Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

Post Reply
TigerLad
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1742
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 6:46 pm

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by TigerLad »

I'm not worried about the team, I know we can play and if we turn up we can beat Quins and Saracens. The summer will suit us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5bbSW8Fj68
We can play good rugby and I think we will.
sapajo
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6054
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by sapajo »

The Boy Dave wrote:I prefer to go on what my eyes tell me. For whatever reason's there is only one winner in an even match up such as the past two games and unfortunately we came off second best, not because we are any poorer IMO but simply beacause the other teams appeared to want it just a little bit more. Could we have won? Yes! Should we have won? Yes! Did we win? No!
I also sense that most teams that play us desperately want to beat us. Alas I do not sense the same hunger from Tigers this season save our derby's with the Stains. Hope the team prove me wrong by now hitting the same heights that we achieved this time last season :smt023
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity
drc_007
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3402
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:28 am

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by drc_007 »

I was told an interesting statistic (that I can't check I'm afraid).

Apparently Manu gets the ball twice as often playing for England as he does playing for Tigers.

Is this a deliberate tactic?
sapajo
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6054
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by sapajo »

drc_007 wrote:I was told an interesting statistic (that I can't check I'm afraid).

Apparently Manu gets the ball twice as often playing for England as he does playing for Tigers.

Is this a deliberate tactic?
Yes! England want him to break the gain line whereas at Tigers they leave this invariably to AA.
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity
mike
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 9:12 am
Location: norwich

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by mike »

But AA doesn't break the gain line - thats the problem ! If you have an asset like Manu you have to use him and if the existing methods/personnel need to change then so be it . If we don't make the most of Manu we will lose him - and deservedly so .
sapajo
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6054
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by sapajo »

mike wrote:But AA doesn't break the gain line - thats the problem ! If you have an asset like Manu you have to use him and if the existing methods/personnel need to change then so be it . If we don't make the most of Manu we will lose him - and deservedly so .
Completely agree and its amazing just how often AA takes the ball into contact rather than offload which is why Manu does not get the ball :smt009
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity
The Boy Dave
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1787
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:40 pm

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by The Boy Dave »

Regarding getting over the gain line and offloading it was interesting to watch Joel Tomkins at the weekend. I suspect he is being developed in the Sonny Bill mould and appears to have all the assets to enable him to be able to actually pull it off. He is very well balanced and stayed on his feet well. Though not particularly quick he had a good enough step to hit the gaps and looked a strong well built lad with long arms and the ability to use one hand on the ball caused some confusion. I think the centres is an area that requires some considerable thought for the future and ideas about how best to approach tighter and tighter defending and what types of players are more effective for the team are crucial.
Cheery chappy
Smudge
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1879
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 1:20 pm
Location: Gosport

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by Smudge »

Of course by rotating 4 centres and 2 stand-offs you could vary your tactics even more. It's a shame we don't.
A life long Tiger
Isambard
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1413
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:13 pm

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by Isambard »

Yes back to the plan B approach. Interesting comments thank you for the info. I think that moving the ball towards the wings is always a good idea. Especially so in this cluttered game of ours.
G.K
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5787
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 10:19 am
Location: See SatNav

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by G.K »

Sarries did that very well and exploited the fact that our two wingers seemed unable to tackle.
Nowadays referees decide matches, players by how much.
kend
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 12:02 pm
Location: Exiled in London

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by kend »

I think that moving the ball towards the wings is always a good idea. Especially so in this cluttered game of ours
Not so easy against 'blitz' style defences as the outside channels tend to be full of defenders - the wisdom I've heard is you can't pass round a blitz (whether it's of the 'centres up' or the 'outside and in' type).

