Both teams could have both victory and self-preservation in mind when Bath visit Northampton on Wednesday. Northampton’s onward march stuttered from Round 9 of the Premiership and missed a step in Round 14 against Wasps. Form was quickly restored against London Irish, but Bath’s victory at Leicester edged them above Saints in the table so 6th plays 5th. For their second game in five days, both DORs must balance ambition against rotation in their quest for a top four slot.
Fans have been speculating about team details, but among the imperatives of player welfare and rotation, squad makeups for the match are anybody’s guess. Saints appear to have attempted a balanced division of their squad for the past two ties, so may well field a 23 similar to that which hosted Wasps on 16 August. Bath, having rotated less, will probably make the more radical changes, although Stuart Hooper was giving little away after the win at Leicester.
Northampton, if they can come to terms with current breakdown interpretations and re-find the form of early season, should be formidable opponents on home turf, especially in search of revenge for their defeat at The Rec. Key to their search for edge up front will be the lineout triumvirate of Ribbans, Ratuniyarawa and Lawes. In the backs they will look to the control of Biggar, who must play a more influential role as pivot while the team adjust to life without Cobus Reinach. Further wide, they possess lively attackers in Dingwall, Furbank and the force of nature that is Naiyaravoro. Against Wasps the big Fijian was an under used and blunted threat, but Bath can expect to see him brought off the blindside wing in attempts to wreak havoc.
Bath, having gained maximum points from the past two fixtures have established pleasing momentum, which they will want to build on, whatever the need for rest and rotation. For that reason, I would not be surprised to see Spencer and Priestland retained at half back. A mix of experience and potential among the forwards has been held back so far and I expect Batty, Stooke, Spencer, Williams and Reid to feature. Interviewed at Welford Road, Tom Dunn spoke of Bath’s strength in depth up front and competition for starting places. This match will give those who have not yet started a chance to impress. With Charlie Ewels likely to be rested in preparation for Wasps at home a new Captain will be required. Zach Mercer’s omission from last week’s selection signals that his could be the leader’s role on the night.
Joe Cokanasiga, if ready, would be a welcome boost to a backline which is likely to see several changes. His experience and physicality would be great for squad morale, as well as a welcome foil to Saints’ huge Fijian opposite. Hamer- Webb and de Glanville ( a try scorer at Welford Road) could be danger men for Bath, but will need quicker ball, more accurately delivered, than the wings have seen in the past two ties.
Whatever the line-up, Bath’s approach is likely to follow the same pattern of strong scrummaging, forward driving and reliance on the lineout as an attacking weapon. Box-kicking from the base and tactical kicks from 10 should also be prominent, especially if The Gardens pitch is heavy from Tuesday’s expected rain. These tactics are effective and, done well are low risk, but Northampton, capable of a similar approach when it suits them, will be a sterner test than either Irish or Tigers.
To stand a chance of a Playoff place, Bath must come away with at least a point. To do that will require concentration, commitment and cussedness for the full 80 minutes. Home advantage and comparative season form favour Saints. Bath will travel in hope but face a stern test of their contender credentials.
Possible Teams
Bath: Obano, Walker, Judge, McNally, Stooke, Williams, Ellis, Mercer (Capt.) B Spencer, Priestland. Cokanasiga, Matavesi, Wright, Hamer-Webb. De Glanville.
Replacements: Vaughan, Batty, Thomas, W Spencer, Reid. Chudley, Bailey, Clark.
Cokanasiga unlikely to be thrown in for a full game. given he only took a limited part in training at farleigh and no part at all in the 15v 15 practice match I suspect he is still a few weeks away. in any case I expect a bench appearance first before being thrown into the deep end. Bayliss will likely play seven with Williams on the bench. Stooke and Spencer to start. hatley singled out redpath for praise so I would expect him to start at 12 again.
one thing we learned on Saturday was that you can't have Priestland and B Spencer off the field at the same time (although redpath looks to have a decent boot on him).
I thought I saw Bailey in the stands on sat as a travelling reserve so they are obviously getting the kid acclimatised to match day. I expect we will see him sooner rather than later but his debut will probably be at the rec. IMHO.
I suspect Hooper might regret going for a near identical line up two games in a row, that means none of those who started both games (13 out of the 15) can start against Saints. Given how Tigers fielded a weakened side a bit more rotation might have been better.
ballsout Given how Tigers fielded a weakened side a bit more rotation might have been better.
Yes hindsight certainly allows 20-20 vision.
Why can't players start against Saints?
No player will play more than 180 minutes if selected in a matchday 23 on three occasions in a week No player will start all three games in a week No player will be selected in more than six matches in the seven games staged between 14 August and 13 September A player’s training load will be managed if they are selected in three matchday squads in any given seven-day period.
The rule was 3 games in a week and they won't have played 3 in a week.
Notwithstanding that I think he will (and should) rotate - I'm not keen on the Bristol approach.
The key to beating Saints is to take them on up front and starve their outside backs of ball. Their scrum is not the strongest and they rarely seem to use it as an attacking weapon. Whilst it wouldn't be the most attractive of games, 10 man rugby is probably the best approach in attack. In defence, aim to get our line up to cut off wide ball and force them to compete at the breakdown slowing the ball down.
I can see our pack being on top provided they don't get on the wrong side of the whistle. However, if we let Saints dictate the pace of the game I fear we could be exposed out wide.
Actually quite strong for a "second string" line-up.
Questions:
* Who takes the goal kicks (I am guessing Redpath or Chudley)?
* Why Bayliss over Mercer for Captain (not dissing my adoptee, but mercer has known form there at England U20 level)?
Pretty happy though - but we will need to work hard to come away with a BP.
plong Half backs the weakness, IMHO, but strong bench in that regard...
Henry Taylor - 26 years old, 4 appearances for Sarries in 5 seasons. I'm happy to back Chudley in a combined XV. But Biggar vs Matavesi (based on limited evidence of Tigers game) could be a bit of a mismatch in terms of overall control.
plong Half backs the weakness, IMHO, but strong bench in that regard...
Henry Taylor - 26 years old, 4 appearances for Sarries in 5 seasons. I'm happy to back Chudley in a combined XV. But Biggar vs Matavesi (based on limited evidence of Tigers game) could be a bit of a mismatch in terms of overall control.
Agree, Biggar has no chance!
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
plong Half backs the weakness, IMHO, but strong bench in that regard...
Henry Taylor - 26 years old, 4 appearances for Sarries in 5 seasons. I'm happy to back Chudley in a combined XV. But Biggar vs Matavesi (based on limited evidence of Tigers game) could be a bit of a mismatch in terms of overall control.
Happy to see lots of rotation. Hopefully GHW can keep Naiyaravoro quiet like he did at the Rec. Strangely disinterested whether Bath lose or win but will enjoy watching the how the young lads get on against some top class opposition.
(I'm not sure what Max Green has to do to get game time tbh. For the few minutes he was on the field last year he looked excellent!)
bit of a 'mare at halfback based on second half at tigers. at least they can bring on rp and bs if things get ugly.
most interesting thing in this selection is the choice of Bayliss as captain. flouw used to be the go-to choice when Charlie was away with england. it seems they think that Bayliss should be the next cab off the captaincy rank which of course has implications for selection. if Charlie is with england Bayliss must play.
BathMatt53
(I'm not sure what Max Green has to do to get game time tbh. For the few minutes he was on the field last year he looked excellent!)
Game time might be the very issue Matt. I believe he is highly regarded, but as he barely featured last season, perhaps Hoops and Hats are targeting a home game for his first runout?
Dont think its a coincidence that Saints have held Auterac back for us, Guessing he will be pumped up to play against Bath. Also looks like they have gone for a big pack to take us on up front.
adopted player, 23/24 Ted Hill.22/23 Cam Redpath. 21/22 Max Clark. 20/21 Henry Thomas. 19/20 Max Wright. 18/19 Cooper Vuna.
