|
What a comeback. What a talented bunch of lads. A great win on the road!
ASTONISHING!!! well played lads!!
Great spirit from them all
And a very entertaining game
And a very entertaining game
Hats off to the lads, so much better after halftime.
Also kudos to Rowntree for sorting out the scrum.
The future is bright. The future is multi-coloured!
Also kudos to Rowntree for sorting out the scrum.
The future is bright. The future is multi-coloured!
Brilliant comeback, real fighting spirit. Thanks to Sir for right question / right time!?.....Discuss?
I would suggest that our ringers like matt luamanu and lambert brought on some much needed go forward and Sarries B team were on the back foot thereafter.
Yes, well played lads but had Sarries thrown on some first teamers may have been a little different
Yes, well played lads but had Sarries thrown on some first teamers may have been a little different
I think Sir may have been giving us the benefit of the doubt after Charlie Matthews' disallowed try, which looked a very harsh call given a player is allowed to place the ball in any direction, and Charlie made one movement to place it on the line.
Tremendous character shown when all seemed lost, well done to all!
It wasn't a try though in my opinion.
Harlequins, (was once) probably the best rugby club in the world!
It wasn't a try though in my opinion.
Harlequins, (was once) probably the best rugby club in the world!
Quote:Saintquin
Tremendous character shown when all seemed lost, well done to all!
It wasn't a try though in my opinion.
But Charlie's was so you have to take the rough with the smooth result the same so all good
Quote:St_Bart
Great result for you guys, well done all
Thanks for the generous congratulations. Great game, & more importantly half dozen or so of the next generation of England players on show?
Boys kept their cool and it was Sarries struggling to cope with the Quins last play....bit of a surprise but well deserved.
Quote:Saintquin
Tremendous character shown when all seemed lost, well done to all!
It wasn't a try though in my opinion.
And thankfully your opinion doesn’t count in this case
We should have had the “Too many rolls”try awarded anyway so some poetic justice
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/11/2017 18:33 by SiBolton.
Quote:10
I would suggest that our ringers like matt luamanu and lambert brought on some much needed go forward and Sarries B team were on the back foot thereafter.
Yes, well played lads but had Sarries thrown on some first teamers may have been a little different
Going by the fawning over the Sarries team by the BT commentator they should win the Anglo-Welsh, F.A cup and the boat race.
Quote:10
I would suggest that our ringers like matt luamanu and lambert brought on some much needed go forward and Sarries B team were on the back foot thereafter.
Yes, well played lads but had Sarries thrown on some first teamers may have been a little different
Not quite sure how this is relevant.
Neither team played many first team players at all.
Don’t think either Luamanu or Lambert would be classed as first teamers and whilst they aren’t youngsters it’s down to our injuries that we were forced to bring them on.
Seems churlish to treat it as a negative.
What a superb fightback. This sort of game will have been an excellent experience for the young guys and sets us up well for the home game next week. Well done to our lads but also to both sides for a cracking game.
I was hugely impressed by the team. Lang was excellent throughout. Matthews is showing so much more character and is carrying way better. Elia looks good and Alofa has never looked better. Viser was good at 15. When you consider we either butchered or wos robbed of at least 3 scoring chances and were playing an excellent Saries team, I am absolutely heartened by it all. With a little bit more luck or more skill we could have scored 7 tries. Well done lads
Quote:SiBoltonQuote:Saintquin
Tremendous character shown when all seemed lost, well done to all!
It wasn't a try though in my opinion.
And thankfully your opinion doesn’t count in this case
We should have had the “Too many rolls”try awarded anyway so some poetic justice
Thankfully you're correct!
Harlequins, (was once) probably the best rugby club in the world!
Quote:Almost quinQuote:Saintquin
Tremendous character shown when all seemed lost, well done to all!
It wasn't a try though in my opinion.
But Charlie's was so you have to take the rough with the smooth result the same so all good
That we do!
Harlequins, (was once) probably the best rugby club in the world!
We looked better with Lang at 10. Sloan looking good and I think Elia must be worth a run in the AP he offers a lot of go forward.
Just got back from the game. I was so incredibly proud of all the boys.
