the strength of our squad and there is nowhere to hide if the players don't perform to the required level. If this team cannot turn up and play to their potential in a Premiership derby against that Gloucester team, which is absolutely stripped to the bare bones in the front row and the back row, then it gives some very clear information about them.
We should beat Gloucester up in the forwards and win this match comfortably.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 08:56
Quote:Malco
It would all feel considerably sweeter this morning if Gloucester hadn't been missing all these players.
We've suffered a lot worse and for an extended period of time. With a lower salary cap teams simply can't compete when faced with this level of injury crisis, as we know only too well from our own experience.
That makes a farce of what is supposed to be the premium domestic club competition in world rugby and it is the spectators who are short changed, paying large sums of money to see mix and match teams get beaten up.
It is not sustainable.
Well its certainly not sustainable in the sense that rugby doesn't earn enough money to pay the wages the top players have come to expect. Something has to give, and what is giving is the standard of play, both relative and absolute. As supporters, we either have to pay (a lot) more or accept what is on offer.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: A.M 180 (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 09:01
Quote:Malco
It would all feel considerably sweeter this morning if Gloucester hadn't been missing all these players.
We've suffered a lot worse and for an extended period of time. With a lower salary cap teams simply can't compete when faced with this level of injury crisis, as we know only too well from our own experience.
That makes a farce of what is supposed to be the premium domestic club competition in world rugby and it is the spectators who are short changed, paying large sums of money to see mix and match teams get beaten up.
It is not sustainable.
After two years of watching my mix and match team getting beaten up, forgive me if I don’t shed many tears for Gloucester
This is a well trodden topic, but my view is that it’s the nature of the modern game that injury rates are too high, not the salary cap
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 09:04
Not sure I get your point malco - does a 9 point defeat after being 17 up make the prem farcial?
Think it was a sell out despite glos fans knowing the likely squad they could put out.
Many weeks we have had more injuries than our opponents, this week we had less and it helped swing the game our way. I am more than happy to take that!
Glos were still able to field a decent 23 I thought despite that injury list. V v rare occasion we had beno/dunn/stuart available- something to celebrate!
I am just going to enjoy the win rather than beating us up cos glos were missing more players , after 2 seasons of being in that position nearly every single game.
I guess we will see if fans walk away cos of cap reduction but I think we should see less mix and match- less games should mean less attritional and less clashes with internationals. Hopefully clubs will put more focus on their pathways and how best to get the best 19-23 year olds meaningful rugby.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:15:09:07:23 by charlieboa.
Think it was a sell out despite glos fans knowing the likely squad they could put out.
Many weeks we have had more injuries than our opponents, this week we had less and it helped swing the game our way. I am more than happy to take that!
Glos were still able to field a decent 23 I thought despite that injury list. V v rare occasion we had beno/dunn/stuart available- something to celebrate!
I am just going to enjoy the win rather than beating us up cos glos were missing more players , after 2 seasons of being in that position nearly every single game.
I guess we will see if fans walk away cos of cap reduction but I think we should see less mix and match- less games should mean less attritional and less clashes with internationals. Hopefully clubs will put more focus on their pathways and how best to get the best 19-23 year olds meaningful rugby.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:15:09:07:23 by charlieboa.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 09:12
Sustainability feels like its reliant on a diverse business?
As a rugby club alone we need Bruce to pump in millions a year- new stadium with cafes, conferencing, restaurants, big merch shop, games like England ladies/touring teams etc and suddenly seems a lot more viable?
In terms of injuries my general rule is a decent squad should be able to cope with 10-15 players out. When it gets more it becomes exceptionally difficult to cope, esp if several are front line. We have often had 20+ players unavailable over the last few seasons- makes it pretty much impossible.
We are in a luxurious position of having less than 10 frontline players out which is incredibly rare for us and I am enjoying it.
As a rugby club alone we need Bruce to pump in millions a year- new stadium with cafes, conferencing, restaurants, big merch shop, games like England ladies/touring teams etc and suddenly seems a lot more viable?
In terms of injuries my general rule is a decent squad should be able to cope with 10-15 players out. When it gets more it becomes exceptionally difficult to cope, esp if several are front line. We have often had 20+ players unavailable over the last few seasons- makes it pretty much impossible.
We are in a luxurious position of having less than 10 frontline players out which is incredibly rare for us and I am enjoying it.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: HK890 (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 10:21
Think there is a genuine chance we get Champions Cup rugby next season. Currently 4 points behind bears and Quins (Still to play). Up against Quins and then Sarries who massively rotate today.
Think that would be a major success for JVG first season when his head had been called for about 3 months in!!!
Think that would be a major success for JVG first season when his head had been called for about 3 months in!!!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: JK7 (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 10:27
Quote:gaz59Quote:JK7
What do we reckon then, battling against the Leinsters and Toulouses this sort of time next year?
Not possible, we will be in the Challenge Cup and def not desirable either
Isn't it the top 8 that qualify for the big cup?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 10:32
Quote:HK890
Think that would be a major success for JVG first season when his head had been called for about 3 months in!!!
Only by trolls and those who simply don't understand how a rugby team develops!
Even then I don't recognise this, who are these people then?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 10:42
Quote:Malco
It would all feel considerably sweeter this morning if Gloucester hadn't been missing all these players.
We've suffered a lot worse and for an extended period of time. With a lower salary cap teams simply can't compete when faced with this level of injury crisis, as we know only too well from our own experience.
That makes a farce of what is supposed to be the premium domestic club competition in world rugby and it is the spectators who are short changed, paying large sums of money to see mix and match teams get beaten up.
Given the theme in the thread title it seems very apposite that this post reminds me of a particular AA Milne character
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: by (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 10:47
I think it's nigh impossible to finish 8th or lower as Bristol, Exeter and Gloucester all play each other.
6th Exeter (43): Tigers, Bristol, Irish
7th Quins(41): Falcons, Bath, Tigers
8th Bears(41): Exeter, Gloucester
9th Gloucester(40): Sale, Bristol
10th Bath(37): Quins, Saracens
6th Exeter (43): Tigers, Bristol, Irish
7th Quins(41): Falcons, Bath, Tigers
8th Bears(41): Exeter, Gloucester
9th Gloucester(40): Sale, Bristol
10th Bath(37): Quins, Saracens
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 10:48
I would very much prefer not to qualify for the big cup next year and not have to play Leinster and Toulouse. Higher seeding for the little cup and an actual win or two in Europe would be nice.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 10:48
Quote:JK7Quote:gaz59Quote:JK7
What do we reckon then, battling against the Leinsters and Toulouses this sort of time next year?
Not possible, we will be in the Challenge Cup and def not desirable either
Isn't it the top 8 that qualify for the big cup?
One of the last games is Bristol v Gloucester so either one will get 4 points and probably 5 so that means we will need to win both of our games. So, yes I was wrong, it is possible, just and I would love it but I really don't see it happening
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 13:47
Quote:hasta
I would very much prefer not to qualify for the big cup next year and not have to play Leinster and Toulouse. Higher seeding for the little cup and an actual win or two in Europe would be nice.
I am in this camp tbh
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: HK890 (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 19:15
Quote:by
I think it's nigh impossible to finish 8th or lower as Bristol, Exeter and Gloucester all play each other.
6th Exeter (43): Tigers, Bristol, Irish
7th Quins(41): Falcons, Bath, Tigers
8th Bears(41): Exeter, Gloucester
9th Gloucester(40): Sale, Bristol
10th Bath(37): Quins, Saracens
Ah I didn’t realise Glos and Bris play each other. Probably takes it away from us but a 9th place finish would do nicely for some easier Challenge cup games.
From what I’ve heard Sarries plan is to go weak again against Irish and then I presume use us a prep game for the finals. For me it’s a very good chance to see where we actually are against arguably who we should be competing against next season.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 19:25
Quote:HK890Quote:by
I think it's nigh impossible to finish 8th or lower as Bristol, Exeter and Gloucester all play each other.
6th Exeter (43): Tigers, Bristol, Irish
7th Quins(41): Falcons, Bath, Tigers
8th Bears(41): Exeter, Gloucester
9th Gloucester(40): Sale, Bristol
10th Bath(37): Quins, Saracens
Ah I didn’t realise Glos and Bris play each other. Probably takes it away from us but a 9th place finish would do nicely for some easier Challenge cup games.
From what I’ve heard Sarries plan is to go weak again against Irish and then I presume use us a prep game for the finals. For me it’s a very good chance to see where we actually are against arguably who we should be competing against next season.
I think putting us in the same bracket as Salaries next season is a bit of a stretch. Not in a one off game, perhaps, but they are absolutely, remorselessly consistent and we are... not. And we're not going to be while we integrate Finn Russell. Add in a RWC and i think the word "Rollercoaster" is going to be the mot juste. Buckle up!
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:15:19:26:40 by joethefanatic.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathIron (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 20:43
The scary thing is Sarries 2nd XV with 14 men (and for a while 13) gave a full strength Saints side quite a scare. We are still a long way from that level.
Quins looked pretty handy also. Should be a cracking afternoon at HQ on Saturday!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:15:20:44:26 by BathIron.
Quins looked pretty handy also. Should be a cracking afternoon at HQ on Saturday!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:15:20:44:26 by BathIron.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 22:09
Quote:charlieboaQuote:hasta
I would very much prefer not to qualify for the big cup next year and not have to play Leinster and Toulouse. Higher seeding for the little cup and an actual win or two in Europe would be nice.
I am in this camp tbh
+1
We can’t even compete in the little cup.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)
Date: 15/04/2023 23:01
Quote:I wouldn't disagree with your sustainability point but just out of interest on what measure are you judging our league to be 'the' premium domestic club competition in world rugby?Malco
.......
That makes a farce of what is supposed to be the premium domestic club competition in world rugby and it is the spectators who are short changed, paying large sums of money to see mix and match teams get beaten up.
........
Did you mean to say 'a.....' or 'one of the.....' ??
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 00:54
The Prem hasn't been the premium domestic league for at least four seasons. It's the most competitive still though.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 07:59
Quote:B4thB4ckQuote:I wouldn't disagree with your sustainability point but just out of interest on what measure are you judging our league to be 'the' premium domestic club competition in world rugby?Malco
.......
That makes a farce of what is supposed to be the premium domestic club competition in world rugby and it is the spectators who are short changed, paying large sums of money to see mix and match teams get beaten up.
........
Did you mean to say 'a.....' or 'one of the.....' ??
On the basis that that's what it claims to be.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 09:19
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: GoneWest (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 12:05
Quote:Hard to disagree with that. I was really upset when Mercer left but Miles Reid to developing into a fine No 8.charlieboa
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/sport/other-sport/bath-rugby-player-ratings-gloucester-8356123
The rugby paper has beno, stuart and reid as 8/10 with Miles as 'star man'
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 12:56
Quote:MalcoQuote:B4thB4ckQuote:I wouldn't disagree with your sustainability point but just out of interest on what measure are you judging our league to be 'the' premium domestic club competition in world rugby?Malco
.......
That makes a farce of what is supposed to be the premium domestic club competition in world rugby and it is the spectators who are short changed, paying large sums of money to see mix and match teams get beaten up.
........
Did you mean to say 'a.....' or 'one of the.....' ??
On the basis that that's what it claims to be.
I hadn't heard them state that and on the basis that it sounded a bit arrogant of them I have checked their web page.
It nearly says that but with an important use of the word 'vision' to say that it is their aspiration rather than achievement:-
VISION AND VALUES:
Premiership Rugby’s vision is to be the best and most competitive league in the world.
Apologies for the pedantry.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 14:20
Quote:BathIron
The scary thing is Sarries 2nd XV with 14 men (and for a while 13) gave a full strength Saints side quite a scare.
Saints are very flakey in defence. They should have won that game very comfortably. I'm not taking anything away from an impressive performance from a seriously depleted Sarries team but Saints really do seem to me to be in an over inflated position right now. They will get hammered in the semi final if they make it
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: JK7 (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 18:10
Good fun seeing Ashton get over 100, cracking celebration too.
Facilitated by one of the stranger sending offs you're likely to see.
Facilitated by one of the stranger sending offs you're likely to see.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 18:15
Quote:JK7
Good fun seeing Ashton get over 100, cracking celebration too.
Facilitated by one of the stranger sending offs you're likely to see.
Which just seemed utterly incorrect, seems double tackles on a try attempt are banned! Even the TMO was reluctant.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: JK7 (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 18:28
It was explained to be correct - Woodburn dived on Ashton who was already on the floor and stopped the try being scored.
Not sure what else Woodburn could have done though. Apparently correct but seems very harsh.
Not sure what else Woodburn could have done though. Apparently correct but seems very harsh.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 18:50
Quote:JK7
It was explained to be correct - Woodburn dived on Ashton who was already on the floor and stopped the try being scored.