To be honest, I can't help but feel are second front 5 are pretty as good as the first.
It'll be a good test for the back row, can they keep the dynamism up against a strong Saints back row.
I hope we see Chudley at his best and with some of the experience and control can allow Matavesi some freedom. I'd definitely had rather not seen Bigger on their teamsheet.
With the exception of Roko that is a young back 5. It'll be a good test for them but if it clicks it should be exciting.
Looking forward to it now. Quite warming to the idea of midweek rugby.
Doesnt look strong enough to get a win (hope i am pleasantly surprised) whilst no complete rest for some key guys the like beno/ boyce/ dunn/ stuart/ ewels/ spencer/ rhys.
If we are in within a score or two at 50 mins then bingo time as that bench looks very tasty!
No surprise in the number of changes. Genuinely think the coaches looked at Irish and Tiggers as games we could win and field strongest side and then ring the changes for Saints away as game at full strength could go either way.
Griff No surprise in the number of changes. Genuinely think the coaches looked at Irish and Tiggers as games we could win and field strongest side and then ring the changes for Saints away as game at full strength could go either way.
It's the "Meatloaf" coaching approach, 2 out of 3 ain't bad!
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Funnily enough I am strangely excited by this selection and as part of Bath Rugby FC development we need to be in a place on international weekends in the future when we turn out a team like this that can go and win.
That would be a real feather in the cap of the management/coaching teams
Adopted player for 2020 - 21 Charlie Ewels Captain of Bath FC......The Bournemouth Barnstormer
I don’t think so 9215.
IIRC he was TMO a few years ago in a notorious Bath- Saints game at the Rec.
Bath lost both hookers to injury and ref M Carley overruled the TMO ( who I believe was Barnes) to allow Nathan Catt to play there - so keeping 8 Bath forwards on the pitch.
I think our pack is good enough and our backs aren't. So 9 man rugby it is. Owen Franks is not what he was and Nick Auterac never was. If matavesi can kick position, I think we've got a shot with our maul. If we give saints run back ball, we'll lose. Ideally, I'd like Bayliss to be in Biggars face for 80 minutes. He'll be the difference one way or another
Bookies have Saints odds on for the win c1/3; Bath c2/1, Oddschecker rugby Bath. Having see the teams selected this looks right though their slow/poor start v LI at the w/end gives me hope. If they start like that again I think we could get a lead and hold on to it, our defence has been a good feature of our game for a while now; if not would still like to think we can secure a LBP...
Adopted players: 23/24 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
it is very misleading by punditry to say stuff like X team makes 14 changes since their last game. this refers to the run on team but not the match squad. for example the press is saying bath is making 13 changes tonight but this refers to the run on side only. if you include the whole 23 player match squad, 17 played on Saturday and only 6 did not. so not so many changes after all. it is a certainty that the bench in its entirety- all first team choices apart from Reid- will be on in the second half sooner rather than later.
given the choice of matavesi and Chudley, with no real kicker, we may even see BS or RP drafted on in the first half.
Bath Rugby make a raft of changes to the matchday squad with 13 changes in all as the side travel up to Franklin’s Gardens to face Northampton Saints in Round 16 of the Gallagher Premiership.
Is it your view that Stooke, Chudley and Judge playing the last 21 mins against Tigers isn't actually a change for this one? Seems an unusual view...
Heart says Bath by 2 points ! Or Head says Saints by 15 ! Either way looking forward to being entertained
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
"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
"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
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Saints get away with a yellow for tipping Zac on his neck !
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
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
Our defensive effort has been great, set piece strong, and we are v much in this game. Our bench could win this for us...
Adopted players: 23/24 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
Clarkey3k Our defensive effort has been great, set piece strong, and we are v much in this game. Our bench could win this for us...
Yeah I much prefer our bench to theirs tbf. Also think the pack is just starting to get on top and hopefully that will show in last 20
"No sprinkles. For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you."
Matt mentioned saints were odds on for this game!
Ball has to get to Matevasi faster, not impressed by Chudley at all. JM doing OK at 10 though. Agree with T and M can't wait for the subs!
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Bing on Ben Spencer for Chudley and Reid for Williams switching Bayliss to blind side. Increase the tempo. I can't stand watching the ball sat at the base of the ruck while players take forever to contemplate the meaning of life.
Adopted players: 23/24 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
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
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
The problem, ballsout, is you didn't comment on the try. Your points aren't wrong, but they're so totally and ridiculously one sided it's very difficult to take you seriously.
Old Bath Tub Heart says Bath by 2 points ! Or Head says Saints by 15 ! Either way looking forward to being entertained
Got that the wrong way round !!
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
"AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY"
FRIEDRICH ENGELS
No complaints at all with that. Huge defensive effort and the subs made a massive difference. Not perfect by any means but full of guts. Credit to them all.
Hutchinson should be sitting out a good few games for the tackle on TDG.
CoochieCoo 3-18 what have you lot done to BO? Where is he?
He might be on the Saints board at the moment...
Adopted players: 23/24 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
ballsout Our scrum on their 22 turns to us defending our try line 30 seconds later. Standard Bath.
Winning again, standard Bath since the restart despite Poor coaching, poor players, hands for feet, feet for hands etc blah blah.
Well done Bath, squad players held them out and the class came on to seal the victory. Ben Spencer is making more of a difference that I even hoped he would, he is some player. Unfortunately for Bath he could well be playing himself into the England 9 position, but hopefully Green will be up to speed to cover as I'm afraid it was night and day when glacial distributor Chudley went off and zippy Spencer came on.
Listening on the radio it sounded as though our line speed in defence strangled Saints all game. Shame about a few injuries but a great result. That should give us a lot of confidence after the first 2 wins were allegedly against weak opposition.
The problem, ballsout, is you didn't comment on the try. Your points aren't wrong, but they're so totally and ridiculously one sided it's very difficult to take you seriously.
Really gutsy game from Tom de Glanville, finishing that try after being tested early and taking a pounding showed a lot of class and courage. Superb to see Miles Reid back playing and looking good. Wow the bench made a difference, Dunn, Stuart Ewels and Spencer had a massive impact.
So so pleased for Beno Obano getting a very well deserved man of the match, he completely dominated Owen Franks! Great interview after the match too, top player and top bloke.
ballsout Are we the only club who can’t string 3 phases together without f-ing up.
awful.
Last season you were saying 2 phases so that must be progress...
The denial continues...
Ballsout you are getting awfully shrill, perhaps you could take to watching the game give the agenda a rest for a bit, stop trolling and enjoy Bath winning.
Toast and Marmite Just an additional thought to the usual comments on defence and belief in our systems - does anyone think we look fitter than previously?
Based on the Bris vs Exe game last night, I think all teams are. The benefits of 5 months out and 2 full games under the belt. There seems to be much more manic intensity. It might tail off. Or bein mi-week, training wasn’t as sludgy as usual.
Great win on the road. Great defence and I thought Josh M was very good at 10 - much improved from the cameos in the first 2 games. Lots of long range kicks into touch and decent distribution. I’d have like GHW to have gotten the ball a bit more, but I’ll take nearly 3 tries to 1 away from home so tonight I shall rock out with my ballsout, if anyone can locate them of course.
Fantastic defensive effort. Delighted with that as thought their stronger starting line up would be too much. Our bench gave us the impetus and Spencer might well turn out to be our best signing for a long time. Really chuffed with that.
That second half was good from Bath. Strong and quick in defence and when Spencer came on we started to look like we could score. He is such a difference maker, Chudley looks so pedestrian in comparison and Spencer's box kicking is fantastic.
