Comeonmylovers.co.uk - SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Comeonmylovers.co.uk (IP Logged)

Date: 01/03/2022 19:41

What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:14:17:01:39 by P G Tips.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 01/03/2022 20:02

Seems Bristol also have issues at scrum half so they will be desperate to get Randall back. Recently it was muted that Ioan Lloyd was going to start at 9. He is listed as a fly-half, fullback and wing having represented at senior level Wales at 10. Our Max Green is on loan currently but I think he is also injured.

https://i.ibb.co/YTDNDCdd/Tyler-Offiah-185.jpg

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 01/03/2022 20:23

No way Randall will be back.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 01/03/2022 20:29

Is roko available?

Cant count up to 3 and there was talk of it being reduced to 2?

Far from nailed on to get back in. Whisper it but looks like we will have some available decent senior squad players who dont even make the 23.....

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 01/03/2022 20:33

Quote:
hasta
No way Randall will be back.

Who is their 9 I wonder, not our problem I know but intriguing nonetheless!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 01/03/2022 22:55

Ioan Lloyd played 9 last week for Bris and was far from poor - even Lil Austin was complimentary.

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Maeght (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 06:21

Theo Strang played most of the match at 9 for Bristol and their forum seems to have him down to start on Saturday in their probable line ups.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 07:09

The team I suggest in the article is closely based on last week’s Bristol lineup.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 07:11

Quote:
Maeght
Theo Strang played most of the match at 9 for Bristol and their forum seems to have him down to start on Saturday in their probable line ups.

Ooops - maybe it was the week before then. Was it Strang who pulled the ball back across the Bris try line at a ruck and allowed a Wasps player to touch it down for a try?

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Maeght (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 07:27

Quote:
joethefanatic
Quote:
Maeght
Theo Strang played most of the match at 9 for Bristol and their forum seems to have him down to start on Saturday in their probable line ups.

Ooops - maybe it was the week before then. Was it Strang who pulled the ball back across the Bris try line at a ruck and allowed a Wasps player to touch it down for a try?

I don't know if it was him or not to be honest.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: elegia (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 09:02

Quote:
joethefanatic
Quote:
Maeght
Theo Strang played most of the match at 9 for Bristol and their forum seems to have him down to start on Saturday in their probable line ups.

Ooops - maybe it was the week before then. Was it Strang who pulled the ball back across the Bris try line at a ruck and allowed a Wasps player to touch it down for a try?

yep

he wont do that again

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Music/Pix/pictures/2011/7/13/1310579502636/New-Order-left-to-right-G-007.jpg

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: elegia (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 09:04

Quote:
shipwrecked
Seems Bristol also have issues at scrum half so they will be desperate to get Randall back. Recently it was muted that Ioan Lloyd was going to start at 9. He is listed as a fly-half, fullback and wing having represented at senior level Wales at 10. Our Max Green is on loan currently but I think he is also injured.

not just mooted, he has covered there the last two games - once when both the starting & replacement scrum halves were injured & then again in a planned move last week

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: dr.bath1865 (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 09:55

I presume Max Green’s loan contract includes the same stipulation as Hughes’ that he can’t play against his home team?

Strang has been a mixed bag when I’ve seen him (and Bristol fans know better than I) but he’s done some good stuff, has a nice pass and is a reasonably experienced head, but has a good number of brain fades each game. The error to give Wasps the try was really quite amusing!

Lloyd at 9 is interesting, and he’s certainly talented enough, but has any player been able to do it effectively since Healey? Might be something to do with modern backs being built the way they are, as dragging 15st (min) from breakdown to breakdown, bending at the waist 60/70 times, can’t be easy on any winger’s body. Also, box kicks are so much more important nowadays. It’d be great to have a sub who could cover 9/10 or 9/back 3 as you could 6-2 split regularly, especially as some scrum halves (eg Spencer) have the fitness to last a full 80. Seems to me like the perfect time for Bristol to pursue Lloyd at 9 - no relegation, doesn’t look like they’re fighting for top 4, so if I was them I’d give Lloyd a tonne of training, a proper run at 9, and see how he goes. He’s one of the few in the league with the talent.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 10:00

According to Bristol site Green is injured.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 10:05

Lloyd would get a few games and then be cast in favour of a regular 9, it really is a specialist job and I'm afraid an incredibly talented player is simply being used as a stand in. If Ford a scrum half? He can play there but I'm really not sure a conversion is realistic.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 10:11

Quote:
dr.bath1865
I presume Max Green’s loan contract includes the same stipulation as Hughes’ that he can’t play against his home team?

It's a standard rule (for obvious reasons).

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 10:36

It shows like us Bristol are suffering injuries and abstractions and like us and unprecedently it is appears focussed on a small number of key positions, even the mega sides like Leinster and the French sides would struggle if their unavailability list concentrates on a few positions - no squad has an endless supply of players in anyone position - and as a rugby fan I feel for them.

This is why we are seeing hybrid players - 2nd rows and hookers who can cover the back row and even vice versa in some backrows who can cover hooker, add to that the rise in utility backs who can cover every position in the backline and Lloyd is one of those types of player.

The problem is with this is that you end up being a "Jack of all trades, master of none" and eventually we will de-skill areas of our game - but financially it makes sense to get players who cover several positions and as the demands grow on players and squads potentially get smaller I can see this becoming the norm.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 11:02

The full quote:

Jack of all trades,
Master of none,
Oftentimes better than master of one

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 11:23

There have been hybrid players in rugby union since the game began. They were called versatile.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: copester (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 11:57

Nice to have back row options but with Faletau leaving I personally would like to see a back row of Reid, Underhill and Coetzee start with Bayliss coming on.
Agree about Hybrid players. We are pretty lucky as Bayliss, Richards, Ojomoh and Redpath probably already fall into this category without a drop in standards.

adopted player, 24/25 Hame Faiva. 23/24 Ted Hill. 22/23 Cam Redpath. 21/22 Max Clark. 20/21 Henry Thomas. 19/20 Max Wright. 18/19 Cooper Vuna.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 11:57

Quote:
Ali1969
The problem is with this is that you end up being a "Jack of all trades, master of none" and eventually we will de-skill areas of our game

I don't regard having more players like Alex Lozowski, Kurtley Beale, Ruan Pienaar, Ben Smith and Matt Giteau would be an issue as none are seen as being particularly de-skilled? Even John Smit played all front row positions. In terms of Bath players Bayliss has played quite a few but doesn't seem to be a huge problem.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: memnoch (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 13:41

Including Green we currently have 5 scrum half’s unavailable due to injury or international duty.

Strang has been good although the brain fart that allowed wasps to score seemed to play on his mind and his game went a bit south after that.

Lloyd played scrum half after 2 sh got injured against Worcester and for about 15-20 mins against wasps.
He did ok but does not look a natural scrum half. He has started at 10 11 12 15 and covered 9 this season. He is best suited to 10 12 or 15 in my opinion. I would like him to stick to 12 tbh.

Our other problem area is tight head. Sinkler away, Afoa and Lahiff injured leaves only Jake Armstrong as a senior TH fit. Unfortunately he does not seem the same player since an injury last season.

Also on the lnjury list we have Piutau, Morahan, Bedlow, and Harding who would all probably started.

Just as you seem to be getting your players back we seem to be losing ours.

Anyway excuses in early 😂😂 I will see some of you on the terrace Saturday.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 13:55

Quote:
BathMatt53
Quote:
Ali1969
The problem is with this is that you end up being a "Jack of all trades, master of none" and eventually we will de-skill areas of our game

I don't regard having more players like Alex Lozowski, Kurtley Beale, Ruan Pienaar, Ben Smith and Matt Giteau would be an issue as none are seen as being particularly de-skilled? Even John Smit played all front row positions. In terms of Bath players Bayliss has played quite a few but doesn't seem to be a huge problem.

BM I am not saying they are bad players in fact they are great players however what I was getting at is that take Ben Smith - a truly great full back when he hit the scene and subsequently went on to become a good International wing - but without doubt his best position was full back - but he played more on the wing so we will never know just how good a full back he would have gone on to be - Anthony Watson is another where is his best position is it full back or wing - Jon Smit I seem to remember only played prop on an emergency basis once he played senior rugby.

10/12 is an interesting one, I seem to remember Wayne Smith amongst others saying playing 2 x 10 is plausible giving you that extra creative option - however he did also state that it also creates weakness as 12/13 are very much specialist positions especially in defensive patterns. I suppose Barrett is a good example where it just doesn't work - why take the world's best 10 and play him at full back - sometimes you upset the equilibrium by trying to play all of your best players and I think the All Blacks found that out.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 14:01

I guess then it comes back to the team balance. if you have 2 amazing 10s who can also play 12 or 15 and no 12 or 15 as good then the overall strenght of the team is improved even if a player is playing at 99% of his or her ability. Personally I don't see the versitility as a problem, in fact as you say its pretty essential these days at all levels.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 14:14

The luxury of 2 x 10s is only possible if you are winning ball up front in the set piece and/or breakdown. Fly halves are not knows as hard hitting tacklers so if you are defending all the time you will lose the battle of the gain line.

Barrett not playing 10 is down to Richie Mo’unga being just as good if you don't play Barrett at 15 he doesn't play at all. Both tackle like demons. I'm all for specialising in the backs but you really can't leave BB out of a side and he certainly doesn't let you down at full back.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 16:41

Quote:
shipwrecked
The luxury of 2 x 10s is only possible if you are winning ball up front in the set piece and/or breakdown. Fly halves are not knows as hard hitting tacklers so if you are defending all the time you will lose the battle of the gain line.
Barrett not playing 10 is down to Richie Mo’unga being just as good if you don't play Barrett at 15 he doesn't play at all. Both tackle like demons. I'm all for specialising in the backs but you really can't leave BB out of a side and he certainly doesn't let you down at full back.

Unfortunately Beauden isn't even the best 15 in his own family.

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 17:40

Quote:
hasta
No way Randall will be back.

Not released, nor are Stuart & Ewels.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 18:02

Funny old squad that - I appreciate it will be superseded next week, but can’t help feeling that Jones is trying to make it look as though the dodgy performances to date are the fault of the players, rather than his ridiculous, mostly Manu-induced brainfrats.

Marler, Daly, Ford axed (or maybe just sent back to their clubs). Furbank and H-C back + some random LI prop.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 18:15

Would be hilars if Ford went back to Tigers to bench behind Freddie.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 19:14

Fitz harding cutting his finger in the kitchen to get out of playing mighty bath- runnjgn scared of our 1 game winning streak (did it last week tbf i think)

Assume bris could end hughes loan and play him against us in theory!? Sure they won't.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 19:43

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
hasta
No way Randall will be back.

Who is their 9 I wonder, not our problem I know but intriguing nonetheless!

Maybe they'll recall Nathan Hughes! On a connected note will he be allowed to play against them?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 19:51

Quote:
hasta
Would be hilars if Ford went back to Tigers to bench behind Freddie.

I think he might. Borthwick is a good enough man-manager not to parachute the golden boy back in especially as Burns has found some form. Also if we know anything from Burns it's that his confidence is pretty fragile but he responds well to being backed when playing well.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 23:25

Hughes can't play against Bris. Faletau can though.

Honestly I suspect you're right about Borthwick, OM. Ford's off anyway.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 02/03/2022 23:47

Quote:
OldMarovian
Quote:
hasta
Would be hilars if Ford went back to Tigers to bench behind Freddie.

I think he might. Borthwick is a good enough man-manager not to parachute the golden boy back in especially as Burns has found some form. Also if we know anything from Burns it's that his confidence is pretty fragile but he responds well to being backed when playing well.

Given that Tigs are nailed on for the Pay-offs and George is pushing off to Sale at the end of the season, I'd be very surprised if Borthers *didn't* bench him.

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 07:29

Quote:
hasta
Hughes can't play against Bris. Faletau can though.
Honestly I suspect you're right about Borthwick, OM. Ford's off anyway.

Hughes more likely to play for briz than us (don't think that will happen)

Out backrow could be along the lines of bayliss/reid, underhill, faletau. Is coetzee likely to be back available?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 09:27

Reid, Underhill, Faletau …. phwoarrrr

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 10:25

Will Morozov play I wonder?

The Russian para athletes were cleared to compete at the Winter Paralympics initially then the reaction of those competing against them was so strong that the have to reverse that decision and ban them.

Similarly with FIFA and EUEFA. So I wonder if something similar might arise with rugby players not wanting to compete against a Russian rugby player irrespective of his stance (unknown) on the invasion of the Ukraine by Russia.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 10:38

I would expect Bath to leave him out of the match day squad.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 11:07

The banning isn't of individual athletes, it's of teams/organisations that represent Russia. If Morozov wants to play for Bath I see no reason why he shouldn't.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 11:11

Personally I would be OK with Morozov playing.

The Olympic & FIFA boycotts are about teams - or Russian athletes representing their country.

He would not be - he would be representing an English club.

Add to that the need to keep ordinary Russian people sympathetic to our ideas of freedom and liberty. I believe that we should treat Russian individuals courteously and humanely unless they are openly in favour of Putin's aggression.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 11:13

I would normally want to separate sport and politics but this goes beyond politics. Surprised we don't have a thread on this yet but maybe with all the news coverage and shocking scenes it is good to visit a sports board and just talk about sport.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 14:28

+1 PGT
+1 B4thB4ck

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: copester (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 15:16

I totally agree. Happy for him to play as he is representing the club. Would probably be appropriate not wear the small flag on the Jersey though as other internationalls do.

adopted player, 24/25 Hame Faiva. 23/24 Ted Hill. 22/23 Cam Redpath. 21/22 Max Clark. 20/21 Henry Thomas. 19/20 Max Wright. 18/19 Cooper Vuna.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 15:23

+1 Copester. Would hate to see that flag on our shirt.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 15:25

Hasta, PG and others. Are you perhaps missing the point?
My post was NOT about the club not playing him or any governing body. In ALL the above examples plus F1 the governing body was happy for participation albeit with caveats (as neutrals) but they had to reverse their decision because other competitors objected to their participation.

I've no objection to him playing but I do feel some sort of statement be made about his views on it and I also wonder if the rest of the players on both sides have been asked.

By agreeing to take the field with Morosov are we not ignoring the fact that he comes from a country that is being investigated for war crimes. Even if he condemns the invasion isn't the point of such bans to apply pressure that get fed back into the Russian nation.

There has to be a Ukrainian connection somewhere in our two clubs, would we ignore a request not to take the field from some such individual.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 15:32

Saturday 5 March

Bath Rugby v Bristol Bears (Recreation Ground) – 3pm Kick-off. Coverage on PRTV Live

Referee: Luke Pearce

Assistant Referees: Sara Cox & Rob Warburton

TMO: Stuart Terheege

Citing Officer: John Byett

[www.premiershiprugby.com]

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 15:37

Quote:
shipwrecked

I've no objection to him playing but I do feel some sort of statement be made about his views on it and I also wonder if the rest of the players on both sides have been asked.

My traditional view is that it's not any of our business what his personal viewpoint is nor should we compel anyone to make the 'correct' statement a condition of their employment.

As far as I can see, he has said or done nothing that can be considered offensive to Ukraine and as long as that continues he should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Agreed that while sanctions are on Russia, the flag on the neck must go.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 15:51

Countries are not their people. He's not an oligarch. In absolutely no way should there be a Russian flag on our jersey.

Morosov should also be prepared that he might get asked this question (/the club might get asked it) and if he doesn't have a the ability to give a very clear answer then it's going to be a problem.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hemington (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 16:32

Even if he hated Putin and his war (which hopefully he does having lived in and worked in Europe) he couldn't say so with family presumably still in Russia.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 16:41

sw

I think The Bear and hemington have answered you on that one.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 18:11

I'm not arguing a point just pointing out what has already happened in three different sports.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 18:38

Quote:
P G Tips
Personally I would be OK with Morozov playing.
The Olympic & FIFA boycotts are about teams - or Russian athletes representing their country.

He would not be - he would be representing an English club.

Add to that the need to keep ordinary Russian people sympathetic to our ideas of freedom and liberty. I believe that we should treat Russian individuals courteously and humanely unless they are openly in favour of Putin's aggression.

PG

I don't think any other British businesses are 'suspending' their Russian employees are they, simply for being Russian? Which is, in effect, what it would be by not selecting him assuming he was fit and his head was in the right place

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 18:58

So the Winter Paralympic athletes were wrong to decide that competing as neutrals was wrong and they should have just let them be part of the games then. Interesting point of view.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 19:02

sw

On the news just now an athlete was shown wearing a track suit inscribed on the back "Neutral Athlete Russia."

Quite apart from the obvious contradiction, the clear message is national representation.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 19:07

Quote:
P G Tips
sw
On the news just now an athlete was shown wearing a track suit inscribed on the back "Neutral Athlete Russia."

Quite apart from the obvious contradiction, the clear message is national representation.

PG

Again PG, tell that to the athletes and footballers who reject this "neutral" status and simply would rather not compete at all if they have to share the arena with Russian athletes.

Its not logical or ethical its emotional!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 19:08

I mean, given the systemic doping, it's also logical.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 19:25

The emotions of the world bar a few despots like Putin is that Russia is a pariah state and should be treated as such in international sporting arenas,

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 19:56

Coochie - agreed in international sporting arenas. You mention Russia and I am happy that sporting bodies interpret that as Russian sporting bodies and constituent clubs. I happen to disagree about treating Russian individuals representing non -Russian clubs like that.

sw - you appear to justify action against individual Russian sportsmen on the basis of emotion. What is the limit to that action? Is assault, driven by anti -Russian emotion for instance, justifiable in your argument? Or as gaz has illustrated, suspending an employee from his place of work?