Not sure what else Woodburn could have done though. Apparently correct but seems very harsh.
I don't think he dived on Ashton though, ground first then slid into contact.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 19:07
I agree with your view sw. I also doubt that his action was what stopped the try. The first tackle seemed to have pulled Ashton up short anyway.
PG
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: JK7 (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 22:34
Yeah, agreed. It does look like Woodburn's already on the ground there. Odd decision.
I don't think it would have changed who won, but Chiefs were really up against it after that.
I don't think it would have changed who won, but Chiefs were really up against it after that.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 16/04/2023 23:07
Quote:JK7
Yeah, agreed. It does look like Woodburn's already on the ground there. Odd decision.
I don't think it would have changed who won, but Chiefs were really up against it after that.
I agree, Tigers well on top that was a truly strange decision.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 00:35
I've just watched the Tigs v Chiefs game. If that ruling stands then players will just dive from 5 yards out and it will be illegal to even touch them. You can bet that Prem teams will be practising that at 07.30 on Monday morning. Absolutely ridiculous call.
If the oppo player in possession of the ball is moving towards your try line, however he's doing it, you should be able to try to stop him. Either that or a player who is off his feet may not ground the ball for a try.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
If the oppo player in possession of the ball is moving towards your try line, however he's doing it, you should be able to try to stop him. Either that or a player who is off his feet may not ground the ball for a try.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 00:42
Quote:joethefanatic
I've just watched the Tigs v Chiefs game. If that ruling stands then players will just dive from 5 yards out and it will be illegal to even touch them. You can bet that Prem teams will be practising that at 07.30 on Monday morning. Absolutely ridiculous call.
If the oppo player in possession of the ball is moving towards your try line, however he's doing it, you should be able to try to stop him. Either that or a player who is off his feet may not ground the ball for a try.
It's a 2nd yellow so not sure it is reviewed...
It's definitely an interesting case. You must not dive onto or into a player on the ground and while you can play the ball, you must do so on your feet.
On the other hand a tackled player should immediately place the ball but, like you say, how often do we see we players slide in from way out. Makes them essentially unplayable as you also can't go to ground to stop them.
(I'd also like to say it's an oddity of the laws but even at lower levels, coaches are aware of it and instruct their players to slide).
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 06:31
Quote:The BearQuote:joethefanatic
I've just watched the Tigs v Chiefs game. If that ruling stands then players will just dive from 5 yards out and it will be illegal to even touch them. You can bet that Prem teams will be practising that at 07.30 on Monday morning. Absolutely ridiculous call.
If the oppo player in possession of the ball is moving towards your try line, however he's doing it, you should be able to try to stop him. Either that or a player who is off his feet may not ground the ball for a try.
It's a 2nd yellow so not sure it is reviewed...
It's definitely an interesting case. You must not dive onto or into a player on the ground and while you can play the ball, you must do so on your feet.
On the other hand a tackled player should immediately place the ball but, like you say, how often do we see we players slide in from way out. Makes them essentially unplayable as you also can't go to ground to stop them.
(I'd also like to say it's an oddity of the laws but even at lower levels, coaches are aware of it and instruct their players to slide).
Have to say I thought Jack Yeandle took it pretty well. I'd have been absolutely livid.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 08:01
Finally watched the full game and to be honest it really wasn’t that great. Full of mistakes and brainless penalties, although impressed with how Bath dug deep to find a way to win.
The commentary almost ruined the game though as it was pathetically biased and added no value whatsoever to a Bath fan. If you just listened to it you could be mistaken about who won!
Glad I didn’t waste £4:95 to listen to that dross.
The commentary almost ruined the game though as it was pathetically biased and added no value whatsoever to a Bath fan. If you just listened to it you could be mistaken about who won!
Glad I didn’t waste £4:95 to listen to that dross.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 08:16
Well done Bath on an invaluable win give the season that we have had. Forwards (front row in particular) were immense.
Also watched the Bristol game on catch-up and I have no idea how Genge didn't get a red for a shoulder to the face of Curry. You either give reds (such as Palframan the other week) for these or yellows (this one) but as it stands you have identical events with different outcomes.
As for the Woodburn slide I didn't have any issue with this as I also think he slid into the player to stop the ball being grounded, not 'onto' the player. I have heard the Law argument but that is based on a law to stop a very different problem (knee drops etc)? I would be annoyed if I liked Exeter.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:17:08:19:59 by BathMatt53.
Also watched the Bristol game on catch-up and I have no idea how Genge didn't get a red for a shoulder to the face of Curry. You either give reds (such as Palframan the other week) for these or yellows (this one) but as it stands you have identical events with different outcomes.
As for the Woodburn slide I didn't have any issue with this as I also think he slid into the player to stop the ball being grounded, not 'onto' the player. I have heard the Law argument but that is based on a law to stop a very different problem (knee drops etc)? I would be annoyed if I liked Exeter.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:17:08:19:59 by BathMatt53.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: redmix (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 09:32
Quote:OutsideBath
Finally watched the full game and to be honest it really wasn’t that great. Full of mistakes and brainless penalties, although impressed with how Bath dug deep to find a way to win.
Same for me. Maybe it was because I had much higher expectations after reading the reports on 'ere that I was disappointed with the match. I think it could have gone either way and if Gloucester had taken their chances the result could have been very different.
Things we did well - defend, and take our chances.
Things we didn't do so well - keep our discipline.
Against other sides we would have been punished much more severely on the scoreboard with all the penalties (and handling errors) against us. That said I'll take the win and hope it adds that little bit more confidence to the side ahead of the next match.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 10:08
Quote:BathMatt53
Also watched the Bristol game on catch-up and I have no idea how Genge didn't get a red for a shoulder to the face of Curry. You either give reds (such as Palframan the other week) for these or yellows (this one) but as it stands you have identical events with different outcomes.
As for the Woodburn slide I didn't have any issue with this as I also think he slid into the player to stop the ball being grounded, not 'onto' the player. I have heard the Law argument but that is based on a law to stop a very different problem (knee drops etc)? I would be annoyed if I liked Exeter.
Point is though Matt Woodburn got carded for an offence he didn't commit. (i.e. he dived onto the ground). More importantly he ignored the TMO's reluctance.
What is becoming daft is you get Woodburn getting sent of and Genge gets only a yellow, how is Genge's action not a high level of danger?
Some poor decisions in my view.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 10:14
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:BathMatt53
Also watched the Bristol game on catch-up and I have no idea how Genge didn't get a red for a shoulder to the face of Curry. You either give reds (such as Palframan the other week) for these or yellows (this one) but as it stands you have identical events with different outcomes.
As for the Woodburn slide I didn't have any issue with this as I also think he slid into the player to stop the ball being grounded, not 'onto' the player. I have heard the Law argument but that is based on a law to stop a very different problem (knee drops etc)? I would be annoyed if I liked Exeter.
Point is though Matt Woodburn got carded for an offence he didn't commit. (i.e. he dived onto the ground). More importantly he ignored the TMO's reluctance.
What is becoming daft is you get Woodburn getting sent of and Genge gets only a yellow, how is Genge's action not a high level of danger?
Some poor decisions in my view.
Yes sorry I mean that I have no issue with Woodburns action - I think that the refs decision was wrong. I can't see how Genge was anything other than a red under the current interpretations.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 10:17
On a separate point I think that offences in the lead up to 'try incidents' should be considered irrespective of whether a try is scored or not. I don't understand how an offence gets dismissed simply by the coring of 5 points.
Ashton scores Woodburn stays on the pitch, why?
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Ashton scores Woodburn stays on the pitch, why?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Bath Supporter Jack (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 10:42
Thing is Redmix of late we have not defended well nor taken our chances and been indisciplined.
In this match we at least improved on 2 out of 3.
How many times have we watched games and marvelled at Saracens, Quins, LI and Saints efficiency in the red zone. What this could mean is you play rubbish for 79 minutes pick up a dropped ball and go and score a try and win.
In this match we at least improved on 2 out of 3.
How many times have we watched games and marvelled at Saracens, Quins, LI and Saints efficiency in the red zone. What this could mean is you play rubbish for 79 minutes pick up a dropped ball and go and score a try and win.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 11:26
There is a long established tradition in cricket of the Captain calling back an opposing batsman who has been given out unjustly.
I would have liked to have seen the Leicester Captain asking the referee to reconsider his decision to red card Woodburn. The players need to fight for their sport.
I would have liked to have seen the Leicester Captain asking the referee to reconsider his decision to red card Woodburn. The players need to fight for their sport.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 11:42
Quote:Malco
There is a long established tradition in cricket of the Captain calling back an opposing batsman who has been given out unjustly.
I would have liked to have seen the Leicester Captain asking the referee to reconsider his decision to red card Woodburn. The players need to fight for their sport.
Don't disagree but I don't think that he would have changed his mind. As soon as he considered that it was a penalty-worthy offence which prevented the try then it had to be a pen try and therefore a (second) yellow. It was just a real case of unfortunate circumstances once the first domino had fallen. Nigel Owens has said that it would have been 'play on' for him.
On a related point I do always love it when players are honest about non-groundings etc. as its an excellent example to set to the kids who play and an antidote to the clapping when someone knocks on or the Itoje-style screaming in the opps face when there is a turnover.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 11:44
Quote:Malco
There is a long established tradition in cricket of the Captain calling back an opposing batsman who has been given out unjustly
There really isn't.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 11:46
Wasn't a straight red, it was a second yellow. But yeah that's not gonna happen in rugby.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 11:52
Quote:OptimistQuote:Malco
There is a long established tradition in cricket of the Captain calling back an opposing batsman who has been given out unjustly
There really isn't.
Yes there is. In fact I've been on both sides of this myself.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 12:29
Not sure its longstanding, it happened to Bob Taylor back in 1979 and probably happens more out of sympathy in lower grade cricket but it is a thing.
Law 27.7
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:17:15:34:56 by shipwrecked.
Law 27.7
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:17:15:34:56 by shipwrecked.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 12:51
Quote:MalcoQuote:OptimistQuote:Malco
There is a long established tradition in cricket of the Captain calling back an opposing batsman who has been given out unjustly
There really isn't.
Yes there is. In fact I've been on both sides of this myself.
The fact that you've been on both sides of it doesn't in itself make it a long-established tradition in the entirety of the game.
Nor, reallly, do the very occasional instances - such as Ian Bell being recalled after being run-out when he thought he was heading off for tea, because these are outweighed by a factor of probably a thousand to one by incorrect LBW/caught behind/run-out decisions that the fielding side are fully aware are incorrect and do nothing to rectify, because the actual longstanding tradition in cricket is that 'these things even themselves out in the long run'.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 12:57
....for avoidance of doubt, I thought it was a pretty awful outcome, but a lot of the comment is framed as if he'd given a straight red. If he'd just given a yellow card it would have remained largely unremarked upon - although I have a massive issue with the absurdity of issuing a yellow card for 'preventing a certain try', and then proceeding to dish out the triple jeopardy of: upgrading a likely try to a certain try, donating a free conversion and then giving the yellow card (during which an average of 10 points are routinely scored anyway).
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 13:05
Quote:I wouldn't be too proud of being called back when an appeal is withdrawn Malco. It probably means you were such a slow scorer of runs, the opposition would rather you stayed at the wicket than have someone else come out to bat. ;-)MalcoQuote:OptimistQuote:Malco
There is a long established tradition in cricket of the Captain calling back an opposing batsman who has been given out unjustly
There really isn't.
Yes there is. In fact I've been on both sides of this myself.
I have seen fielders asked to drop high catches by team mates whilst the ball was in the air for this reason.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Reccing Ball (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 13:51
That’s what I thought the difference between a referee and an umpire, the captains in cricket are all powerful and what they agree between them goes, the umpire opinion is just advisory. I assume they could decide anything between them, whether it is inviting a player back or having ten ball overs.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 14:10
Quote:Malco
There is a long established tradition in cricket of the Captain calling back an opposing batsman who has been given out unjustly.
I would have liked to have seen the Leicester Captain asking the referee to reconsider his decision to red card Woodburn. The players need to fight for their sport.
Another corrosive example of the TMO. Once it goes for review it's never going to be recalled or challenged. Add a layer of seeking 'fine margins' as yellow/red cards have become more 'legitimate' with all this head contact stuff.
You're far more likely to see players draw attention to events and even over-react to get a card rather than anything in the other direction and, indeed, it is exactly what we do see (see Ojomoh - quite legitimately - visibly holding his head after the challenge).
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Griff (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 14:16
Based on the early post Christmas form and last years result, this is a very welcome win and well done boys. Definitely feels like we are moving in the right direction.
Regarding the Woodburn yellow (which led to red) That type of challenge happens week in week out and nothing is given. IMO following Christophe Ridley's decision for us against Glaws and a penalty try in the act of scoring, Karl Dickson didn't wan to be left out and was looking for a reason to give it
"It's all right, Andy! It's just bolognaise!"