Hope tdg is ok, he looks like he is settling in nicely to the squad. That was a swinging arm as he was scoring, in surprised the TMO didn't pick it up and have a look
Dour first half but TdeG, M Clark, GHW, J Walker stuck it out with JM being solid. Miles Reid did OK too. Naiyaravoro kept quiet by Roko and JM. Biggar looked rather ordinary again. Subs did really well and CR and Rory Mc looks really sharp.
How come Max Clark had cramp!
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
I haven't commented during the game as I was too busy watching the game but I cannot believe some of the early criticism. Essentially a second pack, a set of backs with an infrequent 10 and some young outside backs held a much more experienced Saints in the first 60.
Surely our game plan was to keep it tight until the bench could make the difference. If you expected free flowing rugby early on then you are living in an alternate reality.
Thought defence was incredible, physicality excellent, really good discipline and decision making won it towards the end. Yes we have much more too do in attacking fluency but pack depth of quality is really good, Matavesi and De Glanville laid down good markers and Redpath made a solid contribution.
If you are upset at 14 out of 15 points then frankly you are simply trying to be angry to prove a point. Much too much gammon on here at times.
Fantastic team (squad) unity and aggression , really playing for each other. Nice to see BT's commentary storyline of Northampton's rise to a 'rightful' top four position de-railed.
BBWBaaBaa ballsout I fear for his safety............
I didn’t at that point, but I do now. Double-whammy of making a d!ck of himself, and having to wrestle with the reality of a fairly perfect ‘away’ performance and clear into top 4.
A moderately handy foursome of Joseph, Watson, Underhill and Faletau totally rested up.
How the ref failed to pick up the swinging arm into TdG is beyond me.
Teams don’t defend like that and suck up punishment like that unless there’s a very strong spirit.
I don't think anyone should be or is deluded that this was some absolutely phenomenal performance. It was very good. More importantly it was another brick in Hooper's wall. The pack recruitment/development has really come good. The squad energy and defence was excellent. Attack isn't there yet. But, brick by brick, he's building us.
Brilliant performance. Made only better by coming on ere to see BO had made a complete t*t of himself during the 80.
The guts and spirit of the entire squad was awesome, but especially the pack, who sucked up a lot and kept going right to the 80. Beno superb. Eddie will have to pick him sooner rather than later.
Well done the players but also well done Hooper and Hatley. The players are clearly responding to something they’re doing on the training ground. Not perfect but better than I’ve seen in a long time.
I have to admit that when I saw the two teams I thought we would struggle.
Glad to be proved wrong. It wasn’t perfect but a superb effort defensively. The set piece was impressive, and that one scrum was a joy to watch!
Have to say I felt so much more comfortable when Rhys came on. He did a job, but Matavesi isn’t a fly half id like to see us rely on for too many games.
Could definitely see that they were all playing for each other and there is a good team spirit. Well done Hoops, Hats and all, really enjoyed watching that.
I thought Saints played like the Bath teams bo has criticised in the past with their poor set piece, lack of continuity, poor basics, lack of phase play, quality players not living up to their potential etc.
This looks like a different Bath to me now, one that worked really, really hard w/out the ball and took their opportunities when they came. Great job done by the starters for the first 50mn and and great finishing from the bench. The match on Monday v Wasps will be critical to our Top 4 ambitions, win that and I think we will be in the play offs at the end of season. Keep up the good work Bath, tonight made me v happy about our future prospects...
Adopted players: 23/24 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
Congrats Bath, squeezed them to death. Impressive scrum and defence. Bench definitely raised the intensity. Attack as bad as it’s ever been but clearly wasn’t the focus tonight
ballsout Congrats Bath, squeezed them to death. Impressive scrum and defence. Bench definitely raised the intensity. Attack as bad as it’s ever been but clearly wasn’t the focus tonight
Sometimes you need to adapt your play to the way the opposition play. Maybe too much attack would have played into their hands! The real point is when in the red zone you need to score regardless of phases, they didn’t and we did, twice!
I can completely understand some of the criticism early on and completely understand the positive comments later on.
Our attack still looks blunt and telegraphed for the most part. We don’t challenge defences beyond running into them and that was obvious for the first hour. What we can do really well is physically impose ourselves, work hard and be organised in defence. Add the best set piece I have seen from Bath in many a year and that is a pretty serious foundation being laid.
The thing that impressed me the most though is that a largely second string still looked like a Bath side rather than playing like individuals. Spencer, Dunn, Ewels, etc. Add real class but everyone seems to know their role regardless who is on the pitch.
I also thought Matavesi did well at 10 with some lovely kicking out of hand.
Ken I would agree about the lack of fluency if it hadn't been such a makeshift set of backs. Arguably only 2 starting XV backs (Roko and Matavesi) and only 1 playing in preferred position. Also worth considering that:
9/10 combo never played together
10/12 combo never played together
12/13 combo never played together
I am not trying to find excuses as I agree that our lack of creativity and fluency is a problem but that is a criticism that I think is better used against our first line back in other games.
Kudos to Matavesi who took some responsibility for hauling down Nayarivoro more than once. And Hooper’s rotation/selection is starting to look very well managed. This evening will have taken a bit of a toll, but we should be looking at a decent XV starting vs Wasps.
Gameplan was spot on. Saints really looked up for it in the first half and we neutralised it perfectly by keeping them out of our half.
Slightly worried that the short turnarounds will start to take a toll on the squad, and expose the relatively short depth in the front row and midfield.
For Wasps we'll have the big guns back in the form of Underhill, Faletau, Watson and JJ. I think the same front row have been consistently playing around 40 minutes in all 3 games, is it time for rotation?
Due to technical brain function succeeded in not watching match.
So have just ‘followed’ it by reading this thread.
The stand out question for me is, is Ballsout a person or just a thing?
If only a thing can someone please turn it off, it doesn’ t seem to have function.
Toast and Marmite I’m sure this may have been answered before, but does Dallaglio actively dislike Bath for some reason?
Yes - we aren't Wasps.
There's ten other clubs who aren't Wasps... praise of Bath seems especially begrudging. My father (not a Bath fan) texted me: "He's still not got over Grewcock's punch, has he?"
The second team backline, looked like a second team. That was simplified rugby and I'm ok with that... I'd rather that than pretend we could throw it around with reckless abandon successfully.
As others have said, we did manage to impose ourselves and the pack really didn't miss a step, although again they seemed to try and play to the realities rather than the ideal.
It was dull to watch but there was an intelligence to the way Bath were told to play and the way we did play. Credit to the coaches and credit to the players.
But, boy, am I on the ( Spencer hype train now... Difference maker.
sid the seagull
The stand out question for me is, is Ballsout a person or just a thing?
If only a thing can someone please turn it off, it doesn’ t seem to have function.
This, for me, may be one of the best ever comments I've seen on a forum.
Will add my appreciation of the spirit, untypically excellent discipline and great defence. Our line speed and physicality were very impressive. Regardless of the players, I'd still like to see us at least looking for offloads and when making breaks not then slow everything down by giving it to a forward to rumble on a few yards and lose all momentum. The backs tries we're scoring are down to bits of individual brilliance or opportunism rather than any collective fluency and understanding. As to the Mercer incident, the ref explained it clearly on the mic and his thoughts echoed those of Wayne Barnes and the commentators. Tonks flipped ZM whilst virtually sat down and Harrison was pretty blameless, making a tackle on a player who a split second before had been upright. They all agreed a pen and yellow card correct.
On T de G's injury, the law needs to change. He was dangerously tackled in the act of scoring but 5 points were awarded no conversion.
If he hadn't scored the a penalty try was likely. More points obviously. But T de G doesn't get a try.
Wouldn't the ref be entitled to award a restart penalty. Potentially another 3 points. Further more a card would be applied wouldn't it. Yellow or even Red.
So if he doesn't score potential 10 points. He did so we got 5 points and no card sanction. Seems wrong to me. The fact he scores seems to wipe out the foul play.