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: TomReagan (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 20:36

A few posts on this subject on the Rumours thread I think? I'm with PGT, gaz and others. I see a clear distinction between Russian teams and sportspeople representing Russia rather than Russian individuals competing in domestic competitions. There is a consistent message from those introducing sanctions that it's done to isolate Putin, who is behind the war, rather than Russian people. It's also naive to demand that as a condition of being allowed to compete Russian athletes need to condemn their country. Those who feel too angry about Russia's actions to compete against its people-I get that, but what can any of them do? Putin listens to 2 or 3 advisers, and even then, only if they spout what he wants to hear. I actually feel sympathy for a lot of Russian people who probably hate Putin as much, if not more than us, as they see him turn their country into a reviled, pariah state and see their businesses and savings disappear. Turning our revulsion against all Russians seems both wrong and counterproductive if we want to win over the Russian people.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 20:45

Not at all and I am not justifying action or arguing that it is right or wrong.
A lot of countries harbour a grudge against Russia Hasta pointed out the systematic doping of athletes.
It is simply that to put a Russian athlete on the field of play and expect no reaction from Ukrainians, Germans, Poles etc is unrealistic.
It’s not suspension either some times it’s better to recognise that this could be a problem.
He is entitled to play but I think it could promote an emotional response perhaps from players, spectators or in the press.

The parathletes in China simply didn’t want to be reminded of his nationality.

Hide the flag you say but he is still Russian and for relatives of anyone who experienced a cruise missile hitting a residential tower block that reminder may well be too much.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 20:48

Quote:
P G Tips
Coochie - agreed in international sporting arenas. You mention Russia and I am happy that sporting bodies interpret that as Russian sporting bodies and constituent clubs. I happen to disagree about treating Russian individuals representing non -Russian clubs like that.
sw - you appear to justify action against individual Russian sportsmen on the basis of emotion. What is the limit to that action? Is assault, driven by anti -Russian emotion for instance, justifiable in your argument? Or as gaz has illustrated, suspending an employee from his place of work?

PG

PGT my whole argument is very simple sanctions have to hurt the people who in turn will get rid of their mad man. Russia has to be treated as a pariah not individuals who are caught up in this, and Russia needs to be isolated from all sporting, cultural, etc events to ram in the point to the Russian people that their Government and State are now pariahs.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 20:56

Ps banning individuals is hardly likely to hav any affect at all on non international arenas. So as I said Morozov should play, with one proviso if the other side had a Ukrainian player and both have a National stance then both players should be excluded.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 20:57

Yes sw, if he were to play there is a risk that opponents might object on grounds of his nationality.

However, on the paralympic example, I believe that the objection was not so much nationality on its own but representation - and the propaganda opportunity Russia would gain.

Read the fron page of today’s Times. “Russian captives cry for their mothers”. There you can see the powerful message of a different kind of emotion - and of humane and sympathetic treatment.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: The Bear (IP Logged)

Date: 03/03/2022 23:08

The couple in the flat above me are Russian (definitely not oligarchs). I don't know what their views are and they seem perfectly happy. They're not at war with me, they're no shills of Putin. As far as I'm aware they contribute nothing back to Russia or even advocate for it in our conversations. Sanctioning them would achieve absolutely nothing and is just vindictive. It's similar for Morosov.

We don't have to treat individuals badly. These people are not the Russian state. We used to (I'm the west) pride ourselves are treating people correctly irrespective of their origin - not tainting everyone with the same brush.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 10:03

I think first and foremost it is up to the player, it has to be right for his mental health and feelings - Secondly, the last thing you want to do is give the opposition any extra motivation.

The problem is that as much as the vast majority of the Russian public are opposed to the situation they are bound to their dictators actions by association.

Putin was not elected and democracy in the Kremlin is non-existent and he has shown he has nothing but contempt for his people and is only interested in his own wealth and status - but the only way the world can get to him is by convincing the personnel who support him in the Kremlin/the Oligarchs that he needs to go.

Unfortunately this means sanctions and isolation of the Country and it's citizens. The issue with Russian nationals as it is and was in all conflicts is that people who may not be informed or don't care will attack verbally and otherwise innocent victims who happen or they perceive to be Russian.

My son actually informed me that he had to step in the other day in London as an Eastern European woman was being verbally abused by a group of people - it turned out this lady was Polish but the group didn't bother to ask they just assumed - that is my real worry - history has shown how cruel vigilantes and public can be.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 11:16

Sam Nixon signed by bris. Available immediately

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 11:46

Heart breaking watching the women and children looking bewildered and upset getting off buses in safe countries today though heart warming to see the reception and care they are receiving.

Ordinary Russians, whether sports stars or not are between a rock and a hard place of course but I get the impression this is something only they can resolve or at least take the lead with.

My wife has looked into volunteering and I hope our country takes its share of refugees. Her late godfather was from Ukraine, he lived through WW2, got displaced (kidnapped by the army) on his own aged 15 to work in labour camps in Germany and never saw his parents again. He ended up being repatriated to near Bath after the war and it was always humbling to hear him talk through his early life, putting the idea of me having a bad day fully into context. He never wanted to talk about it until he had a glass of whisky to ease the painful memories. History repeats itself.

I guess we should be moving this sort of chat to an OT thread of it's own?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:00

Team Up.Underhill and Faletau return.

Bath Rugby side to play Bristol Bears

15 Tom de Glanville, 14 Semesa Rokoduguni, 13 Jonathan Joseph, 12 Max Clark, 11 Will Butt, 10 Danny Cipriani, 9 Ben Spencer; 1 Valeriy Morozov, 2 Tom Doughty, 3 D’Arcy Rae, 4 Mike Williams, 5 Ewan Richards, 6 Josh Bayliss ©, 7 Sam Underhill, 8 Taulupe Faletau

Replacements

16 Jacques du Toit, 17 Lewis Boyce, 18 Ma’afu Fia, 19 Will Spencer, 20 Jaco Coetzee, 21 Joe Simpson, 22 Orlando Bailey, 23 Joe Cokanasiga

P G Tips

Jaco Coetzee: my adopted Player, 2023-24.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:02

Unavailable list:

Unavailable due to injury, loan or international duty: Tom Ellis, Cameron Redpath, Juan Schoeman, Beno Obano, Anthony Watson, Ruaridh McConnochie, Tom Dunn, Johannes Jonker, Tian Schoeman, Gabriel Hamer-Webb, Ethan Staddon, Josh McNally, Miles Reid, Will Muir, Darren Atkins, Kieran Verden, Max Green, Nathan Hughes, Charlie Ewels and Will Stuart.

P G Tips

Jaco Coetzee: my adopted Player, 2023-24.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:02

Reid injured apparently sad smiley

Mojo rested?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:04

Now the team has been announced and decision made, may I suggest that further chat on the politics of Russia in sport is started on a new thread as B4thB4ck has proposed?

That way we can enjoy speculation about, comment on etc the match itself.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:06

And the Bears' lineup:

Bristol Bears team to face Bath Rugby at the Recreation Ground on Saturday, March 5th (3pm KO):
15. Ioan Lloyd (58 apps); 14. Siva Naulago (14 apps), 13. Semi Radradra (32 apps), 12. Antoine Frisch (7 apps), 11. Alapati Leiua (94 apps); 10. Callum Sheedy (122 apps), 9. Oscar Lennon (2 apps); 1. Jake Woolmore (100 apps), 2. Harry Thacker (67 apps), 3. Jake Armstrong (24 apps), 4. Dave Attwood (67 apps), 5. Joe Joyce (c) (141 apps), 6. Chris Vui (84 apps), 7. Jake Heenan (66 apps), 8. Sam Jeffries (44 apps).

System players: 16. Bryan Byrne (25 apps), 17. Yann Thomas (84 apps), 18. Ashley Challenger (4 apps), 19. Steven Luatua (91 apps), 20. Dan Thomas (103 apps), 21. Theo Strang (5 apps), 22. Tiff Eden (17 apps), 23. Piers O’Conor (98 apps).

Unavailable: Kyle Sinckler, John Afoa, Max Lahiff, Fitz Harding, Harry Randall, Andy Uren, Tom Whiteley, Toby Venner, Max Green, Sam Bedlow, Toby Fricker, Charles Piutau, Luke Morahan, Charlie Powell.

P G Tips

Jaco Coetzee: my adopted Player, 2023-24.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: redneck17 (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:09

Quote:
charlieboa
Sam Nixon signed by bris. Available immediately

But not selected - bit odd considering they're struggling at prop.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:09

Oscar Lennon!

Recent one month loan "Scrum-half Lennon, 21, joins from Hartpury College and represented Bristol twice earlier this season in the Premiership Rugby Cup."

Talk about in at the deep end.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:13

Tempted to say we have a stronger pack, they have stronger backs.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Bristol Ian (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:16

Quote:
shipwrecked
Oscar Lennon!
Recent one month loan "Scrum-half Lennon, 21, joins from Hartpury College and represented Bristol twice earlier this season in the Premiership Rugby Cup."

Talk about in at the deep end.

["Trigger" warning - I'm about to launch into a well-worn stereotype that may may upset some ~~scrumhalfs~~ people]
Weeeeeeeeell... you know what scrumhalfs are like - "can you do a job on Saturday?", "Of course I can! I'll have Spencer in my pocket all game like a snotty hanky! And I'll referee the whole game too!"

You're right though. Could be a rude awakening...

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:21

Im surprised that Will Spencer is sub and not starting. Bookies have it close (Bris by 3). Looking forward to it.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:23

Considering all the noise around a bris injury crisis interesting that they are missing 14 vs our 20!!

Appreciate its specifically at 3 and 9 they have an issue whereas as we like to have a mini crisis across every position

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:30

We have big experience in key positions to make the right calls at the right times (8, 9, 10).

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: dr.bath1865 (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 12:47

Considering this is our last league game for 3 weeks, I'd have liked to have seen Mojo start, which just shows how important he's become to us in a very short space of time. He just creates so much and offers such a great threat. However, he's played a tonne of rugby, so fair enough if he needs a rest.

Good looking XXIII. What a difference it makes having the likes of Boyce, Spencer, Coetzee, Bailey and JCok on the bench. If we can keep their dangerous names quiet, we've got a good chance.

Wouldn't it be nice to win a game comfortably? Can't see it happening – it's a 3 point game either way this one! – but roll on the day when we're 28-9 up with 15 minutes to go. Still, even if we were to be in that position tomorrow, it'll still be impossible to relax!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 13:18

Agree its great to have a bench again where you think players can actually add something when they come on.

Boyce, spencer, coetzee, landy, coko especially

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 13:35

Good bench - the blueprint from last weekend - stay in the game then launch the "Finishers" - Most games are won in the last quarter.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 13:43

Quote:
Ali1969
Good bench - the blueprint from last weekend - stay in the game then launch the "Finishers" - Most games are won in the last quarter.

Given last week I'm not sure we have that nailed to be honest!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Bath Hammer (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 14:05

Where are the tries coming from in the absence of Will Muir? Hopefully Joe Cock can deliver again. Despite all the anguish the Bears look pretty strong.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 14:14

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
Ali1969
Good bench - the blueprint from last weekend - stay in the game then launch the "Finishers" - Most games are won in the last quarter.

Given last week I'm not sure we have that nailed to be honest!

SW it is pretty strong the likes of Bailey and Big Joe coming on and Simpson has always been a player capable of hurting teams as they tire - he still has that searing speed - upfront that is a seriously combative and very heavy replacement front row along with the lump that is Spencer and the power of Coetzee - I am confident they will make a difference.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 14:43

Quote:
charlieboa
Considering all the noise around a bris injury crisis interesting that they are missing 14 vs our 20!!
Appreciate its specifically at 3 and 9 they have an issue whereas as we like to have a mini crisis across every position

Well we’ve won the unavailable list 20-14, I’d be delighted if we could repeat that score on the pitch.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 15:20

Quote:
Ali1969
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
Ali1969
Good bench - the blueprint from last weekend - stay in the game then launch the "Finishers" - Most games are won in the last quarter.

Given last week I'm not sure we have that nailed to be honest!

SW it is pretty strong the likes of Bailey and Big Joe coming on and Simpson has always been a player capable of hurting teams as they tire - he still has that searing speed - upfront that is a seriously combative and very heavy replacement front row along with the lump that is Spencer and the power of Coetzee - I am confident they will make a difference.

Sub at 70 minutes by all means, tactical subbing with seconds on the clock? Not so much!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 16:23

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
Ali1969
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
Ali1969
Good bench - the blueprint from last weekend - stay in the game then launch the "Finishers" - Most games are won in the last quarter.

Given last week I'm not sure we have that nailed to be honest!

SW it is pretty strong the likes of Bailey and Big Joe coming on and Simpson has always been a player capable of hurting teams as they tire - he still has that searing speed - upfront that is a seriously combative and very heavy replacement front row along with the lump that is Spencer and the power of Coetzee - I am confident they will make a difference.

Sub at 70 minutes by all means, tactical subbing with seconds on the clock? Not so much!

Totally agree SW whole point of having a bench like that is for it to make a difference and to do that you need a minimum of 10 minutes preferably 20-25 minutes and empty the tank.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 16:37

Quote:
The Bear
The couple in the flat above me are Russian (definitely not oligarchs). I don't know what their views are and they seem perfectly happy. They're not at war with me, they're no shills of Putin. As far as I'm aware they contribute nothing back to Russia or even advocate for it in our conversations. Sanctioning them would achieve absolutely nothing and is just vindictive. It's similar for Morosov.
We don't have to treat individuals badly. These people are not the Russian state. We used to (I'm the west) pride ourselves are treating people correctly irrespective of their origin - not tainting everyone with the same brush.

Sanctioning individual Russian people by denying them the opportunity to practice their profession/trade simply for being Russian is not only vindictive it is also potentially unlawful
discrimination because it is due primarily if not solely to their nationality

Equally an employer and in this case far less the fans have no right to know what his political position is. In Morozov's case his privacy should be respected and if he is available then he should be selected according to usual criteria

And, this may be a personal issue but I don't think using a term like 'pariah' is very helpful when referring to the country. If it were me and I were on the side of peace and humanity along with many of my countryfolk I wouldn't like to referred to as someone coming from a pariah country - that can only inflame and escalate.

The POC banning athletes at the Para-Olympics is very different. They are not the employer and there is a wider justification of national representation etc

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 16:54

PG made a 'move on' or 'start a thread' request on this, I've chosen the former, I've made my point.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 18:57

So Marler is allowed to play for Quins, yet Stewart Isn’t released to Bath. Jones double standards?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: TomReagan (IP Logged)

Date: 04/03/2022 19:24

As with the previous Quins game, Marler requested he was allowed to play. Good on him.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 02:22

Quote:
Ali1969
Good bench - the blueprint from last weekend - stay in the game then launch the "Finishers" - Most games are won in the last quarter.

Ate not ALL games won in the last quarter?

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 10:31

Verden and atkins in the London Scottish squad today to play Ealing which explains them being on the unavailable list

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 11:34

Quote:
charlieboa
Verden and atkins in the London Scottish squad today to play Ealing which explains them being on the unavailable list

How on earth did you spot that CB?

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 11:38

Quote:
joethefanatic
Quote:
Ali1969
Good bench - the blueprint from last weekend - stay in the game then launch the "Finishers" - Most games are won in the last quarter.

Ate not ALL games won in the last quarter?

Hi Joe -Your right that's why I put Most.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 11:40

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
charlieboa
Verden and atkins in the London Scottish squad today to play Ealing which explains them being on the unavailable list

How on earth did you spot that CB?

Bath shared the London Scottish team on twitter.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 11:42

Quote:
hasta
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
charlieboa
Verden and atkins in the London Scottish squad today to play Ealing which explains them being on the unavailable list

How on earth did you spot that CB?

Bath shared the London Scottish team on twitter.

Heard of that, isn't that the social media thingy they can't get in Russia any more? winking smiley

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:07

Bris pack showing its dominance already. 7-0 after 2 mins

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:08

And another maul and another 7pts. Only 5 mins in

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:17

Our ball, we knock it on on our own line. Scrum pen from the scrum to Bris. Gone for the corner. A few phases and a try in the opposite corner. 0-21 14 mins

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:21

Discipline is letting us down. 5 pens already in 18 mins

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Weeksie (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:25

Most of them from Morozov

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: ken_jnr (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:29

8 minutes without conceding a try. The comeback is on…

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:34

Bris yellow card for repeated pens in their 22

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:38

High hit on Butt. Bris winger red carded. 6 mins with Bris with 13 men

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: dr.bath1865 (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:41

Now, let’s see if I come to regret my harsh assessment of Newc’s efforts v 13 last night!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:43

Roko try. Conv missed

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:46

Pen Bris. 5-24 at HT

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 15:47

How many penalties has Morosov conceded? Boyce on now pls.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:05

Bris yellow for Sheedy. Deliberate knock on when Bath were on the move forward

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:07

JJ try. Conv good. 12-24

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:10

TdG with a nice break. Big Joe down the wing. Recycled back inside and Faleteau for the try. 19-24

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: ken_jnr (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:17

Quote:
ken_jnr
8 minutes without conceding a try. The comeback is on…

Time to bring home the win and TBP!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:24

Game is there to win but the accuracy is not there right now. 60mins gone

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:28

Big Joe in the corner. But foot in touch.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:38

2nd time lucky

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:39

Big Joe in the corner..no issue this time. 24-24 72 mins

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:43

Bris pen 24-27 76 mins

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:50

PT to seal it?

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:51

Bayliss taken out close to Bris line. Time is up. Ref looking at pen try. No pen try. Yellow card. One shot at winning this

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:52

Yasssss you beauty!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:53

TdG try! Bath win!! 29-27

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:55

Should absolutely have been a PT.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Never In Doubt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:57

Amazing finish. Lots of problems still not fixed and won't be without more front five bulk but the spirit is back.

I think we might even be off the bottom.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:57

Quote:
hasta
Should absolutely have been a PT.

Yep. The TMO said the cover was there is debatable. Bailey was close enough he would have almost fallen over the try line

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: ken_jnr (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:57

Quote:
ken_jnr
Quote:
ken_jnr
8 minutes without conceding a try. The comeback is on…

Time to bring home the win and TBP!