Regarding the Woodburn yellow (which led to red) That type of challenge happens week in week out and nothing is given. IMO following Christophe Ridley's decision for us against Glaws and a penalty try in the act of scoring, Karl Dickson didn't wan to be left out and was looking for a reason to give it
"It's all right, Andy! It's just bolognaise!"
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 14:21
[twitter.com]
A similar incident last year. This is clearly the directive from World Rugby - can't go off feet.
A similar incident last year. This is clearly the directive from World Rugby - can't go off feet.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: woodpecker (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 14:33
that one looks bad!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 14:36
Quote:hasta
https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1647695886699446272?s=20
A similar incident last year. This is clearly the directive from World Rugby - can't go off feet.
I'm not sure that is similar though Hasta, he is straight onto the player, I can see why that was yellow.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 14:47
I agree it's worse. But the yellow for Woodburn is the (as Opti says) double jeopardy for the PT. Rugby being a game you play on your feet is pretty well established.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 14:55
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:hasta
https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1647695886699446272?s=20
A similar incident last year. This is clearly the directive from World Rugby - can't go off feet.
I'm not sure that is similar though Hasta, he is straight onto the player, I can see why that was yellow.
Leading with his knees toward the head as well.
Woodburn's to me was more an attempt at a tackle, slightly mistimed.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 15:15
It's an attempt at a tackle for sure, but he's not on his feet. So penalty. Penalty in the act of scoring that prevents a try - PT and YC. Second YC - RC. It's not a yellow card for head contact or anything else.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 15:22
Yes, I accept that hasta.
To me the issue is not in the application of protocol but the referee's interpretation. How else does one tackle a diving player without diving oneself (unintended consequence of the law!)?
Nigel Owens' comment- "play on". Which is what I would have preferred from Dickson.
PG
To me the issue is not in the application of protocol but the referee's interpretation. How else does one tackle a diving player without diving oneself (unintended consequence of the law!)?
Nigel Owens' comment- "play on". Which is what I would have preferred from Dickson.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: WasBBWBaaBaa (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 15:36
I have finally seen the Woodburn incident properly. Call me a Dinosaur, but I saw no penalty, never mind a Yellow/Red card! I know I would be very unhappy if a similar decision happened at my club...... I will not be rude about the referee, but on this one occasion, I strongly differ.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 15:47
Quote:hasta
https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1647695886699446272?s=20
A similar incident last year. This is clearly the directive from World Rugby - can't go off feet.
In that case the ball carrier should be banned from diving to score.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Kidney Stone (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 16:01
The best referees are those that have empathy with the game and the players in their interpretation. Seems ironic that the recently professional player, now ref has the least empathy and seems to be the most pedantic ref in the prem. Maybe he sees Carleys ‘progress’ as a template to follow?
Whilst on referees, I thought Ridley was fair and balanced, despite his birthplace! NID.
Whilst on referees, I thought Ridley was fair and balanced, despite his birthplace! NID.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 16:14
If a player goes off their feet trying to get the ball off another player who's on the floor, it's a penalty. You see it all the time with someone chasing a kick back and an over enthusiastic chase.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 16:22
True, but Woodburn did not attempt to play the ball -only make a tackle.
In another incident earlier this year a Bristol player slid along the ground at a diving Esterhuizen and robbed him of the ball on the line while himself on the ground..
Award? No try.
Referee? Karl Dickson.
PG
In another incident earlier this year a Bristol player slid along the ground at a diving Esterhuizen and robbed him of the ball on the line while himself on the ground..
Award? No try.
Referee? Karl Dickson.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 17:01
Quote:shipwrecked
how is Genge's action not a high level of danger?
Some poor decisions in my view.
Genge has been cited.
[www.bbc.co.uk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 17:31
Quote:P G Tips
True, but Woodburn did not attempt to play the ball -only make a tackle.
In another incident earlier this year a Bristol player slid along the ground at a diving Esterhuizen and robbed him of the ball on the line while himself on the ground..
Award? No try.
Referee? Karl Dickson.
PG
You also can't dive on (into) a tackled player and the tackle is complete once he was on the ground.
The inconsistency is maddening however, without seeing the Esterhuizen one, you are permitted to try and hold the ball up.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 18:07
Just watched that one. I guess it's arguable that the defender slid and targeted the ball? I agree it's maddeningly inconsistent though. I wonder if Dickson got told he was wrong to award it?
[twitter.com]
[twitter.com]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 18:15
Quote:The BearQuote:P G Tips
True, but Woodburn did not attempt to play the ball -only make a tackle.
In another incident earlier this year a Bristol player slid along the ground at a diving Esterhuizen and robbed him of the ball on the line while himself on the ground..
Award? No try.
Referee? Karl Dickson.
PG
You also can't dive on (into) a tackled player and the tackle is complete once he was on the ground.
The inconsistency is maddening however, without seeing the Esterhuizen one, you are permitted to try and hold the ball up.
If the tackle was complete then Ashton has to immediately release the ball. Which he did not do. Sanction - penalty to Exeter.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 18:16
Anyone see the lunacy of the decision that if Ashton scores lifts his foot 1cm then this would all be irrelevant.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: dcsh (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 18:47
Quote:According to the Eggchasers podcast, Dickson was in trouble with the authorities for letting that incident go and was told that is was an infringement, so yesterday he was acting in accordance with the way he has been instructed to referee the game.P G Tips
True, but Woodburn did not attempt to play the ball -only make a tackle.
In another incident earlier this year a Bristol player slid along the ground at a diving Esterhuizen and robbed him of the ball on the line while himself on the ground..
Award? No try.
Referee? Karl Dickson.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 18:53
Quote:shipwrecked
Anyone see the lunacy of the decision that if Ashton scores lifts his foot 1cm then this would all be irrelevant.
Well right, but if woodburn doesn't dive into him, he doesn't need to raise his foot.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 19:07
Quote:joethefanaticQuote:The BearQuote:P G Tips
True, but Woodburn did not attempt to play the ball -only make a tackle.
In another incident earlier this year a Bristol player slid along the ground at a diving Esterhuizen and robbed him of the ball on the line while himself on the ground..
Award? No try.
Referee? Karl Dickson.
PG
You also can't dive on (into) a tackled player and the tackle is complete once he was on the ground.
The inconsistency is maddening however, without seeing the Esterhuizen one, you are permitted to try and hold the ball up.
If the tackle was complete then Ashton has to immediately release the ball. Which he did not do. Sanction - penalty to Exeter.
But, likewise, the tackler must immediately release the tackled player and the tackled player has a few more options and they are permitted to touch down if momentum carries them over.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 19:32
Quote:hastaQuote:shipwrecked
Anyone see the lunacy of the decision that if Ashton scores lifts his foot 1cm then this would all be irrelevant.
Well right, but if woodburn doesn't dive into him, he doesn't need to raise his foot.
It's a general point though Hasta, you can commit a yellow card offence in the lead up to a try but if its scored then that offence is ignored. Nothing else has changed, the offence was still committed. Its fundamentally inequitable.
In the Wales v England game two players got yellow carded Campbell and Packer in the same sequence of play because no score ensued.
If you are going to sanction that leads to players being removed then sort out the offence lottery!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 19:36
They have started yellow carding people anyway even if a try is scored sometimes. It's not consistent, of course.
[www.theguardian.com]
[www.theguardian.com]
Quote:After the match Rob Baxter, the Exeter director of rugby, conceded that he could understand how the officials reached the decision while his opposite number, Richard Wigglesworth, revealed that a specific directive designed to stop the offence in question had been recently issued.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 19:42
Fair enough, but has that directive been made clear to players?
PG
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 19:45
Quote:P G Tips
Fair enough, but has that directive been made clear to players?
PG
Or, just as importantly, the supporters?
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 19:52
Quote:The BearQuote:joethefanaticQuote:The BearQuote:P G Tips
True, but Woodburn did not attempt to play the ball -only make a tackle.
In another incident earlier this year a Bristol player slid along the ground at a diving Esterhuizen and robbed him of the ball on the line while himself on the ground..
Award? No try.
Referee? Karl Dickson.
PG
You also can't dive on (into) a tackled player and the tackle is complete once he was on the ground.
The inconsistency is maddening however, without seeing the Esterhuizen one, you are permitted to try and hold the ball up.
If the tackle was complete then Ashton has to immediately release the ball. Which he did not do. Sanction - penalty to Exeter.
But, likewise, the tackler must immediately release the tackled player and the tackled player has a few more options and they are permitted to touch down if momentum carries them over.
I agree that they may be permitted to do so but the Laws say nothing about momentum, just what has to happen when a tackle is completed.
Also if Dickson was under a directive to ref this type of incident this way, then he is clearly not at fault.
It's a *very* complex game.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 19:52
Very much not the latter IMO Joe.
Responsibility for informing the players could lie with the clubs of course - as long as they have been told!
PG
Responsibility for informing the players could lie with the clubs of course - as long as they have been told!
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 19:56
Quote:Kidney Stone
The best referees are those that have empathy with the game and the players in their interpretation. Seems ironic that the recently professional player, now ref has the least empathy and seems to be the most pedantic ref in the prem.
I find it odd that we're talking about ignoring an illegal act that quite possibly stopped a try being scored as being empathy?
It's been pointed out in several places that Dickson ruled the other way in a similar incident by Whiteley (playing for Bris) on Esterhuizen and was apparently raked over the coals by the referees panel afterwards despite trying to defend his actions.
Given that and the directive hard to see how he could do anything else.
Tbh I think it's a shame that people are going after Dickson. I think he refereed the game well generally and he was spot on with that call whether people like it or not.
As also pointed out elsewhere despite some people saying these sorts of tackles happen all the time they really don't. Add to that a double yellow is incredibly rare. So you're talking about a pretty rare event and it's being treated as if someone's been robbed of the RWC!
I appreciate that the concern is that someone might be if we get the calls wrong but IMO this isn't that. This is someone getting the call right and people not liking it.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 19:57
For my 2p worth, Woodburn was already committed to the tackle and on the way down. He has to assume, subconsciously perhaps, that the 1st tackle will be missed and his tackle will be needed to avoid a try.
This is another example of the officials needing to watch the replay at normal speed instead of ultra slo mo.
Put it this way, if Woodburn had NOT tried to get under the ball and just run alongside he would have been walking back to Exeter.
This is another example of the officials needing to watch the replay at normal speed instead of ultra slo mo.
Put it this way, if Woodburn had NOT tried to get under the ball and just run alongside he would have been walking back to Exeter.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 20:01
Quote:P G Tips
Fair enough, but has that directive been made clear to players?
PG
Players and fans PG, Baxter has a point about removing players. If you are going to start carding to deter players actions defined by multiple directives eg tackle height and contact on the ground then a lot more players will be sitting out matches.
To my mind when players who have never been red carded before get sent of because of technicalities the sanctions are mismatched. Steward, Woodburn are examples and there was another red card debutant I can’t place At the moment.
What will be the next directive, offside perhaps prior to the RWC.?
I still think that red cards are being devalued, they should be reserved for violent and dangerous play.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 20:35
Quote:OldMarovian
I find it odd that we're talking about ignoring an illegal act that quite possibly stopped a try being scored as being empathy?
I appreciate that the concern is that someone might be if we get the calls wrong but IMO this isn't that. This is someone getting the call right and people not liking it.
To be fair OM, most objectors I have read -on this board and others- disagree with Dickson's version of events. He stated that Woodburn "dived on top of" Ashton. Many agree with me that Woodburn attempted a tackle (to which he was committed before Ashton came to ground).
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 21:06
I agree what Dickson said may have been incorrect but tbh I don't think Woodburn was trying to make a tackle but rather slide in and disrupt, that isn't a tackle. That he doesn't know he can't do that is his issue. I suspect it's a little different for Sarries supporters as we saw a call like this against us last season at Tigers so are familiar with this interpretation of the Law.
Obviously just my view but for me this is a case of people not liking the card rather than it actually being wrong. Also because he already had a card it ended up being a much harsher sanction than it would normally be. Tbh in comparison to some of the other actual reds that weren't that have been given recently I'm struggling to see why this has caused such a fuss?
A few Chiefs suggesting this is one of the worst injustices to be perpetrated since ... well obviously not Mercers red funnily enough ... but certainly for a while!
On a related note how does the process work re changing Laws? Does it all come from World Rugby down or do individual Leagues have any ability to change their own Laws?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:17:21:13:00 by OldMarovian.
Obviously just my view but for me this is a case of people not liking the card rather than it actually being wrong. Also because he already had a card it ended up being a much harsher sanction than it would normally be. Tbh in comparison to some of the other actual reds that weren't that have been given recently I'm struggling to see why this has caused such a fuss?
A few Chiefs suggesting this is one of the worst injustices to be perpetrated since ... well obviously not Mercers red funnily enough ... but certainly for a while!
