Sleepy Tigers - A case of Deja Vu

[sapajo]

Yes truly brilliant we finally won at home today well played Tigers!

That said, some 10mins into the second half suddenly this horrendous terrible dejau vu thought came into my head it was " we are 2 converted tries ahead so its now time for Tigers to switch off, go to sleep and throw the match away".

Phew was I relieved as yet again we so very nearly contrived to commit suicide, undo all our hardwork and gift Saints the victory.

Please why do we persist in doing this and not desist from doing it? My nerves are shredded and my nails are chewed to the quick!

So what must and can we do to finally put a stop to it?

[WiggoTiger]

If we look back in history, going years back we have always had a spell where we fall asleep for 20 mins in a game (usually 2nd half). It usually occurs when we seem to be 'cruising' in games, we need to ensure control in the forwards and have the ability to squeeze the opposition ie tactical % kicking.

[sapajo]

Agreed, for a top team we seemingly lack any tactical kicking nouse! We have BT and Geordie but do not use either and instead always drive the ball out of our 22 using the forwards. Why?

[gimme]

you know, there was another team on the pitch with a really classy backline, what a great game, maybe Tigers didn`t go to sleep, just maybe the opposition stepped up a couple of notches, and blooming good they were too. Tigers did everything right to rescue the result, they went up a notch or three, I saw two exhausted teams at the full time whistle. If every game had as much quality and enthusiasm I for one would be well pleased (especially if we nicked every one of `em)
keep rolling on Tigers, the momentum is gathering

[tigergirl]

Entirely agree gimme. I think it was rather more Saints waking up and playing to their strengths i.e. their back line, than Tigers going to sleep. The intent and intensity were both still there from Tigers but Saints didn't play into our hands in the second half and got quick ball away from contact along their line, also putting some clever kicks (both high and low) into the mix. That was what we struggled to cope with - I thought the Dowson try really epitomised the change after the break. What was really encouraging for me was that, when we went 2 points down after having pretty much controlled the game we did dig in and create the winning score. Floody didn't have agreat game with the boot but made the crucial difficult conversion of Agulla's try. Not perfect by any means but Tigers are back!!

[DickyP]

... I saw two exhausted teams at the full time whistle...

You're absolutely right there - when I watched the game again on TV after I got home I also spotted the fact that as the game finished all the players from both teams just stopped dead and started trying to breathe. An immense commitment from everybody involved - you could see they all knew they'd been in a game!

[Daveyboy]

We have BT and Geordie but do not use either.......

Billy Twelvetrees' kicking out of hand was completely aimless and directly led to one, if not two, of Northampton's tries.

[fleabane]

I know it is heretical in the eyes of some to criticise him, but 36 nearly cost us the game yesterday. As stated above, his kicking from hand was costly, and his tackling not as good as it should have been. (Neither was Geordan's - he fell off a number of tackles, and seemed to be adversely affected by Ashton's early late hit.)

A better performance overall, but shaky at best. Once again, a better team then Saints would have put us to the sword; they must be disappointed not to have played as well as they did last week against Sarries.

[kingol22]

A better performance overall, but shaky at best. Once again, a better team then Saints would have put us to the sword; they must be disappointed not to have played as well as they did last week against Sarries.

A better team than Saints may of beaten us but you wont find that many of them. We could only play what was in front of us and won a very physical game with a bonus point. Winning a game with a bonus point against last seasons HC finalists is hardly "shaky at best"

[fleabane]

I disagree. Last season is last season, and comparisons are irrelevant. We were exciting, but shaky. We gifted two, if not all 3 of Saint's tries, fell off tackles, were unequal in the 8 man scrums and kicked poorly.

I call that shaky.

[mightymouse]

our kicking out of hand was woeful - flood and BTT - to allow a back three like theirs to run back at you when you have a good lead is criminal - I thought Andy goode was back at one point.

The other reason for the dip in my view was poor use of the bench

14 men on each side means a more open high intensive game and the guys looked out on their feed. Saints brought oin subs early and regularly.

Ben woods for one should have been on much earlier - Slvi was brilliant ( his best game for us ) but he was knackered - Slater and Castro also should have been on earlier. Hawkins was not even used and yet george hand got through an enourmous amount of work.

I am against subbing when you bring on inferior players like Grindle or staunton but for good qulaity forwrds then we should should use the fresh legs

By the way I though Mafi was outstanding also and probably beetr that anything Tom croft has dione for us since his return from WC

[Longshanks]

I thought Saints had probably had the better half time talk; after the break they showed enough skill and flexibility to enact a Plan B which nearly worked. Tigers, on the other hand, were slow to respond and, as MM rightly says, failed to deploy reinforcements from the bench early enough. For example, whilst it was good to see Ben Youngs "recover" after a nasty looking injury, why risk it when there are fresh legs available.