RugbyRebels

Ref also stated that the tackled player had 'fallen into Barton' Barton hadn't charged, he was pretty stationary. I was expecting a yellow watching the match in all honesty, but the ref was sure of his convictions.

Which Tyler wrote:Although Step 2 often seems to be removed from the equation (eg Charlie Ewels getting yellow carded for head contact with no foul play).

TBH - I'm good with step 2 being removed, for a while at least until players and coaches start adapting, then we can re-introduce nuance (a bit like tackling the man in the air; where being an innocent party who's been jumped into doesn't seem to be an automatic red anymore)

Charlie Ewels tends to tackle upright which puts you straight into trouble because you aren't attempting to lower your height. He's also tall so not dropping his height means automatic high tackle hence he is at fault. If you look at his yellow card Vs Newcastle earlier in the season that's a good demonstration.

Thanks Puja, I may keep hold of that diagram for future use.

FKAS wrote:Charlie Ewels tends to tackle upright which puts you straight into trouble because you aren't attempting to lower your height. He's also tall so not dropping his height means automatic high tackle hence he is at fault. If you look at his yellow card Vs Newcastle earlier in the season that's a good demonstration.

That's exactly the one I'm thinking of - and I agree that he needs to get lower.
However, there was no high tackle for that yellow; it was for head contact after the initial tackle. The ref even said that there was no oul play - but (rightly in retrospect - I was angry at the time as it was the first example I'd seen of the harsher interpretation) gave the yellow for head contact, despite nothing illegal happening.

Gloskarlos wrote:Ref also stated that the tackled player had 'fallen into Barton' Barton hadn't charged, he was pretty stationary. I was expecting a yellow watching the match in all honesty, but the ref was sure of his convictions.

I thought at the time that the ref exercised common sense and got that right. A card could easily have been given, but that would be harsh on a player set to make a tackle at waist height only for the attacking player to fall about a foot in a millisecond.

Yes I'd agree - and I was happy at the time that common sense had prevailed, I was also happy that the statement 'he was run into by a head (paraphrased)' was made, because I think this is a bigger grey area I am concerned about, players leading with their heads.... which could be equally as dangerous.

I also am of the opinion that in the vast majority of cases the TMO agrees with the initial reaction of the ref. Even when I've been surprised by the ref's decision and it gets talked through with the TMO, there is rarely any leading the ref away from his original judgement, they make sure he has seen all angles available, but I can't remember a TMO stating - 'you've got that wrong, the sanction needs to be 'x'' I think this is a good thing and I wonder if that is the agreement between match officials anyhow, nobody wants to listen to a load of argument or one-upmanship for every review.

Which Tyler wrote:Although Step 2 often seems to be removed from the equation (eg Charlie Ewels getting yellow carded for head contact with no foul play).

TBH - I'm good with step 2 being removed, for a while at least until players and coaches start adapting, then we can re-introduce nuance (a bit like tackling the man in the air; where being an innocent party who's been jumped into doesn't seem to be an automatic red anymore)

Step 2 is being oddly interpreted by the IRB's command - if you are upright going into a tackle situation, then you are at fault and have committed foul play, even if it really doesn't look like it. The only way to escape is to bend at the waist.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:Although Step 2 often seems to be removed from the equation (eg Charlie Ewels getting yellow carded for head contact with no foul play).

TBH - I'm good with step 2 being removed, for a while at least until players and coaches start adapting, then we can re-introduce nuance (a bit like tackling the man in the air; where being an innocent party who's been jumped into doesn't seem to be an automatic red anymore)

Step 2 is being oddly interpreted by the IRB's command - if you are upright going into a tackle situation, then you are at fault and have committed foul play, even if it really doesn't look like it. The only way to escape is to bend at the waist.

Puja

Upright tackles are the most dangerous type, probably why it's being taken away as an option to escape sanction.

Which Tyler wrote:

FKAS wrote:Charlie Ewels tends to tackle upright which puts you straight into trouble because you aren't attempting to lower your height. He's also tall so not dropping his height means automatic high tackle hence he is at fault. If you look at his yellow card Vs Newcastle earlier in the season that's a good demonstration.

That's exactly the one I'm thinking of - and I agree that he needs to get lower.
However, there was no high tackle for that yellow; it was for head contact after the initial tackle. The ref even said that there was no oul play - but (rightly in retrospect - I was angry at the time as it was the first example I'd seen of the harsher interpretation) gave the yellow for head contact, despite nothing illegal happening.

Yeah I remember thinking he was lucky and on another day it wouldn't have been mitigated the same way. Clear head contact with Radwan who I think had to go off for a HIA. He was upright so was always going to be in trouble as he was at fault but with mid range of danger, had Radwan not come off worse then he might have got only a penalty as it could have been seen as little danger.