On a related note how does the process work re changing Laws? Does it all come from World Rugby down or do individual Leagues have any ability to change their own Laws?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:17:21:13:00 by OldMarovian.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 21:49
If this had happened anywhere else on the field and was given as a penalty against Woodburn, no one would have batted an eyelid. The problem was that because it was a penalty in the act of scoring it turned into a penalty try, which also turned into a yellow card, which because of a previous action turned into a red.
I'd actually say the problem here is the double jeopardy 'it must be a yellow if it's a PT'. I hate that rule. Not saying nothing should ever be a yellow and a PT, but it's so often a ridiculous over the top punishment.
I'd actually say the problem here is the double jeopardy 'it must be a yellow if it's a PT'. I hate that rule. Not saying nothing should ever be a yellow and a PT, but it's so often a ridiculous over the top punishment.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 17/04/2023 23:16
Quote:hasta
If this had happened anywhere else on the field and was given as a penalty against Woodburn, no one would have batted an eyelid. The problem was that because it was a penalty in the act of scoring it turned into a penalty try, which also turned into a yellow card, which because of a previous action turned into a red.
I'd actually say the problem here is the double jeopardy 'it must be a yellow if it's a PT'. I hate that rule. Not saying nothing should ever be a yellow and a PT, but it's so often a ridiculous over the top punishment.
Agree with this. Don't like the rule - think it was brought in to prevent collapsed mauls but I'd honestly prefer the maul was pushed back or de-powered. A well-crafted maul that travles is a thing of beauty but not these 5 metre flop overs.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 08:57
Quote:hasta
I'd actually say the problem here is the double jeopardy 'it must be a yellow if it's a PT'. I hate that rule. Not saying nothing should ever be a yellow and a PT, but it's so often a ridiculous over the top punishment.
Was having just this discussion on the Saints board hasta.
I'm a bit torn as I get very frustrated when illegal play is ignored because a try is scored. It needs to have a proper sanction to stop there being little or no risk in illegal play beyond conceding the try you would have anyway.
I was suggesting that maybe an illegal act intended to stop a try that is scored anyway should make it a PT (so automatic 7 points) with the card in addition being for the when that illegal act stops a try?
Not typical situation but the example I gave was Sarries game against Quins where Goode tackles Marchant in the air behind our try line on a Crossfield kick. Goode was quite careful in not dropping Marchant who incredibly managed to score. Now because Marchant scored Quins got 5 and the kick out wide which they missed. Had Marchant dropped the ball or simply not grounded it then Goodes illegal play would have seen Quins awarded a PT and Goode would have been off for ten. So Marchants "reward" for his great finish is actually to make Quins situation harder? it's bonkers. My revision would at least have seen Quins rewarded with 7 points. It just feels like a better balance to me.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Reccing Ball (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 09:29
Why can’t they restart with a penalty and no yellow
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Dorset Boy (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 12:27
Quote:Reccing Ball
Why can’t they restart with a penalty and no yellow
Foul play in the act of a try being scored used to be a penalty at the restart.
Probably yet another law the top referees choose to ignore.......
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 12:53
There was one last season where someone was penalised for sliding in late when they had no chance of stopping the try but did managed to hurt the defender. Trying to think who it was?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 13:42
Quote:Dorset BoyQuote:Reccing Ball
Why can’t they restart with a penalty and no yellow
Foul play in the act of a try being scored used to be a penalty at the restart.
Probably yet another law the top referees choose to ignore.......
Foul play while the ball is live would trigger an advantage that would be over once the try is scored.
Foul play when the ball is dead (i.e. after the try is scored) would result in a penalty awarded at the point of the resultant drop out (half-way for a try).
Violent foul play is subject to sanction even if advantage played.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 14:23
Quote:hasta
If this had happened anywhere else on the field and was given as a penalty against Woodburn, no one would have batted an eyelid. The problem was that because it was a penalty in the act of scoring it turned into a penalty try, which also turned into a yellow card, which because of a previous action turned into a red.
I'd actually say the problem here is the double jeopardy 'it must be a yellow if it's a PT'. I hate that rule. Not saying nothing should ever be a yellow and a PT, but it's so often a ridiculous over the top punishment.
Which is basically Dickson's defence
The only thing I will add to the debate is that Woodburn knowing he was on a yellow should have been far more self disciplined in his actions and not sliding in recklessly.
And that is one of the main points of a yellow card which would probably have led to the try being scored and then he wouldn't got a red card
I guess where that leads to is that Dickson doesn't deserve the social media abuse, well for this one anyway
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 15:36
Quote:gaz59
Which is basically Dickson's defence
The only thing I will add to the debate is that Woodburn knowing he was on a yellow should have been far more self disciplined in his actions and not sliding in recklessly.
Hardly recklessly, look at the pic, what's more Woodburn might as well sit out the season on the bench if he isn't going to defend his line.
Woodburn isn't a dirty or reckless player and it is his first red, you can add to that the fact that Nigel Owens would have played on. Ashton wasn't hurt in any way and bounced up smiling thinking he had scored.
Dickson made a poor decision and seems to have been trying to placate World rugby. eradicating post try fouls is one of the more minor things World rugby has to address.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 16:09
Quote:shipwrecked
Woodburn isn't a dirty or reckless player and it is his first red
But not his first Yellow .... not even in the match in question!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 17:41
I think to expect a professional (or even amateur) rugby player to just back out of any attempt to get under the ball and prevent a try is just silly. To expect him to be aware of his yellow whilst an opponent is heading for the try line is at minimum, unrealistic. His brain would be shouting 'stop the try', not 'hang on a minute, let's consider law 14.4b para 2 (made that up), there isn't time. As they cross the line, you can see his hand trying to get under the ball. Just a victim of weird circumstances, no criticism to be aimed Woodburn in my eyes.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 17:48
Quote:shipwrecked
Woodburn isn't a dirty or reckless player and it is his first red, you can add to that the fact that Nigel Owens would have played on. Ashton wasn't hurt in any way and bounced up smiling thinking he had scored.
Dickson made a poor decision and seems to have been trying to placate World rugby. eradicating post try fouls is one of the more minor things World rugby has to address.
Dickson refereed it according to the laws of the game.
I'm glad Owens has the confidence to allow play to continue, partly as he acknowledges the logical endpoint of the law is that players can slide in from miles out.
But that is the law as it stands and it should rely on selective application/misapplication.
It is also not new. It's certainly known in the coaching circles where I am, where we tell players to dive when they are confident momentum will carry them over (and there has been humourous cases where players haven't reached the line).
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 18:05
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:gaz59
Which is basically Dickson's defence
The only thing I will add to the debate is that Woodburn knowing he was on a yellow should have been far more self disciplined in his actions and not sliding in recklessly.
Hardly recklessly, look at the pic, what's more Woodburn might as well sit out the season on the bench if he isn't going to defend his line.
Woodburn isn't a dirty or reckless player and it is his first red, you can add to that the fact that Nigel Owens would have played on. Ashton wasn't hurt in any way and bounced up smiling thinking he had scored.
Dickson made a poor decision and seems to have been trying to placate World rugby. eradicating post try fouls is one of the more minor things World rugby has to address.
Well I never said, and never would say, that Woodburn is a dirty player and I used the word 'recklessly' deliberately to describe his action on this occasion. Here's one definition:
"lack of proper caution : careless of consequences"
Arguably a player already on a yellow card should have been playing with more caution and more mindful of the potential consequences
That's the only point I was making
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 18:12
Quote:The BearQuote:shipwrecked
Woodburn isn't a dirty or reckless player and it is his first red, you can add to that the fact that Nigel Owens would have played on. Ashton wasn't hurt in any way and bounced up smiling thinking he had scored.
Dickson made a poor decision and seems to have been trying to placate World rugby. eradicating post try fouls is one of the more minor things World rugby has to address.
Dickson refereed it according to the laws of the game.
Did he? What law was Dickson applying then because Woodburn does not jump on the Ashton.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 20:17
Pick a ruck anywhere else on the field. Are you allowed to go off your feet? Are you allowed to enter from the side? No? Penalty. Prevented a probable try? Penalty try. (Stupid) double jeopardy rule? Yellow card. Already been yellow carded? Red.
I really don't get why this is particularly controversial, and both DoRs agree.
I really don't get why this is particularly controversial, and both DoRs agree.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 20:19
Quote:B4thB4ck
I think to expect a professional (or even amateur) rugby player to just back out of any attempt to get under the ball and prevent a try is just silly. To expect him to be aware of his yellow whilst an opponent is heading for the try line is at minimum, unrealistic. His brain would be shouting 'stop the try', not 'hang on a minute, let's consider law 14.4b para 2 (made that up), there isn't time. As they cross the line, you can see his hand trying to get under the ball. Just a victim of weird circumstances, no criticism to be aimed Woodburn in my eyes.
Except players have demonstrably shown they can change behaviour around tip tackles and high balls.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 20:47
Quote:hasta
Pick a ruck anywhere else on the field. Are you allowed to go off your feet? Are you allowed to enter from the side? No? Penalty. Prevented a probable try? Penalty try. (Stupid) double jeopardy rule? Yellow card. Already been yellow carded? Red.
I really don't get why this is particularly controversial, and both DoRs agree.
Dckson stated that Woodburn jumped on Ashton. He made no reference to a ruck .
SW’s position (& mine) is that Woodburn attempted a tackle, which is why a card was not needed.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 21:11
Quote:hasta
Pick a ruck anywhere else on the field. Are you allowed to go off your feet? Are you allowed to enter from the side? No? Penalty. Prevented a probable try? Penalty try. (Stupid) double jeopardy rule? Yellow card. Already been yellow carded? Red.
I really don't get why this is particularly controversial, and both DoRs agree.
+1
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 21:30
Quote:hasta
Pick a ruck anywhere else on the field. Are you allowed to go off your feet?
You are not but it is almost never penalized. And that's part of the issue here. What Woodburn did is seen every week and it's never penalised. So why now and particularly when penalizing is going to produce a red card and a match changing outcome for a minor offence?
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 21:46
Quote:P G TipsQuote:hasta
Pick a ruck anywhere else on the field. Are you allowed to go off your feet? Are you allowed to enter from the side? No? Penalty. Prevented a probable try? Penalty try. (Stupid) double jeopardy rule? Yellow card. Already been yellow carded? Red.
I really don't get why this is particularly controversial, and both DoRs agree.
Dckson stated that Woodburn jumped on Ashton. He made no reference to a ruck .
SW’s position (& mine) is that Woodburn attempted a tackle, which is why a card was not needed.
PG
You can't attempt a tackle on a player who is already tackled. He is on the ground. You can't fall into him and if you are on the ground (as Woodburn was) you can't interfere with the player or the ball.
Not to mention, ruck or not, you are supposed to approach from the direction of your own goal line.
I also don't like the outcome but the only criticism of Dickson in this case was that he did not disapply legitimate laws - which is not a very convincing case.
The answer is to look at the laws. As Joe says, these are already selectively applied (for the 'greater good'?).
Never thought I'd find myself defending Dickson...
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 21:57
Have you done that near Bear? What does the law say?
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 22:00
I'm beginning to wonder is there is an agenda at work here. We have a RWC coming up and a global controversy about the Laws and how they are applied. Perhaps we're looking the powers-that-be trying to set precedents in edge cases so such things will be less of an issue in France.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)
Date: 18/04/2023 22:04
Quote:hastaQuote:B4thB4ck
I think to expect a professional (or even amateur) rugby player to just back out of any attempt to get under the ball and prevent a try is just silly. To expect him to be aware of his yellow whilst an opponent is heading for the try line is at minimum, unrealistic. His brain would be shouting 'stop the try', not 'hang on a minute, let's consider law 14.4b para 2 (made that up), there isn't time. As they cross the line, you can see his hand trying to get under the ball. Just a victim of weird circumstances, no criticism to be aimed Woodburn in my eyes.
Except players have demonstrably shown they can change behaviour around tip tackles and high balls.
But you can train for that and we now see the game has changed. Here we have a player about to slide in for a try and another player instinctively sliding across to hold the ball up. By the laws the ref may or may not have it right but again, he should have watched the replays in real time to judge the card situation. So many times this season including the 6N we have seen cards shown on the basis only of ultra slow motion. That is ok to judge the technical aspects, in touch, offside etc but we all want to see empathy in the game and here was great example of that being ignored whilst watching action at 3 frames per second.
Woodburn was always going to slide across. The fact that Hogg got Ashton on the deck beforehand was not a factor in his thinking and he didn't go in high as happened with Mojo.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Dorset Boy (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 07:57
Quote:The BearQuote:P G TipsQuote:hasta
Pick a ruck anywhere else on the field. Are you allowed to go off your feet? Are you allowed to enter from the side? No? Penalty. Prevented a probable try? Penalty try. (Stupid) double jeopardy rule? Yellow card. Already been yellow carded? Red.
