Sixteen men on pitch

[perks46]

Who knows what would have been the outcome if we had managed to kick the penalty that should have been awarded?

What I saw that might also have had an effect was that the Ref did not call time out whilst he repremanded the official.

This was just another instance of things going in favor of the ospreys

[Phil B]

Well spotted!!

[Big Dai]

I hope the outcome of all this is that the toing and froing from the pitch, by players, "waterboys" (AKA tactical advisors and coaches), physioterrorists etc getssorted once and for all and a precedent is set for some pretty hefty punishment.

I agree the result should stand, I don't agree this should go unpunished. As a mark of respect to those who did uphold the rules and got narowly squeezed out a points deduction (already the punishment for playing an "incorrect" player) or, if you must, a heavy fine should follow.

[Kinoulton]

All very unjust.

But accortding to just about everyone in the media, there is no chance of the result being put in doubt.

[Big Dai]

No......you can't go affecting the result, but other sanctions should follow. Ospreys won but broke the rules, if a points deduction followed then another team would progress, not the Tigers.

The results stands......but with penalties applied.

I think we had a similar situation with one of our props? I think he went unregistered after return from somewhere. All the results stood but we came in joint top instead of top. Not that that amounts to a hill of beans in the prem these days but placings were none the less altered with the results standing.

[Tiggersarewonderfulthings]

In the sky sports report.


It says "an unnamed Ospreys player claims that Tigers had 16 men on the pitch at the time" A claim that Tigers deny.

Don't you just love the Ospreys. They have broken the rules so now are concocting a story that Tigers had 16 on the field as well,just to try and save themselves from getting into trouble.

'Unnamed Ospreys player'?

Well, if they know who it is, they should name them. Otherwise this is totally unprovable one way or the other.

Mischievous speculation by Sky.

[Jeremy Anderson]

In the sky sports report.


It says "an unnamed Ospreys player claims that Tigers had 16 men on the pitch at the time" A claim that Tigers deny.

Don't you just love the Ospreys. They have broken the rules so now are concocting a story that Tigers had 16 on the field as well,just to try and save themselves from getting into trouble.

Just read the article and frankly I don't believe it ever happened. If it did why did Lewis not ask us to remove our 16th man before continuing play. He could even have taken time to count our players although it might have helpded if he stopped the clock while all thsi was going on.

No this has been made up by Sky as part of their mission to stand by the Refs even when shown to be seriously incompetent

[Rizzo]

Mischievous speculation by Sky?

You astound me

I think there will be some kind of investigation, a reprimand of the Osprey's coaching team maybe, and possibly a fine. They can't deduct points or affect the result or it'll all be confusion and chaos. We tried, we coould have snatched it at the end, but we lost.

[Tigerbeat]

There was a transgression that took place and was noticed after about a minute or so.
There are sorts of permutations of ifs and what if the penalty had been awarded. On the day Tigers had there chances and failed to take them.
The incident needs to be investigated to find out where it went wrong, who was at fault, so that it does not happen again.
If Ospreys did fail to inform the 4th Official then a fine is probably going to be handed out.
Lets just leave it to the ERC and accept that Tigers were in a very tough group and have missed out by a whisker.

[Gray]

My big questions are, why didn't the Tigers management get a message onto Deacon to tell the ref "as the laws state it's a penalty to us, we'll kick for goal/kick for touch/scrum/tap and go".
And why wasn't our touchline official reminding the 4th official to remind the ref of the rules?

[Purebob]

Even if we got a replay out of this, all things being equal we'd lose by a close margin again.

We should never have been in the position of needing a win / BP over such a renowned aggressive attacking side as 'spreys. They're not a side who could grind out a territory game, but the kind of expansive game we kicked to them yesterday they're just much better at it than we are. Almost like they had an extra man in space at every breakdown

Slap a wrist for his 16 man nonsense then lets learn the lesson that left us needing a cricket score against such a side as 'Spreys.

[Prof]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought blood replacements were there to protect against contamination from blood-borne virsuses, I can't recall a blood replacement for an injured toe (covered by a sock and boot) ever before. I think Byrne should have gone off and stayed off, then this sad situation would never have happened. It was without doubt a refereeing error but then they happen all the time in all sports and is part of the game. However I must add that I thought Ospreys were disgraceful in their treatment of Julian White last season.

[seldomrong]

I like Cockerill's response. I am also sure Ospreys didnt have 16 men in deliberately. Whether the incident materially affected the result we will never know.

All I know is that we beaten fair and square btu I am not that down beat. We had our chances they had theirs - the difference was they took one we didnt. That's sport.

good luck next round Ospreys you deserve to be there.

[Bill W (2)]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought blood replacements were there to protect against contamination from blood-borne virsuses, I can't recall a blood replacement for an injured toe (covered by a sock and boot) ever before. I think Byrne should have gone off and stayed off, then this sad situation would never have happened. It was without doubt a refereeing error but then they happen all the time in all sports and is part of the game. However I must add that I thought Ospreys were disgraceful in their treatment of Julian White last season.

Are we sure it was blood? There was no sign of any contact immediately prior to him going down. Could he have had a capsule in his sock?

[Starburst]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought blood replacements were there to protect against contamination from blood-borne virsuses, I can't recall a blood replacement for an injured toe (covered by a sock and boot) ever before. I think Byrne should have gone off and stayed off, then this sad situation would never have happened. It was without doubt a refereeing error but then they happen all the time in all sports and is part of the game. However I must add that I thought Ospreys were disgraceful in their treatment of Julian White last season.

Are we sure it was blood? There was no sign of any contact immediately prior to him going down. Could he have had a capsule in his sock?

If my memory serves me right (and at my age it may not) Byrne (who regardless of the 16 man issue was playing really well) was down injured for 2 or 3 mins at least in which time the game stopped and was restarted by at least one lineout. If the O's management had thought the injury warrented a blood replacement they would have asked for one. Eventually realising that the player had been down for some time the ref went to see the problem, Byrne's boot by now had been removed and It was the ref who suggested the injury warranted a blood replacement.

Incidently I also thought the way the ref spoke to the O's official was out of order. In my day you didn't raise your voice to a lady. We all know an error had been made but Mr Lewis did not know all the facts at that stage and could not have been sure who was at fault. Besides shouting at that lady didn't help the situation at all. If he had of stayed calm and not lost his temper who knows he may even have remembered to restart the game with a penalty to the Tigers.