Were we a bit lucky today ?

mike · Post by **mike** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:57 pm

Delighted to watch a win but thought we were a bit lucky ! When we were 9-6 down the omens were poor but a few lucky turns helped us no end.
1. Baths backs nearly all got injured .
2.Their replacement backs kept dropping the ball.
3.Uncontested scrums - we were able to get another loose forward on the field - Crane - his ball carrying helped no end .
4.Croft started to attack the bath lineout - he was absolutely great and Bath completely lost the initiative .

Our midfield of Frank , goodey and Vesty was slow , completely predictable and inconsistent as ever - nice to see Johnne and Matt Smith add a bit of flair .

Bill W · Post by **Bill W** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:28 pm

We were not lucky. The best side won.

Sherpa2 · Post by **Sherpa2** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:31 pm

Bill W wrote:We were not lucky. The best side won.

Absoloodle!!

Tiger_in_Birmingham · Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:46 pm

Could easily have been different if both touch judges had been equally happy to intervene. The touch judge running the Crumby side wing in the first half was happy to point things out to the ref and to talk to players to clarify.

The Bath penalty in the midfield in the 2nd half which hit the post and within a minute lead to Bath try could easily have been a Tigers penalty. Abraham legally was shoving the ruck to try to get a Bath leg to knock the ball loose. The Bath loose head didn't like it and tried to pull Abraham's hair a couple of times and sent a lazy swing.

Had the touch judge said anything could have been a Tigers penalty to relieve pressure.

Bill W · Post by **Bill W** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:48 pm

Wouldn;t have been different. We would have still won.

I thoiught the ref had a good game.

Tiger_in_Birmingham · Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:51 pm

Would have made the scoreline more confortable and maybe Goodey might not have gone for the 2 long penalties wide on the right.

Then again most of the time he'd have wanted to go for goal from there

Bill W · Post by **Bill W** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:54 pm

Scoreline IMHO about right. More points to us and fewer to them would have been too flattering to us.

We won the line outs.

We held our own in the scrums

We lost the mauls

We were marginally more creative

We did OK at the breakdown

mike · Post by **mike** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:12 am

Suggest you listen to Cockerill's interview/comments - he seemes to agree that we were lucky . A Coach with a dose of realism is a welcome change from 'a bad day at the office ' mantality .

Phil B · Post by **Phil B** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:07 am

If indeed, luck is merely the convergence of prep'n + opportunity, then we were not lucky.

SimW · Post by **SimW** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:26 am

Neither the touch judge or the referee saw the Bath try. Touch judge because our players were stood on the line and in the way and the ref because he was on the wrong side.

Therefore the try should not have been given. Roe gave the try because he came round to the right side and saw the Bath player holding the ball over the line. Anything could have happened (double-movement, Tigers player could have moved his hand out of the way, knock-on etc). As it happens there was a small knock-on. Had the ref had the video ref option available he would have used it and the try might not have been given.

IMO the try should not have been given because neither touch judge or ref saw it.

Big Dai · Post by **Big Dai** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:55 am

Only found out that we won this morning (Well 11:00 brew time anyway!)

Had to go to the Abergavenny Cricket dinner last night to watch the nipper pick up his gong! I left the house after checking both Sporting Life and the beeb websites convinced we'd lost 6-9 but taking solice in the fact that England Captain Cozza had crashed over for two tries! (At least I could hold my head up amongst the Tafia!)

Reading the papers this morning it sounds like the right team won but whats the story on Boris' "serious head injury"?

keef · Post by **keef** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:02 pm

The Bath games are almost always close affairs.couldnt see the game but just read the match report!

Jeremy Anderson · Post by **Jeremy Anderson** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:24 pm

From our position in the stands it looked like a double movement that scored the Bath try. Before that Luke had had his hair pulled and the touch judge appeared to raise his flag for a foul but then changed his mied when the ref ignored him.
My view is the turning point in the game was going uncontested scrums and bring Jordan on for a prop. We immediately had more mobility and scored before Bath sub'd one of their props.
IMO we deserved the win and got it thanks to some breaks going our way. We could also have easily lost it if the breaks had gone the other way but is that not often the case?

Nik · Post by **Nik** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:27 pm

Tiger_in_Birmingham wrote:Could easily have been different if both touch judges had been equally happy to intervene. The touch judge running the Crumby side wing in the first half was happy to point things out to the ref and to talk to players to clarify.

The Bath penalty in the midfield in the 2nd half which hit the post and within a minute lead to Bath try could easily have been a Tigers penalty. Abraham legally was shoving the ruck to try to get a Bath leg to knock the ball loose. The Bath loose head didn't like it and tried to pull Abraham's hair a couple of times and sent a lazy swing.

Had the touch judge said anything could have been a Tigers penalty to relieve pressure.

What you didn't point out is that at this point the Bath prop then headbutted Luke Abraham, the touch judge saw it and did absolutely nothing, Luke actually went over to the touch judge - and he still did absolutely nothing......... :censored: crazy.

Jeremy Anderson · Post by **Jeremy Anderson** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:31 pm

Nik - we thought the touch judge came forward to bring it to the Ref's attention but then changed his mind and went back behind the touch line. Maybe he came forward to hear what Luke had to say. Anyway a clear penalty or even a card offence.