Tigers v Scarlets

[Soggypitch]

The official attendance that came up on the big screen was 18,000 +

Have to say it felt like two thirds full to me so that would be about right, 12000 would be less than half full which is not how I saw the crowd.

[WhitecapTiger]

The official attendance that came up on the big screen was 18,000 +

Have to say it felt like two thirds full to me so that would be about right, 12000 would be less than half full which is not how I saw the crowd.

Official attendance (or tickets sold before I get corrected...) on the big screen and epcr site was 18832 and I agree on the 2/3 full 'feel', maybe a little less and the terrace seemed to have lots of larger gaps - but certainly not as low as 12k, would be surprised if it was that low.

[Mark62]

Re- Attendance at the Game . A steward told a friend of mine that the actual attendance was 12,042 - not good .

The result of 3 things:

1. Performance on the pitch. Hopefully some who stayed away will be encouraged to attend after the way we played on Friday.

2. The game was televised. With television companies dictating kick off times I fear attendances will continue to suffer except for the really big games like Saints, Bath, post group stage European games.

3. Friday night. It's difficult for supporters who travel from further afield or rely on public transport or have young families. Why bother making the effort when you can watch the game on the telly?

Another potential factor is that I Leicester half term spreads across 2 weeks with the county having last week off and the city this

[JP14]

Not for much longer thankfully Mark62, I believe Leicester City and Leicestershire schools will have the same half terms next year.

[Mark62]

Not for much longer thankfully Mark62, I believe Leicester City and Leicestershire schools will have the same half terms next year.

At last common sense prevails

[mightymouse]

not enforcing the collapsed scrum rule :that would be an interesting ruling. because not only would it mean that it legalise cheating that imasculates the scrum which is annoying enough, but it also legalise the most potentially dangerous act on a rugby field. You would in practice be legalising the ability of one player to catostrophically Injure or possibly even kill another. That makes and even bigger farce out of the current laws referees are being forced to apply making tackling a red card lottery.

[voice of the crumbie]

not enforcing the collapsed scrum rule :that would be an interesting ruling. because not only would it mean that it legalise cheating that imasculates the scrum which is annoying enough, but it also legalise the most potentially dangerous act on a rugby field. You would in practice be legalising the ability of one player to catostrophically Injure or possibly even kill another. That makes and even bigger farce out of the current laws referees are being forced to apply making tackling a red card lottery.

+1

Tigers know only too well what can happen with collapsed scrums given the tragic circumstances of Matt Hampson's injury and that was in a practice session. So in a match situation the competitive edge of two engaging front rows makes collapsing all the more dangerous. If the powers that be really are concerned about player welfare then they must not allow collapsed scrums to go unpunished. I'd like to see an automatic yellow card applied to any team or player that collapses 3 times in succession following a warning after the 2nd collapse.

[mol2]

Quite, an accidental collapsed scrum can be catastrophic, to legitimise collapsing it as a way of negating superior opposition would be reckless.

[4071]

Glad to see Wells getting a lot of love on here.

It's amazing that he's racked up so many appearances for so few minutes played. For several seasons now, he's seemed to be considered a permanent a bench option, regardless of how well he's performed in matches.

He's really strong at the breakdown - almost an extra flanker, getting hands on the ball despite his height - and he's consistently useful in the lineout and open play. But he always ends up back on the bench and coming on for just 10-15 minutes at a time. I like that we have other options at the moment but are still giving the lad a chance to keep the starting spot. It's about time.

I hope he is also considered a starter even when (if) we have all five front-line locks available.



The great thing about GM giving the home-grown guys a real run in the side is that we are developing players and building depth to allow squad rotation as the season drags on. Something Saracens have been doing so well to great effect.

It also builds loyalty and a commitment to the club. Saracens find it easy to hold on to talented second-string players as they know they will still get plenty of starts, even in the big games. I feel that GM's selection policies - with the current squad we have - will take us further in that direction.

Even if we aren't going to be winning any trophies just yet....

[4071]

Quite, an accidental collapsed scrum can be catastrophic, to legitimise collapsing it as a way of negating superior opposition would be reckless.

And in theory a deliberately collapsed scrum should still be penalized. This rule about getting the ball out of a collapsed scrum is to prevent the need for resets in the event of a no-blame collapse.

But I think it does have the unintended consequence of giving teams the option to collapse and giving refs the option to not penalize. Some refs seem to have an objection to rewarding the stronger scrum.

[loretta]

With a bit more research, I can now add that the refs can play advantage at a collapsed scrum. In 2016, law 8.3d was removed, thus allowing advantage. Can only find it on the WRU site.

http://www.wru.co.uk/eng/news/37073.php#.W812SRrTWhA

[Soggypitch]

Quite, an accidental collapsed scrum can be catastrophic, to legitimise collapsing it as a way of negating superior opposition would be reckless.

And in theory a deliberately collapsed scrum should still be penalized. This rule about getting the ball out of a collapsed scrum is to prevent the need for resets in the event of a no-blame collapse.

But I think it does have the unintended consequence of giving teams the option to collapse and giving refs the option to not penalize. Some refs seem to have an objection to rewarding the stronger scrum.

I agree. One easy way to prevent all the re-sets (and allowance of collapses) may be to stop the clock immediately the first scrum goes down and is re-set, then re-start it again when the ball comes out of the re-set scrum. That will take the pressure off the ref to keep the game flowing and stop time wasting in the scrum.

[mol2]

I agree with that.
If the scrum is called at the end of the half or end of them match - play continues until the scrum is completed.

I would be more than happy for he clock to revert to the time of put in until a proper scrum occurs. Too often a significant amount of the game is used by one side of the other by deliberately faffing around at the scrum to kill time.

Perhaps the clock should stop at 30s if play has not restarted be that at a scrum, line out or kick (penalty or conversion).
Am I alone in being annoyed at the overly long preparation to kick taken by some players. 30s should be ample unless the kicker is receiving treatment.

There again I don't agree with drinks being brought onto the field as this is another time waster.

[BFG]

I would hope that everyone realises that front rows are taught how to collapse, even when dominant and going forward some will deliberately collapse to buy a penalty and make his opponent look bad in the hope that the penalties will rack up and they might get a man sin binned.
It's extremely difficult for the refs to differentiate at times and so rather than guess which is often what they have to do anyway they just want the game to play on if possible, which it is if the ball is at the back.
I chatted not so long ago with one ref who basically admitted to me that if the team who had the put in were under pressure and the opposition had made no attempt to hook and the resulting scrum collapsed then he would allow the side putting in to play on if the ball was at the back with no sanction against them for the collapse, otherwise he'd be giving penalties against the head for both sides constantly and he could find a reason at almost every scrum to do so.

[Tigerbeat]

There again I don't agree with drinks being brought onto the field as this is another time waster.

Drinks are only allowed, officially, to be taken when there is a break in play and the clock has stopped so this does not waste playing time.