Quote:Roaming Quin
We looked better with Lang at 10. Sloan looking good and I think Elia must be worth a run in the AP he offers a lot of go forward.
100% agree. If Elia can back up that performance with a good game against Worcester, I'd give him the nod to start in the AP.
Lang and Sloan looked good and Lewis definitely helped to up the tempo in attack when he came on.
To be fair, almost everyone fronted-up in the second half. If we can show that kind of character more often, I'd be very happy.
Game changed when Lang came into 10. Swiel was standing so deep the ball was passed back 10 - 15 metres every time between 9 - 10 axis. Lang stood a lot flatter and it was harder to defend against....I also thought he threw himself into the tackle when playing in the centre. I think he looks an excellent prospect and if it wasn't for a certain MS he would be higher up the pecking order.
Swiel has to learn, or concentrate on turning himself into an alternative FB for us....
Elia and Matthews also excellent. Would love Merrick to start putting himself about more again though as I think he's gone backwards this year.
Overall though a great result against a good Sarries team.
Swiel has to learn, or concentrate on turning himself into an alternative FB for us....
Elia and Matthews also excellent. Would love Merrick to start putting himself about more again though as I think he's gone backwards this year.
Overall though a great result against a good Sarries team.
I'm sure we were being confidently told by someone on here that the 21-year-old internationally-capped hooker Elia Elia wasn't Premiership quality.....
Ironically, our flyhalf options are currently adding value in inverse proportion to what we're paying them...
I liked Visser at fullback enough to make me want to see him there more often. He looked very comfortable under a lot of pressure.
Merrick I thought was doing a lot in the right but wasn't being used as much as Matthews coming onto the crash ball - perhaps being protected a little given he's not long back from injury?
I liked Visser at fullback enough to make me want to see him there more often. He looked very comfortable under a lot of pressure.
Merrick I thought was doing a lot in the right but wasn't being used as much as Matthews coming onto the crash ball - perhaps being protected a little given he's not long back from injury?
Quote:blucherquin
I'm sure we were being confidently told by someone on here that the 21-year-old internationally-capped hooker Elia Elia wasn't Premiership quality.....
Not sure if that was aimed at me but if so it was not what I said at all.
If someone else did say exactly that then it can’t have been based on seeing much of Elia as he simply hasn’t played much at the highest level.
That was certainly a performance worth taking note of from Elia. If we see a couple more performances from him like that we may actually have found a hooker.
Nothing against Matthews, but for me, Elia was MoM yesterday. Good darts throwing; performed well in an underpowered scrum; plenty of line breaks; also seemed to be involved in everything. I was pleased for him that his hard work resulted in him getting a try.
Quote:talkshowhost86Quote:blucherquin
I'm sure we were being confidently told by someone on here that the 21-year-old internationally-capped hooker Elia Elia wasn't Premiership quality.....
Not sure if that was aimed at me but if so it was not what I said at all.
If someone else did say exactly that then it can’t have been based on seeing much of Elia as he simply hasn’t played much at the highest level.
That was certainly a performance worth taking note of from Elia. If we see a couple more performances from him like that we may actually have found a hooker.
Not seen anyone say he's not good enough. Seen plenty of people say 'let's give him a chance' and he appears to be taking it.
On the Matthews disallowed try, you can place the ball, but not roll. Correctly disallowed.
Great performance from Elia last week against Wuss and improved on that yesterday.
Whilst the game did seem to change with Lang at 10 I did'nt think that was the be and end all.
In the 2nd half the forwards managed to achieve at least parity in the scrum (was going backwards in the 1st half) which gave them a 'lift' in other areas of the park, which then converted to them be able to provide a platform for the backs to work off. Then Lang and Sloan went to their 'natural' positions in the backline ie 10 & 12, the tempo of the game started to rise and the Harlequins bench made more of an impact than the Sarries bench. Both sides were pretty dead on their feet in the closing minutes but then Harlequins had built up that intangible commodity, momentum, which made the difference in the end. Just my thoughts watching it all evolve into a firework night finish.