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Very, very good. In the sense that we played to our strengths, negated Saints' and kept our discipline. Those are the sort of performances that, in aggregate, win championships. Josh's kicking impressed me but we'll need more. Spencer made a startling difference when he came on.
Excellent win and genuinely never in doubt, I thought.
shipwrecked On T de G's injury, the law needs to change. He was dangerously tackled in the act of scoring but 5 points were awarded no conversion.
If he hadn't scored the a penalty try was likely. More points obviously. But T de G doesn't get a try.
Wouldn't the ref be entitled to award a restart penalty. Potentially another 3 points. Further more a card would be applied wouldn't it. Yellow or even Red.
So if he doesn't score potential 10 points. He did so we got 5 points and no card sanction. Seems wrong to me. The fact he scores seems to wipe out the foul play.
A few years ago I was a guest of my Glaws supporting Uncle at Kingsholm. It was a niggly match, Bath received 3 or 4 yellows and Glaws ended the match with 11 players on the field.
The relevant point is an incident where Bath scored a try and their scrum half then punched a Bath player. Play was restarted with a penalty to Bath on the half way line.
Granted the incident occurred after the try had been scored but it shows that it is within the laws to restart with a penalty rather than a kick off.
Adopted player 2019/20 Will Chudley. Weird split household co-parented
player 2020 Josh Matavesi
Just a thought. We still have a 'third team' front row of Catt, Batty & Thomas to come and then there is Schoeman as well. So plenty of opportunities to rest our front rows and continue to batter opposition scrums.
hemington Just a thought. We still have a 'third team' front row of Catt, Batty & Thomas to come and then there is Schoeman as well. So plenty of opportunities to rest our front rows and continue to batter opposition scrums.
Good point, Catt and Thomas we’re both first choices before their respective injuries, will be interesting to see where they sit now.
Just about the perfect away match gameplan to beat Saints and executed perfectly. Dominate up front, fast offensive defence, box kicks on the money and capitalise on errors in last quarter
Loved the Obano post match interview, especially when he referenced mutual trust in team mates and everyone knowing their role when asked about the team discipline. That sounds like great coaching to me
No doubt we will fall down somewhere, sometime but at the moment it does look as if the Hooper strategy is moving us in the right direction
That was a complete but very welcome, thankful surprise. Very well done for dogging it out lads at a ground where our record in the last 20 years has not been very good.
Obano, Walker (who was always having to deal with boring in), and I thought Judge had very good games, to be surplanted by the excellent Dunner and top class Stuart. Boyce's scrummaging still needs some work. Ewels arrival with the excellent Stooke added to the packs effectiveness and IMO are probably our best second row combination on current form.
Chudley was slow to get the ball away, partly due to the energetic Saints rucking and contesting the break down. Matevesi did much better than I thought he would, especially with his heavy tackling and clever kicking.
Redpath looks better each game, and Clark obviously needs more time running flat out on those hamstrings. Roko looked interested and my one wish was see Hamer - Webb have a chance to run. He does excite me.
Lastly, De Glanville was very brave and improves at full back. IMO, I believe Hutchinson caught him with a foul blow, possibly accidently, but it should be reviewed as Tom had to leave the field. He had a lot to do to get to the line, but he did it.
Mercer is playing better than Faletau and Bayliss was very effective. On fact, if Josh could take on some line-out jumping as well, he could be even more class than he already is.
However, I do agree with BO on his point about our inability to string more than 1/2 passes or phases together. Needs work along with our back play attacks.
Very well played Bath, congrats all round. Now for Wasps and apart from Tom, we should be picking from a virtual full squad. Great news.
Adopted player 2020/21 Beno 'the Transformer' Obano
Adopted player 2019/20 Jonathan 'JJ' Joseph.The Jink Joseph.
Adopted player 2018/19 Adopted player 2018/19 Semesa 'The Rock' Rokoduguni
The comments from Hooper on the BBC about TDG sound really concerning.
Bath director of rugby Stuart Hooper: "We are making sure we look after Tom the best we can. He took a hit, and credit to him for scoring the try. But thoughts are with him at the moment.
shipwrecked On T de G's injury, the law needs to change. He was dangerously tackled in the act of scoring but 5 points were awarded no conversion.
If he hadn't scored the a penalty try was likely. More points obviously. But T de G doesn't get a try.
Wouldn't the ref be entitled to award a restart penalty. Potentially another 3 points. Further more a card would be applied wouldn't it. Yellow or even Red.
So if he doesn't score potential 10 points. He did so we got 5 points and no card sanction. Seems wrong to me. The fact he
scores seems to wipe out the foul play.
A few years ago I was a guest of my Glaws supporting Uncle at Kingsholm. It was a niggly match, Bath received 3 or 4 yellows and Glaws ended the match with 11 players on the field.
The relevant point is an incident where Bath scored a try and their scrum half then punched a Bath player. Play was restarted with a penalty to Bath on the half way line.
Granted the incident occurred after the try had been scored but it shows that it is within the laws to restart with a penalty rather than a kick off.
Sarries (Farrell funnily enough!) were penalised in a melee following their own try v Quins at the weekend and the play resumed with a penalty to Quins. (The try was awarded as the pen was conceded afterwards). The ref, I'm pretty sure, was Ridley. I'm sure he would have taken action if he'd seen anything untoward. think the Saint's player's hit wasn't seen, for which the assistant ref was more at fault. I thought Ridley had a pretty good game.
Problem is Tom if the try is awarded or actually at the end of the game the TMO review doesn't occur. Remember at the Rec last season when we lost in the 90th minute to a try when there was a no arms hit in the build up. Can't remember the game. Shouldn't scrutiny be irrespective of the outcome?
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
shipwrecked On T de G's injury, the law needs to change. He was dangerously tackled in the act of scoring but 5 points were awarded no conversion.
If he hadn't scored the a penalty try was likely. More points obviously. But T de G doesn't get a try.
Wouldn't the ref be entitled to award a restart penalty. Potentially another 3 points. Further more a card would be applied wouldn't it. Yellow or even Red.
So if he doesn't score potential 10 points. He did so we got 5 points and no card sanction. Seems wrong to me. The fact he scores seems to wipe out the foul play.
A few years ago I was a guest of my Glaws supporting Uncle at Kingsholm. It was a niggly match, Bath received 3 or 4 yellows and Glaws ended the match with 11 players on the field.
The relevant point is an incident where Bath scored a try and their scrum half then punched a Bath player. Play was restarted with a penalty to Bath on the half way line.
Granted the incident occurred after the try had been scored but it shows that it is within the laws to restart with a penalty rather than a kick off.
I recall a game against Northampton at Franklins Gardens when Bath scored a disputed try in the dying seconds which, with the conversion, brought the scores close. In the ruckus Olver had called the referee something that the Rugby Special team didn't elaborate on, so the referee awarded Bath a penalty from the restart that Barnes stroked over from the halfway line to win the game.
A word for Chudley - yes, Spencer deserved plaudits for the way he came on and put a couple of drop-kicks right on the money immediately. But Chudley played the business end of the game when we created the platform and the parity that enabled the bench to come on and capitalise. He took a lot of physical punishment (unusual for a 9 these days, so probably a deliberate Saints tactic) - 2 late body-checks after box-kicks; after a sliced clearance by Josh he took a bit more responsibility for exiting and left the field looking absolutely battered. Very happy to have that good a 9 in the squad as well as Spencer.
shipwrecked Problem is Tom if the try is awarded or actually at the end of the game the TMO review doesn't occur. Remember at the Rec last season when we lost in the 90th minute to a try when there was a no arms hit in the build up. Can't remember the game. Shouldn't scrutiny be irrespective of the outcome?
Didn't know this. Seems an absurd anomaly given the 'power' of the TMO these days. Presumably Hutchinson (?) can still be cited?
