The Loss at Gloss - The Fans View

Oh and some of us need a little faith in Santa and/or Harry Potter...all you need it a little belief in the fantasy world that is successful rugby… now where did I put my magic wand???

 

To me we either need some real grunt up front OR the skill levels of what we have needs to improve considerably and I am not sure too many magic wands are kicking about in the Christmas sales. Ajack

 

The game

 

Facts are, you can't miss five tackles in succession to concede a try.
You can't expect a referee to ping England props for not engaging a week after the World Cup final.
You can't put an inexperienced winger up against Sinbad when he is on fire.
You can't expect AB to tackle everything week in week out, because he'll have a bad game (by his standards) eventually. Mark H

 

.....but those are the games we need to win…… ……We missed a few tackles and frankly didn't look too keen at times (When Paramore is coming at you who would?).
…… We ended the game with 5 back row forwards - 6 if you count Matt Miles. I do so want a big b***ard like Alex Brown.
When you consider we were without Wally, Big Swill, Budge, Daws, Ben, Wookie, Buzzard, and Grays. A great improvement on the last two away games.
 So how was it? Ok! - I frankly didn't expect to win but we played neat football and we fronted up though under enormous pressure in the pack..............but we MUST make those tackles. I remain optimistic but ........ WMS

 

Well I have had along day and the lads did well..........BUT
Our England / Injured players are not backs and I think we are going to need some to make a good team super. James Brookes was two years ago said to be an excellent prospect. Well he was clearly out classed by Simpson Daniel. Not only did the lad look sharp score tries and be dangerous he was awarded the "hit of the day" for hit on us to stop a try.
I look forward to James being in the same league. I confess to not knowing much about the technical stuff.......I just use my eyes. Chris Hoddle

 

Regarding the tackling I was very disapointed with Nick Beal - he missed two last ditch tackles and these caused two tries. While I admit other people should have made the tackles and stopped them earlier if we play the type of defence we are playing the full back must be able to make these tackles. Dave Jackson

 

I thought once AB went we looked pretty rudderless.
We needed some of our older heads to stand up and take the team (and the game) by the scruff of the neck then. They didn't. Chris the Saint

 

It can't be right to say any team is 'one man' but AB is certainly our talisman, as Vickery and Woodman and particularly Paramore are for Gloss. I agree that while AB was in the blood bin (cut to the back of the head) we did lack direction. WMS

 

a disappointing result,and i didn't even see Woodman's try.(i'm 5ft nowt and some kids were in front of me) it worries me when props run so far and aren't stopped with first tackles.when they build up a head of steam like that,it seems that their confidence grows and carries them through. desbralass

 

The best team on the day won. Glaws’ ball retention was superb and they played with real pace and power. Our forwards worked hard especially the back row to keep us in the game until they eventually overpowered us and our poort tackling out wide let us down.
The front row looked to be holding up well and Robbie must have been causing Fortey some problems if Vickery was reverting to using the knee so early after coming on.
 Our back line looked leaky all day and I agree with the comments about Beal’s tackling - and having read Waynes comments maybe he thought the same – although he could have been talking about the whole back line and Brooks in particular who was having a mare against Sinbad. I have always worried about Beals tackling and been prepared to overlook it because of his other all round skills – but I wonder if it is time to confront it – especially as his kicking has become more haphazard. What about Brucie at Full Back when Ben comes back in – and keep Sleights who looks far more solid than Brooks or Raspberry?? Opinion8ed

 

Saints knew how to beat Glaws, they just blew it by trying to be too clever.  In the second quarter, Saints showed Glaws how to play, for the other 3 quarters they just committed elementary schoolboy mistakes.   Robinson, Reihana and Drahm, all had really good games, Robinson esp., but again, schoolboy errors even from Drahm. This is not good, Saints could have, and should have won this game by 10-15 points.  St Marlowe

 