No doubt the Leyd's was falling, and that made it worse - which is why I expected a yellow. But the angle on a replay from behind shows that arm is tucked a lot more than it appears there, almost Farrell-esque. I was amazed it wasn't even a penalty. Consistency again, eh?

Bath v LIrish

Friday, 8.00pm; BTSport2
Ref: Frank Murphy
TJs: Andy Woodthorpe, Phil Watters
TMO: Ben Whitehouse

Bath:
15. Anthony Watson
14. Joe Cokanasiga
13. Jonathan Joseph
12. Cameron Redpath
11. Ruaridh McConnochie
10. Orlando Bailey
9. Ben Spencer

1. Beno Obano
2. Jack Walker
3. Will Stuart
4. Josh McNally
5. Charlie Ewels ©
6. Taulupe Faletau
7. Josh Bayliss
8. Zach Mercer

16. Jacques du Toit, 17. Juan Schoeman, 18. Henry Thomas, 19. Mike Williams, 20. Miles Reid
21. Will Chudley, 22. Max Clark, 23. Alex Gray


LIrish:
15 Tom Parton
14 Ben Loader
13 Theo Brophy Clews
12 Terrence Hepetema
11 Ollie Hassell-Collins
10 Paddy Jackson
9 Nick Phipps

1 Facundo Gigena
2 Agustin Creevy
3 Lovejoy Chawatama
4 George Nott
5 Rob Simmons
6 Matt Rogerson (c)
7 Blair Cowan
8 Albert Tuisue

16 Matt Cornish, 17 Harry Elrington, 18 Ollie Hoskins, 19 Chunya Munga, 20 Ben Donnell, 21 Sean O’Brien
22 Ben Meehan, 23 James Stokes


I'm not sure I can be bothered - though there's nothing else to do anyway, so I probably will.

Which Tyler wrote:Bath v LIrish

Friday, 8.00pm; BTSport2
Ref: Frank Murphy
TJs: Andy Woodthorpe, Phil Watters
TMO: Ben Whitehouse

Bath:
15. Anthony Watson
14. Joe Cokanasiga
13. Jonathan Joseph
12. Cameron Redpath
11. Ruaridh McConnochie
10. Orlando Bailey
9. Ben Spencer

1. Beno Obano
2. Jack Walker
3. Will Stuart
4. Josh McNally
5. Charlie Ewels ©
6. Taulupe Faletau
7. Josh Bayliss
8. Zach Mercer

16. Jacques du Toit, 17. Juan Schoeman, 18. Henry Thomas, 19. Mike Williams, 20. Miles Reid
21. Will Chudley, 22. Max Clark, 23. Alex Gray


LIrish:
15 Tom Parton
14 Ben Loader
13 Theo Brophy Clews
12 Terrence Hepetema
11 Ollie Hassell-Collins
10 Paddy Jackson
9 Nick Phipps

1 Facundo Gigena
2 Agustin Creevy
3 Lovejoy Chawatama
4 George Nott
5 Rob Simmons
6 Matt Rogerson (c)
7 Blair Cowan
8 Albert Tuisue

16 Matt Cornish, 17 Harry Elrington, 18 Ollie Hoskins, 19 Chunya Munga, 20 Ben Donnell, 21 Sean O’Brien
22 Ben Meehan, 23 James Stokes


I'm not sure I can be bothered - though there's nothing else to do anyway, so I probably will.

There's a lot of great talent on display, if both teams play to even the sum of their parts, should be entertaining.

Watching the back 3's alone makes this a very interesting game. Both sides playing some highly entertaining rugby at the moment.

It's a mystery to me how Bath aren't better than they are. On paper, I always think their side looks fantastic - but they never seem measure up to the sum of the parts

I also see that Alex Gray consider himself a winger now! Interesting. He probably lacked some of the grit and ballast required for 8

TheNomad wrote:It's a mystery to me how Bath aren't better than they are. On paper, I always think their side looks fantastic - but they never seem measure up to the sum of the parts

yep.

TheNomad wrote:It's a mystery to me how Bath aren't better than they are. On paper, I always think their side looks fantastic - but they never seem measure up to the sum of the parts

I also see that Alex Gray consider himself a winger now! Interesting. He probably lacked some of the grit and ballast required for 8

It's frustrating - very frustrating

I think we signed him as a centre/winger; and suspect he'll move infield once he's got some match time - assuming he's good enough.