Called it!

I’d rather we didn’t need two yellows and a red card to make us competitive but a win is a win especially against Bristol!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:58

Quote:
hasta
Should absolutely have been a PT.

My bias absolutely agrees - comes down to "probable" vs "almost certain".
Take Strang out, and Bayliss is first to the ball; 1m from the line and with momentum - my money's on him, even though he'd be cutting back into the defenders.

I would have called it differently, but it was no howler of a decision (actually, Pearce was bloody good today) and I have to acknowledge that I'm more biased than the officials

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:05:17:00:36 by Which Tyler.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Never In Doubt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 16:59

Can we sign Ewan Richards up for the next 10 years.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:00

Quote:
Never In Doubt
Can we sign Ewan Richards up for the next 10 years.

He was outstanding today

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: SJS (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:01

Quote:
hasta
Should absolutely have been a PT.

Agreed. No way Luatua gets there to stop Bayliss.

We did make hard work against 14 and then 13 men, but a win’s a win. And after scoring 4 tries and he win with Worcs losing against Irish do we climb to equal bottom?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:02

Off the bottom, baby!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:03

Ewan Richards MOTM. And we look much better with distributors at both 10/12.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Mike the Taxi (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:03

I know I've never been good at maths, but doesn't that take Bath above Wuss in the table?

Well done team!!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:05

What a game to miss! Couldn’t go because of a bug! Not C!

Watched on PRTV great commentary from Flats and RMcC.

Well done a great win and fight back. Brizzle should have won that even with a man down but frankly their decision making was more bizarre than ours and eventually they didn’t know how to keep their points advantage!

We were still inaccurate for most of the game and gave too many pens away.

Great result I am very happy!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:13

Pat Lam on camera waiting to be interviewed was remonstrating with a supporter. “ Be careful what you say” “Come and say it down here” Hope this is not a Bath supporter!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:13

Quote:
SJS
And after scoring 4 tries and he win with Worcs losing against Irish do we climb to equal bottom?

http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=1207

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:05:17:14:37 by Which Tyler.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:14

Would like to thank Bristol for a total lack of discipline.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathPatriot (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:15

Unbelievable win. Well done Bath👏👏

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: supermarinematt (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:22

Quote:
OutsideBath
Would like to thank Bristol for a total lack of discipline.

This along The decision to kick the 3pts when they had us on our line and their pack and only 5 mins or so left in the game

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Rokobilly (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:26

Fantastic day at The Rec. Looked for all the world like it would be another horrible beating after 15 minutes. Bristol shot themselves in the feet time and time again but who cares. We need a bit of luck and we are off the bottom!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:26

Also to the insane decision to clear out well beyond the ball with 45 secs left.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Rokobilly (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:27

Oh and take a bow Ewan Richards. Immense.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:41

Quote:
CoochieCoo
Pat Lam on camera waiting to be interviewed was remonstrating with a supporter. “ Be careful what you say” “Come and say it down here” Hope this is not a Bath supporter!

Agree, it didn't sound good did it? Thought him and Joe Joyce were very professional in the post match interviews

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:50

Quote:
Never In Doubt
Can we sign Ewan Richards up for the next 10 years.

Have been saying (boring people) for a while that he is absolute class.

Was immense for eng u20 last summer at 6.

I expect he can play both positions v well in the future in the way the likes of lawes and itoje do ( don't apologie for putting him in that category, think he is absolutely a future full international)

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Dorset Boy (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:50

5 tries after 4 last week?! And off the bottom too!
Great to beat Bristol, it's been too long.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:52

Quote:
CoochieCoo
What a game to miss! Couldn’t go because of a bug! Not C!
Watched on PRTV great commentary from Flats and RMcC.!

I don't suppose rmc mentioned what his injury is CC?

Don't think any details have been shared by the club? May well have missed it.

Maybe they couldn't face communicating it if it was yet another acl. Sounded a nasty knee injury was it?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Duke of Earl (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 17:58

Some .very bitter and spiteful comments on the Bristol board. They are very unhappy.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: ChippenhamRoman (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 18:15

Quote:
Duke of Earl
Some .very bitter and spiteful comments on the Bristol board. They are very unhappy.

Beautiful!

J

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 18:16

It was decorating and radio rather than PRTV for me.

Thought it a good choice at HT and a poor choice at FT!

The radio commentary was as usual quite poor in terms of no idea where the ball was but it does come across as unbiased as they were critical of Bath the whole game.

Not sure what the Bristol complaints are so will look but there was talk of the ball going forward before the last yellow so maybe it was that.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 18:21

I enjoyed cooch on the wireless. Didn't pull any punches (like when he played!)

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: dr.bath1865 (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 18:29

For me, nailed on PT but TdG scoring it was a much sweeter feeling!

Richards MotM for the 80 minutes… then in minute 80 he promoted himself to MotYear by skinning Radrada and winning us the game. Amazing for such a young lad. Huge potential.

The bench won it. Having Du Toit, Boyce, Spencer and Coetzee coming on gave us just enough. Fair play to Bristol, who almost pulled off a remarkable win.

Goodness, 12th place never felt so sweet.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 18:54

Quote:
charlieboa
I enjoyed cooch on the wireless. Didn't pull any punches (like when he played!)

Yes, I heard it on the radio as well, he was brutal in his criticism at times, love the win but 21-0 down after 20 mins, we were luck to get the numbers advantage and threw away chances to close it out earlier. Still lets just enjoy it while we can and revel in Ewan Richards showing his class at this level.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: dcsh (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 19:09

Great win and brilliant to see the guys dig deep at the end!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: memnoch (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 19:40

Fair play Bath, after 16 mins I thought we were going to stuff you, after thinking all the way over on the train you would stuff us.

Stupid indiscipline cost us dearly, but in saying that, your boys took their chances well, finding the space that the fully justifiable cards created for them.

Major work on for us Discipline!

Strangs slip in front of the posts with a walk in was gutting and then for him to give away the pen and get a yellow with time up was very foolish.

Great banter on the East terrace today, apart from the score, a very enjoyable afternoons rugby.

Good luck for the rest of the season (except on the 18th in the prem cup lol).

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 19:56

Quote:
memnoch
Fair play Bath, after 16 mins I thought we were going to stuff you, after thinking all the way over on the train you would stuff us.
Stupid indiscipline cost us dearly, but in saying that, your boys took their chances well, finding the space that the fully justifiable cards created for them.

Major work on for us Discipline!

Strangs slip in front of the posts with a walk in was gutting and then for him to give away the pen and get a yellow with time up was very foolish.

Great banter on the East terrace today, apart from the score, a very enjoyable afternoons rugby.

Good luck for the rest of the season (except on the 18th in the prem cup lol).

Thanks, listening to the radio they were very complimentary on Bristol's defence with 13/14 for so long so you can take positives.

An odd experience reading the Bristol forum (wanted to see what the Bristol view of the final pen was as commentary suggested the ball went forward beforehand). It seems calling our team B*** or Barf or worse is a habit copied from the Glos forum. All a bit childish in my opinion but there you go.

Happy to call Bristol Bears by their proper name!

Discipline is such a tough but to crack, every team suffers at some point.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 20:06

Two massive improvements from first half of season

1. Going 21 - 0 down in first 15 minutes would have been a 50 point plus hammering

2. We would have found a way to balls up that final series of pick and drives long before it went out wide and quick

Gives me a lot of hope for next season

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: dr.bath1865 (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 20:18

Agree, gaz. TdG admitted as much post game saying that after 20, mins. a few months ago, we’d have lost by 50. Sure, the red card helped but a) cards come as a result of pressure (+ stupidity) and b) it’s interesting how resilient teams are with 14 men, especially if the man lost is a winger. We were holding on v Wasps before TdG’s sin bin. 14 is just manageable. 13 not so much.

Must say, thought the Bris young 9 did well and their 129th choice TH did a good job. It wasn’t until Boyce and Spencer came on and Attwood went off that we got the upper hand up front. On subs, I was sure hooking B Spencer was crazy, and it was, right up until Lloyd thought it’d be a good idea to take out the legendary counter rucker Danny Cipriani beyond the ruck. (Jokes aside, Cip didn’t shirk any contact today).

Oh and Richards MotM, but Luke Pearce not far behind, the failure to give a PT aside, although that was on the guidance of his TMO. Compare Pearce’s attitude, communication with the players and empathy for the game with Dickson last night and…. well, you can’t.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 21:24

That was not a great win- in terms of performance.

That was a great win- in how it will be remembered. To me it will rank alongside other derbies like:

* The battle of Kingsholm 2014 Gloucester 17-18 Bath
* Bath's first JP Cup win 1984, Bath 10- 9 Bristol
* Pilkington Cup QF 1989 Bath 14-12 Bristol.

Much as it is great to wallop derby rivals, many of the most memorable wins have something of a comeback, controversy or late winner about them - this had all 3.

A memorable day.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: by (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 21:25

Great win, great game of rugby. I think both teams can come out of that with their heads held high.

Richards is a real find. Rae, Williams, Cips, Butt and TdG all had great games. Du Toit, W. Spencer, Coetzee and Coka added a lot coming off the bench.

Equally for Bristol I thought Thacker (yellow card aside), Vui, Lennon, Frisch and Lloyd were outstanding. Can't quite believe that, that was Lennon's first premiership start, I'm sure he'll be snapped up from the championship quite quickly.

As others said, the tide seemed to turn when Attwood went off but I was surprised at how well Bristol hung on.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 21:28

I had a most enjoyable journey home, by train into N Somerset via Bristol Temple Meads.

First leg met a group of Bristol supporters claiming that Naulago's was 'in no way a red card" and taunting me that Bath "could only win when Bristol had been reduced to 13 men". Obvious answer: keep 15 on the field!

Second leg. No abuse or complaint but a series of fans in Bristol colours giving me odd looks. Somebody (not dressed in any club colours) asked me "what was the game like?" My answer: "Dramatic. And the right result."

Cue grumpy looks from Bristol supporters.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 21:36

Just a note of love for Orlando's bullet pass to TdG for the final try.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Kidney Stone (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 23:12

Astonishing recovery after sleep walking into the first 30 minutes.

Richards, TDG, Baylis and JC in the second half were the standouts for me.

Sam looked short on match fitness, and Ben Spencer seemed to struggle to get any quick ball away.

Definitely more resilient than earlier in the season..

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 23:18

The difference it makes being able to bring on Boyce, Du Toit, Spencer, Coetzee compared to, well, the whole rest of the season is remarkable.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Bath Blues (IP Logged)

Date: 05/03/2022 23:32

Well done Bath.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 04:08

Just watched the game. There is a famous quote attributed to Wolfgang Pauli - "That (scientific) paper is so bad, its not even wrong." Well, that first 20 minutes was so bad, it wasn't even rugby. Let's be clear if the red card had not happened, we would have been absolutely slaughtered. As it was we played most of the match against 13 men and still it was only a one score game, won in the 84th minute. Yes, we fought back well and, yes, you have to make your advantages count but Bris must be wondering how on earth they managed to lose that game.

We were frankly poor and that is very disappointing after last weeks display. The forwards were playing as individuals and the backs did not seem to understand what Cips wanted. And the box kicking and competition was simply atrocious. Lets not let a ridiculously dramatic win against our closest rivals blind us to the fact that 99 times out of 100 we would have got nothing from that game except a lot of embarrasment.

My MotM - Ewan Richards. It seems our second row problem might be going away. Very rapidly.

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: copester (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 05:25

Quote:
joethefanatic
Just watched the game. There is a famous quote attributed to Wolfgang Pauli - "That (scientific) paper is so bad, its not even wrong." Well, that first 20 minutes was so bad, it wasn't even rugby. Let's be clear if the red card had not happened, we would have been absolutely slaughtered. As it was we played most of the match against 13 men and still it was only a one score game, won in the 84th minute. Yes, we fought back well and, yes, you have to make your advantages count but Bris must be wondering how on earth they managed to lose that game.
We were frankly poor and that is very disappointing after last weeks display. The forwards were playing as individuals and the backs did not seem to understand what Cips wanted. And the box kicking and competition was simply atrocious. Lets not let a ridiculously dramatic win against our closest rivals blind us to the fact that 99 times out of 100 we would have got nothing from that game except a lot of embarrasment.

My MotM - Ewan Richards. It seems our second row problem might be going away. Very rapidly.

Thats Rugby though Joe, Yes we were awful early and yes the cards obviously helped us (but without my rose tinted spectacles) the cards came from us stressing their defence and fighting back. This would not of happened before Christmas. I was at Wasps where we were winning with 10 mins to go until TDGs yellow put us down to 13, Red/Yellow cards are effecting plenty of games ATM. Personally I feel we are now running moves and scoring tries we could only dream about a few seasons back when we were over obsessed with the pick and go and driving Maul. Probably some credit to Hatley/Williams, Its been noted on here that it looks like Hooper has taken a backward step in team affairs since Griffiths took over. Things look to be slowly improving.

adopted player, 24/25 Hame Faiva. 23/24 Ted Hill. 22/23 Cam Redpath. 21/22 Max Clark. 20/21 Henry Thomas. 19/20 Max Wright. 18/19 Cooper Vuna.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:06:09:29:47 by CoochieCoo.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 05:34

Quote:
charlieboa
Quote:
Never In Doubt
Can we sign Ewan Richards up for the next 10 years.

Have been saying (boring people) for a while that he is absolute class.

Was immense for eng u20 last summer at 6.

I expect he can play both positions v well in the future in the way the likes of lawes and itoje do ( don't apologie for putting him in that category, think he is absolutely a future full international)

Call up from Eddie as one of his ‘apprentice/wildcards’ incoming?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 08:08

Quote:
joethefanatic
Just watched the game. There is a famous quote attributed to Wolfgang Pauli - "That (scientific) paper is so bad, its not even wrong." Well, that first 20 minutes was so bad, it wasn't even rugby. Let's be clear if the red card had not happened, we would have been absolutely slaughtered. As it was we played most of the match against 13 men and still it was only a one score game, won in the 84th minute. Yes, we fought back well and, yes, you have to make your advantages count but Bris must be wondering how on earth they managed to lose that game.
We were frankly poor and that is very disappointing after last weeks display. The forwards were playing as individuals and the backs did not seem to understand what Cips wanted. And the box kicking and competition was simply atrocious. Lets not let a ridiculously dramatic win against our closest rivals blind us to the fact that 99 times out of 100 we would have got nothing from that game except a lot of embarrasment.

My MotM - Ewan Richards. It seems our second row problem might be going away. Very rapidly.

Not watched but listened to full radio commentary and that aligns to what I heard.

Cooch was amazed how badly we started, how far second best our pack was. ..and then how long it took us to adjust once that was clear.

Take any wins this season and take any positives- 5 tries and some good individual performances together with finding a way to win.

Actually think we are the third worst team in the league now which is progress and something to build on.

Still feel v positive for next season but shouldn't kid ourselves how far we have to go

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 08:14

After 20 mins it felt like another 70 point drubbing was on the cards. When that last try went over the joy and relief was incredible.

What on earth happened to the players from the start, they looked lethargic, clueless and lacked any leadership. Looked totally under prepared for the game.

On the other hand Bristol seemed totally hyped up, maybe too much so?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 08:46

Quote:
Duke of Earl
Some .very bitter and spiteful comments on the Bristol board. They are very unhappy.

Understandable really, they have watched their team implode again and throw away a big lead. Never a good idea to post straight after a loss. I'm sure after a good nights sleep and a bacon butty this morning most are feeling a bit more pragmatic about it. Its only a game after all.

Looked like an embarrasment was on the cards after getting dominated physically and tactically for the first 15 mins. The seemed to wake up (didn't concede) for a short period before the cards rightly rolled in.

The red was the reddest of reds I've seen in a while TBH, none of the bears fans around me disagreed and were only shaking their heads at the stupidity of a guy who has just come back from an almost identical ban.

I was confused by some of the (largely aimless) box kicking and trying to take them on up front when they had 2 backs off the pitch - every time we chucked it out we were scoring. But thankfully it was all OK in the end. I also wondered why it wasn't a PT given that he just had to flop over the line if he caught it but thankfully it didn't matter.

I thought that Coetzee and Spencer made a positive impact, as did Orlando B. Richards played really well in the loose and I thought that Doughty looked good as well (solid all round game). Underhill was quiet, Morozov was a pen magnet, Cips did OK but to me very much looks like a guy at the end of his career (which he is!). Nice to see Joe C with a smile back on his face after everything he has been through on and off the pitch over the last couple of years. My opinion only but Butt still looks a bit wasted on the wing, look forward to seeing him in his favoured position and punching some holes for the flyers.

For Bris Attwood reminded me of what Bath lost out on when he left, he was immense. Their young 9 played really well I thought as well, agree with comments above we will definitely see more of him.

Finally yesterday showed me that, relegation or not, bottom of the table clashes can still be extremely enjoyable and painful to watch - used the full range of emotions given how it didn't really matter in terms of the league this year.

COYB!

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 08:48

Few observations from me.

Our maul defence is awful it feels like we conced multiple trys each week. Last week and this it improved after W Spencer came on. Our maul offense is nearly as bad. This was one of our strengths a few years ago. Read anything about Gloucs this year and they talk about the amount of time they spend on this.

It is difficult to judge how we were playing in those first 15 mins as we gave 3 soft trys.

We conceded silly pens not just as a defence when under pressure. The Bristol pens felt more deliberate acts to try and slow or stop attacks. When Thacker went we were on pen advantage so was really cynical. Both the other 2 yellows could have been pen trys and for Sheedy's 1st deliberate knock on I think there was another bath player on the outside giving an overlap which was not seen clearly on the 'wide' view shown to the ref. That tubs that to yellow. The point being we may nit have scored while Bristol were at 15 but the actions that reduced their numbers were a big part of the reason.