Impressive team performance and win. Pack is looking very strong and dynamic and the 3/4 line coming more to life and shape. Good to see more youngsters getting their chance and equal to it. Massive defensive skill and grit that just strangled Saints. Perhaps most marked difference to a few months back is how now the team seems to be playing for each other, a real team unit that feeds off trust and commitment. And the skill sets are growing.
Bath are fun to watch again.
shipwrecked On T de G's injury, the law needs to change. He was dangerously tackled in the act of scoring but 5 points were awarded no conversion.
If he hadn't scored the a penalty try was likely. More points obviously. But T de G doesn't get a try.
Wouldn't the ref be entitled to award a restart penalty. Potentially another 3 points. Further more a card would be applied wouldn't it. Yellow or even Red.
So if he doesn't score potential 10 points. He did so we got 5 points and no card sanction. Seems wrong to me. The fact he scores seems to wipe out the foul play.
That's almost the case already.
The correct outcome would be that the try stands, Hutchison sees yellow (potentially even red) and the restart is a Bath penalty from the centre spot. That would all done within the current laws.
However, you can't award a penalty try when a try has been scored. You can only award a penalty try AND restart with a penalty if the pre are 2 offences, with the second happening after the whistle has blown.
Quote:
shipwrecked Problem is Tom if the try is awarded or actually at the end of the game the TMO review doesn't occur. Remember at the Rec last season when we lost in the 90th minute to a try when there was a no arms hit in the build up. Can't remember the game. Shouldn't scrutiny be irrespective of the outcome?
That's not quite true. If the trunks awarded, then a TMO review of the try doesn't happen, but it absolutely can for an act of dangerous play.
The trouble is, if that dangerous play is in the build up to a try, then it's untouchable as advantage has been played (and maximised) - you can only go back to the foul play by not awarding the try.
If that dangerous play is in the act of scoring (yesterday) then you can restart with a penalty from the centre spot - but you can't double-sanction with a penalty try AND a restart penalty.
If that dangerous play is after a penalty try has been awarded, then you can punish that after the event of the penalty try.
That was the most pleasing win so far this season IMHO a totally professional dismantling of a decent side on their own patch - the pack is a handful and it proved we have strength in depth in that department.
There are real signs of things coming together and it was refreshing to hear Beno speaking - he just says it as it is...so refreshing and what a nice bloke - rugby is all about playing with a smile on your face and he epitomises this.
Concerning though how many head injuries Chudley picks up either showing what a whole hearted competitor he is or he is putting his head in the wrong places, hopefully young De G will be fine and I bet the coaches are praying that JM is not too seriously injured - think Clarke just suffering with being out of the game so long.
If you were searching for the complete performance based on the platform laid by the forwards once again is our inability to really cut loose - saying that I am really impressed with young Redpath - think his first 2 performances have been hugely impressive and potentially he may be the long term partner of JJ and the answer to our 12 question - leaving the "elephant in the room" to be addressed.
Yadda, yadda to the technicalities - just absurd that Hutchison wan't carded for that headshot - was exactly what the game has been trying to eliminate in the last few years.
I think Chudley's head injuries were more a symptom of the treatment he was getting after he had completed clearing kicks. This was notified to Ridley by the TMO and he spoke to the Saints about it.
Dorset Boy - I agree - Cannot understand why someone who is as vocal about refereeing and stamping out foul play such as Wayne Barnes totally ignored Hutchinson's swinging arm. Maybe Wayne needs to concentrate more on his officiating than appearing on TV - practice what you preach... He was much more focussed on denying T De G the try than actually looking at whether there was any foul play.
I get why it was not a penalty try - I don't agree with their reasoning but I get it in that if the try is scored they will let it stand and will only award a penalty try if the try is not scored and foul play was involved in the try not being scored - like Jamie George in the game with Bristol.
I find that reasoning totally counter-productive because with a penalty try the 2 point conversion is automatically awarded - whereas with T De G's brilliant effort it was as wide out as possible on a rugby pitch... In addition it appears that if a penalty try is awarded a card of some colour is also brandished. So if T De G had felt the contact and thrown the ball away - we would be awarded 7 points and potentially against 14 players whereas a brilliant finish has left us with 5 points and potentially a serious injury.
The challenge by Hutchinson which personally I think was not malicious, I think he was hoping to dislodge the ball but it was still dangerous and reckless - so why does someone like Nenai-Williams from Worcester get sent off 14 minutes into a game basically condemning the team to a heavy home defeat but Hutchinson and Saints get away with it....Barnes is the man himself who said we need to have parity and consistency in officiating - well I think he has let himself down tonight.
Likewise the tip on Mercer has been a red for one of the players earlier this season and for the last couple, so why suddenly is it only a yellow? Mercer clearly landed on his neck and head. I thought there were no mitigting circumstances whether accidental or not.
Bit late I know, but so good to see Bath 'on the mend' and not an embarrassment at Franklin Gardens, which it has been for far too long. They played as a team not as a group of individuals who hadn't met or read the briefing notes.
Was a really enjoyable game to watch - proper rugby. Change of personnel in wider coaching team is showing. Not just Hatley.
hantssabre Poor old Dallaglio, it was really hard work for him to try and say anything nice about Bath. He must be so disappointed Saints didn’t win!
This is exactly right - and every time he discussed a Saints attack, it was "Unfortunately, Northampton couldn't quite....."
Ah well - my favourite memory at the Rec is watching him come off the field with a face like he'd swallowed nettles, after we gave Wasps a thumping a few years back.
Ali1969 Dorset Boy - I agree - Cannot understand why someone who is as vocal about refereeing and stamping out foul play such as Wayne Barnes totally ignored Hutchinson's swinging arm. Maybe Wayne needs to concentrate more on his officiating than appearing on TV - practice what you preach... He was much more focussed on denying T De G the try than actually looking at whether there was any foul play.
Don't want to stand in the way of a good bashing, but Barnes actually gave the try - it was referred to him after the on pitch ref (Christophe Ridley?) initially didn't give it. Hence why he had to look at every angle.
I hope TdeG's neck injury is not bad. I think that he walked from the field suggests the medical staff didn't think it too serious. If they thought it was, he would have been braced and taken off on a spinal injury stretcher. They clearly thought something was wrong though as someone was supporting his head/neck as he walked off. Fingers crossed he's back playing soon, he does look a real prospect.
TdG tweeted this morning: 'Just wanted to say thanks for all the messages last night and that I’m all good, buzzing with the win and looking forward to pushing on over the next few weeks'
TdG tweeted this morning: 'Just wanted to say thanks for all the messages last night and that I’m all good, buzzing with the win and looking forward to pushing on over the next few weeks'
Martlett my favourite memory was hearing that Ronnie Regan's mum went after Dayglo after a match at the Rec after he had done something unpleasant to her "innocent little boy"
Optimist TdG tweeted this morning: 'Just wanted to say thanks for all the messages last night and that I’m all good, buzzing with the win and looking forward to pushing on over the next few weeks'
Bath Supporter Jack Martlett my favourite memory was hearing that Ronnie Regan's mum went after Dayglo after a match at the Rec after he had done something unpleasant to her "innocent little boy"
Optimist TdG tweeted this morning: 'Just wanted to say thanks for all the messages last night and that I’m all good, buzzing with the win and looking forward to pushing on over the next few weeks'
Excellent news. We don't want him following his Dads example just yet where his nickname went from Hollywood (due to looks) in the early days to Gonzo (due to shape of his nose) by the time he was England captain.
I think the right response from the ref would have been award the try as is and card the player. I think you need to ask what each element is trying to do? The try, the penalty try, the card and the penalty KO.
The try is then pretty much what would happen anyway and a just reward for Bath's play. The foul play is sanctioned with a card. I think too often the ref says the try is sanctioning the offending play, which it clearly isn't. i thought this in the Exeter match. I think it was Exe that scored after the ref said one more and and its a card. That one more I think happened, but as they scored the ref let it go. Is that right?