1.  It was a great game.  2.   I can't subscribe to the 'Saints knew how to beat Gloucester' line. Saints started slowly and only got back into the game when Glaws went to sleep (as they have tended to do in most matches this season). Towards the end of the 1H it wouldn't have been a surprise if Glaws has scored another couple of tries - they had the possession to do it………. ………….Thank goodness the match was trouble free (handbags from the front row doesn't count in my book) and don't fall for the 'Robbo got kneed' line - of course he did, it's a physical game, but he also (insanely in my book) threw a punch at Paramore early on (he was right in front of us). I think Junior simply thought he must have imagined it so he let it pass!  Finally, I thought Spreadbury did OK whiting bay

 

I don't think there were any complaints about the knee whitingbay - just the incompetence of the officials for pinging the wrong man - for which the TJ got some unfortunate comments from the terracing in front of the Main Stand.   WMS

 

St_Marlowe - I think it must have been you and not the commentators that was at a different game. Glaws were all over Saints in the second half, and should have had the bonus point as well. The two tries Saints scored were gifted by stupid Glaws mistakes (and an injured Garvey - no comment).  Whitingbay on the other hand appears to have been at the right game and has summed it up pretty well. MAT nli

 

The best team won....nearly all the play in the 2nd period was in Saints half....that statistic doesn't lie....it would have been daylight robbery if we'd nicked that game.... BBF

 

went very quiet when Sharkey scored.i was with some Glaws supporters and they were non too complimentary about their team,saying that they didn't know where their next league points were coming from.they were more relieved than pleased with the win.good bunch of chaps to chat with and knew their rugby.well done Glaws,.. Desbralass

 

I did not say the best team did not win, if you read my post VERY carefully, you will see that I only gave us one out of 4 quarters!  In that quarter, it was very clear that Saints knew how to beat Gloucester, they just didn't keep it up.  Agree about the pack, but as I said before, the better team won, and my post was a lament for the errors Saints made.
Still, you've got your one eye and I've got mine - 'twill be ever thus!  St Marlowes

 

There are 2 main reasons Gloucester won: first we didn't play for the first 10 minutes - as usual; second, their pack ground ours down in the second half. ………We're short in the front five against more physical packs still & Bruce having to move to the centre did us no favours either as it removed our main threat in the backs……..Gregor

 

Battle of the 9’s

 

Gommersal was made to look very pedestrian by Air Sharky He scored one belter and might have had another if he'd backed himself. Incredible competition now for the 9 shirt.
WMS

 

Sorry to disagree Whitingbay, but your SH as ever, flattered to decieve -
Interesting to note that I was not the only one to think that Gummybear did not have a great game, nowhere in the press was he "a returner influencing the result"  .  St Marlowe

 

 Sorry to disagree but I thought Robinson didn't shine and that Gommersal looked by far the better player whiting bay

 

And as for Gomarsall, I assume he got an earful at half time cos his first half display was mostly awful. He improved in the second half but that was probably partly because he was behind a pack going forward.  Gregor

 

Daws will add his flair and knowledge, but to be honest will he give us more than we got from Sharky yesterday? Who in my opinion was the best Saints player by a mile. Ajack

 

Sharky - seemed to demolish Gomarsall Smurfomatic

Sharky - some big points to prove and my MOTM Mark H

 

all had really good games, Robinson esp  St Marlowe

 

 

World Cup Stars

 

VERY disappointed at the no-show by our England boys As were all the good Gloss folk around us. WMS

 

Well done to Gloucester for playing their England Players and deserved their win.
Lets hope that when the Saints England Players come back that we do better.
Trevor Church

 

And we could have won but for the lift gloss got when Vickery and Woodman came on. First scrum.... we wheeled them - 10 seconds later we were going backwards at a rate of knots on our own ball. That's when we lost it.  WMS

 

As always in rugby, it starts with the pack, and in particular the front row. There wasn't much between the sides until Vickery and Woodman came on, and then your scrum was all over the place.  whiting bay

 

Finally, hats off to Woodman & Vickery for showing real commitment in not just turning up but getting stuck in - very professional. You'll not be seeing them piddling around on Breakfast With Frost... Gregor

