Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Moderator: Puja

User avatar
Which Tyler
Posts: 9067
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:43 pm
Location: Tewkesbury
Contact:

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Which Tyler »

Timbo wrote:Allinson is truly crap.
Tell us something we don't know; barely championship quality.
How he's 3rd choice ahead of HomerJr I'll never know
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17530
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Puja »

16th man wrote:Got a hip / knee to the head making yet another tackle.

Bath seem to have cocked up with not stating it's a HIA, so not being able to switch another guy on. That or they've been told they can't. This really, really needs sorting out. Of course teams are going to mess about with the HIA rules, if there is a risk of having to play a man down becuase it might be deemed an injury sub instead.
They can't declare it as an HIA. Underhill was verified unconscious, so no HIA is performed as that's an automatic removal from the game.
16th man wrote:I know we need to be careful saying this sort of thing on here, but Mallinder has been pretty good tonight, following up a good game last week.
I actually thought he was dire! Kicked away good ball regularly with very poor execution. Plus he had his usual allergy to contact, with the nadir being backing out of tackling the behemoth that is Tapuai in the first half.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Which Tyler
Posts: 9067
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:43 pm
Location: Tewkesbury
Contact:

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Which Tyler »

Puja wrote: They can't declare it as an HIA. Underhill was verified unconscious, so no HIA is performed as that's an automatic removal from the game.
About my only aspect of pride from that game, at last a DOR who actually respects the HIA rules, and will apply them for the sake of his players.
He's dead right, Underhill had failed the HIA before he left the pitch, so no replacement goes on.
Banquo
Posts: 18988
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Banquo »

TheNomad wrote:Awful performance by Bath

Allinson and their front five were terrible. Made it impossible for anyone else.

Joseph looked poor as well. They just never got going.

Ribbans looks like a really good player.
odd to have those bits in bold next to each other, don't you think? Not sure what Joseph was meant to do, but predicted someone would say this.....when you have such a poor pack effort, and Priestland standing still and shovelling ball out whats he supposed to do. Joseph was shoring up defence in the main.

Could have been worse for Bath had Mallinder not kicked it away so much. But Bath were pretty dire.
Timbo
Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 9:05 am

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Timbo »

Not to make any excuses for them but Bath must have been a bit drained after 2 weeks of backs against the wall efforts. They badly need some of their tight 5 injured to get back fit.
fivepointer
Posts: 5862
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 3:42 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by fivepointer »

Saints look like a different team. 2nd week in a row they have played with real aggression and intensity. Keep it up and top 4 is on the cards. Ribbans and Collins excellent, with yet another unsung and unselfish effort from Gibson. Mallinder a mixed bag, kicking far too much for my liking.

Bath were never really in it. The last 2 weeks will have taken something out of them but it was a disappointingly flat performance. Underhill did enough to warrant some of the hype. He does look the part. Interested to see how he goes with Bath on the front foot.
User avatar
Oakboy
Posts: 6310
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:42 am

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Oakboy »

fivepointer wrote:Saints look like a different team. 2nd week in a row they have played with real aggression and intensity. Keep it up and top 4 is on the cards. Ribbans and Collins excellent, with yet another unsung and unselfish effort from Gibson. Mallinder a mixed bag, kicking far too much for my liking.

Bath were never really in it. The last 2 weeks will have taken something out of them but it was a disappointingly flat performance. Underhill did enough to warrant some of the hype. He does look the part. Interested to see how he goes with Bath on the front foot.

I agree about Underhill but, to me, he looks like a blindside playing with 7 on his back. He may turn out to be better at that than Robshaw and Haskell, mind.
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 5828
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Stom »

I saw about a third of the game, in the 2nd half, and Bath were truly dire.

I thought Underhill looked good, and Faletau tried his hardest, while I thought Walker made an impact at hooker. But the lineout was a shambles (ref, wtf with the encroaching? Saints did their homework on him), and every ruck Allinson sat watching the ball while the Saints defense had a cup of tea.

Then he shoveled crap ball onto Priestland, who stood still to deliver even crapper ball past Tapuai/Clark to Joseph, who looked up to see massed defense, tried to straighten, failed because there were just too many defenders, and so either took the ball into contact or passed to someone else.

Absolutely terrible, and it all started at 9. If I was in charge, that would be Allinson semi-permanently dropped. There MUST be better available. Homer is there, he has to play next time out.
twitchy
Posts: 3273
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:04 am

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by twitchy »

Bath were hanging in there until both garvey and khan got injured.
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17530
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Puja »

Oakboy wrote:I agree about Underhill but, to me, he looks like a blindside playing with 7 on his back. He may turn out to be better at that than Robshaw and Haskell, mind.
Agreed - looked very much like a 6 to me from last night. Very destructive, but never looked any kind of threat to Northampton getting the ball back. Not sure how much of that was the dominance of the Saints pack, how much of it was the new ruck laws throwing off his timing, how much of it was the ref allowing everyone to throw themselves off their feet at the breakdown, and how much was just him and his own skills.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Mellsblue
Posts: 14547
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 am

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Mellsblue »

Puja wrote:
Oakboy wrote:I agree about Underhill but, to me, he looks like a blindside playing with 7 on his back. He may turn out to be better at that than Robshaw and Haskell, mind.
Agreed - looked very much like a 6 to me from last night. Very destructive, but never looked any kind of threat to Northampton getting the ball back. Not sure how much of that was the dominance of the Saints pack, how much of it was the new ruck laws throwing off his timing, how much of it was the ref allowing everyone to throw themselves off their feet at the breakdown, and how much was just him and his own skills.