I really don't get why this is particularly controversial, and both DoRs agree.
Dckson stated that Woodburn jumped on Ashton. He made no reference to a ruck .
SW’s position (& mine) is that Woodburn attempted a tackle, which is why a card was not needed.
PG
You can't attempt a tackle on a player who is already tackled. He is on the ground. You can't fall into him and if you are on the ground (as Woodburn was) you can't interfere with the player or the ball.
Not to mention, ruck or not, you are supposed to approach from the direction of your own goal line.
I also don't like the outcome but the only criticism of Dickson in this case was that he did not disapply legitimate laws - which is not a very convincing case.
The answer is to look at the laws. As Joe says, these are already selectively applied (for the 'greater good'?).
Never thought I'd find myself defending Dickson...
But he wasn't tackled though as he wasn't held. If he was tackled then he should have released the ball.
As there was no tackle, your second bit in bold is also rubbish. There is no offside line as a ruck or maul had not been formed. By your logic, cover tackles , or chasing back and tackling from behind are also illegal.....
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 08:06
Quote:shipwrecked
Have you done that near Bear? What does the law say?
The Law (14.3) says:
"2. A player on the ground, in the field of play, without the ball is out of the game and must:
c. Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent. "
So if Woodburn was on the ground when he acted as he did, then Dickson is right.
The law also says (14.4)
"Players on their feet and without the ball must not fall on or over players on the ground who have the ball or who are near it. Sanction: Penalty.
However, in defining a tackle, the law says:
"1. For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents."
So two or more can make a tackle.
It seems that Dickson believes Woodburn was not in a legal position to make a tackle. I disagree. He starts his attempt at a tackle before Ashton hits the ground -even if he is a bit slow to react.
So to me his "crime" is a mistimed attempt at a tackle, not a "player on their feet without the ball falling on or over a player on the ground."
I have quoted what the law says. Not what modern refereeing interpretation is - that may vary of course to assume such actions are illegal. If so that would seem a harsh interpretation to many involved in the game -which is why we are having this debate.
Perhaps Bear, as a current referee, that is something you can enlighten us on?
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 09:01
Quote:Dorset BoyQuote:The BearQuote:P G TipsQuote:hasta
Pick a ruck anywhere else on the field. Are you allowed to go off your feet? Are you allowed to enter from the side? No? Penalty. Prevented a probable try? Penalty try. (Stupid) double jeopardy rule? Yellow card. Already been yellow carded? Red.
I really don't get why this is particularly controversial, and both DoRs agree.
Dckson stated that Woodburn jumped on Ashton. He made no reference to a ruck .
SW’s position (& mine) is that Woodburn attempted a tackle, which is why a card was not needed.
PG
You can't attempt a tackle on a player who is already tackled. He is on the ground. You can't fall into him and if you are on the ground (as Woodburn was) you can't interfere with the player or the ball.
Not to mention, ruck or not, you are supposed to approach from the direction of your own goal line.
I also don't like the outcome but the only criticism of Dickson in this case was that he did not disapply legitimate laws - which is not a very convincing case.
The answer is to look at the laws. As Joe says, these are already selectively applied (for the 'greater good'?).
Never thought I'd find myself defending Dickson...
But he wasn't tackled though as he wasn't held. If he was tackled then he should have released the ball.
As there was no tackle, your second bit in bold is also rubbish. There is no offside line as a ruck or maul had not been formed. By your logic, cover tackles , or chasing back and tackling from behind are also illegal.....
Agree DB
The other point is that Woodburn was carded for 'jumping on the player' which just didn't happen.
By the book would have been contravention of Law 13.4 "Players on their feet and without the ball must not fall on or over players on the ground who have the ball or who are near it. Sanction: Penalty."
He does not fall over or on Ashton as he is already on the floor. (From the pic previously)
Also Woodburn is entitled to prevent the try:
Law 21.10 "If a tackled player is in the act of reaching out to ground the ball for a try or touch down, defending players may knock the ball backwards, or pull the ball from the player’s possession but must not kick or attempt to kick the ball. Sanction: Penalty.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 09:09
Quote:OldMarovian
On a related note how does the process work re changing Laws? Does it all come from World Rugby down or do individual Leagues have any ability to change their own Laws?
I don't think that it would need a change to the Law in this case, just a clarification.
[www.world.rugby]
What are they trying to achieve by the Law, to prevent knee drops etc? Prevent body splash onto prone player? A couple of videos and what is and isn't OK would sort it.
I also agree with those above who have an issue with the compulsory yellow card & pen try, as well as the penalty (or yellow) not being accounted for if a try is scored. TDG getting smashed and knocked out after scoring a try a few years ago comes to mind - no sanction as the try was scored.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 10:05
Quote:P G TipsQuote:shipwrecked
Have you done that near Bear? What does the law say?
The Law (14.3) says:
"2. A player on the ground, in the field of play, without the ball is out of the game and must:
c. Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent. "
So if Woodburn was on the ground when he acted as he did, then Dickson is right.
The law also says (14.4)
"Players on their feet and without the ball must not fall on or over players on the ground who have the ball or who are near it. Sanction: Penalty.
However, in defining a tackle, the law says:
"1. For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents."
So two or more can make a tackle.
It seems that Dickson believes Woodburn was not in a legal position to make a tackle. I disagree. He starts his attempt at a tackle before Ashton hits the ground -even if he is a bit slow to react.
So to me his "crime" is a mistimed attempt at a tackle, not a "player on their feet without the ball falling on or over a player on the ground."
I have quoted what the law says. Not what modern refereeing interpretation is - that may vary of course to assume such actions are illegal. If so that would seem a harsh interpretation to many involved in the game -which is why we are having this debate.
Perhaps Bear, as a current referee, that is something you can enlighten us on?
PG
Ex-ref, so interpretation s may have changed and I don't like the outcome. But Ashton was held by Hogg (otherwise the offence might be on Hogg for sliding a player off his feet into touch or 're-tackling' a player while he was on the ground).
Tackles, of course, can occur from any direction but a tackled player should be approached from the direction of a players own goal line (true for both teams) if the ball is to be contested - can't tell if Woodman does reach for the ball.
Ashton was on the ground, Hogg was still clearly in contact and then Woodburn makes contact from the side (14.4.c.ii & 8), off his feet (13.3, 14.8) and into a player on the ground holding the ball (13.4).
Also note 13.4 applies to any situation in which a player is on the floor holding, or near to, the ball - not only tackled players and 13.3 is, likewise, in all open play.
I do get the argument about immediately releasing the ball but interpretation used to be that the player has one 'action', providing it doesn't take excessively long to initiate.
The timing is almost impossible for Woodburn but he does have sufficient time to judge the correct height to engage and go off his feet so it does seem reasonable to say it's just unfortunate and that he could have used that time to avoid the player.
If the authorities want an out then there are reasonable arguments... And the clarifications are probably quite simple (i.e. if a player has commenced a tackling action then that is to be completed first). But it doesn't seem fair to imply that somehow Dickson (and his team) has reffed this incorrectly. Maybe unsympathetically but (from the outside) refereeing authorities seem to be all tangled up on when to permit leeway and when not to...
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 10:14
I get all that but we are not arguing what is right, we are arguing about what Karl Dickson said and did. He awarded a yellow card for 'jumping on the player.'
Woodburn didn't do that.
He got it wrong factually and conceptually in my view as well, all Woodburn was doing was defending his line.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Woodburn didn't do that.
He got it wrong factually and conceptually in my view as well, all Woodburn was doing was defending his line.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 10:18
Thanks BathMatt.
Very ignorant question but I was meaning more if Premiership rugby decided to change certain Laws and how they were applied does that have to be done World Rugby or do they have the autonomy to do it independently?
Very ignorant question but I was meaning more if Premiership rugby decided to change certain Laws and how they were applied does that have to be done World Rugby or do they have the autonomy to do it independently?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 10:40
Quote:OldMarovian
Thanks BathMatt.
Very ignorant question but I was meaning more if Premiership rugby decided to change certain Laws and how they were applied does that have to be done World Rugby or do they have the autonomy to do it independently?
Each union can issue a clarification - see the index on the left you can sort by country (as well as Law or year). Each union can also make its own law variation, for example the tackle height was just for England initially.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 10:44
Quote:The Bear
But it doesn't seem fair to imply that somehow Dickson (and his team) has reffed this incorrectly. Maybe unsympathetically but (from the outside) refereeing authorities seem to be all tangled up on when to permit leeway and when not to...
I agree - if it was that clear cut we wouldn't even be debating it. Like may refs decisions it does require a judgement to be made.
(I think that from one camera angle it was clear that Woodburn was trying to get an arm under the ball whether that make a difference or not)
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 10:58
Thanks Bear. Like you I am an ex ref, which is why I am puzzled by the decision.
As sw says, Dickson did not reason sliding in or "off his feet" but that Woodburn dived on Ashton, which he did not.
Had he argued any of the other reasons for a penalty I think the reaction (from those who heard his conversation with the TMO) would be different.
It will be interesting to see what arises in tonight's Jack Nowell hearing - a different offence because it is Nowell's comments on trial - but I would like to know how the panel assess the facts of the incident.
PG
As sw says, Dickson did not reason sliding in or "off his feet" but that Woodburn dived on Ashton, which he did not.
Had he argued any of the other reasons for a penalty I think the reaction (from those who heard his conversation with the TMO) would be different.
It will be interesting to see what arises in tonight's Jack Nowell hearing - a different offence because it is Nowell's comments on trial - but I would like to know how the panel assess the facts of the incident.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 11:02
Genge banned - definitely the correct decision. Just a shame these are having to be made retrospectively.
[www.bbc.co.uk]
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
[www.bbc.co.uk]
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 11:55
Ah well, Karl Dickson will be reffing us at HQ on Saturday!
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 12:00
<duplicate post>
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:19:12:05:14 by BathMatt53.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:19:12:05:14 by BathMatt53.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 12:04
No ban for woodburn (but card not withdrawn). Interesting summary:
“Woodburn received two yellow cards for technical offences, during the game against Leicester Tigers on 14 April, contrary to World Rugby law 9.7. The sending-off was deemed sufficient and the player is free to play again with immediate effect.”
The two laws referred to are:
Yellow Card 1 - 9.7a A player must not intentionally infringe any law of the game.
E11 goes to intercept a L pass and goes one handed and has no chance of regathering. YC given live with no review.
Yellow Card 2 - 9.7a A player must not intentionally infringe any law of the game.
L14 going into score a try and has been tackled by E15. The tackle is complete and as L14 slides in to score E11 goes off his feet, in at the side and goes onto L14 which moves his momentum towards the touchline and he goes into touch. We check touch on the screen and see E11 under law 13.3 and 13.4 has committed an offence. We therefore give him a 2nd yellow cards and issue a red card.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:19:12:05:30 by BathMatt53.
“Woodburn received two yellow cards for technical offences, during the game against Leicester Tigers on 14 April, contrary to World Rugby law 9.7. The sending-off was deemed sufficient and the player is free to play again with immediate effect.”
The two laws referred to are:
Yellow Card 1 - 9.7a A player must not intentionally infringe any law of the game.
E11 goes to intercept a L pass and goes one handed and has no chance of regathering. YC given live with no review.
Yellow Card 2 - 9.7a A player must not intentionally infringe any law of the game.
L14 going into score a try and has been tackled by E15. The tackle is complete and as L14 slides in to score E11 goes off his feet, in at the side and goes onto L14 which moves his momentum towards the touchline and he goes into touch. We check touch on the screen and see E11 under law 13.3 and 13.4 has committed an offence. We therefore give him a 2nd yellow cards and issue a red card.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:19:12:05:30 by BathMatt53.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 12:20
Seems reasonable to distinguish between 2 x yellow cards in a game and one straight red for dangerous play
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 13:17
Quote:gaz59
Seems reasonable to distinguish between 2 x yellow cards in a game and one straight red for dangerous play
Particularly as you could get a 'team yellow'.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 14:22
For me there could be ongoing issues with this and needs clarification.
The reference to Laws 13.3 and 13.4 refer to "Players on the ground in open play"
That's not actually correct in my view.
Why, well, its illegal to dive into a tackle in open play "dangerous play 9.11"
Except in the act of scoring when it is legal to dive in to score.
But the clarification also says "In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly."
So that's being ignored as we see players diving in to score every week.
The clarification also says, "From an equity perspective, if they do so, a defender may attempt to make a safe and legal tackle on that player."
How else do you attempt to under a ball to hold it up without going off you feet? The act of scoring makes an exception for one but not the other. So the "equity perspective" is meaningless.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:21:16:22:45 by shipwrecked.
The reference to Laws 13.3 and 13.4 refer to "Players on the ground in open play"
That's not actually correct in my view.