Lineout

 

Lineout was a disaster area against a side who to quote the glaws fan next to me 'haven't win a lineout all season'. Opinion8ed

 

YOYOYOY does the hooker (both guilty today), try either to throw to the back, or a high, looping ball, which gives every opposing jumper hours to get to the ball. Our lineouts were pants.  St Marlowe

you won't win if you lose 90% of your lineouts! BBF

 

How we have not sorted our lineout by now is simply beyond me, and until we do we are going nowhere. You can live with poor possession from the scrum, IF and only if you can control the tempo of the game and move the opposition around, by losing around 50% of your own line out ball this becomes impossible and the inevitable happens where you get ground down to the point where you have no ball, this is what happened to us yesterday and to be fair Glaws should have won by more. Ajack
 

Our lineout wasn’t working and came off second best even though theirs is normally appalling – according to Glaws fans.  Opinion8ed

Agree in spades about the lines out weakness - it must be the most dodgy in the prem - if were put right who knows where we would be now. Old Pete

 

Wally will certainly add some beef to the pack but is there any reason to think the lineout will improve dramatically? And Dan has filled in well; although yesterday was his worst performance I have seen this season…… Ajack

 

…listening on the radio it was apparent that our line out was operating as normal i.e. opposition rub thier hands when they get a good/any terrotory by temporarily kicking away possesion. They know that there is at least a 50/50 chance of nicking it, if not that then we make such a hash of cating it that someone has to tidy up by which time the oppo are all over us. I really find it irritating that this has been such a problem for at least the last 3 (yes 3) seasons. I kid you not I hold me breath at every Saints line out, thinking will they won't they. …… I fear the worst down at Stradey sorry but Ireally do  Saintsby

 

Bob the line out is beyond me, my view is you either have someone who is so good that he can win ball whatever, which is very rare and certainly something we don’t have, or you move your units around so as to make double jumping as hard as possible for the opposition.
I think we lack confidence in this as our lifting is very poor and as such the throwing in looks even worse than it is. ………Ajack

 

Concluding question - do we have the best lines out jumpers and throwers available ? Well, Wallie isn't the best but his England record is far better than his Saints record, which suggests the quality of our jumpers is the problem and/or the level of coaching expertise is inadequate. If I, as a layman, can see this (if I'm right, which I hope someone who does know will confirm or otherwise) why can't the powers that be at FG recognise it and do something about it ?
Or am I over-simplifying it ? tedge

It is much more than just the thrower and the jumper, the guys doing the lifting play a major part and in fact are probably the key, but tend to get no recognition or criticism. The hooker is trying to hit an imaginary point in space and if the jumpers and lifters do not get there the throw looks bad, when in fact it may not be, a bit like passing in front of a player to run onto the ball who is standing still, not the passers fault……. Ajack

 

To me we seem to overcomplicate things. Stacks of moving around making all tasks in the mechanism subject to change and, therefore, error. Is the jumper in the right place? Does he have the necessary support? How's the timing with the thrower? And then, can he throw it there in the weather conditions? All these variables and we haven't even mentioned anyone from the opposition. Throw Alex Brown (Borthwick, Fidler, Grewcock, Kay, Archer, Grimes, Palmer, Jones, Strudwick, Casey, &c, &c) into the mix and we are really under pressure.
For simplicity and control, I really admired Ulster's line-out. Minimum fuss, minimum movement, maximimum support, excellent accuracy and timing. They took all their own ball without us looking like getting a sniff of it. Oddshapedballs

 

We were let down on Saturday by failing in some of the most basic stuff in three areas.
……………..2) Line outs. As for previous comments, I have to agree. Pleas have been made for front row beef, but I believe we need a truly world class second row. We haven't been lucky with injuries in the forwards, but even at full strength, one more second row would be useful. Does anyone have Ben Kay's phone number?   Big Rich

 

