The Play Offs...

[Scott1]

for a Quins/Sale final!

[kk20gb30]

Bristol virtually full strength for semi - only two missing from squad (maybe tactical ???)

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/rug ... va-5536931

[chris111]

I see Rob Baxter is bleating about the unfairness of Exeter players being suspended for foul play. It’s noteworthy how united coaches are in supporting to clampdown on illegal head contact - until it happens to their players.

I’m pleased that SB seems to be an exception - I certainly don’t recall him publicly criticising suspensions of Tigers players in such circumstances.

[Scott1]

Baxter can talk the way his players torpedo over rucks!

[Offside]

Big players are still hitting with the shoulder first then wrapping the arms whilst standing in an upright position. These are not the cheek to cheek tackles of junior rugby. If the make a “dominant hit” on someone s head it is dangerous. I am pleased to see less of those from Tigers recently and no complaints from the coaches. The big problem area is how to defend with a traditional tackle near the line. Chiefs are successful on that red are and also diving into rucks. They now need to recognise the came may be changing back to the traditional play on your feet and tackle at the waist.

[Chobbsy]

I see Rob Baxter is bleating about the unfairness of Exeter players being suspended for foul play. It’s noteworthy how united coaches are in supporting to clampdown on illegal head contact - until it happens to their players.

I’m pleased that SB seems to be an exception - I certainly don’t recall him publicly criticising suspensions of Tigers players in such circumstances.

Sale are lucky to still have Manu after his no arms hit the other match

[Bunchy]

I see Rob Baxter is bleating about the unfairness of Exeter players being suspended for foul play. It’s noteworthy how united coaches are in supporting to clampdown on illegal head contact - until it happens to their players.

I’m pleased that SB seems to be an exception - I certainly don’t recall him publicly criticising suspensions of Tigers players in such circumstances.

i agree with the SB thought - dignified silence often says much more...

I do however agree a little with RB - not about the sanctions so much, but more the inconsistency of refereeing (including the TMO). However, they would have been much wiser in the Exeter players case to have admitted the crime and therefore got less time.....
I think these law changes are there for players protection and are right - and the players have to do their bit to make the change. the number of cards have reduced significantly since the initial onslaught.

[Noggs]

Rob Baxter has always come across well in front of the cameras but you do see a different side to the man when they don't get the rub of the green.

[chris111]

I see Rob Baxter is bleating about the unfairness of Exeter players being suspended for foul play. It’s noteworthy how united coaches are in supporting to clampdown on illegal head contact - until it happens to their players.

I’m pleased that SB seems to be an exception - I certainly don’t recall him publicly criticising suspensions of Tigers players in such circumstances.

i agree with the SB thought - dignified silence often says much more...

I do however agree a little with RB - not about the sanctions so much, but more the inconsistency of refereeing (including the TMO). However, they would have been much wiser in the Exeter players case to have admitted the crime and therefore got less time.....
I think these law changes are there for players protection and are right - and the players have to do their bit to make the change. the number of cards have reduced significantly since the initial onslaught.

I think “inconsistency” is inevitable - refereeing is about judgement/interpretation of each individual incident and the countless variables that provide the context. I actually think there is too little inconsistency in decision-making now! When I see/hear the referee and TMO working their way through the protocol to determine a sanction it feels like a mechanistic checklist has supplanted experience/judgement. I’d actually like to see them occasionally say “OK, we’ve looked at the required elements (fact, intent, mitigation, exacerbation) and the metrics say ‘Red/Yellow/whatever’…but a single incident has far too many variables to be reduced to a simple checklist, so our decision, based on the protocols + our years of experience getting a feel for the full context of similar incidents our decision is ‘X’”.

[Scott1]

Rob Baxter has always come across well in front of the cameras but you do see a different side to the man when they don't get the rub of the green.

Yes,I’ve noticed that a few times. I’m sure he got caught out once on a ref mic or something too which showed a different side to him.

[jgriffin]

Rob Baxter has always come across well in front of the cameras but you do see a different side to the man when they don't get the rub of the green.

Yes,I’ve noticed that a few times. I’m sure he got caught out once on a ref mic or something too which showed a different side to him.

You don't get where he's been, and face down Tony Rowe a couple of years ago, without being a ruthless SOB.

[LE18]

I see Rob Baxter is bleating about the unfairness of Exeter players being suspended for foul play. It’s noteworthy how united coaches are in supporting to clampdown on illegal head contact - until it happens to their players.

I’m pleased that SB seems to be an exception - I certainly don’t recall him publicly criticising suspensions of Tigers players in such circumstances.

i agree with the SB thought - dignified silence often says much more...

I do however agree a little with RB - not about the sanctions so much, but more the inconsistency of refereeing (including the TMO). However, they would have been much wiser in the Exeter players case to have admitted the crime and therefore got less time.....
I think these law changes are there for players protection and are right - and the players have to do their bit to make the change. the number of cards have reduced significantly since the initial onslaught.

I think “inconsistency” is inevitable - refereeing is about judgement/interpretation of each individual incident and the countless variables that provide the context. I actually think there is too little inconsistency in decision-making now! When I see/hear the referee and TMO working their way through the protocol to determine a sanction it feels like a mechanistic checklist has supplanted experience/judgement. I’d actually like to see them occasionally say “OK, we’ve looked at the required elements (fact, intent, mitigation, exacerbation) and the metrics say ‘Red/Yellow/whatever’…but a single incident has far too many variables to be reduced to a simple checklist, so our decision, based on the protocols + our years of experience getting a feel for the full context of similar incidents our decision is ‘X’”.

Chris that would work fine if all refs had the same level of skill/experience but they don't so they have to stick with the format as laid down in the Laws.

[Old Hob]

Exactly. Like our courts, referees adjudicate according to law not justice.

[kk20gb30]

Semi final Preview provided by former England 7's Captain Ollie Phillips :

https://www.cityam.com/ollie-phillips-w ... mi-finals/

[Bunchy]

I see Rob Baxter is bleating about the unfairness of Exeter players being suspended for foul play. It’s noteworthy how united coaches are in supporting to clampdown on illegal head contact - until it happens to their players.

I’m pleased that SB seems to be an exception - I certainly don’t recall him publicly criticising suspensions of Tigers players in such circumstances.

i agree with the SB thought - dignified silence often says much more...

I do however agree a little with RB - not about the sanctions so much, but more the inconsistency of refereeing (including the TMO). However, they would have been much wiser in the Exeter players case to have admitted the crime and therefore got less time.....
I think these law changes are there for players protection and are right - and the players have to do their bit to make the change. the number of cards have reduced significantly since the initial onslaught.

I think “inconsistency” is inevitable - refereeing is about judgement/interpretation of each individual incident and the countless variables that provide the context. I actually think there is too little inconsistency in decision-making now! When I see/hear the referee and TMO working their way through the protocol to determine a sanction it feels like a mechanistic checklist has supplanted experience/judgement. I’d actually like to see them occasionally say “OK, we’ve looked at the required elements (fact, intent, mitigation, exacerbation) and the metrics say ‘Red/Yellow/whatever’…but a single incident has far too many variables to be reduced to a simple checklist, so our decision, based on the protocols + our years of experience getting a feel for the full context of similar incidents our decision is ‘X’”.

Yeah - very fair and well made point. There HAS to be some interpretation.........