Aviva Premiership Round 20

First topic message reminder :

Table:

Pos	Team	__Pld__	__Won__	_Drawn_	_Lost_	__For__	_Against_	__TF__	__TA__	__TBP__	__LBP__	__Pts__
1	Saracens	19	17	0	2	535	284	56	30	8	0	76
2	Northampton Saints	19	14	1	4	475	297	55	25	5	3	66
3	Leicester Tigers	19	13	2	4	449	357	47	32	5	2	63
4	Bath Rugby	19	13	1	5	428	330	42	33	3	2	59
5	Harlequins	19	12	0	7	364	300	36	28	3	3	54
6	Sale Sharks	19	11	0	8	335	323	33	29	2	5	51
7	Exeter Chiefs	19	8	0	11	362	382	33	38	2	6	40
8	London Wasps	19	7	0	12	356	391	35	37	2	9	39
9	Gloucester Rugby	19	7	0	12	345	443	34	48	2	7	37
10	London Irish	19	6	0	13	323	402	30	37	1	6	31
11	Newcastle Falcons	19	3	0	16	212	454	15	51	1	6	19
12	Worcester Warriors	19	1	0	18	257	478	22	50	1	7	12

Fixtures:


Fri 18th Apr 14
19:45 Harlequins  v   Leicester Tigers BT Sport

Sat 19th Apr 14
15:00 Bath Rugby  v   Worcester Warriors
15:00        Exeter Chiefs  v   Sale Sharks
15:15        London Wasps  v   Gloucester Rugby BT Sport

Sun 20th Apr 14
14:00 Northampton Saints  v   London Irish BT Sport
15:00 Newcastle Falcons  v   Saracens

Surely Steve Diamond must be Head Coach of the Year. That team, on paper, looks very average, but the pack is so well drilled. Humiliated Exeter

Hood83 wrote:Surely Steve Diamond must be Head Coach of the Year. That team, on paper, looks very average, but the pack is so well drilled. Humiliated Exeter

Its a great story and has added some real devil to the second half of the season. As to Head Coach of the Year, well I'd agree he has to be in the hat with McCall, Cockerill and O'Shea. My fav would be COS but honestly you can't argue against McCall and Saracens (what influence Borthwick?). Having said all that looking at the fixtures, Leicester Tigers as it turns out have a good run in and depending on how it turns at Twickenham this saturday (a loss might burst their bubble and a win might stretch their playing resources - if -but-maybe they could do the double???), could still have a big say in the competition and thus the Coach of the year consideration.

So much still to play for.

Certainly Steve Diamond should be considered for Coach of the last Season and a Half. He may at times be obnoxious (but then the best are, ey cockers ) but he has that pack well drilled in both legal and illegal manoeuvres. This is giving Cipriani the time and space to work his magic.

A lot though depends on how Sarries end their season. They are back where they were a season ago. Lost in the LV semi, have a home semi final coming up in the HEC and about to top the AP table. Last season it all went wrong in those last few weeks of the season. Get it right this time and McCall should be a shoe in.

'Wretched' and 'embarrassing' are the words being used around the club for that performance, with apologies from Rob Baxter to the fans. Uncharacteristic, and I think winning the LV= is definitely taking its toll - plus another retirement for a long-serving player due to injury. Thanks for everything, James Hanks

Steve Diamond is definitely showing his technical skills. Such an average looking side but they play so well.

I wonder if he'll be in or around the England set up in a few seasons

yappysnap wrote:Steve Diamond is definitely showing his technical skills. Such an average looking side but they play so well.

I wonder if he'll be in or around the England set up in a few seasons

I think he rubs people up the wrong way too much for that to happen.

hmm does that sentence make any sense at all - hopefully you understand.

Unlikely Yappy. England won't appoint a Cockers or a Diamond. Far too confrontational and outspoken for the taste of the RFU.

Diamond has done a great job at Sale but I wonder how he'll get on next season after losing Thomas, Gaskell and Miller in the summer. He's going to have to find some bargains this summer because Sale just aren't a fashionable club so I can't see any big guns heading that way. It'll be interesting to see what they do.

Hines isn't a bad capture Sam

beshocked wrote:One Problem for London Irish is that they didn't vocally contest the grounding of the ball in regards to Elliott. Perhaps a more streetwise side might have persuaded Doyle to consult the tmo or at least put enough doubt in the mind. The tmo is there to stop these sort of decisions happening. I think it's one of the only times it wasn't used.

