Edinburgh vs Ospreys 13th Feb

First topic message reminder :

                  
Edinburgh Rugby v Ospreys
13th February 2015
At Myreside, 8.05pm.

Live on BBC ALBA and BBC Wales

Referee: Gary Conway (IRFU, 7th competition game)
Assistant Referees: Graeme Wells, Stephen Hart (both SRU)
Citing Commissioner: John Kirk (SRU)
TMO: Iain Ramage (SRU)

TEAMS:
Edinburgh
15 Jack Cuthbert
14 Tom Brown
13 Sam Beard
12 Phil Burleigh
11 Damien Hoyland
10 Jade Te Rure
09 Grayson Hart

01 Rory Sutherland
02 Neil Cochrane
03 Willem Nel
04 Anton Bresler
05 Ollie Atkins
06 Roddy Grant
07 Hugh Blake
08 Mike Coman

16 Stuart McInally
17 Grant Shiells
18 John Andress
19 Fraser McKenzie
20 Tomas Leonardi
21 Alex Glashan
22 Tom Heathcote
23 Andries Strauss

Ospreys
15 Dan Evans
14 Tom Grabham
13 Ashley Beck
12 Josh Matavesi
11 Richard Fussell
10 Sam Davies
09 Martin Roberts

01 Marc Thomas
02 Scott Otten
03 Dmitri Arhip
04 Tevita Cavubati
05 Rory Thornton
06 Joe Bearman
07 Sam Lewis
08 Tyler Ardron (Capt)

16 Matthew Dwyer
17 Duncan Jones
18 Daniel Suter
19 James King
20 Ieuan Jones
21 Dan Baker
22 Tom Habberfield
23 Jonathan Spratt

Previous Meetings
Date Home Score Away Att
21/9/14 Ospreys 62 - 13 Edinburgh Rugby 6,340
28/2/14 Edinburgh Rugby 31 - 25 Ospreys 3,000
21/9/13 Ospreys 44 - 10 Edinburgh Rugby 8,356

Form Guide
Date Team Score Team Att
23/1/15 Edinburgh 38 - 20 Bordeaux 4,817
17/1/15 Lyon 21 - 19 Edinburgh 10,935
9/1/15 Connacht 13 - 16 Edinburgh 5,267

Form Guide
Date Team Score Team Att
7/2/15 Bath 10 - 13 Ospreys 13,349
31/1/15 Gloucester 32 - 25 Ospreys 12,225
24/1/15 Treviso 23 - 20 Ospreys 2,780

madmaccas wrote:Wow I think you guys are being incredibly harsh on Te Rure. Yeah he looks a bit rough around the edges, but this is only his 2nd start and he's very young. What I saw out there was bags of attacking potential. He offers something none of the other fly halves have and there were little flashes of Carlos Spencer/Quade Cooper style heads up rugby, interesting angles and deceptive stepping. The dropped ball was just miscommunication, the kind you see when Matawalu does something and people don't follow in time.

When he learns to control a game a little more I could see him being a huge asset to club and potentially country.

Otherwise I thought Hart had a cracker. Never really rated him but that was a great game. SHC will have to work hard to regain his place.

I agree about Te Rure, he has bags of potential and is someone we should try and hang on to. He has got something you can't teach. It may take a little while to make him into the rounded playmaker he would need to be though but at his age he would be worth the investment.

Te Rure reminds me of when Rory Hutton played for Edinburgh - great with ball in hand but his basic skills were terrible.

Te Rure isn't as bad as Hutton was, but you can't have a 10 that makes the odd good break but kicks badly and doesn't control the game whatsoever.

Look at the difference when Heathcoat came on, and he's only 22!

RDW_Scotland wrote:Te Rure reminds me of when Rory Hutton played for Edinburgh - great with ball in hand but his basic skills were terrible.

Te Rure isn't as bad as Hutton was, but you can't have a 10 that makes the odd good break but kicks badly and doesn't control the game whatsoever.

Look at the difference when Heathcoat came on, and he's only 22!

Yeah but with Heathcoat what you see is what you get. He'll never be an attacking 10 because you can't teach that, whereas game management and kicking can be taught. Just look at Toonie, he used to throw wayward passes and couldn't kick for toffee, but once he learned those aspects he became outstanding.