And also great to be at two back to back wins against Sarries ;-))
In the 2nd half the forwards managed to achieve at least parity in the scrum (was going backwards in the 1st half) which gave them a 'lift' in other areas of the park, which then converted to them be able to provide a platform for the backs to work off. Then Lang and Sloan went to their 'natural' positions in the backline ie 10 & 12, the tempo of the game started to rise and the Harlequins bench made more of an impact than the Sarries bench. Both sides were pretty dead on their feet in the closing minutes but then Harlequins had built up that intangible commodity, momentum, which made the difference in the end. Just my thoughts watching it all evolve into a firework night finish.
And also great to be at two back to back wins against Sarries ;-))
WRT Matthews try for me, I was initially disappointed but think momentum stopped then he rolled had it been one motion to deck and immediate roll think he would have had a better case.
It was a fair decision. The question at the end was odd, and odder still was the ref saying he could see it on the line but still waiting for the confirmation he could award it. I thought we were lucky there, but made up for being blown off the park in the first half.
The commentary team banging on about that kind of rolling anywhere else on the pitch was laughable. It's as if there are extensive laws aimed purely at the act of scoring.
The commentary team banging on about that kind of rolling anywhere else on the pitch was laughable. It's as if there are extensive laws aimed purely at the act of scoring.
I didn't think that the ref had a great game.
For the final try, it was a little odd asking for the TMO (when, he said that the ball was grounded on the line). I'm not sure what he wanted the TMO to check for. (I certainly didn't hear him give any direction to the TMO).
I thought that his worst action though was being hit by a Sarries overthrown line out ball. I can't believe that a ref didn't have enough time to get out of the way of a ball flying roughly 20 metres through the air. It was unfortunate for us as Alofa was ready to catch it, and bearing in mind how he was playing, was fairly likely to score IMHO. But, basically, a huge Sarries error resulted in a Sarries scrum - Basically, from their point of view based on the history of the scrums, that was the best possibly result for Sarries (i.e. fairly certain penalty).
For the final try, it was a little odd asking for the TMO (when, he said that the ball was grounded on the line). I'm not sure what he wanted the TMO to check for. (I certainly didn't hear him give any direction to the TMO).
I thought that his worst action though was being hit by a Sarries overthrown line out ball. I can't believe that a ref didn't have enough time to get out of the way of a ball flying roughly 20 metres through the air. It was unfortunate for us as Alofa was ready to catch it, and bearing in mind how he was playing, was fairly likely to score IMHO. But, basically, a huge Sarries error resulted in a Sarries scrum - Basically, from their point of view based on the history of the scrums, that was the best possibly result for Sarries (i.e. fairly certain penalty).
Quote:RodneyRegis
It was a fair decision. The question at the end was odd, and odder still was the ref saying he could see it on the line but still waiting for the confirmation he could award it. I thought we were lucky there, but made up for being blown off the park in the first half.
The commentary team banging on about that kind of rolling anywhere else on the pitch was laughable. It's as if there are extensive laws aimed purely at the act of scoring.
I think it's deemed acceptable to roll in order to present the ball on your side cleanly, but not to gain an advantage in scoring. You can place, not roll. Think the commentators got a little confused!
Quote:Cookie
On the Matthews disallowed try, you can place the ball, but not roll. Correctly disallowed.
That's not what the Laws say:
Quote:World Rugby Law 15.5 (c)
A tackled player may release the ball by putting it on the ground in any direction, provided this is done immediately.
There's no stipulation as to how you have place it, only that it has to be made available immediately. There's nothing saying you can't roll, as long as it's done immediately and you release the ball if anyone is there to contest it.
Quote:World Rugby Law 15.5 (g)
If a player is tackled near the goal line, that player may immediately reach out and ground the ball on or over the goal line to score a try or make a touch down.
15.5(g) does specifically say a player may *reach out* - but it doesn't prohibit rolling.
By way of analogy, we've all seen tries given when a player is tackled onto his back over the goal line and twists or rolls to ground the ball, and we've all seen them disallowed when it takes more than one attempt. The only difference here is that Charlie wasn't over the line and rolled to get there.
As ever, the referee's interpretation is final but in this case he was imposing a sanction for something that isn't specifically prohibited by the Laws.
The ref saw a slight pause in the roll - and on the day deemed it was not immediate and therefore was a second movement.
If I were writing laws from scratch, I would not make a second movement a full penalty.
Possibly a free kick.
