Leicester Tigers - 2013/14 Thread

[LondonTiger]

First topic message reminder :

Senior Squad

Props - Ayerza, Balmain, Bristow, Cole, Mulipola, Schuster, Stankovich
Hookers - Briggs, Chuter, Hawkins, Youngs
Locks - Cain, Deacon. De Chaves, Kitchener, Parling, Price, Slater
Back Row - Crane, Croft, Gibson, Mafi, Salvi, Waldrom

Scrum Halves - Harrison, Mele, Steele, Youngs
Outside Half - Flood, Lamb, Williams
Centres - Allen, Bowden, Smith, Tuilagi
Wings - Benjamin, Camacho, Goneva, Morris, Thompstone
Full Back - Hamilton, Tait

Coaches - Cockerill (DoR & Forwards), Blaze (Asst Forwards), Burke (Backs), Murphy (Asst Backs)


Aviva Premiership Fixtures

Sun 8 Sep 14:00 Leicester Tigers   32         Worcester Warriors 15
Sat 14 Sep 15:15 Bath Rugby  27   Leicester Tigers 20
Sat 21 Sep 15:00 Leicester Tigers  33   Newcastle Falcons 6
Sun 29 Sep 14:00 Exeter Chiefs   9   Leicester Tigers  22
Sat 5 Oct 15:15 Leicester Tigers 19   Northampton Saints  19
Sun 27 Oct 14:00 London Wasps 22   Leicester Tigers 12
Sat 2 Nov 17:30 Leicester Tigers  16   Harlequins 23
Sat 23 Nov 15:00 Leicester Tigers 20   London Irish 11
Sat 30 Nov 15:00 Gloucester Rugby 17   Leicester Tigers 22
Sat 21 Dec 15:00 Saracens  49 v   Leicester Tigers 10
Sat 28 Dec 15:00 Leicester Tigers   v   Sale Sharks
Sat 4 Jan 15:00 Leicester Tigers 27  v   Bath Rugby 27
Fri 7 Feb 19:45 Worcester Warriors  22 v   Leicester Tigers 23
Sat 15 Feb 15:00 Leicester Tigers 11  v   Gloucester Rugby  8
Sun 23 Feb 15:00 London Irish  15 v   Leicester Tigers 20
Sun 2 Mar 15:00 Newcastle Falcons  18 v   Leicester Tigers 41
Sat 22 Mar 15:00 Leicester Tigers   45 v   Exeter Chiefs 15
Sat 29 Mar 15:00 Northampton Saints 16  v   Leicester Tigers 22
Sat 12 Apr 15:00 Leicester Tigers   v   London Wasps Welford Road
Sat 19 Apr 15:00 Harlequins   v   Leicester Tigers Twickenham Stoop
Fri 2 May 20:00 Sale Sharks   v   Leicester Tigers Salford City Stadium
Sat 10 May 15:00 Leicester Tigers   v   Saracens Welford Road



Heineken Cup Fixtures

Friday, October 11 8pm Ulster Rugby 22  Leicester Tigers 16
Friday, October 18 8pm Leicester Tigers 34  Benetton Treviso 3
Sunday, December 8 3pm Leicester Tigers 41 Montpellier Herault Rugby 32
Sunday, December 15 4pm (local time) Montpellier Herault Rugby 14  Leicester Tigers 15
10/11/12 January 2014 Benetton Treviso 19 v Leicester Tigers 34
17/18/19 January 2014 Leicester Tigers 19 v Ulster Rugby 22
Saturday, 5th April ASM Clermont Auvergne v Leicester Tigers

[LondonTiger]

Just seen Richard Cockerill has been given a nine match ban for his conduct during the premiership final.  I'd say this is about right.  Had heard rumours of a possible 2 year or even life ban from the touchline so I suppose you could say he's gotten off lightly.  Originally read it as 9 months(!) and thought that would be harsh but just about defensible.  9 matches probably a more sensible length though.

I think a ban is right. 9 matches feels rather long to me - but pehaps is comparable to Hartley's ban? Suggestions of a life ban would have been crazy - as that would have effectively meant a ban from top flight rugby, as the touchline ban usual;ly also means no matchday contact at all with the team.

[tigerleghorn]

Is it fair that Hartley's ban runs through the close season whereas Cocker's is measured in games?

I would suggest that calling a Ref a cheat is a worse crime so why not a t least a 9 match ban too?

[LondonTiger]

Cockers needs to learn that he has to rein his emotions in a bit. Passionate is fine, but abusive is not. this may re-inforce the lesson.