Awarding the penalty try is effectively giving the offended team points for an act of foul play,
which doesn't seem consistent.
I can't see starting with a pen being right. Imagine the ref is playing advantage when you score, for offside perhaps, does that mean you start the game with a pen? It's the same thing. A penalty occured before the try was scored.
You could argue that, if the offending player weren't there, we'd have run it in under the posts. Yes in this case, no in the general case, so its hard to codify that.
I don't think a penalty try makes sense given we scored the try by diving into the corner under the pressure of two tacklers. If the second tackler hadn't made contact with his neck then he would still have been diving and scored in the corner. He was never going to score under the posts once he started to dive.
For me the only decisions possible are : i) try and no further sanction, (ii) try and card or (iii) try, card and penalty at restart.
The only mitigation is that Tom was so low that he was only just off the ground but I do not know what mitigation that is in the current rule interpretations.
Watching the highlights this morning I thought it was a genuine attempt to force TdG out. As NID says, Tom was very low-inches off the ground. If that was a Bath defender presumably we'd expect them to try and take the player into touch? As to the penalty try, I guess Tom would be happier with an aching jaw knowing that he's scored his 2nd Prem try for his pains, although I'm not offering that as a point in the overall debate! Incidentally he's looked very impressive in both games so far.
I think the most important aspect of recent performances is that the players seem happy, united and know how they are supposed to be playing. It may not be extravagant running rugby, that may come later, but there is plenty of chat amongst the players and the coaches must get praise for this apparent change in attitude. The coming games against stiffer opposition may find us out but so far so good in this late section of the season. I wonder how much the obvious quality and stability of Spencer has added to this improved attitude? Trouble is I think he will be top of Eddie's list come the internationals
Tbf, tackling player is near the floor and TdG is diving to the ground. The tackler may well have been attempting to dislodge the ball. Once you've committed to an action it is pretty much impossible to stop or reverse it in real time. Especially the speed they're playing at. I think that's a fact of physics that is sometimes overlooked by refs/TMOs, etc.
Also - have to say (with the attendant hypocrisy) how reassuring it was to see Priestland coming on at 60 mins - really felt like game was ours at that point.
DanWiley I can't see starting with a pen being right. Imagine the ref is playing advantage when you score, for offside perhaps, does that mean you start the game with a pen? It's the same thing. A penalty occured before the try was scored.
We're not talking about playing an advantage AND penalising the penalty anyway - we're talking about a (dangerous play) penalty offence in the act of soring a try.
Yes, it was technically a fraction of a second before the try was scored - but it was the same act. This is not the same as an offence a the previous tackle, or 2 phases earlier.
You then award the try, because it was scored.
There is no penalty try because no try was prevented.
And you penalise the offender, because they offended. That penalty is a yellow card and a penalty kick, just like it is at any other point in the game. You can give the kick without the card, but as far as I'm aware, there's no allowance within the laws for giving the card but not the kick.
As a ref although only at lower league levels my view is that the offence clearly takes place prior to TdG grounding the ball and therefore advantage is played and the try awarded. A penalty try is only awarded if but for the foul play a try would probably have been scored. As advantage is over once the try is scored there is no provision for restarting the game with a penalty, that only happens if the foul play occurs after the try has been scored. However, the ref could/should still have carded the player for the contact to the head
BathMatt53
Notwithstanding that I think he will (and should) rotate - I'm not keen on the Bristol approach.
Depends what you mean by that? Pat made 9 changes going into the Exeter game including a debut at 12, although that doesn't suit the narrative some media outlets wanted to run with.
Optimist Also - have to say (with the attendant hypocrisy) how reassuring it was to see Priestland coming on at 60 mins - really felt like game was ours at that point.
Was exactly my feeling at the time though I'm not so sure I would have felt same if scores were reversed and we were chasing the game
Optimist Also - have to say (with the attendant hypocrisy) how reassuring it was to see Priestland coming on at 60 mins - really felt like game was ours at that point.
Was exactly my feeling at the time though I'm not so sure I would have felt same if scores were reversed and we were chasing the game
Also - wtf has happened to Biggar's form?? On his last couple of showings I'd start RP ahead of him for Wales.
Optimist Also - have to say (with the attendant hypocrisy) how reassuring it was to see Priestland coming on at 60 mins - really felt like game was ours at that point.
Was exactly my feeling at the time though I'm not so sure I would have felt same if scores were reversed and we were chasing the game
Also - wtf has happened to Biggar's form?? On his last couple of showings I'd start RP ahead of him for Wales.
Playing behind a retreating pack in the face of a fast, offensive defence is never an easy gig
But I think he [and Saints] are seriously missing Reinach in the same way that Spencer seems to have added real zip to our game
midland BBW As a ref although only at lower league levels my view is that the offence clearly takes place prior to TdG grounding the ball and therefore advantage is played and the try awarded. A penalty try is only awarded if but for the foul play a try would probably have been scored. As advantage is over once the try is scored there is no provision for restarting the game with a penalty, that only happens if the foul play occurs after the try has been scored. However, the ref could/should still have carded the player for the contact to the head
Thanks! Refereed plenty of football matches- a lot easier. Despite years of watching rugby and a few playing I'd be absolutely clueless reffing a game- way too technical.
Remember that in any punishment, part of it is deterrent so it doesn't happen again. I haven't seen the tackle but the defender would have been prepared to take a team yellow as a swap for 5 or 7 points. If there was a swinging arm then it should have been punished, these desperate last ditch tackles often seem to result in injuries that would not happen elsewhere on the pitch and don't do the sport any favours.
BathMatt53
Notwithstanding that I think he will (and should) rotate - I'm not keen on the Bristol approach.
Depends what you mean by that? Pat made 9 changes going into the Exeter game including a debut at 12, although that doesn't suit the narrative some media outlets wanted to run with.
Depends how you approach the same stat - personally I would prefer that Bath didn't play key players (especially forwards) as much as Lam did, for example with Hughes and Steven Luatua in those 3 games. I think that those guys were showing it in their legs towards the end of the Exe game but thankfully I don't think that they got injured. I know that each Coach with their physio team knows best about the condition of their players but I am personally happier with the Bath approach. Some teams have arguable gone a bit too far / suffered on the pitch as Tigers did against us by throwing in a very raw team - others such as Exe and Wasps seem to have the balance just about right IMO. Each to their own.
Was interesting that Ollie Woodburn suffered a muscle injury late in the Bris game. I think he was the only Exe player to have started the previous game?
I see that Bristol after only 3 games have had to sign 3 injury cover players of a slightly moderate calibre. Maybe a result of the ‘non rotation’ but perhaps also through having a squad with too many stars and consequent paucity elsewhere.
sid the seagull I see that Bristol after only 3 games have had to sign 3 injury cover players of a slightly moderate calibre. Maybe a result of the ‘non rotation’ but perhaps also through having a squad with too many stars and consequent paucity elsewhere.
FLAP
I don't think that its 3 players who were overplayed that they are replacing. Afoa was actually injured in the warm up so could have happened any time.
Interestingly, Geoff Clark, our erstwhile physio from Meehan days, speaking on the subject of midweek games told me that aside from the likes Danny G (who is an actual cyborg) on average players needed 10 days to fully recover from a game. Which is why the experiment with football style midweek games didn’t last, back in the day. Squad management is critical in this period. So far so good from our lot.
Also, Chris Jones, commentating the Briz Exeter game on the wireless, was enthusing about floodlit midweek games being a great way to show case the sport if it could avoid clashes with footy. I actually wouldn’t mind some of that, but given the attrition that would only work if it were instead of weekend games, not as well as.
Hmmm GD, your 2nd point.
I happen to think that club rugby is a thing alive to be observed in the flesh. You I think are taking a TV point of view. 2/10.