The any reason question at the end was to double check there had not been an offence or knock on prior to grounding. Given the ref had the TMO and it was going to effect the result I can see why he asked. Imagine how you would feel if had been a Sarries try and he awarded it, only for the replay to show a clear knock on before the dive.
Because he asked "any reason not to award the try", the TMO does not need to see the grounding. Again the TMO did not strictly need to check that the ref had seen the grounding - as he should not have asked that question if he hadn't. But in a critical decision, they want to get it right.
If I were writing laws from scratch, I would not make a second movement a full penalty.
Possibly a free kick.
The any reason question at the end was to double check there had not been an offence or knock on prior to grounding. Given the ref had the TMO and it was going to effect the result I can see why he asked. Imagine how you would feel if had been a Sarries try and he awarded it, only for the replay to show a clear knock on before the dive.
Because he asked "any reason not to award the try", the TMO does not need to see the grounding. Again the TMO did not strictly need to check that the ref had seen the grounding - as he should not have asked that question if he hadn't. But in a critical decision, they want to get it right.
To be 21 points adrift away at Saracens and still get the win does indeed suggest a team with real character, especially given the loss of captain Chis before the match. But the guy I want to single out is Luamanu. If there is one bloke in the squad who deserved a rest this weekend it was him. Due to our injury crisis in the back row Luamanu has, I think, played in almost every first team game and most of those have been 80 minute shifts. But he stepped up for the team with the loss of Chis. Well done Matt!
I hope he gets next week off and I hope Chis has a genuine "knock" and that his withdrawal from the team was not concussion sympton related.
I hope he gets next week off and I hope Chis has a genuine "knock" and that his withdrawal from the team was not concussion sympton related.
Quote:poorfourQuote:Cookie
On the Matthews disallowed try, you can place the ball, but not roll. Correctly disallowed.
That's not what the Laws say:
Quote:World Rugby Law 15.5 (c)
A tackled player may release the ball by putting it on the ground in any direction, provided this is done immediately.
There's no stipulation as to how you have place it, only that it has to be made available immediately. There's nothing saying you can't roll, as long as it's done immediately and you release the ball if anyone is there to contest it.
Quote:World Rugby Law 15.5 (g)
If a player is tackled near the goal line, that player may immediately reach out and ground the ball on or over the goal line to score a try or make a touch down.
15.5(g) does specifically say a player may *reach out* - but it doesn't prohibit rolling.
By way of analogy, we've all seen tries given when a player is tackled onto his back over the goal line and twists or rolls to ground the ball, and we've all seen them disallowed when it takes more than one attempt. The only difference here is that Charlie wasn't over the line and rolled to get there.
As ever, the referee's interpretation is final but in this case he was imposing a sanction for something that isn't specifically prohibited by the Laws.
I'd agree with your interpretation. as you say, players often roll over when they're on their back. Anyway, thankfully it didn't matter, and I actually missed that disallowed try live and it's not on the highlights, so can't really comment on that attempt, just on what I had understood to be allowed generally.
Agree that a full penalty for double movement is harsh. No try and free kick seems fairer to me.
Luamanu has generally played really well this season. A couple of games he's gone missing, and his hands let him down in the first couple of games, but he has generally been very good. In the win at Wasps in the premiership, when we were picking and driving at the end he took on the responsibility on several occasions, when a knock on could have given them the chance to win the game.
As for Chis, as above, I really hope it was a knock and if it's concussion related that it really bad news
Quote:never sleep
Nothing against Matthews, but for me, Elia was MoM yesterday. Good darts throwing; performed well in an underpowered scrum; plenty of line breaks; also seemed to be involved in everything. I was pleased for him that his hard work resulted in him getting a try.
My thoughts also!
Harlequins, (was once) probably the best rugby club in the world!
What is the definition of a roll. Is it the full 360, 270 or 180? Charlie's wasn't the full 360 and the commentary team couldn't see anything wrong. If another team scored a try like that against us I couldn't complain. As for our try at the death, we've had a couple given against us at the stoop without the TMO so it was our turn for Karma.
I also noticed that with the Sarries first try the player came down short of the line and then then rolled over to touch down. What is the difference with what he did and what Matthews did?
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