Why, well, its illegal to dive into a tackle in open play "dangerous play 9.11"
Except in the act of scoring when it is legal to dive in to score.
But the clarification also says "In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly."
So that's being ignored as we see players diving in to score every week.
The clarification also says, "From an equity perspective, if they do so, a defender may attempt to make a safe and legal tackle on that player."
How else do you attempt to under a ball to hold it up without going off you feet? The act of scoring makes an exception for one but not the other. So the "equity perspective" is meaningless.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:21:16:22:45 by shipwrecked.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 14:50
Ashton wasn't diving to score, he was tackled. He (and the ball) weren't in-goal when Woodburn made contact and he wasn't reaching out to score at the point Woodburn (potentially) tried to play the ball.
13.3 & 13.4 seem fine in this case. World Rugby needs to ask itself whether it wants players imparting force to opposition players in the ground, in an attempt to deflect them when they have momentum to cross the line.
13.3 & 13.4 seem fine in this case. World Rugby needs to ask itself whether it wants players imparting force to opposition players in the ground, in an attempt to deflect them when they have momentum to cross the line.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 15:11
You are right thanks, just looked again, not sure that negates the point I made though. In the in goal area how do you attempt to hold the ball up whist staying on your feet?
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 16:36
The panel's reason for upholding the red seem reasonable as players are not allowed to slide into others on the ground.
However, their reason is different from the referee's which does little for credibility in a contentious case.
They also refer to "in at the side" so must be referring to a ruck, but then conclude that Woodburn's involvement pushed Ashton into touch preventing a try by actions contrary to 13.3 & 13.4 (Players on the ground in open play).
There is nothing in Law 14 dictating the direction from which a tackle may or may not be attempted. Objectors like Jack Nowell and commentators like Nigel Owens have treated this incident as a tackle which was my opinion.
I wonder if he offered the defence that he was only on the ground and sliding as he was attempting a tackle?
A grey area in need of clarification IMO.
PG
However, their reason is different from the referee's which does little for credibility in a contentious case.
They also refer to "in at the side" so must be referring to a ruck, but then conclude that Woodburn's involvement pushed Ashton into touch preventing a try by actions contrary to 13.3 & 13.4 (Players on the ground in open play).
There is nothing in Law 14 dictating the direction from which a tackle may or may not be attempted. Objectors like Jack Nowell and commentators like Nigel Owens have treated this incident as a tackle which was my opinion.
I wonder if he offered the defence that he was only on the ground and sliding as he was attempting a tackle?
A grey area in need of clarification IMO.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 16:54
That's a very good point sw
As I see it there are only two reasons why you would dive for the line
1. Celebrating a la Redpath recently
2. Get to the line with the momentum that beats a potential tackle
By that definition 2 is unlawful. Is there a third reason?
As I see it there are only two reasons why you would dive for the line
1. Celebrating a la Redpath recently
2. Get to the line with the momentum that beats a potential tackle
By that definition 2 is unlawful. Is there a third reason?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 18:09
Quote:shipwrecked
You are right thanks, just looked again, not sure that negates the point I made though. In the in goal area how do you attempt to hold the ball up whist staying on your feet?
There are options...
-You are perfectly entitled to lie on the floor as long as you don't interact with the game but it's not your fault if the opposition put the ball on you.
-If the opposition are reaching for the try line you are entitled to knock the ball backwards by hand as long as you don't kick it away (which could have been Woodburn's defence except he made contact with Ashton).
-If you are the tackler you don't have to facilitate grounding and if you are an 'other' in the tackle then you must start on your feet but you can go to ground as part of the tackle.
-If it is a maul and the maul goes down (legally) then you don't have to 'roll away'.
Quote:P G Tips
There is nothing in Law 14 dictating the direction from which a tackle may or may not be attempted. Objectors like Jack Nowell and commentators like Nigel Owens have treated this incident as a tackle which was my opinion.
There are not restrictions on the direction in which the tackler can enter the tackle. There are restrictions on those described as 'other' which includes those contesting the ball (i.e. attempting a strip) or those on the ground. The tackle was completed before Woodburn engaged Ashton, so I'd question if he was a 'tackler'. If a team mate has brought someone to ground you can't just fly into them.
Quote:gaz59
2. Get to the line with the momentum that beats a potential tackle
By that definition 2 is unlawful. Is there a third reason?
That's now how I read the clarification. You are permitted to dive to score as long as it is not an attempt to hurdle, or jump out of, a tackle. Likewise the tackler is entitled to tackle you safely. Diving to make it hard for someone to come in and tackle you as you go for the tryline is not an offence, diving out or through a tackle is.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Reccing Ball (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 18:54
If a defender is standing on the try line and the attacker dives for the line and collides with the defender, is this a penalty against the attacker
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 19:02
Quote:The BearQuote:P G Tips
There is nothing in Law 14 dictating the direction from which a tackle may or may not be attempted. Objectors like Jack Nowell and commentators like Nigel Owens have treated this incident as a tackle which was my opinion.
There are not restrictions on the direction in which the tackler can enter the tackle. There are restrictions on those described as 'other' which includes those contesting the ball (i.e. attempting a strip) or those on the ground. The tackle was completed before Woodburn engaged Ashton, so I'd question if he was a 'tackler'. If a team mate has brought someone to ground you can't just fly into them.
.
The Bear
That is obviously what the panel decided - presumably calling the tackle "complete" when Hogg brought Ashton to ground. Ashton was however, still moving (momentum) so Woodburn, whose dive began before Ashton hit the ground, could argue he was attempting a tackle as the tackle was incomplete. I cannot find any statement in law 14 that defines when a tackle is "complete".
What it does state is:
"The tackle ends when:
a. A ruck is formed.
b. A player on their feet from either team gains possession of the ball and moves away or passes or kicks the ball.
c. The ball leaves the tackle area.
d. The ball is unplayable. If there is doubt about which player did not conform to law, the referee orders a scrum. The throw is taken by the team moving forward prior to the stoppage or, if no team was moving forward, by the attacking team."
None of those applied at the time Woodburn made contact.
Maybe they meant
"Not play the ball or attempt to tackle an opponent while on the ground near the tackle".
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 19:45
All three of the below would seem to apply PG, on the basis "for a tackle to occur" is the same as for a tackle to be compete?:
Requirements for a tackle:
For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents.
Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground.
Being held means that a tackler must continue holding the ball-carrier until the ball-carrier is on the ground.
I would certainly recognise those as being things referees make decisions on during a game when a tackle is considered complete. Knee to ground, being probably the most common that a referee actually vocalises.
Requirements for a tackle:
For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents.
Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground.
Being held means that a tackler must continue holding the ball-carrier until the ball-carrier is on the ground.
I would certainly recognise those as being things referees make decisions on during a game when a tackle is considered complete. Knee to ground, being probably the most common that a referee actually vocalises.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)
Date: 19/04/2023 19:51
Quote:OldMarovian
All three of the below would seem to apply PG, on the basis "for a tackle to occur" is the same as for a tackle to be compete?:
Requirements for a tackle:
For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents.
Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground.
Being held means that a tackler must continue holding the ball-carrier until the ball-carrier is on the ground.
I would certainly recognise those as being things referees make decisions on during a game when a tackle is considered complete. Knee to ground, being probably the most common that a referee actually vocalises.
The big issue for me was Ashton's momentum. Can a tackle be said to be complete if the tackled player is able, just by dint of continuing to hold on to the ball, to score a try? I'd have thought the play is still live at that point and the tackle only becomes complete when the ball comes to rest.
... IMHO, of course.
Now in Honolulu
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 09:56
When a tackle is complete the carrier is required to release the ball. By definition the tackle was not complete and therefore Woodburn was free to target the carrier.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 10:04
Quote:Malco
When a tackle is complete the carrier is required to release the ball. By definition the tackle was not complete and therefore Woodburn was free to target the carrier.
Laws 14. 1 and 2.
1) For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents.
2) Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground.
He is brought to ground, tackle complete isn't it?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 10:14
Quote:That's kind of where I see this, there is a moment where the tackle is incomplete and Woodburn is committed to getting on the ground and the laws that apply kind of overlap.Malco
When a tackle is complete the carrier is required to release the ball. By definition the tackle was not complete and therefore Woodburn was free to target the carrier.
It feels like we have seen this type of try saving tackle before so many times without penalty and now there has been a high profile case it probably needs clarification.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 10:20
I do think it all needs clarification, Ashton is entitled to reach out in a try attempt or place the ball, immediately has to a allow for those things to happen surely.
Equally Woodburn's tackle is a fraction behind Hogg's he can't wait to see the outcome before tackling Ashton, he doesn't jump on Ashton just slides up to him, he is reaching out towards the ball and its not dangerous play.
I do wish though that TMO's had the courage of their convictions though and say if they disagree, rather than timidly putting a suggestion the backing down which is the impression I get with these reviews.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Equally Woodburn's tackle is a fraction behind Hogg's he can't wait to see the outcome before tackling Ashton, he doesn't jump on Ashton just slides up to him, he is reaching out towards the ball and its not dangerous play.
I do wish though that TMO's had the courage of their convictions though and say if they disagree, rather than timidly putting a suggestion the backing down which is the impression I get with these reviews.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 10:32
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:Malco
When a tackle is complete the carrier is required to release the ball. By definition the tackle was not complete and therefore Woodburn was free to target the carrier.
Laws 14. 1 and 2.
1) For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents.
2) Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground.
He is brought to ground, tackle complete isn't it?
No, because he still has forward momentum. If the tackle was complete he would have been obliged to release. The carrier is free to reach and score. That is the act of releasing the ball. Until the ball is released the tackle is not complete. At a breakdown the ball can be turned over if the carrier still has it in his possession. The moment he releases the ball if a ruck is formed the ball cannot be handled by the defending team.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 10:37
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:Malco
When a tackle is complete the carrier is required to release the ball. By definition the tackle was not complete and therefore Woodburn was free to target the carrier.
Laws 14. 1 and 2.
1) For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents.
2) Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground.
He is brought to ground, tackle complete isn't it?
That is the whole point though sw - who says it is complete? Nothing in the definition of a tackle or Law 14 says so (see my post yesterday at 19.02 above).
If the ball carrier is allowed to reach forward but a second tackler is not permitted to tackle, does not that undermine a principle of the game (quoted below)?
"CONTEST AND CONTINUITY
The contest for possession of the ball is one of rugby's key features. These contests occur throughout the game and in a number of different forms:
ï in contact
ï in open play
ï when play is re-started at scrums, lineouts, kick-offs and restart kicks."
I would suggest a tackle is "in contact". While a tackled player is still moving and able to or attempting to place the ball I would not see that tackle as complete.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 10:40
Quote:MalcoQuote:shipwreckedQuote:Malco
When a tackle is complete the carrier is required to release the ball. By definition the tackle was not complete and therefore Woodburn was free to target the carrier.
Laws 14. 1 and 2.
1) For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents.
2) Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground.
He is brought to ground, tackle complete isn't it?
No, because he still has forward momentum. If the tackle was complete he would have been obliged to release. The carrier is free to reach and score. That is the act of releasing the ball. Until the ball is released the tackle is not complete. At a breakdown the ball can be turned over if the carrier still has it in his possession. The moment he releases the ball if a ruck is formed the ball cannot be handled by the defending team.
That isn't what the laws say though, there is nothing about momentum or releasing the ball to complete the tackle.
He is brought to ground and more than one knee is in contact.
PG has looked for tackle completion definition and I can't see anything either. Can you direct us to that statement please?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 10:45
Simultaneous posts PG, I agree though, not clear. The other point BB made is pertinent though there has to be time allowed for all these events to play out, immediately can't be instantaneous.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:20:10:47:43 by shipwrecked.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023:04:20:10:47:43 by shipwrecked.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 11:46
With respect this is a fundamental principle of the game. If the ball is in possession then you can compete for it. That's how turnovers occur at a breakdown. That is why it is legal to strip possession from a player in a tackle. If the ball is on the ground in a ruck you cannot handle it until it is lifted.
A player who has been tackled short of the line and has a knee on the ground can still place the ball on the try line and score. Are you suggesting that a defending player should not be able to prevent him from doing that?
A player who has been tackled short of the line and has a knee on the ground can still place the ball on the try line and score. Are you suggesting that a defending player should not be able to prevent him from doing that?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 11:55
Quite Malco.
I think the decision and the outcome of the process that has arisen illustrates a mental mess among officials which needs urgent clarification for players, coaches, officials and fans.
In a related development, Jack Nowell has been fined £10,000 for his tweet!
[www.bbc.co.uk]
Considerably over the top in my view.
PG
I think the decision and the outcome of the process that has arisen illustrates a mental mess among officials which needs urgent clarification for players, coaches, officials and fans.
In a related development, Jack Nowell has been fined £10,000 for his tweet!
