20th Feb 2021 - Home vs Wasps

[OakhamTiger32]

Decent game plan yesterday and the players looked comfortable executing it. These things take time with new combinations. Runners off 9 punching holes and then going a bit wider and using Murimurivalu a lot more. The ball was quicker which meant Wasps couldn’t reset and were on the back foot a lot of the time. Another assured performance at full back from Steward, he looks better every game. Centres working well too. Henry may not be making the right decisions all the time but he’s really improved I think.

The decision to attempt kicks at goal when conditions/kicker were not favourable was poor. To keep doing it lamentable, particularly as 5 points were on offer from our driving game which would have made a significant difference to the table. Other than that, improvements all round.

Agreed. Especially as we were more than 2 converted tries ahead at that stage which makes it even more ridiculous

[johnthegriff]

As in the North/ Adam Thompstone incident a couple of seasons back the fault lies with the jumper flying through the air into a man on the ground who is unable to get out of the way and indeed should be under no obligation to do so. What the laws of the game state is not the point but I firmly believe the laws should be changed, I would definitely ban jumping to catch the ball with feet or knees forward when in the vicinity of other players as this often results in head contact and is dangerous to both the jumper and the man on the ground.
Wiese and Brookes red cards were clear under current interpretation, a year ago they would probably have been no more than a yellow and a year or to before that would not have been remarked upon, it is difficult for players to change the habits of a lifetime when the adrenalin is surging.
Another law of the game I think should be looked at is the " Mark" call, it used to apply anywhere on the pitch and was rightly changed to within the 25 (22) only but why should play stop and a man given a free kick simply because he caught the ball, these days he doesn't even need to be static and making a mark on the pitch.

[Big Dai]

I have been saying for a very long but I will repeat it once again.. there are two law changes that the Law makers must make if they are honestly serious about player safety.
1) They Must sop the handling of the ball on the floor after the tackle it made. We need to revert to the original tackle laws of rugby. Once tackle is made the tacked player and the tackler must immediately let go of the ball when on the floor. After that it is a Ruck and must only be played with the feet. If this was the case the need for this flying hit to clear out the Jackeler would be null and void and the vast amount of injuries would not happen and therefore this ridiculous glut of red cards would reduce significantly
2) They must make illegal this deliberate flying through the air with knees and boots up causing potential danger for themselves and those below them. How we have managed to get to a position where we penalise the poor unsuspecting bloke on the ground who was running after the ball minding his own business is a mystery to me? Instead we allow the far more dangerous act of throwing yourself Into the air knees and boots flying and expect everyone in your path to somehow magically dematerialise. It is a total nonsense

In both these cases we have allowed something dangerous creep into the game and then in order to combat it we have blamed the wrong people for the crime. To me it’s like trying to solve the problem of mugging by telling everyone to stay at home!

Nicely put.... You should have been in the brandy powered session last night. Though perhaps, given the handle, a good malt might have been your choice?

When the ball was on the floor, released on the tackle as you suggest, the call was "Bind up and push". The forwards drove over in a mini scrum and the ball ejected to the 9. (The backs had already ran away from the problem and formed an orderly line in the hope of getting a touch.) Push, not hit, collide or smash. If the problem was not resolved quickly sir award a proper scrum to the side he thought had the advantage. Then we bound together as two opposing units, no hit, and had a pushing contest over the ball. That was put in straight down the tunnel.

Similarly the vocabulary around the tackle has changed to "Hit" and "Collision". What happened to "Tackle"?

The vocabulary of the game itself has erred on the side of the violence, the effects of which we are now striving to control.... Or at least properly direct.

Some properly focused looks back at the roots of the game, when it was played by mere beer swilling mortals rather than these superhuman, superfit Adoni, might prove profitable.

[DingDong]

Well played Tigers, gutsy and committed for 80 mins, getting to be more like the Tigers we want to see

[ads]

I’m not entirely sure who Miss Hanro is, but can I be introduced please ?!

I've heard she's a hooker!

[TigerFeetSteve]

Brandy powered suggestion from posh Richard and I (Very.... The armagnac was strong with us last evening)

The ball must bounce from a kick in play before being played.

The catch on the full is only permitted in the 25 and that must be taken on the ground and a mark made.

A catch on the full outside the 25 will result in a free kick to the enemy... Sorry opposition.