I think Briz are going to miss John Afoa greatly. A highly skilled and intelligent distributor, irrespective of his considerable powers as a porp. He is what Sinckler should be aspiring to become (and presumably that is how Briz see him developing).
CoochieCoo Sometimes you need to adapt your play to the way the opposition play. Maybe too much attack would have played into their hands!
I'm not, and never have, suggested we run the ball from everywhere and do appreciate we went with a plan and it paid off very well.
All I've been saying in this thread is that I'd like to see us string more than 2 or 3 phases together without f-ing up. It really isn't that much to ask. Our ball retention was embarrassing for a Premiership team, even Boyd was making fun of it this week. Often times we could barely handle one pass. Not suggesting Harlem Globetrotters rugby, just some basic skills. Every post of mine in this thread was stating facts, a criminal inability to look after the ball.
But yeah, credit to our scrum, that try and the interception score from nothing woke the side up, the intensity in the last 20 minutes was fantastic.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020:08:29:00:27:11 by ballsout.
I mean... Come on dude. You're not stating facts, you're spouting hyperbole. I criticised you first, not because your points weren't fair, but because you're only commenting on the negative, not the positive. No one is claiming the attack is great. But the team performance is improving and your criticism of us as badly coached compared to some other teams focuses solely on that aspect and not, say, on scrum, lineout, defence, maul.
Chris Boyd (and Ruan Ackermann) got loads of plaudits for their attacking play and their instant impact. But, what failures they've turned into. Ackermann ran away, Boyd has overseen the worst home run for Saints since 2004 *including the year they got relegated*.
Tl;Dr the problem is you're one-eyed. We're all one-eyed, of course, on this site. But you're contrarian one-eyed and it's ridiculous on a fan site.
Saying that we have one first phase carry followed by a knock on, or two passes bfore penalty against isn't hyperbole, it's stating facts. If it was just a once off against Saints then who cares, but the fact is our awful ball retention has been going on for years. I don't understand why it's so bad and why it never seems to improve.
We score tries out of nothing from an interception or a bit of individual magic and then literally don't touch the ball for the next twenty minutes. We didn't touch it for the last half hour against Tigers, and when we did we were losing it a pass or two later.
Great scrum though, I guess it's something to be proud of to scrum for penalties, instead of trying to play off them. Probably for the best the ball doesn't go out.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020:08:29:01:39:25 by ballsout.
ballsout Saying that we have one first phase carry followed by a knock on, or two passes bfore penalty against isn't hyperbole, it's stating facts. If it was just a once off against Saints then who cares, but the fact is our awful ball retention has been going on for years. I don't understand why it's so bad and why it never seems to improve.
We score tries out of nothing from an interception or a bit of individual magic and then literally don't touch the ball for the next twenty minutes. We didn't touch it for the last half hour against Tigers, and when we did we were losing it a pass or two later.
Great scrum though, I guess it's something to be proud of to scrum for penalties, instead of trying to play off them. Probably for the best the ball doesn't go out.
The thing is, our ball retention is not obviously worse than the rest of the prem teams other than Exeter (and maybe Briz). Perhaps it's got something to do with the efforts of the opposition?
I agree with BO that our basic skills when we are in possession are a massive work on. I have watched many games this season where the inability to execute simple 5 yard passes accurately or not lose the ball in contact has been embarrassing.
On the flip side elements of our game have come on hugely and i think we are now a squad that could concern the top teams. Our power game up front is a massive weapon.
Possibly a bit disrespectful to say our tries come from nothing. Most have come from hours on the training field working on a hugely effective attacking maul. On weds they can from accurate kicking and oppressive physical defence forcing bad decisions and errors. These together with set piece solidity/domimance are the nuts and bolts you wantbin place before layering the rest on.
Look on the Saints site-he is getting stick! I love watching Saints when their game is on song and, just like Bristol not too long ago, they just need a bit more pragmatism at times and a stronger scrum and they'll be fine. I hope they stick with him because he's asking them to play a style of rugby that takes time to master but, as with Briz, it can be great to watch and successful.
BO - utter BS about ball retention. Maybe you aren't watching the same team as anyone else. Plenty of multi-phase play from Bath on multiple occassions, if you actually bothered to open both eyes and be honest.
You only know hyerbole, and frankly it ruins this site, and destroys any valid points you try to put across.
Sure were not Exeter or Leinster who go through 30-40 phases regularly, but equally is isn't one or two either.
Dorset Boy BO - utter BS about ball retention. Maybe you aren't watching the same team as anyone else. Plenty of multi-phase play from Bath on multiple occassions, if you actually bothered to open both eyes and be honest.
Sure were not Exeter or Leinster who go through 30-40 phases regularly, but equally is isn't one or two either.
Dorset Boy BO - utter BS about ball retention. Maybe you aren't watching the same team as anyone else. Plenty of multi-phase play from Bath on multiple occassions, if you actually bothered to open both eyes and be honest.
Sure were not Exeter or Leinster who go through 30-40 phases regularly, but equally is isn't one or two either.
WTF? Are you being serious?
Yes.
But you are so blinded by your Bath are @#$%& BS that you are incapable of seeing the reality.
Dorset Boy BO - utter BS about ball retention. Maybe you aren't watching the same team as anyone else. Plenty of multi-phase play from Bath on multiple occassions, if you actually bothered to open both eyes and be honest.
Sure were not Exeter or Leinster who go through 30-40 phases regularly, but equally is isn't one or two either.
WTF? Are you being serious?
BO what is it that drives you?, what is your aim?, in watching every game waiting for Bath's first knock-on so as to be able to come on the forum to berate the club with such passion. Your points may have validity but they lose their point /impact when stated so repetitively and with such vehemence. You seem to want to believe you are a lone voice , driven by a self righteousness , to state a truth only you can see. You don't balance these points with reference and reflection on some positive aspects of play that may be seen as evidence of the green shoots of improvement. Your focus is on back play failings, not long ago we were supposedly not going to win another game, club morale was falling apart and the coaches didn't have a clue! I am not a cheerleader for the club but I am enjoying their current success, I'm not sure you are! Of course you could just be a very committed troll.
Dorset Boy BO - utter BS about ball retention. Maybe you aren't watching the same team as anyone else. Plenty of multi-phase play from Bath on multiple occassions, if you actually bothered to open both eyes and be honest.
Sure were not Exeter or Leinster who go through 30-40 phases regularly, but equally is isn't one or two either.
WTF? Are you being serious?
Yes.
But you are so blinded by your Bath are @#$%& BS that you are incapable of seeing the reality.
You want reality? 1 top four finish in TEN YEARS.
If you genuinely think our ball retention wasn't comical against Saints (or in general) then you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Which is evident anyway from all your other posts. Stick to complaining about referees.
We've got some good strings to our bow, looking after the ball and "multi-phase play" is not one of them.
There is an assumption that multiphase ball leads to scores, that's not always the case. Ball retention is critical if you are using the backs as a means of winning games but the Hooper way up till now has been to use the pack and RP to get field position then retain ball long enough to go over from a rolling maul. We've done that well enough.
Its worth watching the Saints game again, it wasn't that bad actually.
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
shipwrecked Ball retention is critical if you are using the backs as a means of winning games but the Hooper way up till now has been to use the pack and RP to get field position then retain ball long enough to go over from a rolling maul.
Doesn't matter the style of play, coughing up possession or being turned over 1 carry off a scrum, or two passes down the line is shooting yourself in the foot regardless of how you like to win games.
shipwrecked Ball retention is critical if you are using the backs as a means of winning games but the Hooper way up till now has been to use the pack and RP to get field position then retain ball long enough to go over from a rolling maul.
Doesn't matter the style of play, coughing up possession or being turned over 1 carry off a scrum, or two passes down the line is shooting yourself in the foot regardless of how you like to win games.
Not sure I agree, win the ball pass to RP boot it into there 22, win line out, pick and drive till Dunny scores.