I'm not pronouncing him the 2nd just yet, but I don't understand it when people jump on one particular promising player's back after a game. Blake hasn't been getting this criticism yet he had a thoroughly unremarkable game that included dropping an (albeit difficult) try scoring pass. For some reason we seem to pile so much pressure on our fly halves. Give the guy a few run outs, I get the feeling he may surprise a few people.

Would much prefer to see Heathcote get game-time and develop. May never trouble the line in the same way Russell or Te Rure will but he can put teams in the position to win matches.

O'Gara was very much a what you see is what you get fly-half and he won a tonne of stuff.

I just don't see why people are so desperate to see him get his chances, especially to the detriment of Heathcoat who is young and needing developed too. Also, Te Rure's performance was almost going to cost us the result last night if he stayed on - testing a trialist isn't worth the team losing.

I think it is clear from his few appearances so far that Te Rure might not cut it at this level never mind international level. If that's fairly clear at 21 I can't see much changing in a few years.

Just my opinion!

Agree with RDW on this. NSQ players coming over here should already be at a certain level, and not require umpteen chances. Sure, there were promising flashes, but he was all over the place for the most part and his goal kicking was awful.

I think Heathcote put down a marker last night and it would be very surprising if he does not start the rest of the games in the international window. He has been a bit hard done by as he seems to have carried the can for Edinburgh early season form when he was playing behind a pack that was getting murdered.

I think that the fact that he was subbed relatively early by Solmans, who does not exactly rush to use the bench, would make you think that he could see he was struggling a bit as well. I would not write him off though, having Tonks, Heathcote and him as FH options next year would be a decent combo, Te Rure will improve and I still think Heathcote is a classy player and under rated in attack. He certainly saw the space out wide for Browm's try.

I still think that Tonks is a better FB than FH as well. In my Edinburgh team I would have Heathcote at 10 and him at 15. Cuthbert on the bench.

JonnyEdinburgh wrote:Thoroughly enjoyed that (in the end).  Yellow was marginal so could be argued either way.  It's either a "harsh" yellow, or a "he's a little bit lucky" scenario.  Thankfully it didn't cost us the game.  
The Ospreys handed the game on a plate with the scrum though appreciate their cupboard was bare.
I would have had Coman as my MOTM, he has grown with Edinburgh this last 3 months or so.  Tonight everything about him screamed "captain!!!" to be.  Making yards all the time and leading from the front.
Center pairing looked very good too.  Matt Scott might be sweating before long, he could be looking at being 3rd choice center for both club and country if he doesn't get his form back very quickly.  

Why Coman? only carried 17 meters from 11 carries and only made 5 tackles. Atkins and Nel were by some margins the best Edinburgh forwards last night.

funnyExiledScot wrote:Agree with RDW on this. NSQ players coming over here should already be at a certain level, and not require umpteen chances. Sure, there were promising flashes, but he was all over the place for the most part and his goal kicking was awful.

Partly agree with that. Remember that he is SQ and he is also cheap. We are not paying the market rate for a fully developed player here, he is currently only on trial. That may be why he played as Solomons wants to have a proper look at him.

On another point, last night showed my that our strength in depth is a lot better than I thought. The only position I don't have confidence in is tighthead, with Andress a big step down from Nel.

Sutherland has been one of the finds of the season, and the rest of our pack are very competitive.

With Hart and Heathcoat at halfback we have a pairing who are just as good as Sammy and Tonks, and our centres were strong and direct.

Visser and Fife are very much our first choice wingers, but Brown and Hoyland looked up for it.

So I'm a lot more confident about our ability to compete on 2 fronts just now!

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Sutherland has been one of the finds of the season

I think he is a great player, and only 22 years old. Definitely one to watch for the future

Just a couple of points, well done Edinburgh the better team won, especially in the tight phases, it could and should have been a lot closer, how we butchered those 2 chances in the first half, why Dan Evans didn't pass out to Fussell when all he had to do was practically drop over the line, and after his sublime break, it was a terrible pass by Davies for Grabham, who would have been over, even though you Edinburgh fans are over the moon about Nel, I'm afraid I'm not, for a start as I've said on many occasions Thomas is at best our 5th choice loosehead, and on a couple of occasions when you had penalties in your favour, it should have been for us, there was one in particular in the first half where the Ref gave you a penalty for standing up in the scrum, yet the first man up was Nel.
I said before this game I'd be happy with more than one point out of this game, well we didn't even get that, we really should have had that, but because of pure basic errors we came away with nothing, and to make it even worse I cannot see us doing any better next week.

