Aviva Prem Round 10

by Geordie Fri 2 Dec - 8:40

First topic message reminder :

Sorry im no LT so you get the bare minimum!

Sale Sharks v Exeter Chiefs
Bath v Saracens
Gloucester Rugby v Bristol
Leicester Tigers v Northampton Saints
Newcastle Falcons v Harlequins
Worcester Warriors v Wasps

by Welly Sun 4 Dec - 16:18

Sooooo when can we expect Witty to be joining us?

by Geordie Sun 4 Dec - 16:23

Suddenly its not so rosey!!

by Geordie Sun 4 Dec - 16:24

We gave you Barrow...you can make do with him.

Oh Olmstead is off limits aswell!!

by Geordie Sun 4 Dec - 16:29

AH Olmstead....the league signing of the season. What a player!!!!

by Welly Sun 4 Dec - 16:32

GeordieFalcon wrote:We gave you Barrow...you can make do with him.

Oh Olmstead is off limits aswell!!

We sign Falcons in threes

2008
Flood
Wood
Parling

2011
Brookes
Balmain
Young

2016
Barrow
McGuigan
Witty?

by Sgt_Pooly Sun 4 Dec - 16:33

C'mon lads!!!

Witty can do better than Tigers if he does decide to leave, he looks top draw.

by formerly known as Sam Sun 4 Dec - 16:41

We don't need another second row. Now if Wilson fancies a bit of meaningful European rugby...

by Welly Sun 4 Dec - 16:42

formerly known as Sam wrote:We don't need another second row. Now if Wilson fancies a bit of meaningful European rugby...

You can never have enough second rows damn it.

TBH Chick also seems promising player aswell. Wilson prob too loyal at this point similar to Pennell.

by Geordie Sun 4 Dec - 16:45

AH Watson!! What a class winger....but great little kick by Takulua.

I think he should be starting over Young!

by Geordie Sun 4 Dec - 16:46

Do you mean Mark Wilson?

Never going to happen.

And Witty aint going anywhere either. He's going to be immense. His carrying is getting better and better. Hes rapid...and he bulked up scarily this season!

by Geordie Sun 4 Dec - 16:50

Happy days....good win

by Sgt_Pooly Sun 4 Dec - 16:57

Cracking win....up to 7th!

by king_carlos Sun 4 Dec - 17:12

My anorak side thinks it's a shame that Falcons have Sarries away up next in the Jeff - albeit in a few weeks time.

Another win before the 11 game midway point (the weekend after these 2 European Cup games is AP round 11) would have given Falcons 27 points. That would have been the same total points they took in the Prem last year but in half as many game.

Of course it would have been a completely meaningless statistic but also a good indication of home improved Falcons are on last season.

by Guest Mon 5 Dec - 15:16

Aviva Prem Round 10 - Page 3 North01_zpsnjbv9khn

Just seen this on the Tigers Unoffy. I must admit my memory of the incident is pretty off as I was sure North was well into the air when he caught it. Sam and Nathan were certainly much closer to calling it than I realised.

Interestingly the height the ball is caught at is one that's completely catchable without jumping, which is exactly what many people warned that this rule would lead to. The idea is to protect the players but if anything the incentive is to jump. Why wouldn't you? You're likely to either get the ball uncontested or a decent chance of the defender being penalised/carded.

Just for balance I've noticed a few Tigers players doing this, too. I can vaguely remember Thompstone jumping to claim a ball, which was caught below his waist (around about chest height if he hadn't jumped) and winning a penalty when the defender made contact.

by formerly known as Sam Mon 5 Dec - 15:39

I can't believe that North was that dim to be honest. He's had several concussions previously and jumping into a player like that could have put him in serious trouble and possibly ended his career with a other bad concussion.

It's an easy way to milk a penalty and I thought that North was really pushing it, the Saints players rushing in to confront Thompstone had made the refs mind up before he even saw the footage. He was just debating colour of card. Interesting that you could hear Slater asking what was he meant to do and pointing out you can't jump into a tackle.

by **Ozzy3213** Mon 5 Dec - 16:37

He doesn't jump into the tackle, he jumps to catch the ball. To jump into the tackle would imply that he is the ball carrier and is about to be tackled, that is not the case here, when he jumps he is not in possession of the ball.

