Tigers v Glasgow

[Soggypitch]

Our problem is not just defence, it's a lack of forward penetration and fire power.

Sarries have it in abundance, their performance away in Toulon on Saturday was magnificent (particularly the first half), the Vunipola brothers making the hard yards etc...Our best ball carriers were all let go in the summer and not replaced.

Comparing the two packs man for man, yes they are probably better over all, but not by that much, therefore the fact there is such a huge gulf between the two sets of forwards presently, must come down to coaching/man management/self belief - buck stops with the coaches.

I don't know if it's true that Cockers and Mauger don't get on, I also don't know if it's true that the players have lost confidence in one or both of them, but if that is the case something needs to happen quickly.

I don't know what, because I don't have the inside knowledge, but if I were Peter Toms I would be asking to see most of the senior players on a one to one basis and try to find out their take on the situation ASAP!

[SirGordonRamsey]

Sarries defence is very simple in that they blitz and try and push attackers back over the game line halting any momentum, Jack Nowell said before their game aginst Sarries they thought if you can get past 8 phases they blitz becomes to tiring and holes appear.

Those saying that its more of a player issue than a coaching issue (Hansen) must be bonkers. We've lost so many points through gaurd positions, even players at the lowest standards players know to guard around rucks (fat old props favourite spot), and your saying the highest standard of rugby players in our country are not defending those position out of error, may aswell be in pub league if thats the case.

Anticipating D is awful, you're asking defenders to think too much and over-thinking leads to big gaps and easy points losses as we've seen.

They didnt ask Hansen to leave for no reason.

[BFG]

Sarries defence is very simple in that they blitz and try and push attackers back over the game line halting any momentum, Jack Nowell said before their game aginst Sarries they thought if you can get past 8 phases they blitz becomes to tiring and holes appear.

Those saying that its more of a player issue than a coaching issue (Hansen) must be bonkers. We've lost so many points through gaurd positions, even players at the lowest standards players know to guard around rucks (fat old props favourite spot), and your saying the highest standard of rugby players in our country are not defending those position out of error, may aswell be in pub league if thats the case.

Anticipating D is awful, you're asking defenders to think too much and over-thinking leads to big gaps and easy points losses as we've seen.

They didnt ask Hansen to leave for no reason.

I think you questioned the situation perfectly in your own comment regarding the highest standard of rugby players and then asking defenders to think too much and over-thinking leads to big gaps.
If you have to think too much then you are not the highest standard of player.
The bottom line is Leicester beat Worcester 34-13 one week and then lost to Glasgow 42-13 the next, spanked weaker players, spanked by stronger players.
You can put any system you like in place, it's success or failure will ultimately depend on the quality of the players being asked to do it.

[4071]

Sarries defence is very simple in that they blitz and try and push attackers back over the game line halting any momentum, Jack Nowell said before their game aginst Sarries they thought if you can get past 8 phases they blitz becomes to tiring and holes appear.

Those saying that its more of a player issue than a coaching issue (Hansen) must be bonkers. We've lost so many points through gaurd positions, even players at the lowest standards players know to guard around rucks (fat old props favourite spot), and your saying the highest standard of rugby players in our country are not defending those position out of error, may aswell be in pub league if thats the case.

Anticipating D is awful, you're asking defenders to think too much and over-thinking leads to big gaps and easy points losses as we've seen.

They didnt ask Hansen to leave for no reason.

I think you questioned the situation perfectly in your own comment regarding the highest standard of rugby players and then asking defenders to think too much and over-thinking leads to big gaps.
If you have to think too much then you are not the highest standard of player.
The bottom line is Leicester beat Worcester 34-13 one week and then lost to Glasgow 42-13 the next, spanked weaker players, spanked by stronger players.
You can put any system you like in place, it's success or failure will ultimately depend on the quality of the players being asked to do it.

Simplistic. And wrong.

Any pre-match head-to-head match up, even by Glasgow fans, would have had Tigers as favourites simply because we do have better individual players.

The players are not the problem. They have the quality. We aren't spending up to the cap on a team of donkeys. We have top-flight players, we have players who are - on their day - amongst the best in the world. And they are dramatically underperforming for Tigers.

[TigerCam]

Sarries defence is very simple in that they blitz and try and push attackers back over the game line halting any momentum, Jack Nowell said before their game aginst Sarries they thought if you can get past 8 phases they blitz becomes to tiring and holes appear.