Flats and RMC on coms were saying that clearly a red but not deliberate and expressing sympathy and next week we will get all the stuff about reds should only be for serious foul play and not a misjudgement, look at the wings actions he dipped at the knees and drove up into contact. That is a choice not a misjudgement. Thus was his first game back from a ban for the same thing. I am nit sure how anyone can not consider that serious foul play.

As others have said Richards looks some talent but think at the moment we need bulk in the 2nd row with him.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 08:50

Lots of things improve when spencer comes on.

Continues to completely baffle me how little game time he gets when we have such a lightweight front 5.

He has missed a few games due to injury but largely been available since november

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 09:21

Just having a look at the match stats - I knew Richards was immense, but... purely there's a mistake there!
[www.premiershiprugby.com]

72 meters in 7 carries. 7 defenders beaten!

For context, Rocco made 75m in 10 carries ( defenders beaten), TdG made 55m in 9 carries (5 beaten), Coka made 66m in 7 carries (2 beaten) - which is also impressive, in only half a match.

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 09:30

The chron chap said only roko carried more metres (and only just) so that sounds right. Pretty crazy for someone playing lock

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 09:56

Yep the cards helped, but you can only play what is in front of you. It is imperative that all sides keep their discipline to ensure they have the maximum players on the field, let’s not forget the red happened when they already had a yellow and we were attacking quite affectively if I recall. The yellow was given for consistent offences in the red zone from Bath pressure. My point being the offence was caused under our pressure.

As stated the guy has form on this sort of offence and it was incumbent on him and his team to defend legally. The fact that their discipline was so poor not to be able to hold on to a 19 point lead leaves big questions on their coaching and tactics.

Small point, we have now beaten last year’s top of the table team and the champions!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: TG Kesmo (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 10:09

Agree with most of the above. For me TDG had a mixed game, butchered a nailed on 2 on 1 overlap in first half by not passing and getting tackled. Some of the passing especially to Roko was abysmal.
Definitely better off his right hand. Was glad he didn’t pass for the last try.
The post match interview with Ewan Richards was very telling - we stuck to our game plan.
Reallywhen you were 21-0 down ? it clearly was only effective against 13 or 14 men so we were lucky there. I think the selection was a fault not enough ballast in the scrum or maul defence. I think they assumed that Bris would play their usual open game and not attack our weaknesses. How stupid was that ??

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: elegia (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 10:30

Quote:
memnoch
Fair play Bath, after 16 mins I thought we were going to stuff you, after thinking all the way over on the train you would stuff us.
Stupid indiscipline cost us dearly, but in saying that, your boys took their chances well, finding the space that the fully justifiable cards created for them.

Major work on for us Discipline!

Strangs slip in front of the posts with a walk in was gutting and then for him to give away the pen and get a yellow with time up was very foolish.

Great banter on the East terrace today, apart from the score, a very enjoyable afternoons rugby.

Good luck for the rest of the season (except on the 18th in the prem cup lol).

strang had to go for that - if it had not been knocked back then he'd have arrived at the same time as the ball & that was his only chance to stop a much larger player with momentum

Siva's red card aside, Lloyd's clear out was the only stupid thing there
without that we'd have won
& you have to question why no yellow to bath with all the penalties they conceded in the first 20, but guess bristol finishing each attack off with a try probably saved them there.

still a v tense game & as someone said above always prefer the win when behind all the way until the end over the complete trouncing - seems harder won & just so much more pleasing

work ons for both teams

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 10:43

Quote:
BathMatt53
Quote:
Duke of Earl
Some .very bitter and spiteful comments on the Bristol board. They are very unhappy.

Understandable really, they have watched their team implode again and throw away a big lead. Never a good idea to post straight after a loss. I'm sure after a good nights sleep and a bacon butty this morning most are feeling a bit more pragmatic about it. Its only a game after all.

Looked like an embarrasment was on the cards after getting dominated physically and tactically for the first 15 mins. The seemed to wake up (didn't concede) for a short period before the cards rightly rolled in.

The red was the reddest of reds I've seen in a while TBH, none of the bears fans around me disagreed and were only shaking their heads at the stupidity of a guy who has just come back from an almost identical ban.

I was confused by some of the (largely aimless) box kicking and trying to take them on up front when they had 2 backs off the pitch - every time we chucked it out we were scoring. But thankfully it was all OK in the end. I also wondered why it wasn't a PT given that he just had to flop over the line if he caught it but thankfully it didn't matter.

This may sound all wrong but I think the result covered up several issues. I completely agree that you can only play what is in front of you but there are question to be considered.

Firstly, this is the second time we have a win on the back of an opposition red card and both we just scraped through.

Secondly, how can we start so badly when we have players back? Many have broadly supported Hatley in his ongoing coaching role but I'm somewhat concerned to be honest.
That starts were simply dreadful, no one knew who was receiving and in fact often that receiver was Will Muir the fact he wasn't there seem to cause chaos.
Hatley will be forwards coach but for 30 minutes those forwards were in total disarray and the submission to Bristol's forwards, who were weakened incidentally was simply appalling. I sincerely hope that changes under JvG but I'm genuinely concerned about this.

Thirdly, Why is it that the spirit in the side all seems to come from the likes of Richards, Reid, Bailey, Mojo, Doughty? It just seems that without their fire they offer some of the established players don't seem to get going?

TdG is excluded from that criticism incidentally.

Great result but against 14 then 13 for a very long period getting excited about wining in the 81st minute seems distinctly hollow.

Sorry to cast a shadow.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 11:04

It should be noted that the wind was heavily in their favour in the first half. Not that it particularly excuses the maul defence.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Grumpy_Uncle _Iroh (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 11:13

When we anticipate a mauling game we are alright, see Newcastle for reference. When we anticipate Bristol to throw it around and they tuck it up the jumper we were simply tactically out thought and it took till half time to steady that area of the game.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 11:14

Richards, williams, bayliss, underhill, faletau is a very lightweight back 5 behind a front row that never dominate.

Was always going to be an issue esp when they went attwood and Joyce with vui at 6.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Borked Login (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 11:33

I am still struggling to process that. Had a dose of the shakes while laving the Meccano Stand, I think i may have been holding my breath.

One thing that caught my eye when watching the (6 minutes or so) highlights clip reel, Siva Naulago knew he was in the manure - his hand goes up in apology before Butt has even hit the ground.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathOtter (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 12:35

Flats/RMc mentioned on comms that Bris had picked 3 x SR and 2 x No.8, ie a lot of weight and ballast in the forwards. I think they knew Hughes wouldn't be playing, and therefore picked a huge side to use their maul against our lightweight pack. I think it was a great team selection from Lam which would have paid off. As ever, it shows the difference Will Spencer makes when he is on - he literally adds an extra 30kg to the pack on his own! With McNally out Ewels away, Williams needing to rest that knee, hopefully Hats' hand has been forced for a few games now and we'll get Richards and Spencer in the row, which is actually what a few are calling out for - one monster, one taller lighter second row. With Hughes at the back adding considerable bulk, we can get away with Richards in the 2nd row.

On the point about Morozov, I was genuinely shocked he didn't get carded. I think he gave away 2 scrum pens, 1 offside pen on our own line, and then was at the bottom of a ruck to give another pen away, all seemingly in that first 20 minutes. Have definitely seen yellows before for repeated offences, and offenders, but as mentioned above maybe because Bris scored each time it reset in Pearce's mind each occasion? Who knows, but a yellow to Morozov and it could have been a very different story. It's the small moments that influence the game.

But, over the moon. Can only beat what's in front of you, and their indiscipline let them down, much as it has done for us on many occasions this season. The Wasps game is an interesting one to look at on all fronts - without the TdG yellow card, I wonder what the result would have been, and had we held on would Wasps have been lambasted for not beating 14 men? Would we have been equally embarrassed if we couldn't have beaten Bris with 14?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 13:04

I think Morozov would have got a card but they scored after each offence which seems to me to the reason he didn’t.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Bristol Ian (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 13:10

Quote:
BathOtter
Flats/RMc mentioned on comms that Bris had picked 3 x SR and 2 x No.8, ie a lot of weight and ballast in the forwards. I think they knew Hughes wouldn't be playing, and therefore picked a huge side to use their maul against our lightweight pack. I think it was a great team selection from Lam which would have paid off.

It was an interesting comment that - but sadly a bit of an over-simplification. Whilst the end result is exactly as you've said - Lam picking ballast - it's not really as Flats/RMc put it.

I personally think Vui is a great 6 - he often gets put into the second row by Lam because Luatua is playing. Vui has pretty regularly covered 6 when Luatua is off and always plays well. I think Lam plays him in the second row just to ensure he's on the pitch!
Heenan is definitely a "back row" - plays a lot at 7, Lam has started him on occasion at 8 and he's covered 6. When he plays 8, he looks like a 6/7 (6.5?) playing 8 (if you see what I mean. A bit like Tom Curry at 8 - he still "looks" like a 7).
Jeffries is I think a good 6 - a long time ago, Lam used him in odd games in the second row. I like him at 8 and personally think he could do well there, but again, at the moment, he looks to me like a 6 playing 8.
That's a long-winded way of me saying I think we played two second rows and three flankers!

Agree with you on the Morozov "yellow card", but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 13:22

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathOtter (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 13:37

Let never the truth get in the way of a good story!! Interesting to hear the actual scenarios, I suppose it's a bit like with Bath where anyone in the back 5 plays everywhere it seems, which can confuse all round. But as you say, the ploy was to add ballast to counter Bath's lack of at the end of the day, regardless of number on the back.

Just watched the highlights again, love the winning moments and the smiles on the faces. Obviously easier post-win, but everyone looks to be enjoying it again. JJ's break to set up the yellow card for Sheedy was classic 2014/5 JJ, hopefully he rediscovers some of the old magic. And with Lam saying in the post match chat re the final pass being forward at the end with the Richards/Bayliss incident (see BBC match report) I think he's missed the part Sheedy played in trying to stop the ball getting to Bayliss, completely legally I might add. He's allowed to intercept and knock it back, but from the angles its impossible to see whether it is lateral or not, what you can see from behind looking back is Sheedy hits the ball with his left hand after falling off the tackle, but what you can't see from the high halfway line camera is Sheedy himself, which therefore makes the pass look forward. In my opinion...!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 13:54

Thanks for the highlights, better than the PRTV version as it includes the crucial decision making around the final yellow card.

Bristol fans were saying the pass went forward, not sure but even if so the early tackle was the first offence time wise.

Can't say I blame Strang for the early tackle, a roll of the dice that didn't work out. Total chaos even in slow motion.

The ref was talked out of the pen try then? Good job Bath didn't fluff their lines then.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:03

Watching that in detail when Richards makes the pass it’s clearly back but then knocked forward (deliberately?) by Sheedy.
Red card, penalty try but for a different reason!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:06

Quote:
shipwrecked
Watching that in detail when Richards makes the pass it’s clearly back but then knocked forward (deliberately?) by Sheedy.
Red card, penalty try but for a different reason!

What reason? and what offence? (given that it's not Strang's tackle off the ball.)
Why picking Sheedy up there? what's he supposed to have done wrong?

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:06:14:10:11 by Which Tyler.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathOtter (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:08

Quote:
shipwrecked
Watching that in detail when Richards makes the pass it’s clearly back but then knocked forward (deliberately?) by Sheedy.
Red card, penalty try but for a different reason!

I thought Sheedy's actions were fine as the ball was knocked backwards by him, ie towards his own line? Had he knocked it forward whilst facing Richards, then yes pen try and red card for 2nd offence in the same match. I think?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:09

Quote:
Which Tyler
Quote:
shipwrecked
Watching that in detail when Richards makes the pass it’s clearly back but then knocked forward (deliberately?) by Sheedy.
Red card, penalty try but for a different reason!
What reason?
Bear in mind Sheedy didn't knock the ball on there (for once )

I though he did, so second offence. It’s on my phone though.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:13

Quote:
shipwrecked
I though he did, so second offence. It’s on my phone though.

Fair enough - and nope, clearly towards his own line.
A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:16

Agreed, Sheedy did nothing wrong there. It could be argued that the pass would not have reached Bayliss but because Sheedy knocked it up and further toward the line, Bayliss would have had a very easy try, collecting 1m out if he hadn't been floored. Looks like a pen try to me, there was no cover because Sheedy had been sucked in from covering Bayliss.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:19

Quote:
Which Tyler
Quote:
shipwrecked
I though he did, so second offence. It’s on my phone though.
Fair enough - and nope, clearly towards his own line.

Mmmm…. Interesting point, is the offence deliberate knock on or slapping the ball down? I must admit I forgot Sheedy was coming from behind!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Dorset Boy (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:30

Just watched the highlights. I presume the TMO thinks the 2 Bristol forwards are quicker than Usain Bolt. That was a cast iron penalty try.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:55

Whatever the outcome that run by Richards was brilliant, fast, elusive and powerful with perfect technique and the offload. Extremely difficult to defend that and Bayliss in rapid support. A thing of beauty in the modern game.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 14:59

If we’re talking about coaching issues manifested in that game then we don’t need to look much further than Naulago. He did the same a few weeks ago, and either needs coaching or dropping. Bad coaching and player skill/discipline comes in many forms.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 15:03

Quote:
Optimist
If we’re talking about coaching issues manifested in that game then we don’t need to look much further than Naulago. He did the same a few weeks ago, and either needs coaching or dropping. Bad coaching and player skill/discipline comes in many forms.

A couple of times this weekend I've heard in commentary that cards, yellow and red, are not actually changing behaviour in terms of tackle height. No idea if this is true this year but there was data on it last year and there was no significant reduction in high tackles.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: TomReagan (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 15:07

Just my take but no issue with Sheedy as the ball knocked back towards his own line (I assume that's why Lam thought we'd knocked on?). As to the PT Pearce seemed to think it was but the TMO suggested otherwise. I know every incident is meant to be looked at individually but human nature/psychology comes into it. Bristol had Thacker carded for a cynical offence that followed on from a few others, but as has been noted, Bath escaped similar punishment in the first half. Briz also had 2 more yellow cards. The final card was for a split second failure in Strang's timing. Perhaps it's a case of erring on the side of caution given earlier sanctions. Hatley said the decision seemed a fair compromise, although easier to say given Bath won. As to the game, it was mad and very entertaining and we were saying this at what we thought was the end of the game, having 'lost', before the final bit of drama in the far corner (7 of the 8 tries scored at the 'wrong end'!). Nothing to add on the various observations except that we do look quicker of thought and passing in the backs, albeit often against a depleted defence.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 15:24

Quote:
TomReagan
Just my take but no issue with Sheedy as the ball knocked back towards his own line (I assume that's why Lam thought we'd knocked on?). As to the PT Pearce seemed to think it was but the TMO suggested otherwise.

Its interesting Tom that referees very often change their decision to align with the TMO, often it seems reluctantly.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 17:32

It seems to me that Refs like to get a consensus during the TMO intervention. “Are we all agreed?”

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 17:58

Quote:
CoochieCoo
It seems to me that Refs like to get a consensus during the TMO intervention. “Are we all agreed?”

It's a team now. Ref, ARs and TMO. If you are a team, getting buy in for decisions by the team leader is good practice.

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 18:00

They should introduce 'phone a friend' or 'ask the audience'.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 18:04

Quote:
B4thB4ck
They should introduce 'phone a friend' or 'ask the audience'.

Most of the decisions nowadays are 50:50 and that's my final answer!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: TomReagan (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 18:19

As Pearce said, 'There's a lot riding on this', or words to that effect. That's where I think the human nature bit comes in. Pearce could have stuck with his view as he saw what the TMO saw, but as it wasn't a unanimous view he went for the compromise option. It's the same as in football when a player gets sent off you sort of know the ref might be looking to 'even things out', so a bad yellow becomes a red.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 18:20

I suppose asking the audience is out of the question! winking smiley

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 18:45

Quote:
CoochieCoo
I suppose asking the audience is out of the question!

Very good CC thumbs down

, thats the right answer!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 18:48

Quote:
CoochieCoo
I suppose asking the audience is out of the question!

Let's just call it home advantage....

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 18:48

Quote:
TomReagan
As Pearce said, 'There's a lot riding on this', or words to that effect. That's where I think the human nature bit comes in. Pearce could have stuck with his view as he saw what the TMO saw, but as it wasn't a unanimous view he went for the compromise option. It's the same as in football when a player gets sent off you sort of know the ref might be looking to 'even things out', so a bad yellow becomes a red.

You do wonder tho if the PT would have been given much earlier in the game

And if we hadn't had scored the TdG try then would Bath fans be understanding?

But from what I saw I thought Pearce reffed the game well and a derby like Bath v Briz is never easy

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: TomReagan (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 19:10

I'd hope most fans would recognise that it's swings and roundabouts. The Tigers game the other week had fans on this site swearing the ref cost us the game, the Tigers fans posting that he prevented them winning by a bigger margin. I try not to criticise the refs, not so much because of 'rugby etiquette', but because many years ago I gave Roy Maybank some stick as he came off the pitch (Not aggressively in his face, just 'terrace grumbles') after we'd lost to Wasps then watched the game on TV when I was sober and less one-eyed and saw, predictably, that he knew far more about the laws of rugby than I do!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 19:17

On the radio the commentary kept mentioning that 'this is the longest delay for TMO review I can ever remember'.

Listening I was thinking 'I don't care how long it takes, you have stopped the game so you may as well get it right'.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 21:12

From the replay it is clear that Bayliss only had to catch the ball and fall over to score.
Joyce and Vui were too far away to stop him.
I do not buy the idea of “cover.” Hence penalty try.