However one thing is always clear and that is that one person has to make the call and everyone stick to it. We seem to do alot better when Deso jumps, not only because he is good in the air, but because he makes the call and they stick to it, no arguments. I think for now we should be putting it to 2, at least we stand more chance of getting it there. James Simons-Boswell

 

heard Larks say at the open day that lineouts were dependant on four variables, each contributing 25% to failures:
The thrower
The catcher
the lifters
The opposition/conditions
You've got to ask what can we change? With Swill, Budge et al back in the new year, more options open in the pack. If Wally can hit a cow's a*** with a banjo, we're getting better. No one seems to be criticising the lifters, so (in theory*) we're fine after Christmas.
* Theory not a binding contract. No refunds. Remember, a theory is for lif, not just for Christmas. Smurfomatic

 

 

Sorry Smurf but I have been criticising the lifters, perhaps I just put my point over very well, actually no perhaps about it.
We simple are not getting the unit (2 lifters plus 1 jumper) in the right place to the correct height on a regular basis, thus making it impossible for the thrower and then his confidence goes and all the problems compound themselves.
OSB sums it up well, simple moves executed well, but this has to involve some disguise as to what you are actually going to do……. Ajack

 

Whilst the securing of our own line out ball HAS to be the priority, I don't believe that we challenge the opposition throwsnearly enough. We seem to stay grounded waiting to counter any drive by the line out forwards but there has to be an opportunity for nicking the other team's ball more often or at the very least, pressurising them either in to knocking it on, scrum to us or throwing in not straight, scrum also to us…… Stockers

 

We have two exellent positional kickers - shane and larry + bealer for the big boomers.
But the tactic of playing for position is a risk that is becoming unacceptable if the resultant line out is a no hoper.
While a kick for touch in open play gives at best a 50 /50 chance of winning the ball ( for us about 90 - 10 )
It is even becoming no better that 50 /50 on our throw from penalty options.
Other teams are getting to know about this weakness and will exploit it.
It needs dealing with PDQ or the slide down the table begins here. Old Pete

 

Whoever calls the line out needs to remember the conditions too, cos how many times do we see long loopy throws to the back of the line out in really windy weather... some of which get caught by the wind half way along the line and then we get pinged... LOM

 Tackling

 

So thats my six... but a few other comments...
 Bealer is becoming a liability at full back in any one on one situation. He didnt even make a realsitic efort to stop Woodman - he went high and it looked decidedly uncommited (sorry that this always seems to happen right in front of where I'm sitting) Also, although he slowed down Sinbad before their last try he should have taken him out rather tahn let the move continue (he had the positioning to do so) - it was another one on one when he went high and didnt look at all convincing………   Opinion8ed

 

You could also point to some fairly desperate attempts at tackles - fair play to Woodman for his try but there is no way he should have got through the first "tackle" let alone 2 more.  Gregor

3) Most heinous of all, our tackling was poor on Saturday. Woodman scored his try after breaking at least three tackles, and from where I was stood, it seemed that Sinbad did likewise. Time was, we'd never have let that happen...
...all of which leads me to breathe, everso quietly, that we are showing our inconsistencies again. Some games our lineout works, some games the opposition never seem to have the ball, some games, they never get near our line. And then there was Saturday. Big Rich

 

So to the game, we started like the train, late and slow but in all fairness held out well right up to the point where is said “at least the defence looks good today” cue Mr Garvey. To be fair Glaws could and should have been more up but Saints battled well, but with limited ammunition……..To be honest the pack we finished with yesterday will win nothing, simple as that.  Ajack

 

and why move Bruce ? for Ben
unless it is to 15 - I cant see anyone else filling Bealers shoes if at the end of the season the bionic man decides to hang up his boots.
Larry has had a great come back under Smudger but Shane must be the first choice with Larry in support for as long as possible or he thinks is desirable.
We do seriously need some grunt up front - currently we are relying heavily on the back row which even without Budge is both a match winner and saviour from many losses.
Wee Tam made a differnce but not enough - Tongans, Maoris , Boks argies - get some Beef in there please. Old Pete