RugbyRebels

Timbo wrote:I thought Watson was bang to rights. He was a tad unlucky, but by both the letter and the spirit of the law that's a clear red.

Not sure anyone has said different. The argument is that the law doesn't account for third party action which, regardless of Aston's intent, was crucial to the outcome.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: What is the makeup of the panel that (mis)manage the laws and their application?

50% port abusers, 50% gin abusers?

Add in a Snowball abuser and you've described this board.

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: What is the makeup of the panel that (mis)manage the laws and their application?

50% port abusers, 50% gin abusers?

Add in a Snowball abuser and you've described this board.

The only outed drinker of snowballs on the boar drinks one-two per year at Christmas, though not on Christmas Day. That may constitute snowball nonetheless given how absurd the drink, but it's rather lower volume consumption than I had in mind.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:
50% port abusers, 50% gin abusers?

Add in a Snowball abuser and you've described this board.

The only outed drinker of snowballs on the boar drinks one-two per year at Christmas, though not on Christmas Day. That may constitute snowball nonetheless given how absurd the drink, but it's rather lower volume consumption than I had in mind.

Anybody who has drunk a snowball more than once is an abuser. Of what - taste buds, common sense, evolution - is up for debate but an abuser they are.

Mellsblue wrote: Anybody who has drunk a snowball more than once is an abuser. Of what - taste buds, common sense, evolution - is up for debate but an abuser they are.

Meh, pour some of Warnink's finest add a small(ish) amount of Rose's lime cordial then whisk whilst topping up with the lemonade and you've a perfectly respectable drink, all that's left is to pour into room temperature tumbler and adorn with a maraschino cherry or two.

Actually that's not all that's left, as you either need to stop drinking after the snowball or find a transition drink back to normal drinks - a nice sparkling wine is a reliable option here, you certainly want to avoid going from a snowball straight onto a bitter or ale.

Felt Watson was a touch unlucky but he did make contact and Goode did end up on the head/neck. Cook needlessly and foolishly put himself in a position to get a card. Thought Bath started brightly but the 2nd Saracens try seemed to take the wind out of their sails. Roko and Attwood stood out. Wilson wont play again this season.

Saracens look back to their early season best. They played some really good stuff with Farrell again in very fine form.

They seem to play to their own backfoot at the breakdown and look to be offisde more often than not, but if officials let them get away with it......

Digby wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:Remember Finn Russell's red card for obeying the laws of physics whilst Biggar jumps on him?
These days, safe landings are dictated by outcome, not intent, and it feels wrong every time. Basically, the laws is an ass, but it's still the law.
I guess it got this bad as the previous incarnation wasn't preventing incidents, not that the new one is either.

Finn Russell took a final hesitant step, which whilst I feel too harsh a margin to be judging someone by for a red card was a final step into the space Biggar was closing on. If they want to go on outcome for the Goode incident today they should for me issue a red card to Ashton as well as Watson, both were culpable for what happened to Goode though neither intended it, and it'd have the added benefit of not unbalancing the game by referee

We're gonna continue to have these incidents, the new laws don't address the cause of the incidents which is recklessness. In the Russel/Biggar incident it was Biggar who was being reckless by launching himself at speed high into the air. Russel was merely standing where the ball was going to land. In my view anyone who launches himself in the manner that Biggar did is risking themselves, they should be responsible for the outcome for their actions. The laws are currently 180 degrees wrong.

I know that this happens several times in every game with players competing for the ball in the air but the current interpretations aren't gonna solve the central issues. It's simple physics ffs.

I have slight sympathy for Watson as he looks like he was going to leap to compete for the ball but got tangled with Ashton which stopped him leaping thereby making him mostly responsible. Not intentional but needlessly clumsy. It was always a yellow for that reason, the current emphasis made it a red all day long.

Beasties wrote:In the Russel/Biggar incident it was Biggar who was being reckless by launching himself at speed high into the air. Russel was merely standing where the ball was going to land. In my view anyone who launches himself in the manner that Biggar did is risking themselves, they should be responsible for the outcome for their actions. The laws are currently 180 degrees wrong.

As above Russell did take a final step into the space Biggar was closing on. But if they're going to judge on outcome I'm happy enough if an equal punishment is meted out to anyone who has launched themselves into the air

Mellsblue wrote:
Anybody who has drunk a snowball more than once is an abuser. Of what - taste buds, common sense, evolution - is up for debate but an abuser they are.