The consensus narrative makes sense however. At least the card and penalty offered the chance of a victory and thankfully Bath took it.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: @Hydor18 (IP Logged)

Date: 06/03/2022 21:13

Having watched it again (and again), I think the call was right: Sheedy tipping the ball backwards meant Bayliss wasn’t likely to score given the cover on its way.
Had the offload reached Bayliss, there was no way he could’ve scored because Strang had impeded him, meaning a penalty try would’ve been given.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 08:28

IMO...
Had Strang not taken out Bayliss, then he'd have been first to the ball (as proven by Strang being first to the ball, having removed Josh from his path). But he'd have been heading infield at the time, straight towards the covering defenders - who'd have been working harder to get there if it was Bayliss on the ball rather than Strang.

I think Josh would probably have scored, but there was enough defence there to not be nailed on.
It's then down to the individual officials' definition of "probable".

My personal bias says it should have been a penalty try, but I don't think that not awarding it was a bad decision. I'd also say that I think Pearce ran Richards very close for man of the match. We know from an earlier knock on by Sheedy where we had a 2 on 1, that he had a high bar for "probable try"

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 08:40

Quote:
@Hydor18
Having watched it again (and again), I think the call was right: Sheedy tipping the ball backwards meant Bayliss wasn’t likely to score given the cover on its way.
Had the offload reached Bayliss, there was no way he could’ve scored because Strang had impeded him, meaning a penalty try would’ve been given.

Fair point and would be a reasonable explanation, except that that is not what TMO and Ref debated. They were talking only about the actions of Strang pulling Bayliss back off the ball (which actually happened before Sheedy's intervention anyway).

Ref says "Numbers 5 & 19 are behind the ball carrier." (Referring to the "cover").
TMO says "I determine there is sufficient cover." At which point ref says "OK, we can't be certain etc.."

So the TMO persuaded the ref that the cover could have got there, which looking at the replay from both angles seems highly unlikely.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 09:10

I personally think that the right decision was made in relation to whether it was a Penalty Try or not - whether the officials went the right way about it is a different matter and had we not scored and Bristol won I may have had a different "one eyed" view.

The fact is definite whether Bristol fans or others agree the Bristol player put hands on Bayliss prior to him receiving the ball therefore 100% foul play and the penalty is made out.

Sheedy clearly bats the ball backwards so then the question is where will ball bounce and then that also brings the Bristol defenders into the equation.

If the ball had not been touched by Sheedy 100% it was a Penalty Try because as Luke Pearce said Bayliss was in a realistic position to receive the ball and would not have been caught and a try and on a balance of probabilities a try would have been scored. The face Sheedy had batted the ball back meant the ball was actually closer to the Bristol defenders who I believe would have defused it.

So if that makes sense I think the officials actually got the call right.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 09:51

This game never ceases to amaze me - having read some of the posts on the Bristol site.

Whilst they are understandably heartbroken to have lost the game especially having been 21 - 0 up and totally dominant in the first 30 minutes - the comments surrounding Pat Lam and his coaching team bewilder me, having supported a team which has been incredibly badly trained and coached to turn on Pat Lam really confuses me.

Bristol are a seriously good team - Yes their defence has been as porous as ours this season at times but as Saturday showed Pat Lam turns out a team who performed to a seriously high standard - what he cannot legislate for is individual errors and discipline.

Personally I think that in Bristol's case some of their players have definitely not performed to the standards expected and as we all know here at Bath how that feels and probably that semi-final last season had a huge affect on them - I do not believe their coaching team however are to blame in the same way as ours have been held to account - the majority errors they appear to make are individual errors and not as we have seen at our club in the past pure confusion.

I am confident we have turned a corner and will (fingers crossed) go from strength to strength - however I would add to Bristol fans I still believe you are in a strong position and this season has been a blip - as for Saturday I see it as 1-1 - I firmly believe we were the better side at Ashton Gate earlier this season and given the fact you played nearly 60 minutes with 14/13 players and only lost in the 86th minute it is hard to argue you weren't the better side on Saturday - sport is tough to take sometimes but until you have experienced what our great club has this season I don't believe you have experienced supporting a poorly coached team, your coaching team really is not that bad and in Pat Lam you have a gem - be careful what you wish for.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 09:57

For me the PT debate suggests the level of proof should be downgraded from 'reasonable certainty' to something like 'probably'. That shifts the balance required from 90% to 51%

We are, after all trying to penalise foul play and often this in the red zone

Would I have the same view had it been at the other end with us in the lead by a point or two? Hmm, I'd like to think I would

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 10:03

Those comments are mainly just from salty individuals who are scattergunning bile in every direction, from Lam to the Bath (sorry, B##h...hilarious) stadium and everything in between. The facts are that Bristol have some great players and were great to watch last season but have had a bit of a 'mare this season and continue to self destruct and throw away leads. There was clearly nothing that Lam could have done other than not pick Naulago.

Bath got 5 points and Bristol kindly allowed us to move off the bottom of the table, so most grateful for that. Remember that Bath lost by 5 at Bristol when Dunn and Ellis were yellowed so maybe not as much between the teams as some may think.

Onward to the next match...against Bristol!

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 10:40

We were on the wrong end of some awful officiating in the reverse fixture.

I rarely feel 'robbed' but that was about as close as I get!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Griff (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 10:48

Having had a couple of days to recover and watched the highlights a few times. Can't disagree Bath were awful in the first 30 mins, but as others have said Bristol's lack of discipline was down to Bath pressure and a poor decision by Naulago, he didn't need to make that type of tackle in that area of the pitch, Butt was being part tackled when he went in with the shoulder. All Bath can do from that point is make the best of the advantages which we did.

It was't perfect and lots to work on, however with 7 rounds left and a new coaching set up next year, winning as many of those games as possible by hook or by crook will give the club momentum for next season and when JvG comes in.

On a side note did anyone try out Dunnies new venture Black+White? I had a mighty nice Hog Roast roll and Slaw. Hope it's there for the rest of the season.

"It's all right, Andy! It's just bolognaise!"

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 11:15

Quote:
gaz59
For me the PT debate suggests the level of proof should be downgraded from 'reasonable certainty' to something like 'probably'. That shifts the balance required from 90% to 51%
We are, after all trying to penalise foul play and often this in the red zone

Would I have the same view had it been at the other end with us in the lead by a point or two? Hmm, I'd like to think I would

The wording of the law is if "a try would probably have been scored."

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 11:41

Quote:
P G Tips
Quote:
gaz59
For me the PT debate suggests the level of proof should be downgraded from 'reasonable certainty' to something like 'probably'. That shifts the balance required from 90% to 51%
We are, after all trying to penalise foul play and often this in the red zone

Would I have the same view had it been at the other end with us in the lead by a point or two? Hmm, I'd like to think I would

The wording of the law is if "a try would probably have been scored."

PG

Like Pearce had decided it was a penalty try but asked the question of the TMO about the covering players coming across, the TMO said, (wrongly) that the cover would have made it.

It should be noted that Richards stepped Semi Radradra in his runto the line who is on the floor 10m back!

https://i.ibb.co/0DVFmts/bristol-bath.png

Full match Bath v Bristol

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 11:53

Quote:
P G Tips
Quote:
gaz59
For me the PT debate suggests the level of proof should be downgraded from 'reasonable certainty' to something like 'probably'. That shifts the balance required from 90% to 51%
We are, after all trying to penalise foul play and often this in the red zone

Would I have the same view had it been at the other end with us in the lead by a point or two? Hmm, I'd like to think I would

The wording of the law is if "a try would probably have been scored."

PG

Then it's not being reffed properly because Pearce I'm sure used the term "we can't be certain" when explaining his decision

In employment law there are two levels of tests for decisions. Firstly, 'beyond reasonable doubt' and that is quite a high bar though arguably even that is below "being certain"

"Probably" is more in line "on the balance of probabilities", in other words is it more or less likely? No matter how fine a balance that decision may be, so could be a very close call

Looking at those video shots surely on the balance of probabilities you would say a try was more likely than not? Wouldn't you?

It feels like Pearce has confused Probably with Certainty, in my view

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 12:03

I think his use of the word "certain" was about whether the cover might get there. So- he was using certain in that context to define the "probability", if that is not too philosophical!

For me, Pearce gets it right- he is opting for penalty try. His TMO persuades him otherwise.

Interestingly, in the away fixture at Ashton Gate it was also the TMO who incorrectly called the knock-on that cancelled Ojomoh's try and got the Randall knock-on decision wrong (much as we like to blame Tempest). He also called the scrum penalties credited to Sinckler, while Y Thomas on the loose head was packing at an illegal 45° angle.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 12:19

I agree PG, Pearce assumes the TMO will be better informed and defers to him, yet in reality both Pearce and the TMO have the same images in front of them.
Presumably the Ref is on the field because he a better judge and is the more experienced there do seem to be faults in the system.
I'd also say the same applies to VAR in football, when the VAR asks the ref to go to the screen it is nearly always to reverse a decision rather than check.
Gaz is making a procedural point about what the nomenclature should be but surely we should have a little common sense here, the defenders would have had to go round Richards, reverse their direction then play the ball, Bayliss is 2m from the line with the ball in front of him.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 12:29

Slightly irrelevant with the previous offence, but is Strang allowed to grab the loose ball whilst already on the ground? I think that would have been a pen in other circumstances?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 12:29

They regard "a try would probably have been scored" to be no defender basically. I've seen them not given for us when we've had a wing in 10M of space with a front row covering that space and it not been given.

Well done on the win. Need to channel that mojo and do it against teams with 15 next! Good luck (Sm128)

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Bath Supporter Jack (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 16:31

Part of our issue in the last few years has been the number of yellow and red cards we have received.

Rather more pleasant for the boot to be on the other foot.......

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 16:36

Quote:
Bath Supporter Jack
Part of our issue in the last few years has been the number of yellow and red cards we have received.
Rather more pleasant for the boot to be on the other foot.......

During the Newcastle game it was mentioned in commentary that Bath have had the most penalties of any club in the Premiership to sure about cards but that is a record we could do without.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 17:03

Quote:
shipwrecked
I agree PG, Pearce assumes the TMO will be better informed and defers to him, yet in reality both Pearce and the TMO have the same images in front of them.
Presumably the Ref is on the field because he a better judge and is the more experienced there do seem to be faults in the system.
I'd also say the same applies to VAR in football, when the VAR asks the ref to go to the screen it is nearly always to reverse a decision rather than check.
Gaz is making a procedural point about what the nomenclature should be but surely we should have a little common sense here, the defenders would have had to go round Richards, reverse their direction then play the ball, Bayliss is 2m from the line with the ball in front of him.

Completely agree sw that a common sense approach is required. And to me that means a balance of probabilities definition. So the question is, given the wider picture is more or less likely the try would have been scored

It seems that Pearce stated his on pitch decision was PT but the TMO influenced him to change that because he felt it was possible the defence could have got back in time [even if that was unlikely]

I thought the TMO had to produce compelling evidence to overturn an on pitch decision. This one didn't feel like that

And that's where I think PG must be right and the deciding factor is that they [ref and TMO] couldn't be certain the defence wouldn't have got back to stop the try. That's shifting the onus of proof onto a negative which is impossible to do

This may seem like a pedantic analysis but in order to have consistency of decisions you have to first have clear criteria and then clarity of understanding of that criteria that is then consistently applied. As fans, we can take big decisions that go against us provided there is a feeling that the law is being applied consistently, that's why this debate is important

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Rokobilly (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 20:16

I watched the full game back earlier and a few things struck me that I hadn't fully appreciated whilst sitting in the Dyson Stand on Saturday ...

1. The strength of the wind against us in the first half, against Bristol in the second. Definitely played a part in Bristol's fast start as we struggled to exit. Can't use it as an excuse for the maul defence though...

2. Morozov 100% deserved a yellow card in the first half. 4 or 5 penalties all over our half. We dodged one there.

3. Lloyd had a nightmare second half. Could have seen yellow for tackling TDG in the air; carried the ball over to give away a scrum five; gave away the final penalty that gave us a final shot after we had done our best to blow it. His clear out on Cips was idiotic. I must buy him a beer one day to thank him.

4. Coetzee and Will Spencer carried very well off the bench. Very pleasing to see.

5. I was OK with no PT at the end. For me the Sheedy slap down muddles the waters enough to justify the TMO's decision. That said, had we not subsequently scored I expect I would be less sanguine on this point!

Whilst we seem to be getting some bad press for 'only' just beating Bristol despite the cards, the score after the red was 29-6 in 45 minutes which seems reasonable. We only played against 13 for 16 minutes (4 end of first half, 10 for Sheedy, 2 at the death). Scoring 4 tries in those 16 minutes feels clinical to me. Well done the boys, enjoy a week off and let's kick on again.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 21:00

The Sheedy slap down is a red herring.
The ref & TMO did not once mention it in their deliberation.
Anyway, it happened after the crucial incident (Strang early tackle on Bayliss) that they decided was not a PT but was a penalty.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Kidney Stone (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 22:27

On a slightly different track, i was very impressed with Ewan Richards interview on the offy.

An intelligent and articulate young man, a very bright future awaits him I am certain.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: annie blackthorn (IP Logged)

Date: 07/03/2022 23:05

It seems some are becoming a bit obsessive re. Ref Decision making.

We won didn't we? Briz got 3 players sent off. What is the problem, gents?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 08:48

Quote:
annie blackthorn
It seems some are becoming a bit obsessive re. Ref Decision making.
We won didn't we? Briz got 3 players sent off. What is the problem, gents?

Always a more enjoyable experience to analyse a winning game rather than read negativity after a defeat, particularly when every single aspect of the club can be unecessarily criticised. Mostly though just a very dramatic ending so plenty to discuss.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 08:58

When we win -
Hurrah, great result. X played well, hope Y doesn't get picked by Eddie, hope Z's injury is ok.

When we lose -
The selection was wrong, Farleigh is a spa, recruitment is rubbish, no desire, no team spirit, the beer too warm, beer too cold, delays at the gate, weather was awful, kit design wrong, PR team need a wake up, CEO should go, ticket portal slow, stadium late, pitch cutting up. (I may have missed some!).

Generally though, just human nature, I am sure I am just as bad as anyone.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 09:18

Quote:
B4thB4ck

When we lose -
The selection was wrong, Farleigh is a spa, recruitment is rubbish, no desire, no team spirit, the beer too warm, beer too cold, delays at the gate, weather was awful, kit design wrong, PR team need a wake up, CEO should go, ticket portal slow, stadium late, pitch cutting up. (I may have missed some!).

TBF most of those remain true its just they get put to one side for a week. In particular, irrespective of the temperature of the booze it almost universally tastes awful at the Rec. The stadium is also pretty late, although not in geological timescales.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 09:25

Quote:
gaz59
Completely agree sw that a common sense approach is required

'Common sense' eh... If only we could all agree on a common definition of common sense!

I maintain that for deliberate knock-ons, it should be 'penalty try' or 'penalty/yellow card' - not both.

If a player illegally prevents you from scoring a try, but you award a try anyway, then the player's action has been more than just negated - it's been actively punished, and the other team extra-compensated, by turning a 'likely try' into a 'try'. When it's given as automatic 7 points, that is an even greater over-compensation.

I'd prefer to see the referee offer the choice to the attacking captain - 'which do you want - yellow card or penalty try?'

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 09:32

Quote:
Optimist
Quote:
gaz59
Completely agree sw that a common sense approach is required

'Common sense' eh... If only we could all agree on a common definition of common sense!

I maintain that for deliberate knock-ons, it should be 'penalty try' or 'penalty/yellow card' - not both.

If a player illegally prevents you from scoring a try, but you award a try anyway, then the player's action has been more than just negated - it's been actively punished, and the other team extra-compensated, by turning a 'likely try' into a 'try'. When it's given as automatic 7 points, that is an even greater over-compensation.

I'd prefer to see the referee offer the choice to the attacking captain - 'which do you want - yellow card or penalty try?'

Disagree with this Opti, if the try was definitely going to be scored other than for foul play then getting the pen try (aside from maybe making the conversion easier) is basically the same, so why not go for it. I can't see any actual risk / deterrant unless there is the yellow as well (or a pen from the restart).

Its the same as people knee dropping etc not puniched when the try is scored - I remember TDG getting taken out (last season?) and having to go off. Thats why it was excellent to see Kini Murimurivalu get yellowed this weekend.

My issue with some of the 'deliberate' knock ons is that they clearly aren't, the ones where people are wrapping their arms for a tackle and the attacker leaves the pass too late, for example. I think that it would need to be a clear and obvious slap down or batting the ball away rather than attampted catch, one hand or not. I understand that there is interpretation required on that.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 09:47

Quote:
BathMatt53
Quote:
Optimist
Quote:
gaz59
Completely agree sw that a common sense approach is required

'Common sense' eh... If only we could all agree on a common definition of common sense!

I maintain that for deliberate knock-ons, it should be 'penalty try' or 'penalty/yellow card' - not both.

If a player illegally prevents you from scoring a try, but you award a try anyway, then the player's action has been more than just negated - it's been actively punished, and the other team extra-compensated, by turning a 'likely try' into a 'try'. When it's given as automatic 7 points, that is an even greater over-compensation.

I'd prefer to see the referee offer the choice to the attacking captain - 'which do you want - yellow card or penalty try?'

My issue with some of the 'deliberate' knock ons is that they clearly aren't, the ones where people are wrapping their arms for a tackle and the attacker leaves the pass too late, for example. I think that it would need to be a clear and obvious slap down or batting the ball away rather than attampted catch, one hand or not. I understand that there is interpretation required on that.

Completely agree and would add that it should be nothing to do with the direction of the ball. i.e. slapping the ball down backwards would also be an offence.
That was my point in relation to Calum Sheedy and the declined PT in the 81st minute. That was the 3rd time Sheedy had done something similar in that game. Isn't that a deliberate practice that should be penalised?

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 09:58

I guess you do want to 'deter' players from doing it - because a/ it mars the spectacle of try-scoring, and b/ it just leads to interminable replay-watching. So i'll concede the 'free' 2 point conversion for that. But - just as a red card can ruin the spectacle, so a yellow does change the balance of a game, so i'm going to stick to my guns on that one!