[www.bbc.co.uk]
Considerably over the top in my view.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 12:00
Quote:P G Tips
Quite Malco.
I think the decision and the outcome of the process that has arisen illustrates a mental mess among officials which needs urgent clarification for players, coaches, officials and fans.
In a related development, Jack Nowell has been fined £10,000 for his tweet!
[www.bbc.co.uk]
Considerably over the top in my view.
PG
Another nail in the coffin of our sport.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 12:01
Anthony Watson got a suspended one-week ban and will need to deliver a presentation to his team-mates on the importance of respecting match officials and the use of social media.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 12:15
That shipwrecked is why I believe the Nowell punishment to be over the top- clearly "pour encourager les autres", but excessive by comparison to Watson's sanction.
PG
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: redmix (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 12:16
Quote:Malco
A player who has been tackled short of the line and has a knee on the ground can still place the ball on the try line and score. Are you suggesting that a defending player should not be able to prevent him from doing that?
The defending player can if they are on their feet, not if they are off their feet.
One for those more knowledgeable on the laws: Does this change once the ball is over the try line (but not grounded)? I have a vague memory that the field of play is defined as between the try lines therefore once over it into the in goal area some of the laws no longer apply (off side being one of them). Does the off feet law also no longer apply, ie you can contest for the ball if you are on the floor?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 12:28
Quote:redmixQuote:Malco
A player who has been tackled short of the line and has a knee on the ground can still place the ball on the try line and score. Are you suggesting that a defending player should not be able to prevent him from doing that?
The defending player can if they are on their feet, not if they are off their feet.
One for those more knowledgeable on the laws: Does this change once the ball is over the try line (but not grounded)? I have a vague memory that the field of play is defined as between the try lines therefore once over it into the in goal area some of the laws no longer apply (off side being one of them). Does the off feet law also no longer apply, ie you can contest for the ball if you are on the floor?
That was the point I made earlier, not as clearly as you but for me there is an important difference between open play and in goal.
I cant find anything searching, is there a more detailed document on the Laws of Rugby somewhere?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 13:00
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 13:03
Quote:P G Tips
If you want to see the laws themselves sw, you can download them from here:
[www.world.rugby]
PG
Yes, I have that link but I was looking for more detailed stuff PG. When I contacted the WRU they had a document they quoted with specific detail that doesn't seem to be on the net.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 13:53
Quote:redmixQuote:Malco
A player who has been tackled short of the line and has a knee on the ground can still place the ball on the try line and score. Are you suggesting that a defending player should not be able to prevent him from doing that?
The defending player can if they are on their feet, not if they are off their feet.
One for those more knowledgeable on the laws: Does this change once the ball is over the try line (but not grounded)? I have a vague memory that the field of play is defined as between the try lines therefore once over it into the in goal area some of the laws no longer apply (off side being one of them). Does the off feet law also no longer apply, ie you can contest for the ball if you are on the floor?
Please explain how to tackle a player who is grounded when you are on your feet.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 14:26
All of this extended and highly articulate argument over the course of several days, and you're stil arguing ...... still want to be a referee????
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 15:15
Not arguing ....... we are discussing.
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)
Date: 20/04/2023 20:17
What we have here is a very specific set of circumstances that probably do need clarification.
From my recollection Woodburn dived quite early which is the argument put forward on here about not diving on the player.
So had Ashton managed to stay on his feet through the Hogg tackle and Woodburn slide like that to tackle him would there have been any debate about it being a penalty try and therefore a yellow.
If you are on the ground you are out of the game.
one comment from earlier was that is was not reasonable to expect Woodburn to be able to apply the laws to his decision making in the heat of a game. I think that is a basic expectation of a professional what Clive W called Thinking Clearly Under Pressure. When Bath played Exe a couple of weeks ago there were 2 or 3 Bath players in front of another Bath Player who knocked the ball on and all of them managed to not pick the ball up. A similar split second decision which was celebrated on here.
From my recollection Woodburn dived quite early which is the argument put forward on here about not diving on the player.
So had Ashton managed to stay on his feet through the Hogg tackle and Woodburn slide like that to tackle him would there have been any debate about it being a penalty try and therefore a yellow.
If you are on the ground you are out of the game.
one comment from earlier was that is was not reasonable to expect Woodburn to be able to apply the laws to his decision making in the heat of a game. I think that is a basic expectation of a professional what Clive W called Thinking Clearly Under Pressure. When Bath played Exe a couple of weeks ago there were 2 or 3 Bath players in front of another Bath Player who knocked the ball on and all of them managed to not pick the ball up. A similar split second decision which was celebrated on here.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 08:39
Quote:Murty7
one comment from earlier was that is was not reasonable to expect Woodburn to be able to apply the laws to his decision making in the heat of a game.
There are Law and Laws though, when Nigel Owens is saying that he would have said play on and yet it's upheld I think its not unreasonable for a player (or pundits and fans) to not know it.
As you say, given all the chat I would expect a Law clarification fairly rapidly.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 08:47
I think Murty that Woodburn probably did not know which law he infringed.
The ref & panel chose different ones! Nigel Owens thought it a third - which is where the confusion and debate arise.
PG
The ref & panel chose different ones! Nigel Owens thought it a third - which is where the confusion and debate arise.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 09:27
In every game we see defenders trying to hold up the ball after the tackle whilst lying on the ground so the in goal discussion must be pertinent.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 09:30
I get the confusion around the laws and that he may not have thought he would be penalised. My point is more a general one that professional rugby players need to be able to make correct decisions based on a decent understanding of the laws in a split second in the heat of battle. 8t was in response to an earlier post that said he couldn't be expected to not dive ieven n if he knew it was illegal as he was trying to stop a try.
This is why I get really frustrated when sides pull down a maul when they are clearly going to conceded try they end up with 7 point and a YC rather than 5and possible 2 from a wide angle. I think the double jeapody is an attempt to stop sides gambling they will get away with an infingment that stops a try as without the yellow there is no incentive not to.
In this instance I think Woodburns understanding of the way the laws would be applied waw different to the how Dickson applied it so am not sure his decisions making was the problem.
The fault actually lies with the rfu/refs body as if the told Dickson he was wrong when he did it earlier I the year after he told them that is how it is normally interpreted a clarification should have been sent quietly to the clubs and all refs to ensure consistency.
This is why I get really frustrated when sides pull down a maul when they are clearly going to conceded try they end up with 7 point and a YC rather than 5and possible 2 from a wide angle. I think the double jeapody is an attempt to stop sides gambling they will get away with an infingment that stops a try as without the yellow there is no incentive not to.
In this instance I think Woodburns understanding of the way the laws would be applied waw different to the how Dickson applied it so am not sure his decisions making was the problem.
The fault actually lies with the rfu/refs body as if the told Dickson he was wrong when he did it earlier I the year after he told them that is how it is normally interpreted a clarification should have been sent quietly to the clubs and all refs to ensure consistency.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 10:13
Quote:Murty7
I get the confusion around the laws and that he may not have thought he would be penalised. My point is more a general one that professional rugby players need to be able to make correct decisions based on a decent understanding of the laws in a split second in the heat of battle. 8t was in response to an earlier post that said he couldn't be expected to not dive ieven n if he knew it was illegal as he was trying to stop a try.
In this instance I think Woodburns understanding of the way the laws would be applied waw different to the how Dickson applied it so am not sure his decisions making was the problem.
The fault actually lies with the rfu/refs body as if the told Dickson he was wrong when he did it earlier I the year after he told them that is how it is normally interpreted a clarification should have been sent quietly to the clubs and all refs to ensure consistency.
BathBack, PGT and BathMatt have all made the point that Woodburn couldn't have exercised TCUP because as you say later no-one except Dickson knew what law he was breaking including Woodburn himself.
To spring a "World Rugby directive" that no-one was aware of is just nuts then add to that the fact that Dickson applied the Law in a way it was never intended to be applied makes prompt clarification essential.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: redmix (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 10:14
Quote:Malco
Please explain how to tackle a player who is grounded when you are on your feet.
I meant contest for the ball. not tackle
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 10:18
I'm absolutely certain that in that split second Woodburn would have been thinking three things. In order of importance:
1. Don't make contact with his head
2. Force him into touch
3. Get under the ball
That's it. No time or space for anything else. That's his job and his duty of care to the carrier all accounted for.
1. Don't make contact with his head
2. Force him into touch
3. Get under the ball
That's it. No time or space for anything else. That's his job and his duty of care to the carrier all accounted for.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 10:56
Quote:Malco
I'm absolutely certain that in that split second Woodburn would have been thinking three things. In order of importance:
1. Don't make contact with his head
2. Force him into touch
3. Get under the ball
That's it. No time or space for anything else. That's his job and his duty of care to the carrier all accounted for.
Totally agree.
[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: redmix (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 12:41
There's also a definitions section of the laws: [www.world.rugby]
this provides some clarifications on some of the confusion on the laws. For example:
Field of play: The area between the goal lines and the touch lines. Those lines are not part of the field of play.
To my post above, this would mean that if a law applies "in the field of play" it does not apply once the ball is over the try line. Therefore:
Law 13
3: A player on the ground in the field of play, without the ball is out of the game and must:
a) Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.
b) Not play the ball.
c) Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.
Does not apply to players in the in goal area. This does not change the ruling on Woodburn but does explain why it is ok to do these things to prevent a try once in goal.
this provides some clarifications on some of the confusion on the laws. For example:
Field of play: The area between the goal lines and the touch lines. Those lines are not part of the field of play.
To my post above, this would mean that if a law applies "in the field of play" it does not apply once the ball is over the try line. Therefore:
Law 13
3: A player on the ground in the field of play, without the ball is out of the game and must:
a) Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.
b) Not play the ball.
c) Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.
Does not apply to players in the in goal area. This does not change the ruling on Woodburn but does explain why it is ok to do these things to prevent a try once in goal.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 12:42
Quote:shipwrecked
BathBack, PGT and BathMatt have all made the point that Woodburn couldn't have exercised TCUP because as you say later no-one except Dickson knew what law he was breaking including Woodburn himself.
So what. Players breach laws they're unaware of all the time. We've now had a test case and players can be aware of it.
Quote:shipwrecked
To spring a "World Rugby directive" that no-one was aware of is just nuts then add to that the fact that Dickson applied the Law in a way it was never intended to be applied makes prompt clarification essential.
Which World Rugby Directive is noone aware of? Semi-pro clubs in the London area have 'suggested' to their players that if momentum will carry them, they should try and slide over.
Who has decided it was never intended in that way? Plenty of evidence the law and it's consequences have been understood. If you frame it as diving into tackled players, then you'd probably get a different response...
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 13:40
Quote:The BearQuote:shipwrecked
BathBack, PGT and BathMatt have all made the point that Woodburn couldn't have exercised TCUP because as you say later no-one except Dickson knew what law he was breaking including Woodburn himself.
So what. Players breach laws they're unaware of all the time. We've now had a test case and players can be aware of it.
Quote:shipwrecked
To spring a "World Rugby directive" that no-one was aware of is just nuts then add to that the fact that Dickson applied the Law in a way it was never intended to be applied makes prompt clarification essential.
Which World Rugby Directive is noone aware of? Semi-pro clubs in the London area have 'suggested' to their players that if momentum will carry them, they should try and slide over.
Who has decided it was never intended in that way? Plenty of evidence the law and it's consequences have been understood. If you frame it as diving into tackled players, then you'd probably get a different response...
Strange stance to take but perhaps you can enlighten us as a current referee.
Where are the world rugby directives published then and why were professional rugby players, Exeter Chiefs so baffled by this decision?
Woodburn does not drop onto the player, we have already discussed this and the law associated with it.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: redmix (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 13:55
Law application guidelines are published here
Only thing I can see that's relevant is the guideline from January 2023 which has this in it: Tackle law 14.8a Other players must: Remain on their feet and release the ball and the ball-carrier immediately, and 14.8b Remain on their feet when they play the ball.
Not sure it's quite what Woodburn got pinged for but closest I can see
Only thing I can see that's relevant is the guideline from January 2023 which has this in it: Tackle law 14.8a Other players must: Remain on their feet and release the ball and the ball-carrier immediately, and 14.8b Remain on their feet when they play the ball.
Not sure it's quite what Woodburn got pinged for but closest I can see
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: Malco (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 14:27
If a tackler is not permitted to go off their feet then the carrier should also not be permitted to dive for the line. Doing so effectively prevents fair competition for the ball.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 14:30
Thanks Redmix and the previous link as well, its not the detailed stuff the WRU sent when I asked a question of their refereeing panel but it is more detail so appreciated.
If this info isn't readily available how on earth can players be expected to comply? Or do clubs get separate written communication?
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
If this info isn't readily available how on earth can players be expected to comply? Or do clubs get separate written communication?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 14:33
Quote:Malco
If a tackler is not permitted to go off their feet then the carrier should also not be permitted to dive for the line. Doing so effectively prevents fair competition for the ball.