VinceWLB wrote:

JonnyEdinburgh wrote:Thoroughly enjoyed that (in the end).  Yellow was marginal so could be argued either way.  It's either a "harsh" yellow, or a "he's a little bit lucky" scenario.  Thankfully it didn't cost us the game.  
The Ospreys handed the game on a plate with the scrum though appreciate their cupboard was bare.
I would have had Coman as my MOTM, he has grown with Edinburgh this last 3 months or so.  Tonight everything about him screamed "captain!!!" to be.  Making yards all the time and leading from the front.
Center pairing looked very good too.  Matt Scott might be sweating before long, he could be looking at being 3rd choice center for both club and country if he doesn't get his form back very quickly.  

Why Coman? only carried 17 meters from 11 carries and only made 5 tackles. Atkins and Nel were by some margins the best Edinburgh forwards last night.

Surprised by those stats to be honest. Perhaps it was just that I noticed all the the tackles he made and the confirnation bias in my head has expanded that. I did also notice Nel in particular put his body about too.

I think stats need broken down and analysed as the numbers alone are fairly worthless. What do they cover exactly. If someone gets hold of the guy first and starts to take him down but then a teammate arrived marginally after and applies the drive to move them back a couple of yards as they go down. Thats a tick for the original tackler and sweet fa for the teammates' stats.
Also if you are in possession but have been driven back or retrieved the ball through scramble defence. The next carry or two is always likely to make '0 yards'. But stepping up to it, driving the legs in the tavkle to stay on your feet that extra couple of seconds to allow give your teammates time to re-organise and make that ruck, then presenting the ball cleanly. All of that is vital to regaining control of a situation, those little extra bits which contribute nothing to the stats but make all the difference in games as tight as this. Perhaps I am wrong and Coman didnt play the blinder I thought he did, but I just seemed to notice these little bits of dirty work and game management in a lot of his play which is what I would class as captain-like behavioir.

That said I will concede most of the pack probably put their hand up in some way for man of the match.

Wayne, you are clearly up against it, that's a seriously tough next 3 fixtures for you and i can foresee you missing the top 4 at the end of the season despite having played some good rugby in the 1st half of the season.
Cavubati is a decent signing for you looked like your best forward on the pitch but you need to find a backup 10 for Biggar, Sam Davies really isn't very good.

Wayne - to be fair to Nel he's not just been dominat against you guys, our scrum has generally been dominant in every game since November!

Also I can see what you're saying about the penalties, but given we were going forward in pretty much every scrum you can understand why we got all the penalties.

We even got one against the head by pushing you off it!

JonnyEdinburgh wrote:
Surprised by those stats to be honest. Perhaps it was just that I noticed all the the tackles he made and the confirnation bias in my head has expanded that. I did also notice Nel in particular put his body about too.

I think stats need broken down and analysed as the numbers alone are fairly worthless.  What do they cover exactly.  If someone gets hold of the guy first and starts to take him down but then a teammate arrived marginally after and applies the drive to move them back a couple of yards as they go down. Thats a tick for the original tackler and sweet fa for the teammates' stats.  
Also if you are in possession but have been driven back or retrieved the ball through scramble defence.  The next carry or two is always likely to make '0 yards'. But stepping up to it, driving the legs in the tavkle to stay on your feet that extra couple of seconds to allow give your teammates time to re-organise and make that ruck, then presenting the ball cleanly.  All of that is vital to regaining control of a situation, those little extra bits which contribute nothing to the stats but make all the difference in games as tight as this.   Perhaps I am wrong and Coman didnt play the blinder I thought he did, but I just seemed to notice these little bits of dirty work and game management in a lot of his play which is what I would class as captain-like behavioir.

That said I will concede most of the pack probably put their hand up in some way for man of the match.

The pack as a unit has been outstanding since November. Edinburgh has been using a lot of latching (those 3 man pods) which is borderline illegal but they got away with it and it's very hard to stop, basically how can you stop a 350 kg ball carrier running at you? (Soctland should be using a lot more that tactic) Coman isn't a great ball carrier but he does a fairly lot of graft and is quite a pain at the breakdow, he is a decent lineout operator too, the problem i have is Leonardi got dropped for him earlier in the season when he was tearing up trees.

Agree with the stats, it doesn't give the whole picture, particularly if you are a loose forward it can be very frustrating as they don't show the number of turnover you won. They are what they are and are pretty accurate for numbers of meters gained and number of tackles made.