Disagree that it's the same as 'knee-dropping' - i'm only referring to deliberate knock-ons here. Foul play can be punished all-day long as far as i'm concerned.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 10:08

Quote:
Optimist
I guess you do want to 'deter' players from doing it - because a/ it mars the spectacle of try-scoring, and b/ it just leads to interminable replay-watching. So i'll concede the 'free' 2 point conversion for that. But - just as a red card can ruin the spectacle, so a yellow does change the balance of a game, so i'm going to stick to my guns on that one!
Disagree that it's the same as 'knee-dropping' - i'm only referring to deliberate knock-ons here. Foul play can be punished all-day long as far as i'm concerned.

OK so how about dropping the yellow but penalty from the restart? There has to be some jeopardy IMO. Otherwise just drop every maul that looks like its rolling over under the posts, there is no free 2 pts anyway.

Obviously the action isn't the same as knee dropping but there do IMO seem to be actions that are overlooked when a try is scored. Bath at the weekend arguably 'benefitted' from that in the first 20 mins...

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 10:22

There is a bit of jeopardy though - try telling Freddie Burns that 'probably' is the same as 'definitely'. And i've given you the free 2 points, so that's my final offer !!

Again - i don't think rolling mauls are the same. There's still a means to prevent those tries being scored, and for those tries to be butchered (was it Tom Curry who got a maul try scratched off last year?) right up until the moment the ball is touched down. So any team that just pulled it down would be a bit foolish. But I do think that awarding both try and yellow card in the case of rolling mauls is ridiculous. But that's a whole other debate - i find the sight of a rolling maul - in which any number of players can essentially be offside - contrary to rugby union's most basic premise.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 10:26

Problem with that though Opti is collapsing a maul is potentially dangerous. In the same way that a high tackle in the lead up to a try shouldn't get dismissed. That for me should be a restart penalty same as the Knee drop at the weekend. That is a rarity.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 11:02

What amazes me is that professional rugby players are unable to think clearly enough to know that is they commit an offence at that point it will be penalty try and yellow. I would also yellow as well as allow the try if the team score anyway.

The last yellow on sat was a slightly different player situation for me at that point if Bayliss is not pulled back he is very likely to score and if he does the game is lost anyway so the gamble on whether the officials are brave enough to give a pen try to settle the game is worth making and could have paid off had Bath's execution been poor.

I agree with above point that without double jeopardy all teams will always commit an offence where they can to stop a try, its worth the 2 point gamble but really shouldn't be worth the 2 point and yellow.

Foul play after a score is one of the offences that winds me up and is rarely punished. It is petulant unnecessary and the only thing it can achieve is injuring the scoring player. I would make it an automatic red

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 11:06

Quote:
shipwrecked
Completely agree and would add that it should be nothing to do with the direction of the ball. i.e. slapping the ball down backwards would also be an offence.

Why?

Quote:
shipwrecked
That was my point in relation to Calum Sheedy and the declined PT in the 81st minute. That was the 3rd time Sheedy had done something similar in that game. Isn't that a deliberate practice that should be penalised?

Yes, but you're allowed to do legal things repeatedly.
They kept beating us in the maul as well - that doesn't mean we should start penalising teams for mauling.

Quote:
Murty7
Foul play after a score is one of the offences that winds me up and is rarely punished. It is petulant unnecessary and the only thing it can achieve is injuring the scoring player. I would make it an automatic red

I agree almost completely. I think foul play after the try has been scored or in the act of scoring should be punished the same way it would if the try hadn't been scored.
It's already in the lawbook that an offence after the try has been awarded can restart with a penalty from the halfway line - but there's a lot that can, and does happen between the ball being put down (or even earlier) and the whistle blowing. If a defender puts the knee in on the try scorer, or tries to take their head off in the act of scoring etc etc - I'd award the restart penalty at the location of the offence, and give any cards that should be forthcoming.

ETA: actually, I'd probably keep the restart penalty for offences that earn a card, so not things like being bad at scrummaging/mauling 5m out, for example.

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:08:11:13:26 by Which Tyler.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 11:29

[quote Which Tyler][quote shipwrecked]Completely agree and would add that it should be nothing to do with the direction of the ball. i.e. slapping the ball down backwards would also be an offence.[/quote]
Why?

DKO is penalised because its breaking down play deliberately, why does it not apply if you 'break down play deliberately' and the ball goes backwards yet apply when you 'break down play deliberately' and the ball goes forwards, its illogical.

[quote shipwrecked]That was my point in relation to Calum Sheedy and the declined PT in the 81st minute. That was the 3rd time Sheedy had done something similar in that game. Isn't that a deliberate practice that should be penalised?[/quote]Yes, but you're allowed to do legal things repeatedly.

They kept beating us in the maul as well - that doesn't mean we should start penalising teams for mauling.

But Sheedy was doing it illegally, beating us in the maul is legal. He did it at 26 mins and only got a penalty (mistake by ref?) then again at 42 mins when he was yellow carded. (Second offence - red?) Then also batted the ball back in the 81st minute doesn't that show its a ploy?

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 11:36

I don't think that there is anything wrong with batting a ball back SW unless it is batted out of play (i.e. deliberately)? Isn't that what players often do when they try and win box kicks (or restarts)?

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 11:47

Quote:
BathMatt53
I don't think that there is anything wrong with batting a ball back SW unless it is batted out of play (i.e. deliberately)? Isn't that what players often do when they try and win box kicks (or restarts)?

I'm talking deliberate knock ons here Matt. Knock the ball forward in the intervention its a yellow card, knock it down and goes backwards its legal.
Fact is its preventing the pass getting to the receiver.

This is current laws, I actually think interfering with the pass should be allowed as legitimate defence, but working with current rules I think they are illogical.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 11:49

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
BathMatt53
I don't think that there is anything wrong with batting a ball back SW unless it is batted out of play (i.e. deliberately)? Isn't that what players often do when they try and win box kicks (or restarts)?

I'm talking deliberate knock ons here Matt. Knock the ball forward in the intervention its a yellow card, knock it down and goes backwards its legal.
Fact is its preventing the pass getting to the receiver.

This is current laws, I actually think interfering with the pass should be allowed as legitimate defence, but working with current rules I think they are illogical.

But Sheedy's right at the end (where Bayliss was taken out) was backwards? He didn't do anything wrong - if he had knocked it harder (over the dead ball line) then he would have.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 11:54

It's getting to the point with deliberate knock-ons where you wouldn't be surprised if players are actually training to time and direct their passes into the arm as it comes round into the tackle.

Likewise tacklers will have to amend their technique so that they go in with arms tucked in to the body, rather than spreadeagled.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 12:02

Quote:
BathMatt53
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
BathMatt53
I don't think that there is anything wrong with batting a ball back SW unless it is batted out of play (i.e. deliberately)? Isn't that what players often do when they try and win box kicks (or restarts)?

I'm talking deliberate knock ons here Matt. Knock the ball forward in the intervention its a yellow card, knock it down and goes backwards its legal.
Fact is its preventing the pass getting to the receiver.

This is current laws, I actually think interfering with the pass should be allowed as legitimate defence, but working with current rules I think they are illogical.

But Sheedy's right at the end (where Bayliss was taken out) was backwards? He didn't do anything wrong - if he had knocked it harder (over the dead ball line) then he would have.

Yes I agree, but isn't that the point? Why is batting the ball out illegal? But sticking to DKO the current offence should be interfering with the pass direction shouldn't matter.

Restarts are different to open play.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 12:28

Quote:
shipwrecked
DKO is penalised because its breaking down play deliberately, why does it not apply if you 'break down play deliberately' and the ball goes backwards yet apply when you 'break down play deliberately' and the ball goes forwards, its illogical.

Could you point me towards that please - because it's a new one to me. A deliberate knock on is a illegal because it's a knock-on that is deliberate, rather than a realistic attempt to catch the ball. The foul is being a knock on, the card is because it's a cynical, professional foul.

A deliberate knock back , Like Sheedy's at the end, may be cynical and professional, but it's not a foul of any description.
You're allowed to to do legal, cynical things.

The illegal action isn't "interfering with the pass" - because that's not illegal, and it would be absolutely terrible for rugby to make it illegal*. The illegal act is throwing or knocking the ball forwards.

*Just to be clear - if you want "interfering with the pass" to be illegal, then you've just ruled out all intercepts, you're ruled it illegal to rush out of defence, from onside, and stand in the passing channel waving your arms and forcing the ball carrier infield... etc etc
If it's the tap back, you're making 30% of lines out illegal, you're making a tap back challenging for a high ball illegal, you're making a fumbled pass illegal...

Quote:
shipwrecked
But Sheedy was doing it illegally, beating us in the maul is legal. He did it at 26 mins and only got a penalty (mistake by ref?) then again at 42 mins when he was yellow carded. (Second offence - red?) Then also batted the ball back in the 81st minute doesn't that show its a ploy?

No, he wasn't.
At 36 minutes, he knocked the ball forwards, and was penalised for that.
At 42 minutes, he knocked the ball forwards, and was penalised for that - it was his first yellow card worthy offence (according to Pearce), so his card was yellow, not red.
at 81 minutes he did nothing illegal, so there's no penalty.

Your asking to penalise and card someone for doing something that is perfectly legal in rugby.

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:08:12:53:23 by Which Tyler.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 12:39

I asked opinions about something else but don't remember a reply so here it is again - after the ball is knocked back legally, Strang, who is already on the deck, scoops the ball in and prevents Coetzee from picking up and falling over the line. My reading is he needed to get back to his feet 1st before playing the ball. Is that right? If so then pen try as Coetzee was also prevented from scoring?

Just interested from a laws point of view.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 12:44

Quote:
B4thB4ck
I asked opinions about something else but don't remember a reply so here it is again - after the ball is knocked back legally, Strang, who is already on the deck, scoops the ball in and prevents Coetzee from picking up and falling over the line. My reading is he needed to get back to his feet 1st before playing the ball. Is that right? If so then pen try as Coetzee was also prevented from scoring?
Just interested from a laws point of view.

Agreed - he's on all fours, before scrambling for the ball - but I don't think it's any more relevant than the tackle off the ball.
The officials decided that the covering defence was in place to potentially tackle Bayliss, they'd have been in a better position to potentially tackle Coetzee.

Now, I still think it should have been a penalty try on balance of probabilities, but I don't think this one changes anything.

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 12:44

sw

I have to agree with Which Tyler on this - Sheedy's knock back is legal and would only have been illegal if he had batted the ball into touch (or touch in goal).

It does not matter anyway. The only bearing his action had on the decision about the infringement was that Pearce needed to check if Richards had thrown forward. Once satisfied that it was a defender's hand that propelled the ball toward the tryline he concentrated on the matter at hand - the early tackle/pull back and whether that merited a penalty try or penalty.

You acknowledge that in current laws it is OK. It would make for a bizarre game to change to your wish as the tap back is used to contest a kick-off and in the lineout- so is an established, legal part of the game going back a century or more.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 12:50

In my one eyed view they should have added the 2 x Strang incidents within 2 seconds together to = 1 Pen Try !!

Makes sense to me, though maths nerds will probably point out you can't add logarithmic values together either....

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Dorset Boy (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 13:15

Quote:
B4thB4ck
I asked opinions about something else but don't remember a reply so here it is again - after the ball is knocked back legally, Strang, who is already on the deck, scoops the ball in and prevents Coetzee from picking up and falling over the line. My reading is he needed to get back to his feet 1st before playing the ball. Is that right? If so then pen try as Coetzee was also prevented from scoring?
Just interested from a laws point of view.

If you are involved in a tackle, then yes, you must return to your feet before you play the ball.
As with other offences, this is regularly ignored by referees, and then suddenly they'll apply it out of the blue (IIRC Roko last year).

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 13:28

Why is everyone focussing on the 81st min incident?

What I'm saying is that a DKO is illegal. "If the referee decides a player has intentionally knocked on or thrown the ball forward, a penalty is awarded to the other team. And if the referee decides the other team would have scored a try if the intentional knock-on had not taken place, a penalty try is awarded."

Sheedy did it twice.

In responding to Matts point I'm stating that once the ref has decided its not an intercept attempt then its an illegal act to prevent a try.

Why does it matter if that "illegal act to prevent a try" means the ball goes forwards or backwards?

The PT incident is a different scenario I know it wasn't an offence, I have not said it was.

Quote:
Which Tyler
Your asking to penalise and card someone for doing something that is perfectly legal in rugby.

A deliberate knock on isn't legal, I don't understand your point and you keep editing the post. But I would read what I said previously, I think you misunderstand my point, probably poorly explained by myself.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 13:57

A DKO is illegal no doubt about it and punishable. However if the player intercepted the ball say with his palm and it scooped backwards, that isn’t a DKO and not punishable.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 14:03

sw

Have you watched the PRTV recording (whole match not highlights)?

Pearce gives clear reasons why his sanctions against Sheedy are 1) "penalty only, 2 "penalty, yellow card, not penalty try."

You may not agree (this is a subjective decision in the referee's opinion), but the reasons are audible.

That will be more infornative than we can be.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 14:15

Quote:
P G Tips
sw
Have you watched the PRTV recording (whole match not highlights)?

Pearce gives clear reasons why his sanctions against Sheedy are 1) "penalty only, 2 "penalty, yellow card, not penalty try."

You may not agree (this is a subjective decision in the referee's opinion), but the reasons are audible.

That will be more infornative than we can be.

PG

Yes PG I posted the link, what do you think I am saying?

I’m not arguing about Pearces decisions in any way other than I think DKOs are generally yellow carded nowadays but that is his prerogative.

WT seems to think I’m keen to penalise Sheedy in some way, I don’t understand that given what I said.

My point is simply that if you can’t catch or intercept the ball then you are in illegal territory.
It shouldn’t matter if the ball goes back or forwards. Going for the intercept is a gamble, Catch it it’s a try, if not it’s a pen, perhaps a yellow, do it twice it’s a red.
Pearce penalised Sheedy twice for the same offence, he’s a lucky boy.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 14:46

Quote:
shipwrecked
It shouldn’t matter if the ball goes back or forwards.

It does because forwards is the definition of knock-on:

"Knock-on: When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it."

I agree Sheedy is a lucky boy, but that is because I would have carded him the first time.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 15:03

Quote:
P G Tips
Quote:
shipwrecked
It shouldn’t matter if the ball goes back or forwards.

It does because forwards is the definition of knock-on:

"Knock-on: When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it."

I agree Sheedy is a lucky boy, but that is because I would have carded him the first time.

PG

Agreed in the current laws it is, we were discussing common sense in the current law framework.

So what is the argument that says knocking the ball forward is a pen and knocking it backward is OK?

He can’t catch it so he stops play by deflecting the flight of the ball.
Say he batts the ball down and it goes behind him it’s no pen. However he has still batted the ball down and killed the move!

Backwards of forwards shouldn’t matter. That for me is wrong.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 15:13

The concept of rugby as I understand it is that you only play the ball forwards with your feet not your hands. The ball must go backward from the hands.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 15:30

Quote:
CoochieCoo
The concept of rugby as I understand it is that you only play the ball forwards with your feet not your hands. The ball must go backward from the hands.

Thats the point CC you are not playing it at all, you are preventing play, if serendipity sends the ball back it’s legal forwards it’s a penalty. What argument can you make for that to be fair?

If you can’t catch it leave it alone. Not “I’ll deflect this ball to break down the move and I might get away with it if it goes backwards “

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 15:30

One of the core principles of Rugby is you are not allowed to send the ball forward from the hand so there is already a key difference between knocking the ball backwards and forwards. The reason a DKO is a penalty is that the player committing the offence is choosing to do something they know is illegal. This is the same with a number of offences eg the difference between offside and accidental offside.

That said I do think that yellow cards are giving out disproportionately for this against other deliberate attempts to ruin attacks eg offside killing/slowing down the ball at the ruck. For these offences it appears to need multiple infringements but often only one for DKO. With regard to Sheedys first offence if as the ref concluded there was cover then I agree it should only be a penalty but I think I saw a BBW shirt one man further out that was only very briefly partly shown in the wide angle. If That is the case we had a n overlap and with the current interpretation it was a yellow.

I also dont have any problem with interfering with the pass within the laws eg slapping backwards. Why should a team not be able to interfere with a pass dont understand the logic. The who purpose of the defense is to interfere with the attack within the laws.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 15:37

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
CoochieCoo
The concept of rugby as I understand it is that you only play the ball forwards with your feet not your hands. The ball must go backward from the hands.

Thats the point CC you are not playing it at all, you are preventing play, if serendipity sends the ball back it’s legal forwards it’s a penalty. What argument can you make for that to be fair?

If you can’t catch it leave it alone. Not “I’ll deflect this ball to break down the move and I might get away with it if it goes backwards “

Hang on a mo, sw, what about a ball being passed down the line and a player palms it to the player outside. Perfectly legal and usually a good ploy to open up space!

The palming player does not catch it but helps it on its way, backwards!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 15:46

Quote:
CoochieCoo
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
CoochieCoo
The concept of rugby as I understand it is that you only play the ball forwards with your feet not your hands. The ball must go backward from the hands.

Thats the point CC you are not playing it at all, you are preventing play, if serendipity sends the ball back it’s legal forwards it’s a penalty. What argument can you make for that to be fair?

If you can’t catch it leave it alone. Not “I’ll deflect this ball to break down the move and I might get away with it if it goes backwards “

Hang on a mo, sw, what about a ball being passed down the line and a player palms it to the player outside. Perfectly legal and usually a good ploy to open up space!

The palming player does not catch it but helps it on its way, backwards!

That's within your own team CC the opposition aren't involved.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:10

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
CoochieCoo
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
CoochieCoo
The concept of rugby as I understand it is that you only play the ball forwards with your feet not your hands. The ball must go backward from the hands.

Thats the point CC you are not playing it at all, you are preventing play, if serendipity sends the ball back it’s legal forwards it’s a penalty. What argument can you make for that to be fair?

