Tigers v Worcester

[strawclearer]

Apart from that, imho, we have a better squad and a better structure to our play than 12 months ago. Onwards and upwards!

That might well be true, but they're only a guff away from mid-table mediocrity, so it just goes to show how far the team had fallen.

Given that teams 2 to 5 in the Premiership have each won 6 out of 9 matches so far - and Exeter have won only one more at 7/9 - I'd suggest that's true of all teams.

[Roly]

Apart from that, imho, we have a better squad and a better structure to our play than 12 months ago. Onwards and upwards!

That might well be true, but they're only a guff away from mid-table mediocrity, so it just goes to show how far the team had fallen.

Given that teams 2 to 5 in the Premiership have each won 6 out of 9 matches so far - and Exeter have won only one more at 7/9 - I'd suggest that's true of all teams.

True - AND the other teams don't have Manu Tuilagi - so Tigers are safe.....

[kend]

Mid table beckons if we are not careful

Blimey. And there I was thinking I'd watched a game typical of the international window where one side is missing lots of players and the other hardly any.

two failings which I believe made the difference:

1. Harrison and Ford both had very poor games. I can't believe he was voted MotM but Sam won't have many poor performances during a season; Joe has yet to convince me he's good enough for a Premiership 10. If your 9 and 10 don't 'click' on the day, you're unlikely to get a result.

2. Donncha O'Callaghan 'managed' a poor ref far better than Sam. (I suggested to DO'C at half-time that he should swap shirts with the ref - others in the tunnel made similar suggestions - the grin on his face said everything!)

I agree with you about the 9/10/12 axis clicking, but IMHO Harrison sometimes looked poor because Worcester stopped him playing. Warriors were very good on the day and denied Tigers space. The ref threatened to card O'Callaghan if he continued 'in his ear', so it might not have been that effective. That said, any side that concedes 16 penalties to 1 will consider themselves fortunate to have won. And only had one card.

I thought the key problem was the error count, which was across the team. Even in conceding 5 tries Tigers should still have won, but lack of 5 metre composure/accuracy cost them. The other factor IMHO is lack of a real line breaker in the centres. Some might be sceptical of Manu and whether he will return as the same player, but he does have the ability to misshape the defence, might not make the clean breaks, but he creates the space for others. He will make a difference if he can get back to form.

[LE18]

If you take 5/6 players out of your best side, you are bound to have a degree of fall off in your overall performance, Worcester had a more or less full side out, we did not!

I have a revolutionary suggestion as to how to promote equality/fairness on International days, this is it.:-

if Team A loses 2 props, 1 Scrum Half, 1 Fly Half, 1 Winger, to the Home nation, ie England, (not sure whether to include other nations or not), but to compensate for this Team B is not allowed to select their 1st choice players to match these positions. This applies to all teams where the National body selects a number of players thus depriving/weakening a club in an AP match and thus promotes fairness to that deprived club. I do realise that there may be a debate as to who is the 1st choice in that position but at least its an attempt to promote fairness.

Discuss?

[Hinckley Bob]

Both on paper and in reality, I'm not convinced that was a poor Tigers side we put out on Saturday - far from it. Given that roughly half of our 1st XV was away, that was a pretty solid team which should have secured at least 4 points.

I confess I haven't felt able to watch a recording so, from my seat in the Crumbie, I saw two failings which I believe made the difference:

1. Harrison and Ford both had very poor games. I can't believe he was voted MotM but Sam won't have many poor performances during a season; Joe has yet to convince me he's good enough for a Premiership 10. If your 9 and 10 don't 'click' on the day, you're unlikely to get a result.

2. Donncha O'Callaghan 'managed' a poor ref far better than Sam. (I suggested to DO'C at half-time that he should swap shirts with the ref - others in the tunnel made similar suggestions - the grin on his face said everything!)

Apart from that, imho, we have a better squad and a better structure to our play than 12 months ago. Onwards and upwards!

I have to agree with most of that and, though I don't like criticising individuals, Joe needs to learn from his brother that you sometimes have to take a hit before shipping the ball on in order to create openings. I doubt that he was tackled all day as he just passed the ball down the line without testing the defence.

[TigerCam]

If you take 5/6 players out of your best side, you are bound to have a degree of fall off in your overall performance, Worcester had a more or less full side out, we did not!

I have a revolutionary suggestion as to how to promote equality/fairness on International days, this is it.:-

if Team A loses 2 props, 1 Scrum Half, 1 Fly Half, 1 Winger, to the Home nation, ie England, (not sure whether to include other nations or not), but to compensate for this Team B is not allowed to select their 1st choice players to match these positions. This applies to all teams where the National body selects a number of players thus depriving/weakening a club in an AP match and thus promotes fairness to that deprived club. I do realise that there may be a debate as to who is the 1st choice in that position but at least its an attempt to promote fairness.