TIGERS XV
[club appearances in brackets]

15 Freddie Steward [26]

14 Harry Potter [11]

13 Matías Moroni [10]

12 Matt Scott [17]

11 Kini Murimurivalu [13]

10 Johnny McPhillips [16]

9 Richard Wigglesworth (c) [9]

1 Luan de Bruin [11]

2 Charlie Clare [25]

3 Joe Heyes [62]

4 Harry Wells [115]

5 Cameron Henderson [11]

6 George Martin [9]

7 Tommy Reffell [41]

8 Hanro Liebenberg [27]

REPLACEMENTS

16 Tom Youngs [207]

17 Ellis Genge [80]

18 Dan Cole [255]

19 Tomás Lavanini [30]

20 Jasper Wiese [10]

21 Jack Van Poortvliet [16]

22 George Ford [99]

23 Dan Kelly [12]

That's a pretty stacked bench, particularly the forwards.

I certainly shan't be concerned when it's time to bring on the bench with that cohort in reserve!

This is a winnable game for us, even with the rotated team, but I don't yet feel comfortable about our ability to produce on demand. This weekend will hopefully answer some more questions.

Puja

I think Borthwick has looked back at the last game Vs Falcons. Falcons didn't come out the blocks and we pinned them back tactically. Scored points and applied pressure. At half time they regrouped and came back at us. I think Borthwick will do his usual switch the front row just after half time. Let Richards, his coaches, Flood etc see how we are playing and then to counter their counter we'll swiftly change the picture.

Leaves Falcons with food for thought as their bench isn't that strong particularly with the tight five. As Tigers add in quality do they try and keep their best players out there or do they try and freshen things up knowing that the skill levels aren't the same.

Falcons will feel the pressure to dominate the first half so that'll be interesting to see how they go about that and whether Tigers can apply pressure and pounce like they did Vs Connacht. Layers of interest in this game. Like it.

FALCONS: 15. Tom Penny; 14. George Wacokecoke, 13. Matias Orlando, 12. Pete Lucock, 11 Ben Stevenson; 10. Brett Connon, 9. Michael Young; 1. Trevor Davison, 2. George McGuigan, 3. Logovi’i Mulipola, 4. Greg Peterson, 5. Sean Robinson, 6. Will Welch, 7. Mark Wilson, 8 Callum Chick
Replacements: 16. Jamie Blamire, 17. Kyle Cooper, 18. Mark Tampin, 19. Rob Farrar, 20. Gary Graham, 21. Louis Schreuder, 22. Joel Matavesi, 23. Cooper Vuna

Got to favour Tigers but Newcastle got a good win last week.

This one could be good Sat 8pm

Saints: Freeman; Sleightholme, Hutchinson, Francis, Naiyaravoro; Biggar, Mitchell; Waller (cc), Matavesi, Hill; Ribbans, Coles; Isiekwe, Ludlam (cc), Harrison.
Replacements: Haywood, Auterac, Painter, Moon, Wood, James, Tuala, Dingwall.

Ulster: Lowry; Baloucoune, Hume, McCloskey, Stockdale; Burns, Cooney; O'Sullivan, Herring, Moore; O'Connor; Treadwell, Reidy; Murphy (c), Timoney.
Replacements: Andrew, Warwick, O'Toole, Rea, Jones, Mathewson, Madigan, McIlroy.

TheNomad wrote:It's a mystery to me how Bath aren't better than they are. On paper, I always think their side looks fantastic - but they never seem measure up to the sum of the parts

I also see that Alex Gray consider himself a winger now! Interesting. He probably lacked some of the grit and ballast required for 8

I think it's more because he put so much into his speed when trying to crack into the NFL that he is now a realistic option out there.

fivepointer wrote:This one could be good Sat 8pm

Saints: Freeman; Sleightholme, Hutchinson, Francis, Naiyaravoro; Biggar, Mitchell; Waller (cc), Matavesi, Hill; Ribbans, Coles; Isiekwe, Ludlam (cc), Harrison.
Replacements: Haywood, Auterac, Painter, Moon, Wood, James, Tuala, Dingwall.

Ulster: Lowry; Baloucoune, Hume, McCloskey, Stockdale; Burns, Cooney; O'Sullivan, Herring, Moore; O'Connor; Treadwell, Reidy; Murphy (c), Timoney.
Replacements: Andrew, Warwick, O'Toole, Rea, Jones, Mathewson, Madigan, McIlroy.

James is unlucky, being playing very well at 9. Handy back 3 for Saints.....but they need to hope Biggar doesnt get crocked; good to see Coles keeps his spot.

Tactical decision, or are Grayson and Furbank both injured?

Peej wrote:Tactical decision, or are Grayson and Furbank both injured?

Dunno about Grayson but with Furbank other players are fit and available so...

FKAS wrote:

Peej wrote:Tactical decision, or are Grayson and Furbank both injured?

Dunno about Grayson but with Furbank other players are fit and available so...

Furbank is injured, and would start at 15 if not - he has been very good there for Saints. Freeman is pushing him hard though, Furbank has also been pretty handy filling in at 10 when Biggar was with Wales and Grayson injured.