The truth....

Both teams were intent on 'making a point' and determination outstripped ability on a few occasions, notably Watson on Goode.

WiganShark wrote:Fan allegedly got into refs changing room and verbally abused Greg Garner, tweeted by Flats but I cant find it. Also Flats, Nick Mullens not at all happy with the Bath fans after the game and the verbal abuse of the officials. This reported on various boards. What disciplinary action might there be if found to be true?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35952781

Bath are investigating apparently. It must surely be a lifetime ban if it's true.

Puja

Puja wrote:

WiganShark wrote:Fan allegedly got into refs changing room and verbally abused Greg Garner, tweeted by Flats but I cant find it. Also Flats, Nick Mullens not at all happy with the Bath fans after the game and the verbal abuse of the officials. This reported on various boards. What disciplinary action might there be if found to be true?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35952781

Bath are investigating apparently. It must surely be a lifetime ban if it's true.

Puja

I would certainly hope it's a lifetime ban

Puja wrote:

WiganShark wrote:Fan allegedly got into refs changing room and verbally abused Greg Garner, tweeted by Flats but I cant find it. Also Flats, Nick Mullens not at all happy with the Bath fans after the game and the verbal abuse of the officials. This reported on various boards. What disciplinary action might there be if found to be true?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35952781

Bath are investigating apparently. It must surely be a lifetime ban if it's true.

Puja

I can't see them having any option other than to investigate, and a life-time ban; there's just no viable alternative.

I don't know if it needs to be a life ban. In a few years they'd very likely let Adam Johnson go into the ground, so some perspective wouldn't go amiss.

There certainly needs to be some strong action, which would entail a ban and perhaps having to give up some time spent assisting referee training courses to warrant a chance to go back.

Digby wrote:I don't know if it needs to be a life ban. In a few years they'd very likely let Adam Johnson go into the ground, so some perspective wouldn't go amiss.

There certainly needs to be some strong action, which would entail a ban and perhaps having to give up some time spent assisting referee training courses to warrant a chance to go back.

I can guarantee you Johnson will have a life ban from hang out with minors in an official capacity......

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:I don't know if it needs to be a life ban. In a few years they'd very likely let Adam Johnson go into the ground, so some perspective wouldn't go amiss.

There certainly needs to be some strong action, which would entail a ban and perhaps having to give up some time spent assisting referee training courses to warrant a chance to go back.

I can guarantee you Johnson will have a life ban from hang out with minors in an official capacity......

This might be so, but looking ahead he'd still be allowed to go down the Rec to watch home games Vs a Bedford or Nottingham

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:I don't know if it needs to be a life ban. In a few years they'd very likely let Adam Johnson go into the ground, so some perspective wouldn't go amiss.

There certainly needs to be some strong action, which would entail a ban and perhaps having to give up some time spent assisting referee training courses to warrant a chance to go back.

I can guarantee you Johnson will have a life ban from hang out with minors in an official capacity......

This might be so, but looking ahead he'd still be allowed to go down the Rec to watch home games Vs a Bedford or Nottingham

Blimey. I know he's been a very naughty boy but that seems overly draconian punishment.

Puja wrote:

WiganShark wrote:Fan allegedly got into refs changing room and verbally abused Greg Garner, tweeted by Flats but I cant find it. Also Flats, Nick Mullens not at all happy with the Bath fans after the game and the verbal abuse of the officials. This reported on various boards. What disciplinary action might there be if found to be true?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35952781

Bath are investigating apparently. It must surely be a lifetime ban if it's true.

Puja

What did you say to the ref?

skidger wrote:

Puja wrote:

WiganShark wrote:Fan allegedly got into refs changing room and verbally abused Greg Garner, tweeted by Flats but I cant find it. Also Flats, Nick Mullens not at all happy with the Bath fans after the game and the verbal abuse of the officials. This reported on various boards. What disciplinary action might there be if found to be true?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35952781

Bath are investigating apparently. It must surely be a lifetime ban if it's true.

Puja

What did you say to the ref?

Puja: "That was the ****est officiating performance I've seen in a long time"
Garner: "I couldn't care less what you think"
Puja: "Do you know who I am?"
Garner: "No idea."
Puja: "I'm the mod for the EMB on Rugby Rebels."
Garner: "You've changed."