This makes me quite sad. We didn't get the decision because we didn't surround the referee and berate him, forcing him to go to the TMO. I am sad, because you are probably right, and it's a terrible indictment of where the game is heading in the professional era.

Hines is a good capture but he's not a valid option for much more than a season. He's already past 35. Sale have found a couple of great signings in recent times though. Braid was an inspired signing.

Ozzy3213 wrote:

beshocked wrote:One Problem for London Irish is that they didn't vocally contest the grounding of the ball in regards to Elliott. Perhaps a more streetwise side might have persuaded Doyle to consult the tmo or at least put enough doubt in the mind. The tmo is there to stop these sort of decisions happening. I think it's one of the only times it wasn't used.

This makes me quite sad.  We didn't get the decision because we didn't surround the referee and berate him, forcing him to go to the TMO.  I am sad, because you are probably right, and it's a terrible indictment of where the game is heading in the professional era.

No criticism intended of Shane, who I think has done an admirable job filling is as captain, but I am pretty sure that if Skivs had been playing he would have insisted that the ref checked that one.

Ozzy I agree it's a shame but if you don't indicate that Elliott might not have ground it then he's not going to check. Not suggest surround the ref but a quick word in the ref's ear from the captain might have made him reconsider. It seems as if the Irish players had indeed thought he grounded it.

Ozzy3213 wrote:This makes me quite sad.  We didn't get the decision because we didn't surround the referee and berate him, forcing him to go to the TMO.  I am sad, because you are probably right, and it's a terrible indictment of where the game is heading in the professional era.

Nigel Owens pops up regularly on Talksport. He has been hinting, over the last few weeks, that there's an active discussion over whether to allow teams to have an official challenge, which he expects to be see given a trial.

The idea would be, as in cricket, for teams to have the right to request a TMO review. This right is lost if the review reveals nothing, retained if it supports the challenge.

The request ought to be made by the captain but there is obviously a timing issue if he's at the other end of the field. I suppose there might also be a question of whether you lose your review right if your immediate complaint is not upheld but the TMO spots something else. I'm only guessing,but there might also be a a foul play exemption if say, a player has clear teeth marks on an arm but the TMO can't see what happened.

Owens says referees are aware of the way players have begun to appeal to them, even while play is still on, and want to find a way to put a lid on that development. Brian Moore suggested that he would have asked for reviews if he thought his team needed a breather, which is presumably why they want to limit the ability of a team to call for one.

I think these ideas are well-intentioned but ultimately doomed. It's becoming more common to hear former professional players - including those who never had the benefit of reviews - say during commentary "he should have made more of a meal of that", or some other remark suggesting players need to show the referee what happened.

When a player's peer group so evidently values "streetwise" behaviour, then we've already lost the battle.

We could ask referees to penalize a team for histrionics or getting in his ear but its doubtful many would do so to the extent it stamps out the problem. We've always had "gobby" players, including top international captains, and this is just an unwelcome extension of those attributes. Nevertheless, we could ask officials to act more severely in junior matches.

However, it's really something you need to see the professional players associations acting against, or clubs start self-policing. Neither seem very likely prospects in the immediate future.

I don't know if it's be discussed already but in the Saints v Irish game Pisi puts a tackle in on Geraghty and knocks the ball back. Healey made the point it should have been a knock on by Pisi.

I was wondering if this new law clarification from the IRB comes into play

http://www.irblaws.com/index.php?domain=10&year=2014&clarification=1001&language=EN

Technically it applies the other way (knock on from ball carrier rather than tackler) but the principle is the same.

LondonTiger wrote:

yappysnap wrote:Steve Diamond is definitely showing his technical skills. Such an average looking side but they play so well.

I wonder if he'll be in or around the England set up in a few seasons

I think he rubs people up the wrong way too much for that to happen.

hmm does that sentence make any sense at all - hopefully you understand.

So how does Diamond, who was villified last year turn it around this year?

By taking over the day to management, Jimpy.

He started last season upstairs with Redpath as Head Coach. at the end of October, with Sale winnless and bottom, he takes over the head coacxh duties himself and there was an immediate improvement. they win their first AP match - then stutter for a while around their HEC campaign. After that is all done and dusted they win 5 and draw 1 of last 9 matches.

Diamond has always been an excellent forwards coach - and whilst he has been doing what he does best, Sale have gone well. Certainly a team that i sgreater than the sum of the parts

LondonTiger wrote:By taking over the day to management, Jimpy.

He started last season upstairs with Redpath as Head Coach. at the end of October, with Sale winnless and bottom, he takes over the head coacxh duties himself and there was an immediate improvement. they win their first AP match - then stutter for a while around their HEC campaign. After that is all done and dusted they win 5 and draw 1 of last 9 matches.