Of course I hope he keeps the passion, and does not resort to the snide comments we see from some coaches.

[HammerofThunor]

Anyone know what he actually said? Without that how can anyone say he got off lightly or was harshly dealt with?

Hartley 'could' be involved with international rugby. Make's it more complicated. I'd rather they just winged it (ie you're probably involved internationally so you will be banned until xx/xx/xx).

[HammerofThunor]

Cockers needs to learn that he has to rein his emotions in a bit. Passionate is fine, but abusive is not. this may re-inforce the lesson.


Of course I hope he keeps the passion, and does not resort to the snide comments we see from some coaches.

Was he actually abusive? He was done for "...and/OR unprofessional behaviour".

Do we get discipline reports for these?

[LondonTiger]

He was charged with "using obscene, and/or inappropriate and/or unprofessional language/behaviour in an exchange with fourth official Stuart Terheege" under RFU rule 5.12.

He was found guilty of using "words that were obscene, inappropriate and unprofessional and behaviour that was inappropriate and unprofessional".

According to Prem Rugby: http://www.premiershiprugby.com/news/25412.php

[formerly known as Sam]

Did you have a drink or two last night Jeff?

Don't think any comment can be passed until the written verdict is published. The verdict makes no reference to the language being aimed at the fourth official merely that language is abusive or unprofessional. That could be a dangerous precedent.

[jeffwinger]

Is it fair that Hartley's ban runs through the close season whereas Cocker's is measured in games?

I would suggest that calling a Ref a cheat is a worse crime so why not a t least a 9 match ban too?

I'm pretty sure that when Hartley's ban was announced there was mention of 11 weeks meaning 11 matches, with the dates set accordingly. Also, the ban forced him to miss a Lions tour, which is clearly a huge punishment. I don't think it's possible to say that Cockerill has been treated harshly in relation to Hartley. It's also not the first time he's been punished for this sort of behaviour.

LondonTiger, I agree a life ban would have been ridiculous, but I did hear it mentioned as a possibility recently.

[HongKongCherry]

Do you think the occasion had an impact on the term of the ban too? The fact it was at the final in front of what I'd expect was the largest tv audience of the season may have been seen as an embarrassment to the powers at be. But equally his emotions would have been heightened due to the occasion too. I hope it didn't as each match should be treated the same, but I do feel the ban is correct as there really is no place for that kind of behaviour. One of the many reasons I stopped watching football was due to how officials were treated by players and managers, so I really hope this ban sends out the correct message.

[LondonTiger]

I hope this is the benchmark. Cockers needs to learn - but then some other coaches are far from innocent.

[Portnoy's Complaint]

I reckon it's a great RFU ban. Cockers must not overtly disrespect match officials. He's got to demonstrate personal restraint both for himself and more importantly the club and the game.

[ed] Having said that, I reiterate my view that Dorian West spouting off to the media during the game was putting the game into disrepute.

Hopefully the RFU mandarins will have had a quiet word in his shell-like

[formerly known as Sam]

Agree LT. This now has to be the benchmark. I'd Cockers is going to get 9 weeks the next time a coach uses bad language remonstrating with an official a ban must ensue. If this a one off box tick then I'll be annoyed.

The published verdict should be an interesting read of they were in there for four hours.

[yappysnap]

Not sure if this can be the benchmark as Cockers has previous, if another coach had done this but had no past misdemeanors then shouldn't he get less?

[Portnoy's Complaint]

All I aspire to is balanced, rational justice, not a fixed regime of penalty notices irrespective of the circumstances.

Personally I'd gladly punch Brendan Venter smack in the fizzog and do the porridge for it.

[formerly known as Sam]

Yappy, that previous was from 2009, that's a long time from which to drag up previous. Calum Clark's previous red card for the England under 20s was judged as not relevant being 4 years old.

Though Cockers along with O'Shea were warned over their criticisms of referees at the start of the season, though Cockers only called for then what he has been for years and that is consistency.

I have no problem if the RFU are going to take a forceful stand and punish club staff who berate officials. I do have a problem if this is the only case because it was in the AP final and was part of a media witch hunt. The laws should be applied consistently, irrelevant of level of the game or how publicly viewed the fixture.

[Portnoy's Complaint]

Yappy, that previous was from 2009, that's a long time from which to drag up previous. Calum Clark's previous red card for the England under 20s was judged as not relevant being 4 years old.

Though Cockers along with O'Shea were warned over their criticisms of referees at the start of the season, though Cockers only called for then what he has been for years and that is consistency.