I do agree however that there was very little Thompstone could do to avoid the collision, partly due to the way the ball bounced up and back behind him. Carding him for it was ridiculous, a penalty would have sufficed.

What has gripped my Poopie over this is Saints. Putting him back on the pitch afterwards was bad enough but their lame attempt to justify it by saying the doctor said he wasn't knocked, he hurt his neck, is embarrassing. If the doctor did say that then frankly he needs to be up in front of the GMC charged with negligence.

by Heaf Mon 5 Dec - 19:28

Indeed - it looked to me like he was out cold face down in the dirt

by formerly known as Sam Mon 5 Dec - 20:57

Heaf wrote:Indeed - it looked to me light was out cold face down in the dirt

He didn't look in a good way. There's only two reasons to stay down like that. One he's out cold or two he's milking the contact to get Thompstone off. I don't think North is the kind of player that would milk the contact to get another player into trouble.

I was amazed he came back on. He was off for the majority of the ten minutes allowed to undertake the test as well. That's not a good sign.

by Scottrf Tue 6 Dec - 11:47

Or 3. What the medical staff and player said: He was worried about a neck injury so didn't want to move. The medical team was there immediately, to think they would lie about it and risk permanent damage to someone's health is a bit much. However it looks.

by **Ozzy3213** Tue 6 Dec - 11:53

I take it you're a Saints fan Scottrf?

by Scottrf Tue 6 Dec - 11:57

Yes but I think it's also good to not question professional integrity of a player and medical staff from a TV clip when they are on the scene.

by formerly known as Sam Tue 6 Dec - 12:06

Scottrf wrote:Or 3. What the medical staff and player said: He was worried about a neck injury so didn't want to move. The medical team was there immediately, to think they would lie about it and risk permanent damage to someone's health is a bit much. However it looks.

In which case you stay head down and wave a hand to show you need urgent attention. What the coaches say to the media and what the medical team say behind closed doors isn't necessarily the same thing.

Given the time he was off the pitch I'm sure the medical team went through the HIA. Given they were worried about his neck being hurt you'd have to wonder why he took a HIA test and why it took so long. You'd also wonder why they'd risk a player who was saying his necks hurting to the extent he didn't risk getting up.

If it was a Tigers player I'd have wanted him to stay off the pitch.

by Scottrf Tue 6 Dec - 12:13

He did stay head down and a member of the medical team was there in about a second. He had to take a HIA because he did have contact with his head. So that doesn't really say they thought he was knocked out.

And I didn't say I didn't want him to stay off the pitch.

by HongKongCherry Tue 6 Dec - 12:22

Spot on Sam.

I find it very difficult to believe he was intentionally motionless as he was limp the moment he bounced after the landing and remained motionless after he came to rest. There was no signal in his hands, eyes or mouth to suggest he was intentionally doing this.

Personally I think their integrity should be questioned. More importantly there shouldn't be any level of ambiguity about head injuries and at the very least checks and processes should be improved. My concern is that medical staff were meant to have access to TMO technology to assess head injuries during live play and I cannot see how anyone could have reviewed the footage and accepted he was motionless intentionally.

by Scottrf Tue 6 Dec - 12:29

Well it's being investigated so there should be big sanctions if anything untoward is found. Realistically though there's no way to prove anything either way.

by **LondonTiger** Tue 6 Dec - 15:32

Wales winger George North has been stood down from playing by Northampton until he has undergone independent assessment of the head injury he suffered against Leicester on Saturday.

North, 24, was tackled in the air by Tigers winger Adam Thompstone but passed the head injury assessment.

Saints reiterated that North did not lose consciousness after the check.

However, they added that they did not have access to full television footage of the incident at the time.

"If evidence suggesting a loss of consciousness had been available to the medical team at the time of assessment, George would not have been allowed to return to the field of play," said a club statement.

by Guest Tue 6 Dec - 15:54

At least now we won't be able to be told off by Saints fans for having the audacity to challenge the medics, by merely stating what could be seen in the video footage.

by **Ozzy3213** Thu 8 Dec - 10:02

Apparantly on the Flats and Shanks podcast this week Tom Shanklin, who knows North well was saying that he was speaking to North's girlfriend and North is slurring his words currently and they are quite worried about it.

