mauger not starting

captain_insaino · Post by **captain_insaino** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 3:43 pm

mauger has failed a late fitness test and will not start
just heard on tv

WhitecapTiger · Post by **WhitecapTiger** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 7:21 pm

Shame Mauger didn't play today, with all the gaps Glaws were leaving on the pitch I think he would've exploited them far more than DH did in the IC channel, then I think the score/result would've been far more comfortable, and a truer reflection of our dominance in terms of possession and field position.

But if he was injured, not up to fitness, then it was the right decision, and we can welcome him back into the line for the LIrish game at Welford road next week.

Darc Tiger · Post by **Darc Tiger** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 7:27 pm

His replacement Matt Smith had a quite game. Didnt do anything exciting, but was very sound in defense and was enthusiastic throughout. Tom Youngs was quite impressive at 12. More effective than Hipkiss.

We did miss Mauger though. Hope its nothing serious, and he will be back next week.

gimme · Post by **gimme** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:04 pm

its amazing ! the bloke doesn`t even play and gets rave revues,. whats it all about?
Look at the team that did the business today, not the one that didn`t,

Darc Tiger · Post by **Darc Tiger** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:10 pm

gimme wrote:its amazing ! the bloke doesn`t even play and gets rave revues,. whats it all about?
Look at the team that did the business today, not the one that didn`t,

We missed penetration from our centres. Hipkiss had a few flashes, but Matt Smith was fairly anonymous in attack.

Mauger would have jinked through and opened up plenty of gaps in a weakened glos defense. He has the rugby brain and awareness to spot and exploit these oppotunities.

Tom Youngs looked better at 12 than Hipkiss did. Lots of power and breaking the gainline the majority of the ball he received.

gman · Post by **gman** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:11 pm

If glaws had been more clinical we might not have done the job. They wasted so many chances.

Where is erinle is he injured?

gimme · Post by **gimme** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:18 pm

Darc Tiger,. I reckon you`re after blood, what a great win by the players involved, do you reckon any of the other injured Tigers could have done what he didn`t do also ?

Darc Tiger · Post by **Darc Tiger** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:20 pm

gimme wrote:Darc Tiger,. I reckon you`re after blood, what a great win by the players involved, do you reckon any of the other injured Tigers could have done what he didn`t do also ?

Im sorry, but i didnt quite understand the question.

WhitecapTiger · Post by **WhitecapTiger** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:34 pm

Gimme

I for one am not giving anyone rave revues.....

Merely commenting that, IN MY OPINION, Mauger's superior (than Hipkiss, Matt Smith or Tom Young's - and theirs are by no means bad!) rugby brain MAY have exploited the gaps a little more than we did today.

It was meant as a good sign for the future, not as condemnation and/or damnation of the players selected today, who did a good, sorry, better than good job, but realistically wouldn't have been there IF Mauger had started. Darc Tiger is correct, in my opinion, we did lack effective penetration from our centres today, but hey, it's the first game of the season and as you rightly said a great result, if not the finished performance, it will be by the end of the season though.

Snorbins · Post by **Snorbins** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:42 pm

[quote="gman"]If glaws had been more clinical we might not have done the job. They wasted so many chances.

Just remember its only a game! And Glaws don't win the ones that matter.

gimme · Post by **gimme** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:43 pm

young Smith stepped into the cauldron at the last minute and stood up, nice to give star billing to the guy he replaced...nice one, I`m sure he`ll be delighted

Darc Tiger · Post by **Darc Tiger** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:52 pm

gimme wrote:young Smith stepped into the cauldron at the last minute and stood up, nice to give star billing to the guy he replaced...nice one, I`m sure he`ll be delighted

As i have said in another thread, Matt Smith was very solid in defense but I feel was fairly anonymous in attack. That and the fact that our centres where ineffective at slicing through a gap or making half breaks. It was more crash ball, which thankfully worked out in the end, especially with Tom Youngs.

In summary, its what I said before, our centres lacked penetration today.

Crivvens · Post by **Crivvens** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:57 pm

I agree, the centres did well, especially defensively, but lacked a penetrative edge which I feel Mauger would have given us.
Was impressed with Tom Youngs when he came in at 12 though, looked a player in the same physical mould of Hipkiss, big and strong. Matt Smith did well enough but was pretty anonymous for large parts of the game.

WhitecapTiger · Post by **WhitecapTiger** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 9:03 pm

I don't recall Matt Smith playing in the IC centre channel today, which my original remark was about, something that it would appear you seem to have maybe missed, no mention of Matt Smith being poor either - I thought he had a decent game, albeit more defensively than attacking.

The topic was Mauger related, hence the comments about Mauger being missing.

Tom Youngs was a strong runner when he came on, and had some fantastic ball carries, and did his bit admirably when required in defence, but he did also get stupidly caught out entering the ruck from the side and, on one occasion that stands out in my mind, from the opposite side to our 'gate', right under the ref's nose, maybe it was a tactic to slow the game near the end maybe not.

I think it's a shame you're on what seems to be an anti-Mauger crusade, our young guys can learn so much from him, and they will, making them even better players than they already are, but he's not here just to teach, that's a by product of him being here - and a welcome one in my book, he's here to play and I for one want to see him doing that as often as possible.

Guess we won't agree on this, but at least that's good for debate!

Darc Tiger · Post by **Darc Tiger** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 9:08 pm

WhitecapTiger wrote:I think it's a shame you're on what seems to be an anti-Mauger crusade, our young guys can learn so much from him, and they will, making them even better players than they already are, but he's not here just to teach, that's a by product of him being here - and a welcome one in my book, he's here to play and I for one want to see him doing that as often as possible.

In an interviews with Flood and Mauger pre season, they both praised mauger for his influence in training and how he is always helping them with their game and how he is very approachable when you want to ask him something.

A very valuable member of the team on AND off the pitch it seems.