Diamond has always been an excellent forwards coach - and whilst he has been doing what he does best, Sale have gone well. Certainly a team that i sgreater than the sum of the parts

Tigers' loss to Quins on Friday means they have two difficult matches to conclude the regular season. I would like to think they can beat Sale away, but they need five points realistically if they want to finish third. I'm not so sure that they can now, even winning may be a tough ask there. On balance, I still think tigers will finish third, and it wont matter to them whether they have to play Saints home or away.

Sale have shown they are vulnerable to sides who can match them up front. I reckon we have the beating of them there, and thus their backs will struggle.

It will be interesting to see just how strong a side Saracens pick for the last round. I guess a lot depends upon whether they beat Clermont this week.

Bath have a tricky run in too facing Saints at home and Quins away.


My gut feel is Sarries v Bath and Saints v Us in semis, though a defeat for Bath (and us I guess) in round 21 would make round 22 very interesting with Quins firmly back in the mix.

I think that we are going to massively rue that loss at home to Sale. I think it might well end up costing us our play off place, having been in the top 4 all season, i'd be gutted! We aren't playing well at the moment, we were very lucky against a very poor Worcs side and very average against an 11 a side Gloucs! I hope that we can pull off a result at home to Saints, as I don't think we'll get one at the Stoop, but i'm not confident. General Eeyore feeling at the moment!

Bath have a much tougher run up than us.

 As said if Sarries are in the HC final I can see them putting in a mix team, they have do it before, they are pretty much nailed on 1st and will most likely break the record for points in the season by the final round.

 Sale are playing very well but quins did out do them at sale, it's also a Sat/sun cant remember game not a Friday game which should suit us better cant remember the last Friday game Leicester played well in.

Ozzy3213 wrote:

beshocked wrote:One Problem for London Irish is that they didn't vocally contest the grounding of the ball in regards to Elliott. Perhaps a more streetwise side might have persuaded Doyle to consult the tmo or at least put enough doubt in the mind. The tmo is there to stop these sort of decisions happening. I think it's one of the only times it wasn't used.

This makes me quite sad.  We didn't get the decision because we didn't surround the referee and berate him, forcing him to go to the TMO.  I am sad, because you are probably right, and it's a terrible indictment of where the game is heading in the professional era.

Unfortunately there damned if they do, damned if they don't. They get moaned at for using the tmo too much then moaned at for not using them.

I think the refs are in a hard place at the minute, I like the idea of 1 challenge though.

Doyle should just be damned  
(not sure why my emoticons aren't working)

nathan wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:

beshocked wrote:One Problem for London Irish is that they didn't vocally contest the grounding of the ball in regards to Elliott. Perhaps a more streetwise side might have persuaded Doyle to consult the tmo or at least put enough doubt in the mind. The tmo is there to stop these sort of decisions happening. I think it's one of the only times it wasn't used.

This makes me quite sad.  We didn't get the decision because we didn't surround the referee and berate him, forcing him to go to the TMO.  I am sad, because you are probably right, and it's a terrible indictment of where the game is heading in the professional era.

Unfortunately there damned if they do, damned if they don't. They get moaned at for using the tmo too much then moaned at for not using them.

I think the refs are in a hard place at the minute, I like the idea of 1 challenge though.

I just think that introducing a set amount of challenges is the tip of the iceberg. It works in cricket because the teams have five days to play the match and delays are part of the sport. One challenge might be alright -but, we already have TMO's reviewing incidents at the referees discretion, some of these decisions take longer than others. I think we already have enough stoppages in play, can't we just accept that referees can make some poor decisions but that actually, it probably evens out over the course of a match (or even season). We're going to end up going down the route of more stoppages than play at this rate.

Jimpy wrote:

nathan wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:

beshocked wrote:One Problem for London Irish is that they didn't vocally contest the grounding of the ball in regards to Elliott. Perhaps a more streetwise side might have persuaded Doyle to consult the tmo or at least put enough doubt in the mind. The tmo is there to stop these sort of decisions happening. I think it's one of the only times it wasn't used.

This makes me quite sad.  We didn't get the decision because we didn't surround the referee and berate him, forcing him to go to the TMO.  I am sad, because you are probably right, and it's a terrible indictment of where the game is heading in the professional era.

Unfortunately there damned if they do, damned if they don't. They get moaned at for using the tmo too much then moaned at for not using them.

I think the refs are in a hard place at the minute, I like the idea of 1 challenge though.