Those saying that its more of a player issue than a coaching issue (Hansen) must be bonkers. We've lost so many points through gaurd positions, even players at the lowest standards players know to guard around rucks (fat old props favourite spot), and your saying the highest standard of rugby players in our country are not defending those position out of error, may aswell be in pub league if thats the case.

Anticipating D is awful, you're asking defenders to think too much and over-thinking leads to big gaps and easy points losses as we've seen.

They didnt ask Hansen to leave for no reason.

I think you questioned the situation perfectly in your own comment regarding the highest standard of rugby players and then asking defenders to think too much and over-thinking leads to big gaps.
If you have to think too much then you are not the highest standard of player.
The bottom line is Leicester beat Worcester 34-13 one week and then lost to Glasgow 42-13 the next, spanked weaker players, spanked by stronger players.
You can put any system you like in place, it's success or failure will ultimately depend on the quality of the players being asked to do it.

Simplistic. And wrong.

Any pre-match head-to-head match up, even by Glasgow fans, would have had Tigers as favourites simply because we do have better individual players.

The players are not the problem. They have the quality. We aren't spending up to the cap on a team of donkeys. We have top-flight players, we have players who are - on their day - amongst the best in the world. And they are dramatically underperforming for Tigers.

I'm not sure that, man for man the individuality of Glasgow players to Tigers is that much different? Glasgow have 13-15 internationals of some standing 3 of which I believe did not play last week. IMO Glasgow were better organised and had their game plan centered around the Tigers frailties to defend and the inability to punch holes into their defence? I believe if the Tigers had two good 8s and offered something better than a 'scramble' defence, that went totally awry in the latter stages of the game, the talent that the Tigers have in quantity and quality will be seen and make all the difference. IMO until these two areas are addressed the Tigers defence will continue to 'leak like a sieve' and losses will continue?

[Big Dai]

Just watching Munster. I fear there is no light at the end of the tunnel.

[fleabane]

What little light there is is the Munster train approaching.

[BFG]

Sarries defence is very simple in that they blitz and try and push attackers back over the game line halting any momentum, Jack Nowell said before their game aginst Sarries they thought if you can get past 8 phases they blitz becomes to tiring and holes appear.

Those saying that its more of a player issue than a coaching issue (Hansen) must be bonkers. We've lost so many points through gaurd positions, even players at the lowest standards players know to guard around rucks (fat old props favourite spot), and your saying the highest standard of rugby players in our country are not defending those position out of error, may aswell be in pub league if thats the case.

Anticipating D is awful, you're asking defenders to think too much and over-thinking leads to big gaps and easy points losses as we've seen.

They didnt ask Hansen to leave for no reason.

I think you questioned the situation perfectly in your own comment regarding the highest standard of rugby players and then asking defenders to think too much and over-thinking leads to big gaps.
If you have to think too much then you are not the highest standard of player.
The bottom line is Leicester beat Worcester 34-13 one week and then lost to Glasgow 42-13 the next, spanked weaker players, spanked by stronger players.
You can put any system you like in place, it's success or failure will ultimately depend on the quality of the players being asked to do it.

Simplistic. And wrong.

Any pre-match head-to-head match up, even by Glasgow fans, would have had Tigers as favourites simply because we do have better individual players.

The players are not the problem. They have the quality. We aren't spending up to the cap on a team of donkeys. We have top-flight players, we have players who are - on their day - amongst the best in the world. And they are dramatically underperforming for Tigers.

In reply to the bold text I think that is a massively overstated comment.
There is no proof that we have the players who are - on their day - amongst the best in the world, apart from Dan Cole as a world class scrummager.
It's only really the belief that the potential exists to be better and given that the team was actually winning at one stage up in Glasgow then that is fair but also the result can't be argued against given the overall performance.
Leicester were actually winning the game against Glasgow, the coaches didn't suddenly run on the pitch and tell the players to start playing rubbish as far as I am aware but the coaches get most of the flak.
The highest quality brings consistency in my opinion and that's why we'd all sign Maro Itoje if we could.
It's a team sport and players and coaches will achieve together.
No team can afford to fill it's books with world class players.
Leicester no doubt have quality, whether they possess enough to compete with the current best or on a level that given their history expects is questionable but the players have just as much to prove as the coaches in my opinion especially given that the coaches put their faith in those players in signing them.

[jgriffin]

I don't think any team could've lived with Munster this weekend. A team possessed.

[Bowden Tiger]

That was Munster of old. At Thomond Park they are still one of the hardest sides to beat in Europe. I think the red card hardened their resolve, and worked against Glasgow.