VinceWLB wrote:

JonnyEdinburgh wrote:
Surprised by those stats to be honest. Perhaps it was just that I noticed all the the tackles he made and the confirnation bias in my head has expanded that. I did also notice Nel in particular put his body about too.

I think stats need broken down and analysed as the numbers alone are fairly worthless.  What do they cover exactly.  If someone gets hold of the guy first and starts to take him down but then a teammate arrived marginally after and applies the drive to move them back a couple of yards as they go down. Thats a tick for the original tackler and sweet fa for the teammates' stats.  
Also if you are in possession but have been driven back or retrieved the ball through scramble defence.  The next carry or two is always likely to make '0 yards'. But stepping up to it, driving the legs in the tavkle to stay on your feet that extra couple of seconds to allow give your teammates time to re-organise and make that ruck, then presenting the ball cleanly.  All of that is vital to regaining control of a situation, those little extra bits which contribute nothing to the stats but make all the difference in games as tight as this.   Perhaps I am wrong and Coman didnt play the blinder I thought he did, but I just seemed to notice these little bits of dirty work and game management in a lot of his play which is what I would class as captain-like behavioir.

That said I will concede most of the pack probably put their hand up in some way for man of the match.

The pack as a unit has been outstanding since November. Edinburgh has been using a lot of latching (those 3 man pods) which is borderline illegal but they got away with it and it's very hard to stop, basically how can you stop a 350 kg ball carrier running at you? (Soctland should be using a lot more that tactic) Coman isn't a great ball carrier but he does a fairly lot of graft and is quite a pain at the breakdow, he is a decent lineout operator too, the problem i have is Leonardi got dropped for him earlier in the season when he was tearing up trees.

Agree with the stats, it doesn't give the whole picture, particularly if you are a loose forward it can be very frustrating as they don't show the number of turnover you won. They are what they are and are pretty accurate for numbers of meters gained and number of tackles made.

I have wondered about the legality of those pods from time to time, but figured I was happy to see us using and getting away with it so shrugged it off!
I must admit I am in the same camp as you. Leonardi has been one of the big losers in our resurgence recently. When we were playing Kack he was one of the few to play very well. He was dropped rather inexplicably for Coman who, back then, did seem to be invisible a lot of the time. If I was Solomans, Coman wouldn't have got the run in the first place this season as I would have stuck with Leonardi until he gave me reason to drop him!

As long as the ball carrier is in front of the other two, those pods of 3 are fine.

Leonardi is clearly going to be off at the end of the season, which is why they are not persevering with him. He is a decent player and has done well for Edinburgh when he has been given the chance. They have plenty options in that position now though, so you can see why he has become surplus to requirements. Hopefully he will find another club.

RDW_Scotland wrote:Wayne - to be fair to Nel he's not just been dominat against you guys, our scrum has generally been dominant in every game since November!

Also I can see what you're saying about the penalties, but given we were going forward in pretty much every scrum you can understand why we got all the penalties.

We even got one against the head by pushing you off it!

Yes RDW, I agree you were the dominant scrum and even when there were no obvious infringements, you were fundamentally stronger, it doesn't alter the fact there were a couple of times Nel should have been penalised and not us, look I played in the front row and if you can get away with things, you carry on doing them and fair play you did, his experience really told against Thomas, who really has only played LV games before this season, and is only there because of the spate of injuries, it is a tough baptism for him and to be honest I don't think he'll ever be a top class prop, yet one thing in his favour is his courage, that fundamentally is not in doubt.

JonnyEdinburgh wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:

JonnyEdinburgh wrote:
Surprised by those stats to be honest. Perhaps it was just that I noticed all the the tackles he made and the confirnation bias in my head has expanded that. I did also notice Nel in particular put his body about too.

I think stats need broken down and analysed as the numbers alone are fairly worthless.  What do they cover exactly.  If someone gets hold of the guy first and starts to take him down but then a teammate arrived marginally after and applies the drive to move them back a couple of yards as they go down. Thats a tick for the original tackler and sweet fa for the teammates' stats.  
Also if you are in possession but have been driven back or retrieved the ball through scramble defence.  The next carry or two is always likely to make '0 yards'. But stepping up to it, driving the legs in the tavkle to stay on your feet that extra couple of seconds to allow give your teammates time to re-organise and make that ruck, then presenting the ball cleanly.  All of that is vital to regaining control of a situation, those little extra bits which contribute nothing to the stats but make all the difference in games as tight as this.   Perhaps I am wrong and Coman didnt play the blinder I thought he did, but I just seemed to notice these little bits of dirty work and game management in a lot of his play which is what I would class as captain-like behavioir.