He needs a long time off if not retirement as any more knocks will surely leave him in a really bad way later in life, if he's not at that stage already.

by lostinwales Thu 8 Dec - 10:33

Ozzy3213 wrote:Apparantly on the Flats and Shanks podcast this week Tom Shanklin, who knows North well was saying that he was speaking to North's girlfriend and North is slurring his words currently and they are quite worried about it.

He needs a long time off if not retirement as any more knocks will surely leave him in a really bad way later in life, if he's not at that stage already.

I remember reading that piece about Hape - about how when things were bad any impact might temporarily leave him out cold.

It is bad news about North and I hope he recovers. If he doesn't then its going to raise the profile of this issue higher than ever.

by Guest Thu 8 Dec - 14:28

Ozzy3213 wrote:Apparantly on the Flats and Shanks podcast this week Tom Shanklin, who knows North well was saying that he was speaking to North's girlfriend and North is slurring his words currently and they are quite worried about it.

He needs a long time off if not retirement as any more knocks will surely leave him in a really bad way later in life, if he's not at that stage already.

I think whoever has described it to you has slightly misunderstood what he said. He seemed to have been talking about previous concussions that have lead to slurred speech and how it's unlikely North would go back on if there was any chance of a concussion.

Edit:
'I know him pretty well and he's had a lot of injuries, a lot of concussions, so much so that it's affected his speech. You know his girlfriend Becky James has said that, you know slurring his words and stuff like that. So he's aware of the seriousness of his concussions. So I don't think there's anyway he would want to put himself back on that field with his history of concussions.'

by doctor_grey Thu 8 Dec - 18:46

I know Saints medical team and, sadly, I do think they have something to answer for. Please keep in mind these are good people who generally do a very fine job and are very careful with their charges. And for the record, in many cases more conservative than many other medical teams.

But first a few points of clarification.

1. North hit the ground hard, and did not move for a few seconds - these are the seconds we have seen over and over. There are good reasons why he might not move, including what appears to me the likely one is that half his body just hit the ground hard. I think if we took impact like that we might not move for a few seconds either.

2. Someone mentioned if he had a neck injury he should wave for assistance. That is good advice if you want to help someone become paralysed. With any potential spinal injury, the patient should never move or be moved except by trained professionals.

3. North came back on after less than 10 minutes. This is OK because the protocols only take a few minutes if the person being evaluated passes the initial evaluations. From everything I heard he passed with flying colours, and I believe that without reservation.

4. If you watched North walk off, which I did over and over, his gait and balance was fine. This is one potential indicator of head trauma, assuming no consideration of foot/knee/hip etc.. In the army in the field under pressure situations, this was sometimes the only clue I had time to consider.

Yet, despite the above comments I think this was bad judgment. And for the simple reason that North has too many priors. When I see someone's head bounce off the turf, I screw the evals and take the safe route. Further, the contact happened by the touchline. Clearly people saw his head bounce off the turf, so I struggle with the notion this information did not get to the medical team at some point (though possibly after North returned). At that point he should have been removed.

by beshocked Fri 9 Dec - 14:47

Bit late but congratulations to Bath for beating Saracens.

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/the-telling-stats-from-bath-rugby-s-14-11-win-against-saracens-in-the-aviva-premiership/story-29956146-detail/story.html

Very interesting stats.

by Scottrf Fri 9 Dec - 14:55

Arent those stats fairly typical for a rush defence? Maybe not to that extent but certainly higher than a drift defence.

by **LondonTiger** Fri 9 Dec - 15:27

Aye, the kind of defence perfected by Sarries and used now by England will always have a higher number of missed tackles - largely due to the way a tackle is and missed tackle is defined.

Sarries look to put in big hits to disrupt the attack and stop momentum, now even if not completed, such a tackle will have a reasonable impact. Meanwhile a traditional tackle may be successful but concedes ground and allows the ball carrier to offload the ball.

by Sponsored content

Aviva Prem Round 10

Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10

Re: Aviva Prem Round 10