Hasn't that been this seasons pattern? Multiple phases don't come into that game plan.
Couple that with a solid defense also a seasons feature and win ball from turnovers. Lets face it that's what Sale did today. Its a winning formula, might not be Prem winning but its a start.
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
shipwrecked Ball retention is critical if you are using the backs as a means of winning games but the Hooper way up till now has been to use the pack and RP to get field position then retain ball long enough to go over from a rolling maul.
Doesn't matter the style of play, coughing up possession or being turned over 1 carry off a scrum, or two passes down the line is shooting yourself in the foot regardless of how you like to win games.
Not sure I agree, win the ball pass to RP boot it into there 22, win line out, pick and drive till Dunny scores.
Hasn't that been this seasons pattern? Multiple phases don't come into that game plan.
Couple that with a solid defense also a seasons feature and win ball from turnovers. Lets face it that's what Sale did today. Its a winning formula, might not be Prem winning but its a start.
I think you're over-thinking things and way over-simplifying what it takes to win games. If kicking into their 22 automatically meant you won the ensuing lineout and scored from it then hooray, but games of rugby don't work out like that.
Zach breaking from a scrum and coughing the ball up seconds later doesn't help, regardless if you're trying to make 10 man or expansive rugby. At some point you need to make dents into an opposition defence and not being able to string two or three passes will hurt any team.
Saints created tons of chances but couldn't execute anything. We created nothing but squeezed them up front that it didn't matter. Not every game will turn out like that and we need more strings to our bow.
I think most fans are pretty accepting our attack and accuracy/skill levels in possession need to improve a lot before we can realistically win the title.
It doesnt mean we cant enjoy the parts of our game/ the club we all love that are going well.
Personally think we have some solid foundations on and off the pitch to be challenging for top 4 for the next few seasons which is good as many v ambitious, well run clubs esp with sale and bris firmly in the mix now
"Saints created tons of chances but couldn't execute anything. We created nothing but squeezed them up front that it didn't matter."
Exactly. It was the right gameplan for the opposition, 5th v 4th and away from home
"Not every game will turn out like that and we need more strings to our bow"
Completely agree but as others have said we start from a sound platform as above and build from there to bring in the skills and flair of Watson, JC, JJ et al for the right game conditions
gaz59 Completely agree but as others have said we start from a sound platform as above and build from there to bring in the skills and flair of Watson, JC, JJ et al for the right game conditions
No idea if it’s changed post lockdown, but we didn’t have a clue how to get our backs into the game earlier in the season. There just seemed to be no game plan other than win through the forwards and the backs looked confused when they finally got the ball.
Maybe there is an attack plan for the backs now, but reading the comments on our games it appears to be the same old stuff.
I like a good analogy. I don't have a good analogy unfortunately but hopefully this will do.
If you have a good pack and team spirit then there is your cake. If you are winning most games then there is the icing on that cake.
If your backs are finding space in the last quarter to run in some pretty tries then there is the cherry on the icing on the cake.
Since we seem to have an iced cake at the moment I suspect our backs coach will be under some pressure at Farleigh to produce the cherry. He has the players and has been there a while now though you could say the icing is still setting.
shipwrecked Much as I respect everyone one on here OB I really do think taking the comments on this board as an accurate analysis of the game is a bit dodgy.
Watch it for yourself here Then decide.
P.S. Its a Covid friendly link !
Thanks for the link SW, but I’ll give it a miss all the same. To be honest there’s generally a balanced view of our performances on the board so it’s not too dodgy. There is however a widely held view that we have little inventiveness through our backs. I would therefore expect our attack coach to be on a final warning.
shipwrecked Much as I respect everyone one on here OB I really do think taking the comments on this board as an accurate analysis of the game is a bit dodgy.
Watch it for yourself here Then decide.
P.S. Its a Covid friendly link !
Yes, great try but that pass from first receiver certainly looked forward. His hands were not pointing backwards
shipwrecked Ball retention is critical if you are using the backs as a means of winning games but the Hooper way up till now has been to use the pack and RP to get field position then retain ball long enough to go over from a rolling maul.
Doesn't matter the style of play, coughing up possession or being turned over 1 carry off a scrum, or two passes down the line is shooting yourself in the foot regardless of how you like to win games.
Not sure I agree, win the ball pass to RP boot it into there 22, win line out, pick and drive till Dunny scores.
Hasn't that been this seasons pattern? Multiple phases don't come into that game plan.
Couple that with a solid defense also a seasons feature and win ball from turnovers. Lets face it that's what Sale did today. Its a winning formula, might not be Prem winning but its a start.
I think you're over-thinking things and way over-simplifying what it takes to win games. If kicking into their 22 automatically meant you won the ensuing lineout and scored from it then hooray, but games of rugby don't work out like that.
Zach breaking from a scrum and coughing the ball up seconds later doesn't help, regardless if you're trying to make 10 man or expansive rugby. At some point you need to make dents into an opposition defence and not being able to string two or three passes will hurt any team.
Saints created tons of chances but couldn't execute anything. We created nothing but squeezed them up front that it didn't matter. Not every game will turn out like that and we need more strings to our bow.
Watching Saracens v L Irish all SIX tries scored from 5 yards out from set pieces. Absolutely no relevance to ball retention in scoring those points, just field position then trundle over. Thats the point I'm making.
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Ignoring the fact that it was Saracens against London Irish... I still don't understand your point. We had multiple chances in the Wasps 22 but coughed up possession on almost all occasions. How do you think Saracens get into a position to have setpieces to score from? By controlling posession. We don't do that. It's as if we're allergic to the ball at times. I'm not saying we need 70% possession in every game but just look after the ball better, that's all. It's been killing us. Whenever we're in possession, you just know that round of possession will last about 15 seconds, ending either in a kick, knock on, penalty against, or shocking pass.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2020:09:01:08:26:46 by ballsout.
It seemed we did more damage to ourselves holding on to the ball going over the line than we did knocking on or kicking it away in the opposition 22.
We have the players to execute the dominant forwards routine (against most sides) but there is still a naivety to the way we play that the coaches need to address.
ballsout Ignoring the fact that it was Saracens against London Irish... I still don't understand your point. We had multiple chances in the Wasps 22 but coughed up possession on almost all occasions. How do you think Saracens get into a position to have setpieces to score from? By controlling posession. We don't do that. It's as if we're allergic to the ball at times. I'm not saying we need 70% possession in every game but just look after the ball better, that's all. It's been killing us. Whenever we're in possession, you just know that round of possession will last about 15 seconds, ending either in a kick, knock on, penalty against, or shocking pass.
I wasn't talking about specifics when I wrote that BO. In the Wasps game it all went wrong when we tried to keep it in hand. The ball retention was dreadful then.
If we had played a 10 man game of field possession through kicking then take points in the 22, by kicking penalties we would probably have won.
What I'm saying is that we can play a game that doesn't need us to go through phases, thats what won us games. RP kicks well but can't pass. If we can't cross the line after a few phase take 3 and forget 5 or 7.
Every time we get into the 22 we should get something. If you can't retain the ball don't try.
Saracens didn't run the ball into the 22 it got booted there!
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Of course it's possible to win games without going through phases of attack, we did just that at Northampton, but why limit yourself? Why make do with ball control a pub team would be embarrassed by? If we've aspirations of finally winning something, we need more strings to our bow.
We don't put teams under pressure in open play because we never threaten for long periods.
ballsout It's that sort of limited, head-down mentality that lost us the game yesterday.
Not sure that was the reason, if you win ugly repeatedly it becomes a habbit a good habit then you extend the game, that way Exeter and Saracens have done over the past few seasons. You also have something to fall back on, a tactic that works, might be unattractive but it works.
Sam Harris
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment.
We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals.
We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards.
If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing
abuse@sportnetwork.net