If you can’t catch it leave it alone. Not “I’ll deflect this ball to break down the move and I might get away with it if it goes backwards “

Hang on a mo, sw, what about a ball being passed down the line and a player palms it to the player outside. Perfectly legal and usually a good ploy to open up space!

The palming player does not catch it but helps it on its way, backwards!

That's within your own team CC the opposition aren't involved.

But the opposition could be involved by intercepting and palming the ball backwards! What I think you are advocating is that all interceptions should be against the law if the oppo has no chance of catching it cleanly. Cannot agree to that change!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:11

Quote:
Murty7
One of the core principles of Rugby is you are not allowed to send the ball forward from the hand so there is already a key difference between knocking the ball backwards and forwards. The reason a DKO is a penalty is that the player committing the offence is choosing to do something they know is illegal. This is the same with a number of offences eg the difference between offside and accidental offside.

Its about playing the ball though isn't it?

What is a deliberate knock on?

A deliberate knock on is when a player makes no attempt to play the ball. For instance, if a defending player see’s that there is an attacking team overlap which would result in and punches the opposition ball away without trying to play the ball this would be seen as deliberate knock on. This would be seen by the referee as a penalty offence. In most scenarios that I have seen of this nature a player is usually yellow carded for such an offence.

Quote:
Murty7
I also dont have any problem with interfering with the pass within the laws eg slapping backwards. Why should a team not be able to interfere with a pass dont understand the logic. The who purpose of the defense is to interfere with the attack within the laws.

I actually agree with you on that Murty, if Sheedy defected the ball and that were permitted that would be simply be a knock on.
The whole is is that its a deliberate knock on currently. It's a penalty not a scrum so its foul play, you are being dishonest with the ball (as opposed to cheating).
If you are doing that it's irrelevant the direction of the ball. You are stopping play illegally. You are not playing the ball at all.

It's what we have as the law today but I agree that 'failed intercepts' should be scrums not penalties, if you pass to your teammate without seeing if its a clear passage that's poor decision making.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:15

Quote:
CoochieCoo
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
CoochieCoo
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
CoochieCoo
The concept of rugby as I understand it is that you only play the ball forwards with your feet not your hands. The ball must go backward from the hands.

Thats the point CC you are not playing it at all, you are preventing play, if serendipity sends the ball back it’s legal forwards it’s a penalty. What argument can you make for that to be fair?

If you can’t catch it leave it alone. Not “I’ll deflect this ball to break down the move and I might get away with it if it goes backwards “

Hang on a mo, sw, what about a ball being passed down the line and a player palms it to the player outside. Perfectly legal and usually a good ploy to open up space!

The palming player does not catch it but helps it on its way, backwards!

That's within your own team CC the opposition aren't involved.

But the opposition could be involved by intercepting and palming the ball backwards! What I think you are advocating is that all interceptions should be against the law if the oppo has no chance of catching it cleanly. Cannot agree to that change!

Not fair CC, never said that AT ALL, (words in mouths speech to follow). We are talking failed intercepts. Not passing to teammates.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:21

One of the principles of the game is competition. It is OK to rob an opponent of the ball, including by ripping it out of his hands- if the ball travels backwards it is not then a knock on. An attempted intercept is an attempt to compete for the ball. If it fails and the ball falls backwards it is no different from an attempt to catch that goes backwards, just a failure of skill.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:25

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
CoochieCoo
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
CoochieCoo
Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
CoochieCoo
The concept of rugby as I understand it is that you only play the ball forwards with your feet not your hands. The ball must go backward from the hands.

Thats the point CC you are not playing it at all, you are preventing play, if serendipity sends the ball back it’s legal forwards it’s a penalty. What argument can you make for that to be fair?

If you can’t catch it leave it alone. Not “I’ll deflect this ball to break down the move and I might get away with it if it goes backwards “

Hang on a mo, sw, what about a ball being passed down the line and a player palms it to the player outside. Perfectly legal and usually a good ploy to open up space!

The palming player does not catch it but helps it on its way, backwards!

That's within your own team CC the opposition aren't involved.

But the opposition could be involved by intercepting and palming the ball backwards! What I think you are advocating is that all interceptions should be against the law if the oppo has no chance of catching it cleanly. Cannot agree to that change!

Not fair CC, never said that AT ALL, (words in mouths speech to follow). We are talking failed intercepts. Not passing to teammates.

But a failed intercept could go backwards and allow the oppo to pick up the ball and it is a turnover. A DKO is punishable because there was no chance of catching the ball. A mere KO is given if the interception was deemed possible but failed because of execution.

IMO DKO’s should be punished depending on whether it stopped the oppo from scoring, pen and YC. Clumsy KOs by a scrum. If the ball is knocked back no offence.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:29

Quote:
P G Tips
One of the principles of the game is competition. It is OK to rob an opponent of the ball, including by ripping it out of his hands- if the ball travels backwards it is not then a knock on. An attempted intercept is an attempt to compete for the ball. If it fails and the ball falls backwards it is no different from an attempt to catch that goes backwards, just a failure of skill.
PG

Those are infringements though PG if you get that wrong it's a scrum. I'm referring to a Deliberate Knock On which is a penalty offence. It's spoiling illegally.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:37

Quote:
CC
But a failed intercept could go backwards and allow the oppo to pick up the ball and it is a turnover.

It's not a turnover though as the team had the ball in the first place. It's not dropping the ball (scrum) its a Deliberate Knock On and a penalty offence, penalty kick.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:47

Just an idea.

What about an additional point or possibly two for a penalty try instead of a yellow card? So making it 8 or 9 points?

The issue I have if there is no additional sanction over the 7 points then a PT near the sticks is no worse an outcome than not infringing and allowing a 'probable' try to be scored

Very different obviously if it is wide out, on the 'wrong' side for the kicker and in very windy conditions when the 'free' conversion is a bonus

Would also add some extra spice to last play situations where the offending team were 8 or 9 points ahead depending on whether it was an extra one or two points added and clearly a yellow card is of no consequence in the game

Or is my thinking just billyhox?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:48

sw
Why not sign up for the next BRSC "Ask the Ref" event (usually in October)? You can put ypur question/idea to Tony Spreadbury and get an answer straight from the horse's mouth.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 16:52

Quote:
P G Tips
sw
Why not sign up for the next BRSC "Ask the Ref" event (usually in October)? You can put ypur question/idea to Tony Spreadbury and get an answer straight from the horse's mouth.

PG

How would I do that PG, it's a good idea?

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 17:00

Join Bath Rugby Supporters' Club

They have a website - google them. Only £10 a year. Failing that, email them and ask to be alerted when the next "Ask The Ref" is. Non members welcome for a small fee.

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 17:02

Quote:
P G Tips
Join Bath Rugby Supporters' Club
They have a website - google them. Only £10 a year. Failing that, email them and ask to be alerted when the next "Ask The Ref" is. Non members welcome for a small fee.

PG

OK, I'll look into it. Many thanks.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 17:13

I'd award a restart penalty against the defence for every PT.

I don't agree with SW, a deliberate knock back is a perfectly valid (and skillful) play. If you are not at all times attempting (legally) to interfere with the opposition, what are you doing on the pitch?

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:08:17:15:08 by joethefanatic.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 17:28

A PT is already a guaranteed 7, I don't think more points are necessary. If it's foul play I think a YC is a fair addition. But the double jeopardy of a PT and a YC because your forward pack is bad at defending mauls does seem to make mauling more valuable than most other things.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 17:57

Quote:
B4thB4ck
I asked opinions about something else but don't remember a reply so here it is again - after the ball is knocked back legally, Strang, who is already on the deck, scoops the ball in and prevents Coetzee from picking up and falling over the line. My reading is he needed to get back to his feet 1st before playing the ball. Is that right? If so then pen try as Coetzee was also prevented from scoring?
Just interested from a laws point of view.

Sorry if this is answered above already, my eyes got a bit cloudy when presented with all the Law interpretations!

I am pretty sure that you are allowed to pick up a ball when on the deck as long as you aren't in a tackle and you try to regain your feet (or present it backwards). Otherwise falling on a ball when defending a kick through would be illegal, as would falling on any loose ball.

I think that this would potentially fall under WR Law 13: 'Players on the ground in open play'

HOWEVER:

A player on the ground without the ball is out of the game and must:
- Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.
- Not play the ball.
- Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.
Sanction: Penalty.

So I read that as meaning that a Strang knock back out of the reach of a player on his feet would indeed be a pen. What I am not clear on is whether (as with offside) all bets are off in-goal as otherwise two players wouldn't be able to dive into the in-goal and ground the ball?

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 08/03/2022 18:42

Thanks. It had occurred to me that although we spent an eternity getting the decision right on Saturday, had the TMO pushed everyone's patience further by drawing the refs attention to Strang denying Coetzee the ball closer to the line than Bayliss was tackled he might have awarded a OT for that offence. A whole new argument we might not have the appetite for but we see similar incidents and the only one I recall being punished recently was where a player rolled away from a ruck and then reached up to tackle whilst still on the ground.

I wouldn't mind having a go as a ref.....provided I have access to slow mo replays for everything! The matches would all last about 5 hours if that is ok with everyone....

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: charlieboa (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 06:37

Have watched the build up to that pen/ yellow several times.

Not so much for the decision but for the absurd play by richards.

80 mins in the legs at lock and he steps a fresh 9, gases radrandra, and barrels Lloyd. Love it.

Lots of comparisons to other players being made- has a bit of the tom croft about him I think. Probably a slightly bigger frame which leaves open the option of being a lock.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 08:05

Quote:
charlieboa
Have watched the build up to that pen/ yellow several times.
Not so much for the decision but for the absurd play by richards.

80 mins in the legs at lock and he steps a fresh 9, gases radrandra, and barrels Lloyd. Love it.

Lots of comparisons to other players being made- has a bit of the tom croft about him I think. Probably a slightly bigger frame which leaves open the option of being a lock.

The look of Semi on the ground looking back bewildered is the best bit for me!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 08:28

Quote:
joethefanatic
I'd award a restart penalty against the defence for every PT.
I don't agree with SW, a deliberate knock back is a perfectly valid (and skillful) play. If you are not at all times attempting (legally) to interfere with the opposition, what are you doing on the pitch?

The implication of that Joe is that you are rewarding the execution of a penalty/yellow card offence.

That would be deemed Unfair Play, a repeated offence would be Foul Play

Law 10.2 UNFAIR PLAY
(a) Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or play unfairly. The player who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned that a send off will result if the offence or similar offence is committed, or sent off. After a caution a player is temporarily suspended from the match for a period of ten minutes playing time. After a caution, if the player commits the same or similar offence, the player must be sent off.
Sanction: Penalty Kick

Law 10.3 REPEATED INFRINGEMENTS
(a) Repeatedly offending. A player must not repeatedly infringe any Law. Repeated infringement is a matter of fact. The question of whether or not the player intended to infringe is irrelevant.
Sanction: Penalty kick

I will get an official referees view on this either as PG suggests or through my own enquires and give feedback.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 09:17

The knock back is not an offence though SW? It is all part of the game as seen in re starts.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 09:59

Quote:
B4thB4ck
The knock back is not an offence though SW? It is all part of the game as seen in re starts.

Currently, but thats precisely my point, its not an infringement that results in a restart, scrum/lineout to the opposition, its unfair play that leads to a penalty (possible yellow) or if repeated foul play (possible red).
As soon as you fail to catch the ball you are committing a professional foul or cynical play. That in the case of the DKO is a penalty. The direction of the ball after that should be irrelevant. Its against the spirit of the game which is part of the foul play definition..

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 10:07

Quote:
shipwrecked
its unfair play that leads to a penalty (possible yellow) or if repeated foul play (possible red).

I think that I'm a bit lost here SW. Are you basically putting it in the bracket of throwing (or kicking) the ball away after a pen is awarded to stop the quick tap?

I don't think that there was anything unfair or illegal about Sheedy knocking it backwards. In relation to the Law you quoted, its not even an infringement to knock it backwards (unless the ref has already blown and you are stopping the tap, as above).

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 10:35

Quote:
BathMatt53
Quote:
shipwrecked
its unfair play that leads to a penalty (possible yellow) or if repeated foul play (possible red).

I think that I'm a bit lost here SW. Are you basically putting it in the bracket of throwing (or kicking) the ball away after a pen is awarded to stop the quick tap?

I don't think that there was anything unfair or illegal about Sheedy knocking it backwards. In relation to the Law you quoted, its not even an infringement to knock it backwards (unless the ref has already blown and you are stopping the tap, as above).

No Matt, I'm saying that play stops for 3 reasons and then restarts after the ref has made his decision.

To be clear as the law stands today a knock back isn't an offence and the game wouldn't stop. I'm saying thats wrong.

The 3 reasons are:

Infringement, eg forward pass result scrum to the opponent.
Unfair play as defined by Law 10.2 UNFAIR PLAY (repeated unfair play move it to foul play with its sanctions.
Foul Play eg Dangerous tackling results in a Penalty leading to a yellow or red card.

Where there is no catch or intercept as in a DKO its unfair play. Its always a penalty or a higher sanction.

Whether the ball goes back or forward should be irrelevant because that player has prevented the try from being completed being a professional foul or cynical play. yellow, red, or PT.

Batting a ball down that goes backwards currently means no offence. Thats a nonsense as its the act of touching, deflecting or batting the ball preventing the pass that is the offence.

When you fail to catch and deflect the ball is the offence and where it goes doesn't matter.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 11:02

Ah I understand, so you aren't saying that what Sheedy did is currenty contrary to the Laws, but that you would like it to be. I personally am OK with it (not what Strang did of course).

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 11:17

Quote:
BathMatt53
Ah I understand, so you aren't saying that what Sheedy did is currenty contrary to the Laws, but that you would like it to be. I personally am OK with it (not what Strang did of course).

Which is where we started from Opti's comments on the deliberate knock on yesterday morning 9.25am.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 11:26

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
BathMatt53
Ah I understand, so you aren't saying that what Sheedy did is currenty contrary to the Laws, but that you would like it to be. I personally am OK with it (not what Strang did of course).

Which is where we started from Opti's comments on the deliberate knock on yesterday morning 9.25am.

Fair enough, I logged on yesterday to a wall of Laws so missed that bit - apologies!

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 15:28

Sorry but I fundamentally disagree that knocking the ball backwards is cynical professional foul. Using your had to make the ball travel backwards is one on the kjey things in the game. Using your hand to knock it forward is against the rules. The reason a DKO is a penalty offence is because it is deemed a deliberate choice to break the rules not an accident so the sanction is higher. That is fairly consistent across the game eg accidental offside scrum. Deliberate offside penalty.

The objective of defense is to stop an attack within the rules, if you can intercept a pass great if you can knock it back towards your own line great but that often comes with risk as the attacking side are traveling that way and the defenders in the other direction. The reverse is true with knock o.

What Sheedy did in the last min would have resulted in a try for Bayliss without the early tackle

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 15:55

Ask yourself why not just catch the ball then? Have you ever seen anyone knock the ball backwards as a defensive ploy?
This arises when the ball is knocked and goes backwards as opposed to forwards on is legal one not.
What argument justifies that.

Your argument that you should be allowed to defend by interfering is different, that then is simply an infringement and a scrum would result. I’ve no problem with that but those aren’t the rules at present.

The whole point of the game is to handle the ball, it’s not volleyball. The emphasis should be on picking the ball up or catching it.
Batting into touch is already a penalty anyway.

The reasoning for that is that that player doesn’t have the skill to catch it so is denying the opposition the chance of doing so, what is the difference?

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 16:50

I don't think you are going to persuade anybody sw!

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 17:01

Quote:
P G Tips
I don't think you are going to persuade anybody sw!
PG

+1 certainly not me. A ball that is liable for interception is playable by both teams. Both Teams can kick it forward or back, catch it, or palm it back towards their own team. That is not interference that is legitimate competition for the ball.

If a ball is deliberately palmed out of the field of play, that stops the competition for the ball and is therefore foul play. That is the difference.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 17:11

I think you are slightly missing my point I am not suggesting that a player should be allowed to break the rules to defend and a deliberate knock on should be a penalty but I am not convinced all DKO are deliberate and often I think a genuine attempt is being made to catch the ball.

There is currently nothing in the rules that prevents a player playing the ball backwards into play from their hand and I don't see why that should be illegal based on which side last had possession of the ball which is what you are suggesting. There will clearly be some occasions where a player could use one hand to knock the ball back to one of his players but could not catch it that would be smart defending to me.

Not sure why you think a player needs the skill to catch a ball to be able execute a defensive play.

The penalty for deliberate knock on is not awarded for messing up an attack it is awarded for deliberately breaking the rule that the ball cannot go forward off the hand. If I jump for the ball from a kick and deliberately knock it forward so one of my players can pick it up behind the defence that is also a penalty.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 17:11

Quote:
P G Tips
I don't think you are going to persuade anybody sw!
PG

Not really the point though is it PG, its about raising a question. All the arguments against have related to infringements (scrum to the opposition) and not unfair play (penalty and card) or foul play (penalty and card).

In the action of committing an act punishable by a penalty the ball goes backward, there is no offence, if forwards its a penalty and potential card yellow or red.

Batting the ball into touch to stop a player getting the ball is already a penalty and recently probably decided a game.

What is the difference?

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: P G Tips (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 17:21

Because that action has never neen against the laws and is analagous to many often used ploys/skills!

PG

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 17:22

SW the difference is throwing a ball or palming a ball into touch stops competition for the ball. Palming it back on field is still available for competition. The former is against the law the latter is fair play and can still be available for competition.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:09:17:24:21 by CoochieCoo.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 17:26

The difference is it is and never should be illegal to compete for the ball at any point do the act of touching the ball in flight between 2 players is legal it only becomes illegal when the player deliberately knocks the ball forward

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 17:27

Quote:
CoochieCoo
Quote:
P G Tips
I don't think you are going to persuade anybody sw!
PG

+1 certainly not me. A ball that is liable for interception is playable by both teams. Both Teams can kick it forward or back, catch it, or palm it back towards their own team. That is not interference that is legitimate competition for the ball.

