Tigers v Saints (H) - Saturday 28th January 2023 - KO 14:00

[Dr H Flashman MBE]

Edwards was poor, ponderous and unable to get the ball quickly from ruck or scrum. Our driving maul is a busted flush. Watson did not get ball in hand enough in promising positions, particularly when we had front foot ball in the first 20. Poor all round despite some excellent individual efforts

Yes,what game were some watching regarding Edwards,poor like the majority. And his box kicking especially was awful!

His box kicking was on the money and caused Saints issues. The issue was that we had a tendency to slap the ball back to Saints players and had no plan B. Neither of those were the fault of Edwards, he was told to box kick under the circumstances he did and he put up contestable kicks or kicks that allowed to us to tackle the catcher.

It's not down to him we were a damp squib in attack.

I think is part of the issue. After a few really good contested balls from Law’s box kicking, Saints worked it out and just had a man waiting for the slap back. Didn’t take a Mensa candidate to think, let’s try something different or support Watson or Potter.

[Scott1]

Edwards was poor, ponderous and unable to get the ball quickly from ruck or scrum. Our driving maul is a busted flush. Watson did not get ball in hand enough in promising positions, particularly when we had front foot ball in the first 20. Poor all round despite some excellent individual efforts

Yes,what game were some watching regarding Edwards,poor like the majority. And his box kicking especially was awful!

His box kicking was on the money and caused Saints issues. The issue was that we had a tendency to slap the ball back to Saints players and had no plan B. Neither of those were the fault of Edwards, he was told to box kick under the circumstances he did and he put up contestable kicks or kicks that allowed to us to tackle the catcher.

It's not down to him we were a damp squib in attack.

It’s very 50/50 on him here tbf as I’ve read through. I’m in the poor camp

[Scott1]

One huge positive for me though was some of our dominance on the gainline, smashed them back several times with one man or two. Hurd put some big hits in,he’s growing on me!

[sam16111986]

Yes,what game were some watching regarding Edwards,poor like the majority. And his box kicking especially was awful!

His box kicking was on the money and caused Saints issues. The issue was that we had a tendency to slap the ball back to Saints players and had no plan B. Neither of those were the fault of Edwards, he was told to box kick under the circumstances he did and he put up contestable kicks or kicks that allowed to us to tackle the catcher.

It's not down to him we were a damp squib in attack.

I think is part of the issue. After a few really good contested balls from Law’s box kicking, Saints worked it out and just had a man waiting for the slap back. Didn’t take a Mensa candidate to think, let’s try something different or support Watson or Potter.

Yeah that's fine but not the call of the 20 year old making his Prem debut is it. If his captain or flyhalf are calling for the box kick which is tactic selected by the coaches that's what he's going to deliver. There's literally no point him whipping a pass out to a flyhalf that doesn't want it in that area of the pitch.

For me it was a solid debut. He's not much of a running scrum half but his passing and kicking are accurate and he made a couple of good defensive contributions that stopped promising Saints breaks.

We are suffering the same problem we've had all season, our attacking structure is very basic and relies heavily on our playmaker creating things and calling them during the game. As soon as Pollard went off that started to dry up and Burns didn't look fully fit, which isn't a surprise in his first game back in a few weeks. Had Wells not clattered his own flyhalf we might have managed to win that but without Pollard there's no structure for the team to fall back on. We on rare occasion run a set move but it's rare and late on Simmons then Porter stuffed them up in really poor ways. We've got two attack coaches and back coach at the club but you wouldn't know to watch us play.

[Scott1]

His box kicking was on the money and caused Saints issues. The issue was that we had a tendency to slap the ball back to Saints players and had no plan B. Neither of those were the fault of Edwards, he was told to box kick under the circumstances he did and he put up contestable kicks or kicks that allowed to us to tackle the catcher.

It's not down to him we were a damp squib in attack.

I think is part of the issue. After a few really good contested balls from Law’s box kicking, Saints worked it out and just had a man waiting for the slap back. Didn’t take a Mensa candidate to think, let’s try something different or support Watson or Potter.