I have no problem if the RFU are going to take a forceful stand and punish club staff who berate officials. I do have a problem if this is the only case because it was in the AP final and was part of a media witch hunt. The laws should be applied consistently, irrelevant of level of the game or how publicly viewed the fixture.

I don't quite agree with that view Sam.

I'd make the rules equal for professional outfits and appropriate for amateur/semi-pro clubs according to the offence and the circumstances of the club and the offender.

[formerly known as Sam]

Not really, abusing a match official should cop the same level if ban at any level of the game. Punching etc does. Fines etc are obviously variable depending on level but length of ban should be set by the laws and by precedent and maintained. I'm wisely informed by a colleague who is a very active member of a large local amateur club that instances of this nature are becoming more frequent at junior level and this is a stance he would welcome. If this is how the RFU are going to deal with the problem then it should be from the top all the way down.

[HongKongCherry]

Not really, abusing a match official should cop the same level if ban at any level of the game. Punching etc does. Fines etc are obviously variable depending on level but length of ban should be set by the laws and by precedent and maintained. I'm wisely informed by a colleague who is a very active member of a large local amateur club that instances of this nature are becoming more frequent at junior level and this is a stance he would welcome. If this is how the RFU are going to deal with the problem then it should be from the top all the way down.

A big +1!

This needs to be in place at all levels to ensure it doesn't spread. If it had to differ, I'd suggest harsher penalties at the amateur end. If someone is giving up their time to officiate a match we need to ensure they do not receive anything but the utmost respect.

[LondonTiger]

I gave up reffing after being spat at by spectators in a little stand at Mill Hill.

Anyway back to better things - premiership fixtures are released this week, so we will find out which matches Cockers will miss.

[Portnoy's Complaint]

appropriate for amateur/semi-pro clubs according to the offence and the circumstances of the club and the offender

Draconic (e.g. Sharia-type laws) can lead to unknown and undesired consequences on the societies (i.e clubs) and individuals concerned.

Be careful what you wish for lest your desires are realised.

[MrsP]

Yappy, that previous was from 2009, that's a long time from which to drag up previous. Calum Clark's previous red card for the England under 20s was judged as not relevant being 4 years old.

Though Cockers along with O'Shea were warned over their criticisms of referees at the start of the season, though Cockers only called for then what he has been for years and that is consistency.

I have no problem if the RFU are going to take a forceful stand and punish club staff who berate officials. I do have a problem if this is the only case because it was in the AP final and was part of a media witch hunt. The laws should be applied consistently, irrelevant of level of the game or how publicly viewed the fixture.

That was because the QC told the judge that it was more than 5 years ago and that Clark was underage at the time. Neither of those statements was true and I will never understand why nothing came of that!

[formerly known as Sam]

He wasn't underage he was 20. That case set an appalling precedent in that it openly encouraged lying and a pitiful attempt at an apology with insistence that it was an accident will get you a much shorter term than actually contesting the case on proper grounds.

[MrsP]

Well, if memory serves, the QC said he was only 17 at the time of the red card against NZ and that it was more than 5 years ago so should be considered spent.

Clark was actually 19 when the incident happened and it was in 2008 so not 5 years before the arm breaking incident. At least that is my memory of the thing.

Why did the Tigers management not kick up a fuss at the time of the hearing? The silence from them and the press was deafening.

[MrsP]

"11. Mr Smith submitted that the one previous incident of foul play could be ignored because it was five years old and committed when the Player was under 18 and that he could be treated as a man of good character."

[formerly known as Sam]

Tigers don't pass comment or report incidents for citing. Club policy.

You're right though Mrs P that is a shocking lie they bought hook line and sinker.

[yappysnap]

Still angers me now! Can not believe that they got away with such a blatant lie.

[Pete C (Kiwireddevil)]

Ouch http://www.espn.co.uk/scrum/rugby/story/188569.html
 
Castro's not a happy man by the looks of it.

[Portnoy's Complaint]

Disappointing comments there.
Just imagine how St Bod of Blackpool will be feeling.

[formerly known as Sam]

No his leaving was not positive from either side. Tigers were not pleased he wanted to join Toulon and had agreed a deal to go so readily. Tigers wanted value from their investment and Castro having been told they were willing to release him was unimpressed with what Tigers were demanding.

It all really came down to him believing he should be the first choice and the management disagreeing. Whilst he might be right there may be some less than happy campers that does happen in most teams. You will always get players who believe they should be first choice or that so and so doesn't deserve more money from them or players that don't necessarily get on with the coach. I understand that Billy Twelvetrees for instance didn't get on with Matt O'Connor and that he wasn't the only one. I'm sure that'll be true for Cockers as well.