That said I will concede most of the pack probably put their hand up in some way for man of the match.

The pack as a unit has been outstanding since November. Edinburgh has been using a lot of latching (those 3 man pods) which is borderline illegal but they got away with it and it's very hard to stop, basically how can you stop a 350 kg ball carrier running at you? (Soctland should be using a lot more that tactic) Coman isn't a great ball carrier but he does a fairly lot of graft and is quite a pain at the breakdow, he is a decent lineout operator too, the problem i have is Leonardi got dropped for him earlier in the season when he was tearing up trees.

Agree with the stats, it doesn't give the whole picture, particularly if you are a loose forward it can be very frustrating as they don't show the number of turnover you won. They are what they are and are pretty accurate for numbers of meters gained and number of tackles made.

I have wondered about the legality of those pods from time to time, but figured I was happy to see us using and getting away with it so shrugged it off!
I must admit I am in the same camp as you.  Leonardi has been one of the big losers in our resurgence recently.  When we were playing Kack he was one of the few to play very well.  He was dropped rather inexplicably for Coman who, back then, did seem to be invisible a lot of the time.  If I was Solomans, Coman wouldn't have got the run in the first place this season as I would have stuck with Leonardi until he gave me reason to drop him!

Yup, Coman didn't really earn his place in the starting lineup on the pitch but rather from pre-made selection from Solomons as far as i'm concerned. At least Coman is now performing at a decent level after all the confidence he is being given by the coach in that run of games.

I heard you can bind to your team mate only after tackles are being made which is something you barely see! I think these pods of 3 are fairly dangerous and it's only a matter of time before we see a serious injury from it. But at least for now it allows teams who are short of ball carriers to make up some grounds.

Edinburgh are going to be fairly well stocked in the back row, assuming everyone re-signs on.

6/8 Denton, Du Preez, Coman, Bradbury, Ritchie

7 Watson, Grant, Blake

We certainly don't need John hardie!

wayne wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:Wayne - to be fair to Nel he's not just been dominat against you guys, our scrum has generally been dominant in every game since November!

Also I can see what you're saying about the penalties, but given we were going forward in pretty much every scrum you can understand why we got all the penalties.

We even got one against the head by pushing you off it!

Yes RDW, I agree you were the dominant scrum and even when there were no obvious infringements, you were fundamentally stronger, it doesn't alter the fact there were a couple of times Nel should have been penalised and not us, look I played in the front row and if you can get away with things, you carry on doing them and fair play you did, his experience really told against Thomas, who really has only played LV games before this season, and is only there because of the spate of injuries, it is a tough baptism for him and to be honest I don't think he'll ever be a top class prop, yet one thing in his favour is his courage, that fundamentally is not in doubt.  

Being a winger I'll have to take your word for it, but I don't think the O's can have many complaints given they were very much 2nd best all game!

VinceWLB wrote:

I have wondered about the legality of those pods from time to time, ..........................

I heard you can bind to your team mate only after tackles are being made which is something you barely see! I think these pods of 3 are fairly dangerous and it's only a matter of time before we see a serious injury from it. But at least for now it allows teams who are short of ball carriers to make up some grounds.

From the ORB site - you decide
(p) Flying Wedge and Cavalry Charge.

A team must not use the ‘Flying Wedge’ or the ‘Cavalry Charge’.
Sanction: Penalty kick at the place of the original infringement.

‘Flying Wedge’. The type of attack known as a ‘Flying Wedge’ usually happens near the goal line, when the attacking team is awarded a penalty kick or free kick.

The kicker tap-kicks the ball and starts the attack, either by driving towards the goal line or by passing to a team-mate who drives forward. Immediately, team mates bind on each side of the ball carrier in a wedge formation. Often one or more of these team mates is in front of the ball carrier. A ‘Flying Wedge’ is illegal.
Sanction: Penalty kick at the place of the original infringement.

Was delighted with this performance - few teams will deny the Os a LBP this season.

Completely agree about the similarities between Te Rure and Hutton. Proves you cannot be a 10 at this level without quality basics. The flip side is that this can be learned, whereas having fast feet and an eye for the gap cannot. We have had plenty of stodgy and unspectacular 10s - nice to have one who can actually play a heads-up game with confidence.