I just think that introducing a set amount of challenges is the tip of the iceberg. It works in cricket because the teams have five days to play the match and delays are part of the sport. One challenge might be alright -but, we already have TMO's reviewing incidents at the referees discretion, some of these decisions take longer than others. I think we already have enough stoppages in play, can't we just accept that referees can make some poor decisions but that actually, it probably evens out over the course of a match (or even season). We're going to end up going down the route of more stoppages than play at this rate.

+1

I don't think anything needs to change rules/lawes wise. All that's needed is greater consistency from the refs.

I may be biased and I'm not advocating challenges etc but I just don't buy into this 'evens out over the course of a season' stuff ... this year alone LI have had several tries awarded against them where they clearly haven't been grounded, similarly blatant obstructions have been missed/ignored, but I can't recall the reverse happening in their favour ... last year LI got a red card for a perfectly legal tackle. I agree it's the consistency that is lacking from refs.

Heaf wrote:I may be biased and I'm not advocating challenges etc but I just don't buy into this 'evens out over the course of a season' stuff ... this year alone LI have had several tries awarded against them where they clearly haven't been grounded, similarly blatant obstructions have been missed/ignored, but I can't recall the reverse happening in their favour ... last year LI got a red card for a perfectly legal tackle.  I agree it's the consistency that is lacking from refs.

So what would the real total of tries against be then? 70? 80?   

And do you have an as accurate estimation of the number of things LI got away with but should have been picked up on?

There was definitely a try scored by George Ford that didn't look like it was fully grounded

Fair play to Steve Diamond for signing that Russian lock, scored a try and delivered two try scoring passes against Exeter.

[quote=lostinwales]And do you have an as accurate estimation of the number of things LI got away with but should have been picked up on?[/quote]

LI get away with all sorts, like not playing in London, or being Irish for starters.

I don't think their season has been marred by decisions that went against them, it's more to do with the fact that they're cack.

In terms of the refereeing and appeals process, it's a matter of enforcing the laws, the only player who can speak to the referee is the captain unless spoken to by the referee (instant yellow), no foul language towards the referee (instant yellow), no one other than the player(s) involved and the captains should speak to the referee regarding an incident (instant yellow), and the referee's final decision is just that.
One the great strengths of our sport is the way players at all levels respect and obey the officals - regardless of whether the decsion is correct or they agree with it, especially given that a large part of the game is based on finding ways of doing things that they don't see.
As a sport which is self regulating and has laws/rules which are largely open to individual interpretation by players and offiicals rugby needs this if it is to continue.

As a Sale fan I am somewhat worried by our impressive young talent has been enticed away. We can attract older talent I think quite well, but currently I feel we have to rely more on our youth academy for promising young talent and hope we can keep hold of them.

That said if this season turns out to be the norm we should find it easier to find better talent.

I agree Steve deserves a lot of credit for turning us around this season.

englishborn wrote:As a Sale fan I am somewhat worried by our impressive young talent has been enticed away. We can attract older talent I think quite well, but currently I feel we have to rely more on our youth academy for promising young talent and hope we can keep hold of them.

That said if this season turns out to be the norm we should find it easier to find better talent.

I agree Steve deserves a lot of credit for turning us around this season.

Any word on where they are going to be playing next season? Only asking because Edgeley Park is about 10 minutes walk from where I work.....

No word as of yet, I too hope its at Edgeley, not a great stadium but good pubs and easy to get to, unlike currently  

Thought I heard that staying where they are but moving preferred match day to Saturday to help with access

lostinwales wrote:And do you have an as accurate estimation of the number of things LI got away with but should have been picked up on?

No, but I can certainly tell you that we've not been awarded any tries where we clearly didn't ground the ball. That scoreline this season is 0-2. Who knows, maybe we'll get one in each of our final two games and things will 'even themselves out'.   

things never even out.

Two main reasons:

1) the teams at the top of the table create more pressure and will tend to have more decisions go their way.
2) As fans we are partisan and tend to spot the decisions going for us, but ignore those against.

LondonTiger wrote:things never even out.

Two main reasons:

1) the teams at the top of the table create more pressure and will tend to have more decisions go their way.
2) As fans we are partisan and tend to spot the decisions going for us, but ignore those against.

I think 2) should be the other way round. Fans see things that go against their team but ignore those that go for them

Jimpy wrote:

Heaf wrote:I may be biased and I'm not advocating challenges etc but I just don't buy into this 'evens out over the course of a season' stuff ... this year alone LI have had several tries awarded against them where they clearly haven't been grounded, similarly blatant obstructions have been missed/ignored, but I can't recall the reverse happening in their favour ... last year LI got a red card for a perfectly legal tackle.  I agree it's the consistency that is lacking from refs.