[LondonTiger]

Updated the OP with AP fixtures.

We start (Wuss) and end (Sarries) the season at home. One hell of a final fixture.

The home match with Quins on 2nd November clashes with England v Australia.
The 6 nations starts on 1st Feb and ends on 15st march, clashing with fixtures away to worcester, LI & Falcons, and a home match with Glaws.

[HongKongCherry]

I shall be championing Tigers players for selection in this years 6N

[LondonTiger]

I shall be championing Tigers players for selection in this years 6N

we meet in one of those off weekends, so non starters in the squad should be available.

Based on most posters preferred England XVs, we may be missing Dan Cole, Ben Youngs and Manu - but after that shoudl have everyone else available (so from this years EPS that will be Parling, Croft, Youngs T & Flood).

Glaws will of course be missing Freddie Burns, Billy Twelvetrees and Ben Morgan.

<insert random emoticon here>

[Portnoy's Complaint]

Sounds like the Tigers have struck their vicious claws into the nobbled meat of the fixture fixing.

Who's at home in the HQ double-header?

[HongKongCherry]

I personally feel the Lions would have won by now if there were more Tigers players and I shall say the same in February. Unlike those rubbish Glaws players you mention!

To be honest I was somewhat disappointed to meet you during that period, as I'd rather have the full strength teams going head to head. My main gripe is that we play at WR during the rainy season.

[Portnoy's Complaint]

Seemples HKC. Get shot of the playoffs, reduce the Jeff to manageable proportions and presto! - no club/country conflicts.

[HongKongCherry]

 

[Portnoy's Complaint]

 

[LondonTiger]

I personally feel the Lions would have won by now if there were more Tigers players and I shall say the same in February.  Unlike those rubbish Glaws players you mention!

To be honest I was somewhat disappointed to meet you during that period, as I'd rather have the full strength teams going head to head.  My main gripe is that we play at WR during the rainy season.

Aye, doubt we will see May at FB if it is wet


I love the thought of ending the season hosting Sarries, but hosting Glaws and Quins on Int weekends is a shame, as I would rather see unrestricted selections wherever possible.

As an aside I love that with the fist saturday in november being the 2nd, and England only playing 3 AIs, we have two rounds of AP before the HEC has it's December double-headers.

[HongKongCherry]

I'm sure you guys have a sprinkler system somewhere at the top of the stands!

[formerly known as Sam]

LT, I fully expect T Youngs, Cole, Parling, Croft, B Youngs and Manu to be unavailable throughout the AIs and 6N. Flood is a maybe. Lancaster seems to favour the younger options in most positions which counts against him.

Big final game of the season potentially. I say potentially because the other year when that fixture occurred we rest a half dozen playera in order to be ready for the knock out games.

HKC, could be worse, you could be playing is towards the end of the season where we are generally strongest and on a winning run.

[Portnoy's Complaint]

I'm sure you guys have a sprinkler system somewhere at the top of the stands!

The yellow rain is a permanent, guaranteed and entirely copper-bottomed promise for the Cherries at Welford Road.

It's a symbiotic token of mutual respect.
They really need to put a loft on the shed though...

[king_carlos]

Sam

With Argentina playing England, Wales and Italy back to back in the Autumn we can also assume that Ayerza and Camacho could well be away.

Similarly with Tonga, Fiji and Samoa playing at different times in the AI's Goneva, Mulipola and Mafi may well be away at the same time. I've desperately got my fingers crossed that Schuster doesn't suddenly find himself in the France squad or we could be struggling in the prop department badly.

1.Stankovich or Balmain
2.Hawkins or Brigg
3.Schuster
4.Slater
5.Kitchener
6.Salvi
7.Gibson
8.Crane or Waldrom

9.Harrison
10.Williams or Lamb

11.Benjamin or Thompstone
12.Allen
13.Smith
14.Morris
15.Tait

We could well be looking at something such as that in the AI's. Of course that is subject to injury and selection though so it could be better (or worse!).

[formerly known as Sam]

We'll probably have a team of:

Schuster, Briggs, Balmain
Slater, Kitchener
Waldrom, Crane, Salvi
Mele, Williams/Lamb
Allen, Smith
Thompstone, Tait, Morris

Bench: Stanko, Hawkins, Bristow, L Deacon, Gibson, Harrison, Bowden, Hamilton.

That's a fair side if we get hit by the biggest likely call ups list of Youngs x2, Cole, Parling, Croft, Flood, Manu, Ayerza, Mulipola, Mafi and Goneva. The majority of games in the International period will be LVC games and will field the A League team for those games.