I'm not sure the statistic regarding Manu is actually that significant. I would have thought you really want him getting the ball in space; you could argue he is more likely to get that with a team that plays off the 12?
jgriffin
Super User
Super User
Posts: 8074
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:49 pm
Location: On the edge of oblivion

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by jgriffin »

We have always remarked on the lack of ball Manu gets. I have always put it down to AA's failure to attract attention and then offload. Good player, but not a line-breaker, and defences know it.
I don't buy the 'AA is essential' etc - that stinks of a failure to coach. You cannot just have one defence leader, in the same way you can't have just one packleader - you have to train others to take those roles. It is the playbook that dictates, and Tigers book seems to be from the last century.
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.
PM76
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 988
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 9:46 am

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by PM76 »

jgriffin wrote:We have always remarked on the lack of ball Manu gets. I have always put it down to AA's failure to attract attention and then offload. Good player, but not a line-breaker, and defences know it.
I don't buy the 'AA is essential' etc - that stinks of a failure to coach. You cannot just have one defence leader, in the same way you can't have just one packleader - you have to train others to take those roles. It is the playbook that dictates, and Tigers book seems to be from the last century.
AA is essential but only due to the lack of coaching you speak of. There is a lack of adaptability throughout the set-up ATM!! The side lines up to play the same way regardless of those selected, more flexibility/ variation/ nous is required. Same can be said of playing Harrison at 9, he is a very good SH but does not really fit the style which is consistently played. I don't think this problem can be blamed on AA/ Bowden or Youngs/ Harrison, more thought is required especially when it's blindingly obvious that those players have such contrasting styles. I don't think it's really possible to try and defend the coaches on this point either it has happened time and time again!! Clearly players should be able to adapt but if I can tell Bowden is not a defensive organiser, then I expect an experienced "world class" backs coach to be able to and adapt accordingly.

It is probably the thing that frustrates most about RC/ MOC, alongside the use of the bench. :smt013 :smt013 :smt013
RWA
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 478
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 9:29 pm

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by RWA »

There are some concerns here. The Tigers of some of last season and certainly 2 season prior to that just had too much power for other sides. As well as the usual superb set piece, we just wore sides down and we rolled over sides, even the better teams were beaten in the last 20 minutes. You could argue that we were a step ahead of the others, who just couldn't cope with us. So take Sarries and Quins. Like or loathe them, they have recruited well, either the SA route for Saracens or the Academy (and Nick Evans) for Quins. Now both do not get bullied by Tigers. They hold their own in the set piece, have additional nous at the breakdown (eg: Borthwick/Easter) and do not take a backward step. I still think with a full team we would beat Sarries, even if they had Barritt and Farrell back. Quins are a different proposition. As well as fronting up and more than holding their own, they have 2 or 3 games they can play. They can arm wrestle if required, they can play a forward based off-loading game and if that doesn't work, they can play wide - all pretty damn successfully. It helps to have Evans orchestrating the whole operation, and even when he's out they bring it Botica who holds his own. Someone as influential as Robshaw departs for 2 months, it's not a problem, someone else steps up to the mark. It pains me to say it, but the way Quins play from a ruck, passing 2 out...to take the ball away from the point of contact, is great to watch. They move sides around until they find a gap or a weakness. They are patient, they are all comfortable on the ball, they all off-load. More importantly, they know WHEN to off load and when to keep it tight. From 1 to 15, they can all do this. It's effective.

So when playing Quins or Sarries, they are always going to be tight games and we always found a way to win, but not anymore. Maybe it's due to the confidence they have of beating us at Welford Road and getting more belief, or a combination of that and the fact that they have improved and we haven't improved as much - which is the difference. You look at our last 2 games, we haven't lost by much, but we've lost all the same.

It's easy to make excuses, but they are true to a certain extent, losing the players, injuries etc but the main cause I think it's been our inability to progress over the last 3 years when the others have. Even the other sides are tough nuts to crack now, more organised, bigger, better set piece etc - the 40 point thrashings appear to have gone. Every game appears to be tight. We built a dynasty with a young side and kept those players and haven't adequately replaced all of them - I'm talking of Johnson, Kay, Back, Corry, Healey, Alesana Tuilagi to name 6. These type of players don't come along that often.