Yeah that's fine but not the call of the 20 year old making his Prem debut is it. If his captain or flyhalf are calling for the box kick which is tactic selected by the coaches that's what he's going to deliver. There's literally no point him whipping a pass out to a flyhalf that doesn't want it in that area of the pitch.

For me it was a solid debut. He's not much of a running scrum half but his passing and kicking are accurate and he made a couple of good defensive contributions that stopped promising Saints breaks.

We are suffering the same problem we've had all season, our attacking structure is very basic and relies heavily on our playmaker creating things and calling them during the game. As soon as Pollard went off that started to dry up and Burns didn't look fully fit, which isn't a surprise in his first game back in a few weeks. Had Wells not clattered his own flyhalf we might have managed to win that but without Pollard there's no structure for the team to fall back on. We on rare occasion run a set move but it's rare and late on Simmons then Porter stuffed them up in really poor ways. We've got two attack coaches and back coach at the club but you wouldn't know to watch us play.

Pollard didn’t go off until the 45th minute. We started the game brightly and played heads up rugby. Why did we revert to type way before he went off? Pressure? And whose call was it to? In your opinion

[longlivethecrumbie]

One huge positive for me though was some of our dominance on the gainline, smashed them back several times with one man or two. Hurd put some big hits in,he’s growing on me!

I thought that one of the (few) bright spots was the front row. When you looked at ours v Saints, you'd have thought we'd have got schooled. But, Hurd held his own and put in some good hits in defence. Whitcombe is absolutely solid. He's nowhere near as destructive as Genge, but few props are. For a young guy, he's doing pretty well. Montoya is the one class act across the front three but he can't do it on his own and he was well supported by those two young guys. Just wish someone had bought Hurd a razor for Christmas.....

[TigerFeetSteve]

Tbf I thought given the worries our front row held up well even Richardson when he came on on his weaker side.

[sam16111986]

I think is part of the issue. After a few really good contested balls from Law’s box kicking, Saints worked it out and just had a man waiting for the slap back. Didn’t take a Mensa candidate to think, let’s try something different or support Watson or Potter.

Yeah that's fine but not the call of the 20 year old making his Prem debut is it. If his captain or flyhalf are calling for the box kick which is tactic selected by the coaches that's what he's going to deliver. There's literally no point him whipping a pass out to a flyhalf that doesn't want it in that area of the pitch.

For me it was a solid debut. He's not much of a running scrum half but his passing and kicking are accurate and he made a couple of good defensive contributions that stopped promising Saints breaks.

We are suffering the same problem we've had all season, our attacking structure is very basic and relies heavily on our playmaker creating things and calling them during the game. As soon as Pollard went off that started to dry up and Burns didn't look fully fit, which isn't a surprise in his first game back in a few weeks. Had Wells not clattered his own flyhalf we might have managed to win that but without Pollard there's no structure for the team to fall back on. We on rare occasion run a set move but it's rare and late on Simmons then Porter stuffed them up in really poor ways. We've got two attack coaches and back coach at the club but you wouldn't know to watch us play.

Pollard didn’t go off until the 45th minute. We started the game brightly and played heads up rugby. Why did we revert to type way before he went off? Pressure? And whose call was it to? In your opinion

Yes but we looked occasionally threatening whilst Pollard was on the pitch. Remember he's on his what fifth game with us? With a new 9 and 12 combination or did he play with Porter briefly Vs Sarries?

The revert to type is the attacking foundation and game plan we have, it's fine if that is option A and then there is an option B and in an ideal world an option C as well. Pollard called a few bits as he saw them and we played off him, Burns did for the little wrap around move for Potter's second. It's just a bit reliant on the 10 though. The wingers hold their width, the fullback only joins the line in the 13 channel, support runners don't appear to be a thing for us.

We were better than Saints today but Saints had spent the week working on lineout and maul defence. They were physical in defence (no Dingwall tends to help that) and they had the attacking toolkit to get in the right areas of the field and hold onto the ball. One moment of individual skill was enough as well as our poor discipline to give them the game.

[mol2]

We were not better than Saints today! The score flattered us.
Yes we had better players but did not use that advantage. We couldn’t even get the better of their forwards. They crossed the gain line, we were knocked back.