Discuss?

While it may be true that there may be a degree or two of 'fall-off' when the Ints are away, it is up to the the coaches and remaining players to front up and continue to perform well and win the games. There was no excuse for the Tigers losing to the Wuss. The Tigers have leaked 9 trys in 2 games and IMO there must be some glaring issues of defence that need an immediate fix (not a sticking plaster either). IMO to make it a level playing field for all clubs over the International periods, and more importantly for the supporters that pay good money to see the best XV that can be available for every AP match, the AP should be stopped and replaced with AW games or something similar?

[LE18]

If you take 5/6 players out of your best side, you are bound to have a degree of fall off in your overall performance, Worcester had a more or less full side out, we did not!

I have a revolutionary suggestion as to how to promote equality/fairness on International days, this is it.:-

if Team A loses 2 props, 1 Scrum Half, 1 Fly Half, 1 Winger, to the Home nation, ie England, (not sure whether to include other nations or not), but to compensate for this Team B is not allowed to select their 1st choice players to match these positions. This applies to all teams where the National body selects a number of players thus depriving/weakening a club in an AP match and thus promotes fairness to that deprived club. I do realise that there may be a debate as to who is the 1st choice in that position but at least its an attempt to promote fairness.

Discuss?

While it may be true that there may be a degree or two of 'fall-off' when the Ints are away, it is up to the the coaches and remaining players to front up and continue to perform well and win the games. There was no excuse for the Tigers losing to the Wuss. The Tigers have leaked 9 trys in 2 games and IMO there must be some glaring issues of defence that need an immediate fix (not a sticking plaster either). IMO to make it a level playing field for all clubs over the International periods, and more importantly for the supporters that pay good money to see the best XV that can be available for every AP match, the AP should be stopped and replaced with AW games or something similar?

So you don't like my idea then? But if the AP has to be played on the same day then surely something needs to be done to promote equality?

[mol2]

Our defensive was exposed.
Was it the structure itself or was that individual players could not play the roles that was needed to make the structure work?

For me there were some players who didn't make meaningful tackles that stopped the player or didn't make the tackle.

Also the forwards lacked the physicality when the opposition forwards were doing the "hard yards" work so more players were needed to stop each move.

As a result of both of these our defence was very narrow and then easily exposed when they moved the ball wide.

(When we move it wide - it was essentially a series of diagonal passes without committing tacklers, let alone breaking a tackle and making holes for the others to run in to.)

[ourla]

People,

It's Friday. There is another game on tomorrow. Time to move on.

[ellis9]

If you take 5/6 players out of your best side, you are bound to have a degree of fall off in your overall performance, Worcester had a more or less full side out, we did not!

I have a revolutionary suggestion as to how to promote equality/fairness on International days, this is it.:-

if Team A loses 2 props, 1 Scrum Half, 1 Fly Half, 1 Winger, to the Home nation, ie England, (not sure whether to include other nations or not), but to compensate for this Team B is not allowed to select their 1st choice players to match these positions. This applies to all teams where the National body selects a number of players thus depriving/weakening a club in an AP match and thus promotes fairness to that deprived club. I do realise that there may be a debate as to who is the 1st choice in that position but at least its an attempt to promote fairness.

Discuss?

One of the worst ideas ever!

[ellis9]

If you take 5/6 players out of your best side, you are bound to have a degree of fall off in your overall performance, Worcester had a more or less full side out, we did not!

I have a revolutionary suggestion as to how to promote equality/fairness on International days, this is it.:-

if Team A loses 2 props, 1 Scrum Half, 1 Fly Half, 1 Winger, to the Home nation, ie England, (not sure whether to include other nations or not), but to compensate for this Team B is not allowed to select their 1st choice players to match these positions. This applies to all teams where the National body selects a number of players thus depriving/weakening a club in an AP match and thus promotes fairness to that deprived club. I do realise that there may be a debate as to who is the 1st choice in that position but at least its an attempt to promote fairness.

Discuss?

While it may be true that there may be a degree or two of 'fall-off' when the Ints are away, it is up to the the coaches and remaining players to front up and continue to perform well and win the games. There was no excuse for the Tigers losing to the Wuss. The Tigers have leaked 9 trys in 2 games and IMO there must be some glaring issues of defence that need an immediate fix (not a sticking plaster either). IMO to make it a level playing field for all clubs over the International periods, and more importantly for the supporters that pay good money to see the best XV that can be available for every AP match, the AP should be stopped and replaced with AW games or something similar?

So you don't like my idea then? But if the AP has to be played on the same day then surely something needs to be done to promote equality?

We can talk about equality when all clubs abide by the salary cap. Until then, why bother.