There's some options, a change of coach to bring new ideas, perhaps with Cockers focusing on keeping our tradition for scrummage/forward play. Then there's the option of focusing on the Academy and writing off a few years to bring them through and hope we can build a side like Quins. What we don't want to do is go down the Bath/Wasps route of a few years ago of bringing in journeymen who don't want to buy into the Tigers way and who haven't got the required commitment to be at our great club. I know it's wrong to name individual players, but Dan Bowden is a good example, clearly a talented individual, great skils etc but just doesn't (for me) fit into the Tigers mould.
sapajo
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6054
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Thank you Richard.....time to move on

Post by sapajo »

RWA wrote:There are some concerns here. The Tigers of some of last season and certainly 2 season prior to that just had too much power for other sides. As well as the usual superb set piece, we just wore sides down and we rolled over sides, even the better teams were beaten in the last 20 minutes. You could argue that we were a step ahead of the others, who just couldn't cope with us. So take Sarries and Quins. Like or loathe them, they have recruited well, either the SA route for Saracens or the Academy (and Nick Evans) for Quins. Now both do not get bullied by Tigers. They hold their own in the set piece, have additional nous at the breakdown (eg: Borthwick/Easter) and do not take a backward step. I still think with a full team we would beat Sarries, even if they had Barritt and Farrell back. Quins are a different proposition. As well as fronting up and more than holding their own, they have 2 or 3 games they can play. They can arm wrestle if required, they can play a forward based off-loading game and if that doesn't work, they can play wide - all pretty damn successfully. It helps to have Evans orchestrating the whole operation, and even when he's out they bring it Botica who holds his own. Someone as influential as Robshaw departs for 2 months, it's not a problem, someone else steps up to the mark. It pains me to say it, but the way Quins play from a ruck, passing 2 out...to take the ball away from the point of contact, is great to watch. They move sides around until they find a gap or a weakness. They are patient, they are all comfortable on the ball, they all off-load. More importantly, they know WHEN to off load and when to keep it tight. From 1 to 15, they can all do this. It's effective.

So when playing Quins or Sarries, they are always going to be tight games and we always found a way to win, but not anymore. Maybe it's due to the confidence they have of beating us at Welford Road and getting more belief, or a combination of that and the fact that they have improved and we haven't improved as much - which is the difference. You look at our last 2 games, we haven't lost by much, but we've lost all the same.

It's easy to make excuses, but they are true to a certain extent, losing the players, injuries etc but the main cause I think it's been our inability to progress over the last 3 years when the others have. Even the other sides are tough nuts to crack now, more organised, bigger, better set piece etc - the 40 point thrashings appear to have gone. Every game appears to be tight. We built a dynasty with a young side and kept those players and haven't adequately replaced all of them - I'm talking of Johnson, Kay, Back, Corry, Healey, Alesana Tuilagi to name 6. These type of players don't come along that often.

There's some options, a change of coach to bring new ideas, perhaps with Cockers focusing on keeping our tradition for scrummage/forward play. Then there's the option of focusing on the Academy and writing off a few years to bring them through and hope we can build a side like Quins. What we don't want to do is go down the Bath/Wasps route of a few years ago of bringing in journeymen who don't want to buy into the Tigers way and who haven't got the required commitment to be at our great club. I know it's wrong to name individual players, but Dan Bowden is a good example, clearly a talented individual, great skils etc but just doesn't (for me) fit into the Tigers mould.
Many of us have repeatedly expressed our concern that our great club has not evolved our style of play to compete with our competitors who have stolen the march on us and as a result we continue to fall prey to our competition and fail at the final hurdle. :smt009

Fact is we are no longer top dog, the supporters know it, but it would appear that the Tigers Board and the team management either do not and/or worse are ambivalent. :smt018

This begs the question just what will it take for this untenable situation to be now finally be urgently addressed? The cynic in me thinks that providing the cash still keeps flowing through the gate and tills nothing will change.
The optomist in me thinks that this may at last be the season when the board and the management finally wake up and smell the coffee. I live in hope :smt023
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity
Post Reply