They did not need to hold on to the ball.

We aimlessly kicked it back to them time after time.

[sapajo]

Thought I was witnessing time travel today to when and how Tigers used to play back under Murphy at our worst. It's like Wiggy is caught in a time loop coaching the old
Sarries kicking game.

[sam16111986]

We were not better than Saints today! The score flattered us.
Yes we had better players but did not use that advantage. We couldn’t even get the better of their forwards. They crossed the gain line, we were knocked back.

They did not need to hold on to the ball.

We aimlessly kicked it back to them time after time.

I mean we smashed them all over the place up front when we defended. They managed some nice interplay for a break or two but our errors were what kept them in the game. Saints didn't really get close to the try line even when they had lineouts in our 22. We gave them 12 easy points from mainly needless penalties.

The kicking wasn't aimless. They kicked in pretty much the same way, it's modern rugby. The difference was they had enough guile in attack so when their forwards went nowhere they could actually offer a threat, we lacked patience in defence and gave away penalties. We only had the spin it wide and look to win a one on one out wide, a tactic that doesn't work nearly as well now Nadolo isn't here. Saints had more patience in defence and with so little creativity it was much easier to target who our ball carrier was going to be.

[westwinds31]

Last year’s success was built on suffocating defence, a driving maul to die for and having some collision winners….Nadolo, Wiese, Montoya, Genge and selected others. Add that with players making metres, it allowed Ford to manipulate retreating and fractured defences.

This year….defence is not as good but still holds up pretty well, with Reffell, Montoya etc still great over the ball. The driving maul has had limited success, clubs have found a way to negate it, so defences are set when the ball comes out. Ball carriers…..Cracknell, Wiese, Montoya, but nowhere near the metres that we gained last year. Ford replacement….Injured, looked good and now concussed. Atkinson/Burns stepped in….not as good.

Edwards….give him a break. It’s his first game.

We’re clearly struggling, but what can you do….work hard to improve. The effort is there, we’re just a bit rudderless. RW is also learning, he can’t all of a sudden become an experienced coach overnight. So we either stick with him and hope things improve or look elsewhere. That’s about the size of it.

[nicmattyg]

Just watched the Wiese foot/ankle incident again on twitter.

It looks bad.

Not sure what he was trying to achieve by his actions other than something nasty. I’ve watched and played the game for many years and never seen/done anything like that to get a player to go to ground….

https://twitter.com/lutherburrell/statu ... IKpNaKDzww

[Tigers86asw]

Just home after long trip. Conclusion;
1) Tigers can have no excuses. We didn’t take our chances and looked blunt in attack.
2) Physically we did not make the ground I was expecting. Very little go forward.
3) We had plenty of pressure but for little reward and our lack of discipline kept them in the game.
4) Edwards kicking was poor first half but definitely improved.
5) Lack of success at the maul is concerning.
6) Simmons was caught out defensively for their try. Showed nativity.
7) Chances at the end- lineout, two dropped balls, tackled into touch- in a one point game you cannot complain when you cough up those chances.
8) We look cooked- such little energy in the team.
9) Martin aside we had no impact from the bench.
10) We have to play with more variety- we are far too predictable.

[CrumblingTerrace]

One huge positive for me though was some of our dominance on the gainline, smashed them back several times with one man or two. Hurd put some big hits in,he’s growing on me!

I thought that one of the (few) bright spots was the front row. When you looked at ours v Saints, you'd have thought we'd have got schooled. But, Hurd held his own and put in some good hits in defence. Whitcombe is absolutely solid. He's nowhere near as destructive as Genge, but few props are. For a young guy, he's doing pretty well. Montoya is the one class act across the front three but he can't do it on his own and he was well supported by those two young guys. Just wish someone had bought Hurd a razor for Christmas.....

They did better than (low) expectations, but Saints has nothing to fear from our scrum. Or lineout. Or maul.

The jury's out for me with Whitcombe. Some games he gets parity, he'll win the odd penalty, but he's not consistent. I haven't seen him properly better his opposite number yet. Plenty of games where you almost don't notice him.

Young lad, plenty of time, needs to find some snarl.