So what would the real total of tries against be then? 70? 80?   

Not sure why that's relevant - you only need one to turn a game?

Bathite wrote:There was definitely a try scored by George Ford that didn't look like it was fully grounded

Yep that was one ...

lostinwales wrote:And do you have an as accurate estimation of the number of things LI got away with but should have been picked up on?

Nope - but I still don't see the logic in assuming things will even out somehow

Jimpy wrote:

lostinwales wrote:And do you have an as accurate estimation of the number of things LI got away with but should have been picked up on?

LI get away with all sorts, like not playing in London, or being Irish for starters.

I don't think their season has been marred by decisions that went against them, it's more to do with the fact that they're cack.

Thanks for the constructive feedback and bringing up the old London and Irish thing ... that's been done to death and I'm not sure of the relevance to whether things even out or not ...

LondonTiger wrote:things never even out.

Two main reasons:

1) the teams at the top of the table create more pressure and will tend to have more decisions go their way.
2) As fans we are partisan and tend to spot the decisions going for us, but ignore those against.

Exactly. It's just a fact of the game that the lower clubs will be put under more pressure, so will be on the wrong end of more decisions

I can get how being under more pressure could result in having more penalties given against them but struggle to see how being put under more pressure results in things like tries being awarded when the ball clearly hasn't been grounded … that's just shoddy officiating ...

Heaf wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

lostinwales wrote:And do you have an as accurate estimation of the number of things LI got away with but should have been picked up on?

LI get away with all sorts, like not playing in London, or being Irish for starters.

I don't think their season has been marred by decisions that went against them, it's more to do with the fact that they're cack.

Thanks for the constructive feedback and bringing up the old London and Irish thing ... that's been done to death and I'm not sure of the relevance to whether things even out or not ...

Oh goodness, you are a bundle of fun aren't you?

Maybe things don't even themselves out, maybe they do (evidently not in the case of the so hard done by Oirish). I think my point was that we don't need the introduction of team challenges, there are enough stoppages in the game as it is. Go with the Ref's decision and if players are getting into positions whereby they can be awarded a try but not ground the ball, then, er, don't let them get into that position....

Jimpy, I agree that we don't need challenges. They are at times shambolic in cricket and I don't think they would work in rugby for a number of reasons. The ref has the TMO available and should use it when they need to.

I can't however agree with your last statement. In adeal world our teams would all be so good as to not allow the opposition scoring opportunities, but that's not realistic. The bottom line is that if the ball has not been grounded a try shouldn't be awarded. You don't get a wicket in cricket for narrowly missing the stumps or almost taking a catch, or a goal in football for almost getting the ball over the goal line, and this is no different.

Referees have a tough job, much tougher in rugby than the other sports I mentioned, but if we want the Premiership to be the best league in the world, then that includes the standard of refereeing, and awardign tries when the ball is not grounded is poor whoever it is against.

The Elliot try should not have been awarded.

It is suggestions that this and another decision that went against the team cost you 14 points in effect and without that you would have won. Had JP Doyle not awarded the try - everything that then happened afterwards no longer happens.

Most likely scenario - Saints awarded a 5m scrum for held up over the line, after 7 resets and one YC Doyle awards a penalty try. After that who knows - but what was clear to me was that Northampton were much the better side on the day, and LI only came into it when they switched off.

So in short, Doyle deserves to be castigated for awarding a try - but blaming him for losing is completely and utterly unfair.

I don't think I've blamed him for losing LT, just for making poor decisions. I quite agree that it's a completely differnet game if makes the correct decision for the try.

I can't remember if it was here, on The Craic or the Saints message board where I said Saints deserved the win, but I felt our performance warranted us getting something from the game.

Not sure about your most likely scenario though, scrum was a bit of a lottery from what I remember and we certainly got a few penalties there ourselves.

I may have read more into this than was intended:

We're losing by 8 and those two decisions are a 14 point swing. Tough to take.

Mate, that's a while the game was on getting heated in front of the TV comment, which is still factual. I'd like to think that my postings since the game have been somewhat more level headed.

To be honest though, had the Marland Yarde try been allowed to stand the score would have been 29-28 with about 8 minutes to play, Saints down the 14 men and all the momentum our way. I do think that from that position, regardless of who the better team were over 80 minutes, we would have a had very realistic prospect of winning the game.