Mellsblue wrote:

skidger wrote:

Puja wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35952781

Bath are investigating apparently. It must surely be a lifetime ban if it's true.

Puja

What did you say to the ref?

Puja: "That was the ****est officiating performance I've seen in a long time"
Garner: "I couldn't care less what you think"
Puja: "Do you know who I am?"
Garner: "No idea."
Puja: "I'm the mod for the EMB on Rugby Rebels."
Garner: "You've changed."

Sh*t - how did you know that!?

Puja

Still gutted on Monday morning,Buy and not building a team is really costing us,Really can't see any change next season either.
As good as Watson and Mafi are they just run off on their own and normally get turned over.
Leroy showed with his try what a player he is but bench is all he can expect next season but the rumours I'm hearing is he's unhappy and for a player who plays with a smile on his face speaks volumes on how the rest of the squad feel.
Really hope changes happen because I hate seeing Bath playing with what appears a group of individuals.

PPJ wrote:Still gutted on Monday morning,Buy and not building a team is really costing us,Really can't see any change next season either.
As good as Watson and Mafi are they just run off on their own and normally get turned over.
Leroy showed with his try what a player he is but bench is all he can expect next season but the rumours I'm hearing is he's unhappy and for a player who plays with a smile on his face speaks volumes on how the rest of the squad feel.
Really hope changes happen because I hate seeing Bath playing with what appears a group of individuals.

According to the stats neither got turned over.

On a side note I thought Charlie Ewels played very well. I thought he was more industrious and effective than Attwood, albeit it was Attwoods first game back.

Stats are wrong then because both lost ball in contact.Ewells did play well,in fact a lot of individuals played well and there lies the problem.

PPJ wrote:Leroy showed with his try what a player he is but bench is all he can expect next season but the rumours I'm hearing is he's unhappy and for a player who plays with a smile on his face speaks volumes on how the rest of the squad feel.
Really hope changes happen because I hate seeing Bath playing with what appears a group of individuals.

Been saying that all season; and it's far from just Leroy.
For me a coach's job is to mold a group of individuals into a team; and it's one of the first signs that a coach (may have) lost (part of) the dressing room. Those signs have been on the wall since pre-season - though I'd always make allowances for that, they become relevant in retrospect.

Which Tyler wrote:[
Been saying that all season; and it's far from just Leroy.
For me a coach's job is to mold a group of individuals into a team; and it's one of the first signs that a coach (may have) lost (part of) the dressing room. Those signs have been on the wall since pre-season - though I'd always make allowances for that, they become relevant in retrospect.

Agree 100% with this.
Lots of rumours going around and none of them good ones.

I think he's lost their respect.
His man-management has always been iffy; and I think that's where the Redacted saga took it's biggest toll.
Devoto, Fearns and Garvey getting screwed around positionally => upset with those players and those thinking "there but for the grace of god go I"; and thoughts that the team is picked based on wage packet rather than previous performance / training.
Burgess leaves and Faletau move falls through => Houston & Garvey feel shafted; further thoughts on selection based on wage packet.
Faletau falls through, whilst Priestland doesn't get the "2-starts, 2 benches" he'd allegedly been promise (seem unrealistic, but I'm sure he expected more); so he unretires from international rugby - and gets "shafted", selection based on petty grievance, thoughts of nepotism enter the equation.
Devoto gets played everywhere but his best position - more petty grievance.
Evans gets no game-time; Matawalu is favoured over Cook - more selection based on wage packet not performance.

Every turn seems to have re-enforced the idea that the Redacted saga planted; the team play as a group of individuals, and the team as a whole relies on individual brilliance rather than set moves / tactics to secure victories - all stinks of players trying avoid personal blame on the Tuesday, or playing to build a highlights reel and attract other options - or even just his own selectors.

I've always felt that Ford's ego is too big; and has been for a good decade now, disrupting 3 England regimes; disrupting Gold's regime. He calls out players in the press for poor performances, and seem fond of "looking hard at ourselves in the mirror on Tuesday" - I wonder how often he applies that to himself? certainly seems unwilling to replace or rest his son.
He talks a good game for player rotation; but never seems to actually do it.

He built up a lot of good-will for the team performances last year; though rotation was still an issue; but he's spent it this year; and I worry that he's over-spent it as far as the players are concerned.