Similarly lifting to receive a kick, or in the line out will be outlawed.

We've heard a lot about head injuries but not much about falling from heights. Falling 5ft or so onto one's back cannot be healthy.

OK.... It's rubbish.... But we've had our say.

Biggest problem for me is that means you aim a high kick off at a shortish bloke and the kicking team has such an advantage regathering.

Accounting for the vagueries of a bouncing egg shaped ball? We thought that might inject a little chaos to proceedings. Ahh well. Back to the drawing board.

Ahh apologies I misread your post, thought it said floor not full... (so no jumping)

[TigerFeetSteve]

I’m not entirely sure who Miss Hanro is, but can I be introduced please ?!

I've heard she's a hooker!

Genuine story, had a friend who's a vicar once at a wedding describe the bride stood between her new husband and her dad as reminding him of a rugby front row with the bride being the short one in the middle, only that wasn't the wording he used, what he said was "looks like a hooker between two props."
Turned out they weren't fans of rugby, it was a good job he used to play lock as it gave him the size to get an explanation out before being thrown out

[ads]

[baz1664]

I still think the punishment of red card is very harsh for a sport where tackling an opposition is constant for 80 minutes, the Wiese clear out happens in lots of games unnoticed, the Brookes tackle was one where Lavanini fell into him and his position was all wrong, there was nothing sinister, as for Liebenberg he was in the impossible position, a player jumping into him, how can he control this or catch him and bring him to the ground safely, concussion and head injuries are something that are part of a high impact game, the advances of specialist treatment is key to identifying prolonged damage of concussions.

[teds]

There is absolutely no argument in the laws of the game for Hanro staying on the pitch. If you're making one, it's through green, white and red-coloured spectacles.

It really sounds to me that you are saying up to Hanro to jump for the ball and try to get to the right height to knee Bassett in the head. When it’s put that way it doesn’t sound so good does it?

As it is, Law 9.12 explicitly prohibits striking another player with the knee. This would be sufficient grounds to penalise Bassett.

[PM76]

One of the best performances yet for me, disappointing not to get the TBP but a focus on winning needs to be the priority in the short term. In the Cockers' years claiming LBPs after poor performances on the road and TBPs at home was something that we were relatively successful at (at least from memory) and I think that is something that will come as the side continues to improve.

Nice to see the backs looking slightly more potent every week. Best performances yet from Green (my MOTM), Brink, Murimurivalu and Moroni for me.

Provided injuries (and perhaps suspensions) don't strike too badly I think we could be looking very strong come April/ May when the England players are embedded back into the side- that said another dire performance next week will probably change my thoughts on that.

Consistency of performance needs to be developed now. I am not suggesting we need to go to Bristol and win, but hopefully we will compete, stay in touch for the majority of the game and not hand the win to the opposition on a plate through simple errors and poor execution (as we did vs. Irish, Quins and Sale).

[Dokie]

As in the North/ Adam Thompstone incident a couple of seasons back the fault lies with the jumper flying through the air into a man on the ground who is unable to get out of the way and indeed should be under no obligation to do so. What the laws of the game state is not the point but I firmly believe the laws should be changed, I would definitely ban jumping to catch the ball with feet or knees forward when in the vicinity of other players as this often results in head contact and is dangerous to both the jumper and the man on the ground.
Wiese and Brookes red cards were clear under current interpretation, a year ago they would probably have been no more than a yellow and a year or to before that would not have been remarked upon, it is difficult for players to change the habits of a lifetime when the adrenalin is surging.
Another law of the game I think should be looked at is the " Mark" call, it used to apply anywhere on the pitch and was rightly changed to within the 25 (22) only but why should play stop and a man given a free kick simply because he caught the ball, these days he doesn't even need to be static and making a mark on the pitch.

Let’s look at this from a different perspective. There have been many posts complaining about us endlessly kicking the ball, often with no apparent purpose. Yet, after Hanrogate yesterday, most posters are suggesting the problem is with the jumping catcher.
However, not allowing the receiver to jump for the ball gives the kicking team an advantage and also opens the likelihood of the catcher being smashed as he takes the ball because he is on the ground.
Most of us would like to see the ball through the hands more, so if there is an advantage, it should be with the receiving team, not the chasers. So, if there was to be a law change here, it would make sense to not allow the chasing team to compete for the kick. Then you wouldn’t have players losing their bearings in the kind of area Hanro was yesterday.
A biproduct may also then be to change the strategy of kick orientated teams to mix up their game more, thus giving us a better spectacle.

