SARRIES NARROWLY FAIL TO OVERCOME EARLY LETHARGY
On TOKS' xmas card list?
By TOKS
November 18 2008
Well, wasn't yesterday morning an unfortunate one for Marius Jonker to call his old mate Sean Davey and pass on everything he knew about front-row play? True, the conversation wouldn't have taken long but it did lead to some confusion in an area Sarries could and should have dominated during the game.
Let's get the referee issue out of the way first. Now, I'm no great fan of Sean Davey - he spends far too much time looking bewildered and staring in a multitude of different directions at the same time in a vain attempt to see what's going on. But, with him, one thing is quite consistent. Namely, he makes up his mind very early in a game who's dominating and who's infringing and he tends to go with that for the whole game. Thus, it's essential to be off the mark quickly and establish the right credentials in Mr. Davey's mind. Sarries started the game like a retired greyhound who'd been on the lash for the past few years whilst Gloucester, on the other hand, were out of the traps like a whippet on speed and proceeded to totally dominate the first portion of the game. After 25 minutes or so I turned to one of my fellow bi-weekley sufferers and commented that it seemed that Gloucester had re-cycled the ball about 400 times to our 2. In hindsight, that may not have been too far wide of the mark.
Despite the away side's dominance Sarries kept the score down with good defence and were also aided by Ryan Lamb's showing off by trying to hit one of the posts rather than sticking the ball between them. However pressure did tell, unfortunately Mr. Davey - unlike a famous occasion of a couple of years back - had brought his cards onto the pitch and despatched Hugh Vyvyan to the sin-bin for constant infringing. Ryan Lamb struck two penalties for Gloucester with Glen replying with one of his own in the 19th minute to make the score 6-3.
Now, the rub of the green didn't really seem to be going Sarries' way (although, as a blinkered home supporter isn't that always the case?). De Kock, clearly inside the 22, had passed to Jackson, also clearly inside the 22 and the ball was kicked directly into touch. Back came the lineout to where Jackson had kicked the ball from. Cue much muttering. (This didn't happen again, so I assume someone had informed the officials of the recently-introduced ELV soon thereafter). Sarries also took three Gloucester put-ins against the head, but only one of these was allowed to stand. Why is a stronger front-row not allowed to dominate? Why are these things "evened up" by referees?
In the 24th minute came one of the pivotal moments of the game. Anthony Allen crossed the line in the corner and whilst we in the South Stand could see that the grounding was ok we could also see the expression on the lady's face in row 4 of the Lower Rous as Allen's size 9 landed in her bag of chips fractionally before the ball was grounded. Even the referee is powerless when one of his henchmen (two feet away and perfectly sighted) gets a decision so wrong. It must have made for a very awkward couple of minutes for the officials as the big screen, in true Sarries style, replayed the incident half-a-dozen times. Lamb converted but a well-worked try from Skirving after several phases meant that Sarries were only down by 8-13 at the break.
Within a couple of minutes of the restart Jackson had reduced that to 11-13 with another penalty but then unfortunately, having marshalled Vainikolo well all game, Sorrell was caught between two stools when defending the big South Sea Islander and Olly Morgan out wide and Morgan scooted through the gap to score, albeit with some unnecessary and crowd-baiting show-boating to go with it. We were then treated to the unedifying sight of Lamb "congratulating" the crest-fallen Sorrell while he was still on the floor, which to his immense credit Sorrell didn't react to (apparently, when he grows up, Lamb wants to be a professional rugby player).
So, with the Gods rebuking Lamb for his childish and unsporting behaviour by making him miss a straightforward conversion, it was 11-18 and the next score was crucial. Regrettably it was the visitors again, but this time it was neither illegal nor greeted by behaviour more in line with the roundball game, it was a thing of beauty. Many phases of play worked a large gap on the left and a perfectly placed cross-kick allowed a wide open Vainikolo to touch down (at least I think it was Vainikolo, some websites give it to Satala!).
Thus, 11-25 and this was surely too much for Sarries to make up. Brad Barritt and Wikus Van Heerden were introuduced for their debuts, Tom Ryder came on to shore up what had been a fairly creaky line-out and Tom Mercey entered the fray to inflict yet more damage on a fairly inept opposition front row. In true Sarries style they then produced the rugby in the final 20 that would have seen them win the game if produced 60 minutes earlier, but it had been left too late. Another Jackson penalty and a penalty try when the Gloucester pack very nearly ended up in the South Stand meant that the final score was 21-25 and Sarries had only a losing bonus point to show for their efforts.
Again, the "what ifs" proliferated in the after-match conversations, but the fact remains that Gloucester were better for more of the game than Sarries were. Indeed if the somewhat odious Lamb had had his kicking boots on, and the Gloucester back-line had had their overlap blinkers off, it could have been worse. Sarries have to produce 60-70 minutes of good rugby per game if they are going to prevail against opposition of this quality, and Gloucester were good value for a narrow win.
Would just like to say in regards to the incident below, that it was a result of a Sarries line-out that started outside the 22; hence the correct decision. At the time I thought we had got away with it
De Kock, clearly inside the 22, had passed to Jackson, also clearly inside the 22 and the ball was kicked directly into touch. Back came the lineout to where Jackson had kicked the ball from. Cue much muttering. (This didn't happen again, so I assume someone had informed the officials of the recently-introduced ELV soon thereafter).
Great report btw!
It's a long time since Sports network paid anything!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:11:19:09:20:47 by TonyTaff.
Nice to remember the words of Cir Mhor
Quote:I really wouldn't worry about our props, I think you'll find that they're well up to looking out for themselves! There are plenty down Glaws way who think you might just be seeing the future England props on show - Forster is the more inexperienced of the two, but ask Carl Hayman about Nick Wood as the first time they met Hayman spend a fair amount of time popping up out of the @#$%&!
how does that sit with the ELVs - line-out should take place outside the 22, but the quick throw-in is on the 22 (thats ok)
being shown up by Cobus does not in fact make any difference to your England credentials - nor indeed being shown up by young Mercey
Sheridan is the incumbent despite being taken to the cleaners against Sarries on a number of occasions
his only considered replacement is Tim Payne - whom I remember Mercey dismantling in his first (Merceys) full start for Sarries
in fact the last time Carl Hayman was at VR he hardly covered himself in glory either
Here's to 80 minutes of good Saracens play - all in one game please.
You'll find the Glaws equivalent of your match report on
[www.gloucesterrugby.net]
There's less whingeing about the ref, less insulting comments about players, but I freely own up to having a go about the dreadful 'match experience' at Vicarage Road - it really is demeaning to see a great club being dragged down by the kind of small-minded 'marketing' that was in evidence on Sunday. Surely no proper Sarries fan can be proud of that?
I won't comment further on the suitably-maligned Lamb other than to say if he keeps on doing what he did to Sorrell on Sunday then someone will knock him into the middle of next week before too long.
I did have a look at Shedweb and noticed the mainly positive comments about Mr. Davey. If I were a Glos fan I'd probably have said much the same, which probably tells the story. Sarries' and neutrals would have a different view, I suspect.
And finally, your club is your club. Sarries is ours and we love it. Thus you have to put with things that you may not like. Nothing is perfect in this world.
I would agree with the 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder' comments when it comes to the standard of the reffing, IF we hadn't all predicted it before hand!!!
BTW TOKS - What happened to our 'date' in Druids?