Puja
Not to worry. Robshaw has the most turnovers so far this season. Two 6.5's, what could go wrong?
User avatar
Oakboy
Posts: 6310
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:42 am

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Oakboy »

Mellsblue wrote:
Puja wrote:
Oakboy wrote:I agree about Underhill but, to me, he looks like a blindside playing with 7 on his back. He may turn out to be better at that than Robshaw and Haskell, mind.
Agreed - looked very much like a 6 to me from last night. Very destructive, but never looked any kind of threat to Northampton getting the ball back. Not sure how much of that was the dominance of the Saints pack, how much of it was the new ruck laws throwing off his timing, how much of it was the ref allowing everyone to throw themselves off their feet at the breakdown, and how much was just him and his own skills.

Puja
Not to worry. Robshaw has the most turnovers so far this season. Two 6.5's, what could go wrong?
The main thing that could go wrong is people's expectation. I've got no problem with any of the three playing at 7. But, then, I see no problem with any of those three, Lawes, Billy V or Itoje playing at 6 if circumstances require it.
twitchy
Posts: 3273
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:04 am

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by twitchy »

People have consistently said he plays like a 6 rather than a 7.
TheNomad
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:19 am

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by TheNomad »

Agree on all respects re: Underhill. Looks like a great 6.5. Was impressed
Banquo
Posts: 18988
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Banquo »

16th man wrote:I know we need to be careful saying this sort of thing on here, but Mallinder has been pretty good tonight, following up a good game last week.
Prickly much; he was good last week, but I thought he was crap last night. Wasted so much possession with bad kicks.
Banquo
Posts: 18988
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Banquo »

Puja wrote:
16th man wrote:I know we need to be careful saying this sort of thing on here, but Mallinder has been pretty good tonight, following up a good game last week.
I actually thought he was dire! Kicked away good ball regularly with very poor execution. Plus he had his usual allergy to contact, with the nadir being backing out of tackling the behemoth that is Tapuai in the first half.

Puja
Totally agree; he had a slightly better second half, but options first half were dire; the crowd were giving him a real hard time. It was clearly the plan for territory, but high risk v Bath's back three- mind Watson was on one leg most of the match.
Banquo
Posts: 18988
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Banquo »

Be interested to know what people mean by 'plays like a 6 rather than a 7'? He was making a shed load of first up tackles, because Saints had a shed load of ball (esp first half); that means his ability to influence the breakdown over the ball was limited. Because of the way Bath were using the ball (or not), there was no opportunity to link play or carry. Just think its a bit early to make that call- he was a good stopper, generally, but that's effectively all he could do. So be great to understand what is meant- in multi-phase rugby, players increasingly do similar jobs. I 'm guessing its evidence of stealing/slowing the ball on the floor that is being sought?
twitchy
Posts: 3273
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:04 am

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by twitchy »

I don't think it's meant as a criticism just an observation.
Banquo
Posts: 18988
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Banquo »

twitchy wrote:I don't think it's meant as a criticism just an observation.
maybe so, but what IS being observed....I'm interested in why its being said. Its not an arguing point, but an enquiry.
User avatar
Puja
Posts: 17530
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Puja »

Banquo wrote:So be great to understand what is meant- in multi-phase rugby, players increasingly do similar jobs. I 'm guessing its evidence of stealing/slowing the ball on the floor that is being sought?
It would be for my mind. Northampton got continuous quick, clean ball and I would've liked to have seen their 7 dropping out of the defensive line and looking to float around and poach or slow down the ball, rather than stepping up to always be first man to make the tackle. Don't get me wrong, he did a great job of stopping them from going forwards, but they did recycle the ball every time, so it just went to another phase.

Like I said, not sure if that's a lack of ability as a "traditional 7", a lack of support from the rest of the Bath pack, uncertainty about the new laws, or the referee allowing Saints to flop on everything. Hard to tell just from one game where the rest of his pack were getting hosed.

Puja
Backist Monk
Banquo
Posts: 18988
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:52 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by Banquo »

Puja wrote:
Banquo wrote:So be great to understand what is meant- in multi-phase rugby, players increasingly do similar jobs. I 'm guessing its evidence of stealing/slowing the ball on the floor that is being sought?
. Hard to tell just from one game where the rest of his pack were getting hosed.

Puja
quite. But what you said is what I assumed was meant by he 'played like a 6'. A tad narrow tbh.
kk67
Posts: 2117
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 6:27 pm

Re: Bath vs Saints Fri 19:45

Post by kk67 »

I'd add guys who go again. One of the things that hacks me off so much about 6.5's playing 7 is they have a tendency to lie on the deck and look at the beautiful thing they just did instead of getting back up and supporting.
It's not just having a fantastic engine, it's the willingness to rev the engine until the tank is bone dry.
Robshaw may not be a great 7 but in these respects he's pretty good.
Post Reply