Back up props to those in that squad are Brookes (former England under 20), the two Italian under 20s (1x TH, 1x LH) and the Canadian under 20 we have in the academy. We could also loan Holford from Notts in an emergency.

[nathan]

The written judgement is out;

http://www.rfu.com/thegame/discipline/judgements/judgments-2012-2013/judgments-by-offence/~/media/files/2013/discipline/judgments/aviva%20premiership/cockerillleicestertigersjudgmentjuly13.ashx

Reading it, Cockerill warned that he was going to instruct his team to "smash the Kumquat" in the second half as his team were not being protected. The RFU/4th official took this to mean violence? Surely he could of meant doing it legally?

Anyway, i think Cockerill certainly deserves his time off. The 4th official should of had his wrists slapped for squaring up to cockerill.

[nathan]

24. Mr. McEvilly’s second statement also deposed that Mr. Cockerill’s comments made in a
BBC interview on 29th December 2012 following the Leicester Tigers v Gloucester rugby match had
been referred to him in view of criticism made of the Match Referee. That resulted in his writing a
private and confidential letter to Mr. Cockerill warning him about his conduct and that a copy of the
letter was to be kept on file. Mr. Cockerill’s response to this included the following comments:-

“I have either brought the game into disrepute or I have not. If I have, charge me. If I have
not, don’t send me pointless e-mails”

he really doesn't help himself sometimes lol

[nathan]

Another strange part is that they say they didn't take into consideration complaints from media and fans, yet they mentioned they received complaints from media and fans multiple times.

Also interesting that in this case they took into consideration that it was a final watched by millions of people (was it millions?) and so took that in to consideration yet they didn't take that into consideration for Hartleys case in the very same game.

Dont get me wrong, Cockerill certainly deserves a ban but it annoys the hell out of me that the RFU can do things equal.

[Portnoy's Complaint]

24. Mr. McEvilly’s second statement also deposed that Mr. Cockerill’s comments made in a
BBC interview on 29th December 2012 following the Leicester Tigers v Gloucester rugby match had
been referred to him in view of criticism made of the Match Referee. That resulted in his writing a
private and confidential letter to Mr. Cockerill warning him about his conduct and that a copy of the
letter was to be kept on file. Mr. Cockerill’s response to this included the following comments:-

“I have either brought the game into disrepute or I have not. If I have, charge me. If I have
not, don’t send me pointless e-mails”

he really doesn't help himself sometimes lol

Hmm.

“I have either brought the game into disrepute or I have not. If I have, charge me. If I have
not, don’t send me pointless e-mails”

I like that response.
Put up or shut up - in the meantime feck off.

[formerly known as Sam]

What a crock of Poopie that report is. No wonder the club are annoyed. Using Nobby's embarrassing interview and email complaints as evidence was ridiculous. The RFU report does not draw the picture of a particularly professional organisation, particularly the conclusion which seems to hand down the punishment with a degree of relish.

Having said that Cockers used unacceptable language in communication to a match official so deserves a ban. Whether that should be a 9 week ban I'm not sure.

His evidence about concerns over previous Saints actions in games against Tigers was both interesting and seemingly completely ignored by the panel.

[jeffwinger]

These RFU reports are always a complete joke.  Don't focus on the details of the report, despite the fact that it's supposed to be the important bit, it will just drive you mad.  I think all must admit that his behaviour probably is deserving of the ban though.

You should read the report of Darren Dawidiuk's ban last season if you really want a laugh.  Highlights include (second hand, didn't read myself):
- a spotless ~8 year record regarded insufficient to gain any reduction for previous good behaviour
- discounting witness testimony of the 'victim' as they used to play together
- statement that a second player wasn't involved, despite having cited a second player for the same incident
- and the very best bit: 8 - 3 = 6 (8 week ban with 3 week reduction for remorse making 6 week ban).

Apologies for the slightly off topic discussion but another example of the RFU's incompetence in any disciplinary matters.

[Frankston]

His evidence about concerns over previous Saints actions in games against Tigers was both interesting and seemingly completely ignored by the panel.

I wasn't going to bite but what the hell, I'll do it anyway.

What do the actions of Saints players' in previous games have to do with this hearing? When Saints players have done things wrong they were cited, and banned. The RFU have already dealt with the cases that were deemed to require a hearing.

What you, and Cockerill, are trying to do is deflect away from the fact that what Cockerill did was wrong by bringing up completely irrelevant events.

[Sponsored content]