[TigerFeetSteve]

I still think the punishment of red card is very harsh for a sport where tackling an opposition is constant for 80 minutes, the Wiese clear out happens in lots of games unnoticed, the Brookes tackle was one where Lavanini fell into him and his position was all wrong, there was nothing sinister, as for Liebenberg he was in the impossible position, a player jumping into him, how can he control this or catch him and bring him to the ground safely, concussion and head injuries are something that are part of a high impact game, the advances of specialist treatment is key to identifying prolonged damage of concussions.

The fact it happens a lot is why there's been a cry for more focus on it, there's pages of threads on it here saying it needs to be stamped out (eg Simmons being taken out vs Cheifs). By the recent red carding vs Wales and over this weekend it's clear that they're taking these more seriously, and now players know this could be red more commonly they will modify the behaviour to remove this.

I also quite like the idea they're trialling in Aus of 20min red card. Ie the penalised player cannot return, but after 20min a sub is allowed on so it doesn't spoil the spectacle. Personally I'd prefer to keep a Red card as is so if something is cynical and dangerous then it is a full red, but where dangerous play took place due to clumsiness I'd be in favour of this punishment.

So I'd have

Cynical but not dangerous/repeated offenses "Yellow" (as current 10min sin bin)

Dangerous but not cynical "Orange" (20min sin bin but original player not allowed to return must be a substitute on at end of the sin bin - citing committee, if it finds that orange card was correct automatically assigns the 50% ban reduction)

Dangerous & Cynical "Red" (as per current red remainder of game a man short, if upheld by citing committee then ban reduction only in exceptional circumstances)

[sam16111986]

I still think the punishment of red card is very harsh for a sport where tackling an opposition is constant for 80 minutes, the Wiese clear out happens in lots of games unnoticed, the Brookes tackle was one where Lavanini fell into him and his position was all wrong, there was nothing sinister, as for Liebenberg he was in the impossible position, a player jumping into him, how can he control this or catch him and bring him to the ground safely, concussion and head injuries are something that are part of a high impact game, the advances of specialist treatment is key to identifying prolonged damage of concussions.

I think the problem is that both the Weise and Brookes incidents are fairly common in the game. If the aim is to bring down concussions and concussion risks then these illegal tackles and clear outs are the place to start.

They've never been legal. Bai was dismissed for dangerous collision with the head Vs Wasps at a breakdown years ago it's not a new thing. Brookes wasn't a tackle it was a cheap shoulder charge. No attempt to wrap and not attempt to bend to make a legitimate tackle. That's not ok, it's cheap, lazy and most of all dangerous. Weise has to use correct technique, if he attempts to wrap both arms it's a yellow and he's back on to finish savaging Wasps in the second half. What he did was reckless and dangerous.

Hanro is the only one I sympathise with because that was purely an accident. The 'victim' created that scenario.

Incidentally I'd have Henry practising his kick offs so they fall over the head of the jumping pod of the opposition to next week. Get our winger to start off the pitch and then on the blindside of the guard behind the pod jump straight through the back of him when going up for the ball. Forwards rarely if ever jump for collecting a kick off...

[johnthegriff]

Dokie, I would suggest that in most cases where a player is jumping and travelling a distance through the air to gather a kick he is in fact chasing a kick by a team mate rather than an opposition kick forward where the ball is coming to him. Liebenberg was not making a tackle just as a few years back Thompstone was not attempting a tackle on North, in both instances the jumping player was endangering himself and the guy he was jumping into. I believe the rules to be wrong and need change,
I recall a match away to Sale when the Shark fullback ran forward leapt into the air and into contact landing head first to the ground. Play stopped, the ref had his hand in his card pocket and we all watched the replay on the big screen to see who was getting the red, it became obvious that the impact had been with another Sale player, had it been a Tiger he would have been off, as it was the ref restarted the game (and I have no idea why) with a penalty to Leicester. A vertical jump to receive the ball is one thing a jump where one player travels yards through the air into another is a danger to all concerned and should be stopped.