I agree with this, there is an exemption for diving out of a tackle in open play if a try attempt is being made but not for the defender. An inequitable situation.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 16:04
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:The BearQuote:shipwrecked
BathBack, PGT and BathMatt have all made the point that Woodburn couldn't have exercised TCUP because as you say later no-one except Dickson knew what law he was breaking including Woodburn himself.
So what. Players breach laws they're unaware of all the time. We've now had a test case and players can be aware of it.
Quote:shipwrecked
To spring a "World Rugby directive" that no-one was aware of is just nuts then add to that the fact that Dickson applied the Law in a way it was never intended to be applied makes prompt clarification essential.
Which World Rugby Directive is noone aware of? Semi-pro clubs in the London area have 'suggested' to their players that if momentum will carry them, they should try and slide over.
Who has decided it was never intended in that way? Plenty of evidence the law and it's consequences have been understood. If you frame it as diving into tackled players, then you'd probably get a different response...
Strange stance to take but perhaps you can enlighten us as a current referee.
Where are the world rugby directives published then and why were professional rugby players, Exeter Chiefs so baffled by this decision?
Woodburn does not drop onto the player, we have already discussed this and the law associated with it.
We're having the same discussion. The laws he fell foul of are included earlier in this thread and in the disciplinary report. Just because you think he a) didn't fall into the player and b) didn't attempt to tackle the player or play the ball doesn't mean he didn't.
And, honestly, it doesn't matter what the Exeter Chiefs players think.
These laws(around players off feet) have existed for years. Why do you need a directive?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 16:11
Quote:shipwreckedQuote:Malco
If a tackler is not permitted to go off their feet then the carrier should also not be permitted to dive for the line. Doing so effectively prevents fair competition for the ball.
I agree with this, there is an exemption for diving out of a tackle in open play if a try attempt is being made but not for the defender. An inequitable situation.
I think you misunderstand the exemption, though I can't say I've come across its application.
You are allowed to dive to score.
The opposition are extended the right to tackle a player in the air diving to score provided they do so safely.
You are not allowed to jump out of a tackle even in the act of scoring (I e. the dive has to be before the tackle commenced).
For clarity Chris Ashton did not dive (and once you hit the ground, those laws apply).
He was tackled (knee on ground, held by the tackler - Hogg). He is perfectly entitled to ground the ball if his momentum carries him over the line.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 16:24
Quote:The Bear
We're having the same discussion. The laws he fell foul of are included earlier in this thread and in the disciplinary report. Just because you think he a) didn't fall into the player and b) didn't attempt to tackle the player or play the ball doesn't mean he didn't.
The Bear
Do you think he “fell onto the player”? Dickson said “dived on top of”.
Do you think he attempted a tackle? If that is what he did, what element of a Law 14 did he infringe?
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 16:27
Quote:The BearQuote:shipwreckedQuote:Malco
If a tackler is not permitted to go off their feet then the carrier should also not be permitted to dive for the line. Doing so effectively prevents fair competition for the ball.
I agree with this, there is an exemption for diving out of a tackle in open play if a try attempt is being made but not for the defender. An inequitable situation.
I think you misunderstand the exemption, though I can't say I've come across its application.
You are allowed to dive to score.
The opposition are extended the right to tackle a player in the air diving to score provided they do so safely.
You are not allowed to jump out of a tackle even in the act of scoring (I e. the dive has to be before the tackle commenced).
For clarity Chris Ashton did not dive (and once you hit the ground, those laws apply).
He was tackled (knee on ground, held by the tackler - Hogg). He is perfectly entitled to ground the ball if his momentum carries him over the line.
Ignoring this particular incident because I'm not referring to it and neither was Malco I believe but two days ago I wrote this:
Quote:shipwrecked
For me there could be ongoing issues with this and needs clarification.
The reference to Laws 13.3 and 13.4 refer to "Players on the ground in open play"
That's not actually correct in my view.
Why, well, its illegal to dive out of tackle in open play "dangerous play 9.11"
Except in the act of scoring when it is legal to dive in to score.
But the clarification also says "In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly."
So that's being ignored as we see players diving in to score every week.
The clarification also says, "From an equity perspective, if they do so, a defender may attempt to make a safe and legal tackle on that player."
How else do you attempt to under a ball to hold it up without going off you feet? The act of scoring makes an exception for one but not the other. So the "equity perspective" is meaningless.
Why are you so defensive?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 17:13
[quote shipwrecked]
Why, well, its illegal to dive out of tackle in open play "dangerous play 9.11"
Except in the act of scoring when it is legal to dive in to score.
So that's being ignored as we see players diving in to score every week.
The clarification also says, "From an equity perspective, if they do so, a defender may attempt to make a safe and legal tackle on that player."
How else do you attempt to under a ball to hold it up without going off you feet? The act of scoring makes an exception for one but not the other. So the "equity perspective" is meaningless.[/quote]
Why are you so defensive?[/quote]
I am, as politely as possible, saying your understanding of the laws and the clarification is not consistent with the laws and exemption.
A dive is not the same as being on the ground. Law 13 is specifically concerned with players on the ground. I see nothing in the clarification that considers 'diving' as a player on the ground (e.g. "As we have said above, jumping to avoid a tackle should be regarded as dangerous play..."
A player who is diving is permitted to be tackled until such point he is on the ground and then he must comply with those rules. A player may not jump out of a tackle even in the act of scoring ("In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.").
Why, well, its illegal to dive out of tackle in open play "dangerous play 9.11"
Except in the act of scoring when it is legal to dive in to score.
So that's being ignored as we see players diving in to score every week.
The clarification also says, "From an equity perspective, if they do so, a defender may attempt to make a safe and legal tackle on that player."
How else do you attempt to under a ball to hold it up without going off you feet? The act of scoring makes an exception for one but not the other. So the "equity perspective" is meaningless.[/quote]
Why are you so defensive?[/quote]
I am, as politely as possible, saying your understanding of the laws and the clarification is not consistent with the laws and exemption.
A dive is not the same as being on the ground. Law 13 is specifically concerned with players on the ground. I see nothing in the clarification that considers 'diving' as a player on the ground (e.g. "As we have said above, jumping to avoid a tackle should be regarded as dangerous play..."
A player who is diving is permitted to be tackled until such point he is on the ground and then he must comply with those rules. A player may not jump out of a tackle even in the act of scoring ("In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.").
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 17:23
Quote:P G TipsQuote:The Bear
We're having the same discussion. The laws he fell foul of are included earlier in this thread and in the disciplinary report. Just because you think he a) didn't fall into the player and b) didn't attempt to tackle the player or play the ball doesn't mean he didn't.
The Bear
Do you think he “fell onto the player”? Dickson said “dived on top of”.
Do you think he attempted a tackle? If that is what he did, what element of a Law 14 did he infringe?
PG
He infringed Law 13, that you may not fall on a player on the ground near the ball, and that you may not tackle a player while off your feet.
In terms of Law 14 I wouldn't consider he was a tackler and therefore infringing as an 'other' (14.4.c.ii&iii and 14.8) but those were not the law referenced in the disciplinary decision.
I think there is an element that many don't like the outcome and feel that it must be the application of the law at fault rather than the law.
I don't think anyone would have issue with this if it had happened 40 yards out. The unsatisfying part of it all, for me, is that it, in essence, paints a new line on the pitch at which point a players momentum makes them unstoppable and they will score and yet the defender can't react any differently to 40 yards out.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 17:33
Interestingly though, while stating that the referee was correct, the panel chose to state that Woodburn slid into Ashton, which I think is correct (although maybe not in the way the law was created to regulate).
Dickson states he dived on top of Ashton which the replays do not support.
Nigel Owens thinks he attempted a tackle. If so he did not infringe.
3 different versions - hence the desire for a statement in clarification. Personally I find the puzzlement understandable and request reasonable.
PG
Dickson states he dived on top of Ashton which the replays do not support.
Nigel Owens thinks he attempted a tackle. If so he did not infringe.
3 different versions - hence the desire for a statement in clarification. Personally I find the puzzlement understandable and request reasonable.
PG
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 17:38
[quote The Bear][quote shipwrecked]
Why, well, its illegal to dive out of tackle in open play "dangerous play 9.11"
Except in the act of scoring when it is legal to dive in to score.
So that's being ignored as we see players diving in to score every week.
The clarification also says, "From an equity perspective, if they do so, a defender may attempt to make a safe and legal tackle on that player."
How else do you attempt to under a ball to hold it up without going off you feet? The act of scoring makes an exception for one but not the other. So the "equity perspective" is meaningless.[/quote]
Why are you so defensive?[/quote]
I am, as politely as possible, saying your understanding of the laws and the clarification is not consistent with the laws and exemption.
A dive is not the same as being on the ground. Law 13 is specifically concerned with players on the ground. I see nothing in the clarification that considers 'diving' as a player on the ground (e.g. "As we have said above, jumping to avoid a tackle should be regarded as dangerous play..."
A player who is diving is permitted to be tackled until such point he is on the ground and then he must comply with those rules. A player may not jump out of a tackle even in the act of scoring ("In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.").[/quote]
OK I'll put it simply then.
You can not jump out of a tackle in open play, you can do so in attempting to score a try. Is that true or not?
Now apply that to going off feet to defend a score.
Your ability to not see both sides of the argument troubles me a little when making statements about being a current referee!
Clearly you think Dickson was right, many who play, watch and referee the game don't agree, why is that so hard to accept?
Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Why, well, its illegal to dive out of tackle in open play "dangerous play 9.11"
Except in the act of scoring when it is legal to dive in to score.
So that's being ignored as we see players diving in to score every week.
The clarification also says, "From an equity perspective, if they do so, a defender may attempt to make a safe and legal tackle on that player."
How else do you attempt to under a ball to hold it up without going off you feet? The act of scoring makes an exception for one but not the other. So the "equity perspective" is meaningless.[/quote]
Why are you so defensive?[/quote]
I am, as politely as possible, saying your understanding of the laws and the clarification is not consistent with the laws and exemption.
A dive is not the same as being on the ground. Law 13 is specifically concerned with players on the ground. I see nothing in the clarification that considers 'diving' as a player on the ground (e.g. "As we have said above, jumping to avoid a tackle should be regarded as dangerous play..."
A player who is diving is permitted to be tackled until such point he is on the ground and then he must comply with those rules. A player may not jump out of a tackle even in the act of scoring ("In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.").[/quote]
OK I'll put it simply then.
You can not jump out of a tackle in open play, you can do so in attempting to score a try. Is that true or not?
Now apply that to going off feet to defend a score.
Your ability to not see both sides of the argument troubles me a little when making statements about being a current referee!
Clearly you think Dickson was right, many who play, watch and referee the game don't agree, why is that so hard to accept?
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 20:41
Quote:shipwrecked
OK I'll put it simply then.
You can not jump out of a tackle in open play, you can do so in attempting to score a try. Is that true or not?
That is not true: "In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly."
Quote:shipwrecked
Now apply that to going off feet to defend a score.
A dive is not equivalent to a slide, or being on the ground in terms of the law. If you are on the ground Law 13 applies (for attackers and defenders).
Quote:shipwrecked
Your ability to not see both sides of the argument troubles me a little when making statements about being a current referee!
Well that's fortunate then that I am not a current referee.
Quote:shipwrecked
Clearly you think Dickson was right, many who play, watch and referee the game don't agree, why is that so hard to accept?
It's perfectly fine for people to disagree but all I see is a lot of 'I don't like it, so it must be wrong'. I think the conclusion that Dickson came to is entirely compatible with the laws. Even Owen's argument was that if you apply the laws as written the outcome will be undesirable (true). So maybe instead of 'wrong decision' we should be asking for clarification.
Like I said, if Woodburn had dived into a tackled player at half way, noone would have objected to a penalty. But we'll see if the RFU will request clarification - it would certainly be interesting.
Re: PIN THE TAIL. GLOUCESTER v BATH. TEAM UP!
Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)
Date: 21/04/2023 22:06
Quote:The BearQuote:shipwrecked
OK I'll put it simply then.
You can not jump out of a tackle in open play, you can do so in attempting to score a try. Is that true or not?
That is not true: "In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly."
Agree that is what I said it relates to open play. World Rugby clarification.
A player may not jump out of a tackle even in the act of scoring ("In principle, in a try scoring situation, if the action is deemed to be a dive forward for a try, then it should be permitted. If a player is deemed to have left the ground to avoid a tackle; or to jump, or hurdle a potential tackler, then this is dangerous play and should be sanctioned accordingly.").
The second sentence is in relation to other areas on the field. Don't agree, then why does WR sanction Johnny May's try when he is clearly hurdling/diving to avoid a tackle. Because he is in the act of scoring a try.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.