Blake proved yet again how unlikely it is for Super Rugby players to be dropped into a Pro 12 environment and be exceptional straight away. It's a new team and new conditions - it takes time. Elsom, Howlett, Anscombe, Maitland all needed time to bed in. Let's give the kid a break. We all know that he was average and made quite a major defensive mistake - let's see how he gets on next time.

These international window produce very interesting team selections and the games are well worth watching.

The question is, is Te Rure worth perusing to the detriment of the team and potentially the result? I was no where near confident we were going to win while he was still playing.

We're in a real dog fight just now and can't have any passengers in the team - especially not at 10.

RDW_Scotland wrote:The question is, is Te Rure worth perusing to the detriment of the team and potentially the result? I was no where near confident we were going to win while he was still playing.

We're in a real dog fight just now and can't have any passengers in the team - especially not at 10.

I would be surprised if he starts next week, he may not even play. Tonks may be released back to Edinburgh, depending on how much time he gets to play this afternoon.

Heathcote played well when he came on and should probably start. If he does not, or at least bench if Tonks starts, then it would appear that he is out of favour as well and will also probably be off at the end of the season. You do get the feeling that Solomons feels that Heathcote is a player that was forced upon him and has never really taken to him. I think he has got that one wrong as he is a very good FH.

Agreed on heathcoat, and it would be strange if Solomons doesn't think he fits given he's the kind of 10 perfect for his game plan.

(put it on the right thread this time! )

Scarlets destroying Connacht 25-3 after 35 minutes which is good news but Edinburgh will have to go to Llanelli!

Well for those that followed my earlier post (there weren't many) I think the Scarlets beating Connacht is a good thing, although we could have done without them getting the 4 try BP.

So as things stand:

Scarlets - 33 points, +35 PD, 3 try BPs
Connacht - 33 points, -3 PD, 1 try BP
Edinburgh - 32 points, -22 PD, 1 try BP

So I'm not sure what the rules are regarding points difference of tries scored separating teams, but Edinburgh are behind in all aspects just now.

Each team's run ins are as follows

Edinburgh:

Ulster H
Blues A
Treviso A
Scarlets A
Munster H
Zebre H
Dragons A
Leinster H


Scarlets:

Munster H
Ulster A
Leinster H
Edinburgh H
Zebre A
Dragons A
Blues H
Treviso A


Connacht:

Dragons A
Treviso H
Blues A
Munster A
Ulster H
Glasgow H
Zebre A
Ospreys H


Don't really know what to make of those run ins - Scarlets have some tough games coming up but 3 out of 4 at home. Edinburgh have a run of 3 away games coming up, albeit against bottom half teams.

Tell you what though, it's going to be close! Once again Edinburgh's draw at home to Scarlets and losing to Connacht at home and Zebre away really hasn't done us any favours.

It's the loss to Zebre that really scunnered us. None of the top sides should be losing there.

In Edinburgh's favour is momentum. Of the three we are the form team. I do think the fixtures favour Scarlets though. They finish with four very winnable games, whereas we have Munster and Leinster in the run in (albeit both at home).

I think of the three of us Connacht will struggle. To face Munster, Ulster, Glasgow and the Ospreys all in the final 5 fixtures is really tough, and of the three of us Connacht appear to be falling away a little bit.

RDW, my recollection (OK fine, my copy-and-paste job) of the competition rules is:

3.5. If two or more Teams finish with the same number of league points, their placings will be determined by the following criteria in descending order:

•    number of matches won;
  
•    the difference between points for and points against;
  
•    the number of tries scored;
  
•    the most points scored;
  
•    the difference between tries for and tries against;
  
•    the fewest number of red cards received;
  
•    the fewest number of yellow cards received.

That being said, the Pro12 head honchos have already chosen to ignore rule 3.7 for staging the final, so I wouldn't hold my breath. For all we know, they might just decide that any try scored by Connacht is worth double points and a yellow card for the opposition's captain. We live in uncertain times.

On the run-ins, I would have to say that Connacht's is the toughest (I mean, they play Glasgow. Game over, man, game over.). Looking at Edinburgh's fixtures, I'd say that five are definitely winnable, with another couple on the 'possible' list. I'm not going to say which ones are winnable, as I've already committed myself to too many stupid predictions this year (ref: The Perilous Tale of IanBru's Stones)