If a ball is deliberately palmed out of the field of play, that stops the competition for the ball and is therefore foul play. That is the difference.

So why is a ball that is palmed to the ground any different? It has stopped competition for the ball.

Also its not actually foul play CC its unfair play (law 10.2). Foul play is specific, itemised and listed. (Schedule 17). Its only foul play if its a second time.

Take the batting into touch. Law 10.2 (c) Throwing into touch. A player must not intentionally knock, place, push or throw the ball with his arm or hand into touch, touch-in-goal, or over the dead ball line.

It doesn't mention direction because its preventing the player from playing the ball.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 17:34

Good grief SW you are really attempting to change the concept of rugby if you consider a backward push unfair play and should be illegal! Sorry will never be able to agree and certainly hope the law makers don’t agree with you! winking smiley

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 17:59

Quote:
CoochieCoo
Good grief SW you are really attempting to change the concept of rugby if you consider a backward push unfair play and should be illegal! Sorry will never be able to agree and certainly hope the law makers don’t agree with you!

Its a technical point CC and specific to the DKO situation not general play.

Its got to the point where no-one is going to alter their view whatever is said which is why much earlier in this thread I said I would refer to an established referee to get a view and I'll do that and post feed back.

My local ref saw it in a different way if anyone is interested, he refs the WRU Admiral National League.
He knew nothing of the Bath game. His view was that if a player batted the ball to prevent a pass being completed he would card them for cynical play being against the spirit of the game.

Not definitive in any way because he once sent a spectator out of the park for throwing the remains of his coffee onto the pitch!

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 18:20

Not sure this is a technical point the law is clear. Knocking the ball backwards is legal in all circumstances where a player is on his feet and onside. A ref who gives a pen and or yellow card is incorrect. Regs are not there to decide what the want to see but ref the laws as written

One of my pet hates is regs who think it is their role to decide which rules to implement. Changes to the laws is the role of world rugby not a quango of refs. It appears refs have decided there is no need to throw straight into the line out and then s causes defending sides to jump across to compete and they then get penalised. Competition for the ball is fundamentally to the game.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 18:51

Quote:
Murty7
Not sure this is a technical point the law is clear. Knocking the ball backwards is legal in all circumstances where a player is on his feet and onside. A ref who gives a pen and or yellow card is incorrect. Regs are not there to decide what the want to see but ref the laws as written.

Not really Murty unless you can point to it.
Again you are referring to general play. Its not general play, its the next level up but not foul play.
Also what about batting the ball into touch is a penalty whatever the direction.

As soon as you are in unfair play status, (that associated with a DKO) you may have to apply the spirit of the law.
Laws will always need to be interpreted and not everyone will agree you can't account specifically for everything.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 19:35

Quote:
shipwrecked

.......Not definitive in any way because he once sent a spectator out of the park for throwing the remains of his coffee onto the pitch!

If he threw it deliberately forward, quite right too!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 19:37

Quote:
B4thB4ck
Quote:
shipwrecked

.......Not definitive in any way because he once sent a spectator out of the park for throwing the remains of his coffee onto the pitch!

If he threw it deliberately forward, quite right too!

Pure genius BB. (Sm22)

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Murty7 (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 21:04

I might be missing something but what does next level mean?
Where do ee get to unfair play, surely that can only be decided by what is in the rules.

No one is saying that deliberately knocking the ball into touch is not a pen.

The issue we are debating is should it be a pen offence to interfere with a pass by knocking it towards your own try line. My view is it shouldn't as it is within the laws and I believe the spirit of the laws as it intrupts an attack legally. As I have said playing the ball back towards you own goal line with your hand is allowed within the

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 21:30

You're allowed to pass the ball backwards.
You're not allowed to pass it forwards.
You're allowed to bat the ball backwards.
You're not allowed to bat it forwards.
You're not allowed to deliberately throw it into touch regardless of direction.

Not really sure what's complicated here.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 22:02

Quote:
hasta
You're allowed to pass the ball backwards.
You're not allowed to pass it forwards.
You're allowed to bat the ball backwards.
You're not allowed to bat it forwards.
You're not allowed to deliberately throw it into touch regardless of direction.

Not really sure what's complicated here.

Nothing at all hasta though it seems odd to me that you are not allowed to deliberately throw the ball out of play but you can kick it out obviously as well as hold it and walk over the line with it. I'm not sure what but something doesn't feel quite consistent there. Perhaps it's one of those, it is because it is?

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 22:04

I've always felt that the head is a greviously underused mechanism for advancing the ball over a rush defence. Can you throw the ball backwards onto your own head (sort of a short range chip) and either recapture the ball yourself or have a team mate do it (if they were onside when you headed it?

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 09/03/2022 22:06

Quote:
hasta
You're allowed to pass the ball backwards.
You're not allowed to pass it forwards.
You're allowed to bat the ball backwards.
You're not allowed to bat it forwards.
You're not allowed to deliberately throw it into touch regardless of direction.

Not really sure what's complicated here.

Because those are ALL in normal play situations, I am not talking about normal play, I am talking about an unfair play situation law 10.2 situation.
It’s not specific to that situation.
You are not allowed to batt it back or forwards into touch. That is also an unfair play situation.

Penalty: Penalty Kick. 2 UNFAIR PLAY. (a) Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or play unfairly. The player who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned that a send off will result if the offence or similar offence is committed, or sent off.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:09:22:07:51 by shipwrecked.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 03:14

But that only a good argument if you think that knocking the ball backwards is unfair - which it isn't

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 09:01

Quote:
joethefanatic
I've always felt that the head is a greviously underused mechanism for advancing the ball over a rush defence. Can you throw the ball backwards onto your own head (sort of a short range chip) and either recapture the ball yourself or have a team mate do it (if they were onside when you headed it?

I thought same jtf, a long time ago in my decent playing days and tried it several times in a training session to much entertainment of team mates. Shape of ball means you have to be so precise and lucky in execution so thankfully I never had the nerve to try it out in a competitive game

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 09:12

Quote:
gaz59
Quote:
joethefanatic
I've always felt that the head is a greviously underused mechanism for advancing the ball over a rush defence. Can you throw the ball backwards onto your own head (sort of a short range chip) and either recapture the ball yourself or have a team mate do it (if they were onside when you headed it?

I thought same jtf, a long time ago in my decent playing days and tried it several times in a training session to much entertainment of team mates. Shape of ball means you have to be so precise and lucky in execution so thankfully I never had the nerve to try it out in a competitive game

[twitter.com]

Like this!

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Ali1969 (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 10:11

Quote:
BathMatt53
Quote:
gaz59
Quote:
joethefanatic
I've always felt that the head is a greviously underused mechanism for advancing the ball over a rush defence. Can you throw the ball backwards onto your own head (sort of a short range chip) and either recapture the ball yourself or have a team mate do it (if they were onside when you headed it?

I thought same jtf, a long time ago in my decent playing days and tried it several times in a training session to much entertainment of team mates. Shape of ball means you have to be so precise and lucky in execution so thankfully I never had the nerve to try it out in a competitive game

[twitter.com]

Like this!

Seem to remember Serge Blanco doing similar during an International match when a pass was thrown to him and no way he was going to catch it without being smashed (never something Blanco was a fan of) he either headed it or tapped it over the defender catching it prior to it hitting the ground.

On another note I remember playing against Mark Ring (a visionary IMO) and he liked to use his knee to "dink" the ball over the rushing defence which meant he never broke stride and you never saw it coming, first and only time I experienced it - man was a genius and a nightmare to play against - great bloke though.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 12:05

Quote:
gaz59
a long time ago in my decent playing days

You're not telling me you've finished playing gaz ... say it ain't so!!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Trawling (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 17:54

There is a logic to SW's suggestion but it goes against the overwhelming logic of how the game works. Lineouts don't work if you can't tap the ball back, likewise competing for a kick, let alone the player skilful enough to bat the ball on BACKWARDS, rather than take the time to catch and pass.
In the case of the intentiinal knock on, without wanting to repeat myself yet again, the professional game is refereed in a specific way, which the players understand.
As a grass roots referee I would be wrong to apply exactly the same standards as a Premiership referee, because of the difference in skillset. (And would hope that the players in their turn would not expect me to be Wayne Barnes - or whoever your favourite ref is!) Likewise, I referee colts games to a different standard than under 14s games.
On the point of WHY the laws are what they are, there are a series of central concepts which have their own logic - you can kick and run with the ball in any direction but this doesn't apply to playing the ball with your hand for example - but all sports are governed by tradition and arbitrary decisions. The number of players, the size of the pitch and ball, whether you have 'umpires' like hockey or 'referees' like rugby, are examples of this.
To show that on some aspects of law, referees will instinctively disagree, I am frankly amazed that someone would genuinely sanction tapping the ball back to prevent a pass with a penalty, let alone a yellow card. To me that's nothing to do with sportsmanship (Law 27), whereas that's exactly the law which any deliberate heading forwards of the ball would fall foul of for me.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 19:33

Quote:
BathMatt53
Quote:
gaz59
Quote:
joethefanatic
I've always felt that the head is a greviously underused mechanism for advancing the ball over a rush defence. Can you throw the ball backwards onto your own head (sort of a short range chip) and either recapture the ball yourself or have a team mate do it (if they were onside when you headed it?

I thought same jtf, a long time ago in my decent playing days and tried it several times in a training session to much entertainment of team mates. Shape of ball means you have to be so precise and lucky in execution so thankfully I never had the nerve to try it out in a competitive game

[twitter.com]

Like this!

Well that's certainly the way to do it but he came blooky close to necessarily running over the dead ball line before dotting down. Now that would have been funny!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 19:52

Quote:
Optimist
Quote:
gaz59
a long time ago in my decent playing days

You're not telling me you've finished playing gaz ... say it ain't so!!

Sadly yes Opti, on medical instructions. For a while I had been finding difficult to get started first thing in the morning and on the off for a run. Had a 24 hour heart monitor revealed overnight my pulse dropped to 28 and barely got above 34 by mid morning! Pacemaker fitted and wow hoo, all cylinders firing again.

Contact sport totally out of the question unfortunately from that point on. So I rang Eddie and to be fair he took it well

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 21:13

The main part of my argument is the state of play at the time when plays stopped.
If at the time the play is stopped it would be restarted by a scrum or line out then we are in normal play.
If at the time the play is stopped it would be restarted by a penalty then we are in unfair play as defined by (law 10.2)
If at the time the play is stopped it would be restarted by a penalty and the play is part of the foul play criteria then we are in foul play, itemised and listed in WR (Schedule 17).

A DKO or batting the ball into touch are examples of unfair play as it is Intentionally Offending.

It's clear we only have conflicting opinions at the moment so that's why I'm getting an informed opinion to clarify.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Optimist (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 22:33

Quote:
gaz59
So I rang Eddie and to be fair he took it well

Spluttered me coffee there gaz! Glad to hear you’re all sorted. 28bpm - Zeus!! did your gp consider the possibility that you are Michael Johnson out of Red Rum??

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 22:38

I'm even more confused now.
A knock back, deliberate or accidental, doesn't stop play, the ball is still live for anyone to gather.

You also still haven't explained why you think knocking the ball back from a legal position is unfair.

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:10:22:39:51 by Which Tyler.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 22:41

Quote:
gaz59
Quote:
Optimist
Quote:
gaz59
a long time ago in my decent playing days

You're not telling me you've finished playing gaz ... say it ain't so!!

Sadly yes Opti, on medical instructions. For a while I had been finding difficult to get started first thing in the morning and on the off for a run. Had a 24 hour heart monitor revealed overnight my pulse dropped to 28 and barely got above 34 by mid morning! Pacemaker fitted and wow hoo, all cylinders firing again.

Contact sport totally out of the question unfortunately from that point on. So I rang Eddie and to be fair he took it well

Really pleased that you got it sorted out Gaz, when you have been sporty and run a fair bit you just assume you are still fit and finding out you are vulnerable can be a real shock. Delighted that you spotted the problem. Are you back with jogging as part of the rehab?

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: shipwrecked (IP Logged)

Date: 10/03/2022 22:47

Quote:
Which Tyler
You also still haven't explained why you think knocking the ball back from a legal position is unfair.

I really have WT and as I've said I'll give feedback but to answer your question its because a DKO is defined as unfair play (Law 10.2) in the laws as referenced above. Recycling opinions is pointless.

Its worth reading the definitions I posted above.

Tyler Offiah
Opinion is based on assumptions, whereas fact is based on observation or research.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: hasta (IP Logged)

Date: 11/03/2022 00:04

A DKO is a sub-set of a knock-on which is defined as forward. A knock-back is not a knock-on.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 11/03/2022 07:46

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
Which Tyler
You also still haven't explained why you think knocking the ball back from a legal position is unfair.

I really have WT and as I've said I'll give feedback but to answer your question its because a DKO is defined as unfair play (Law 10.2) in the laws as referenced above. Recycling opinions is pointless.

Its worth reading the definitions I posted above.

I have to say SW I have read them and I still don't get where you are coming from in terms of the Laws (albeit I now understand that it is your preference rather than the current Laws). You keep referring to DKO rather than DKB but Knock ons have their own Laws at section 11, they don't need to fall under section 10 at all IMO.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: Quel Carreleur (IP Logged)

Date: 11/03/2022 09:29

Quote:
shipwrecked
I really have WT and as I've said I'll give feedback but to answer your question its because a DKO is defined as unfair play (Law 10.2) in the laws as referenced above. Recycling opinions is pointless.
Its worth reading the definitions I posted above.

I have repeatedly, I've also gone to the lawbook itself to see the wording used - but they still don't mention a knock-back that doesn't leave the playing area.

ETA: Otherwise, on a pedantic point of order, from the source of the law book. [www.world.rugby]

Quote:
WR
10.2: A player can be offside anywhere in the playing area.

I think you mean 9.7

Quote:
WR
A player must not:
a. Intentionally infringe any law of the game.
b. Intentionally knock, place, push or throw the ball with arm or hand from the playing area.
c. Do anything that may lead the match officials to consider that an opponent has committed an infringement.
Sanction: Penalty.
d. Waste time. Sanction: Free-kick.

No mention of a knock or throw that remains within the playing area.
Or law 11.

Quote:
WR
11 Knock-on or throw forward
Knock-on
1. A knock-on may occur anywhere in the playing area.
2. It is a knock-on when a player, in tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent, makes contact with the ball and the ball goes forward. Sanction: Scrum (if the ball goes into touch, the non-offending team may opt instead for a quick-throw or lineout).
3. A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm. Sanction: Penalty.
4. It is not an intentional knock-on if, in the act of trying to catch the ball, the player knocks on provided that there was a reasonable expectation that the player could gain possession.
5. The ball is not knocked-on, and play continues, if:
a. A player knocks the ball forward immediately after an opponent has kicked it (charge down).
b. A player rips or knocks the ball from an opponent and the ball goes forward from the opponent’s hand or arm.

6. A throw forward may occur anywhere in the playing area. Sanction: Scrum.
7. A player must not intentionally throw or pass the ball forward. Sanction: Penalty.

Which explicitly and only mentions the ball going forwards

A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything

RAEBURN SHIELD

Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:11:09:45:05 by Which Tyler.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 11/03/2022 11:53

Quote:
shipwrecked
Quote:
Which Tyler
You also still haven't explained why you think knocking the ball back from a legal position is unfair.

I really have WT and as I've said I'll give feedback but to answer your question its because a DKO is defined as unfair play (Law 10.2) in the laws as referenced above. Recycling opinions is pointless.

Its worth reading the definitions I posted above.

So your argument sw seems to rest on the fact that it isn't specifically allowed in the rules and that is why it is unfair as opposed to scoring a try for example.

Personally I thought it was really unfair the way that Glaws stacked their Prem Cup team with first squad players and so thrashed our makeshift team. And I'm guessing there is no rule in that competition that you have to field a team that is reasonably balanced with what the opposition can put out!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: OldMarovian (IP Logged)

Date: 11/03/2022 12:31

Quote:
gaz59
Quote:
joethefanatic
I've always felt that the head is a greviously underused mechanism for advancing the ball over a rush defence. Can you throw the ball backwards onto your own head (sort of a short range chip) and either recapture the ball yourself or have a team mate do it (if they were onside when you headed it?

I thought same jtf, a long time ago in my decent playing days and tried it several times in a training session to much entertainment of team mates. Shape of ball means you have to be so precise and lucky in execution so thankfully I never had the nerve to try it out in a competitive game

A hard one to live down if it goes wrong! Just the last defender to beat but he's a monster so you try and header it over him only for it to go straight into his hands ... eek!

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: B4thB4ck (IP Logged)

Date: 11/03/2022 14:50

Quote:
Optimist
Quote:
gaz59
So I rang Eddie and to be fair he took it well

Spluttered me coffee there gaz! Glad to hear you’re all sorted. 28bpm - Zeus!! did your gp consider the possibility that you are Michael Johnson out of Red Rum??

A bit of a shocker that, sorry to hear it Gaz. As suggested I suppose I would have interpreted a low heart beat as a sign of elite fitness, the sort of thing you hear about with professional cyclists. Hopefully your general health will improve even though your dreams of gracing Twickenham might have faded a tad.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: BathMatt53 (IP Logged)

Date: 11/03/2022 15:10

Quote:
B4thB4ck
the sort of thing you hear about with professional cyclists.

Yes, Miguel Indurain was reported to have a resting heart rate of just 28 beats per minute. Chris Boardman was 38.

[24/25 adoptee: Francois van Wyk]

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 11/03/2022 16:04

Quote:
Optimist
Quote:
gaz59
So I rang Eddie and to be fair he took it well

Spluttered me coffee there gaz! Glad to hear you’re all sorted. 28bpm - Zeus!! did your gp consider the possibility that you are Michael Johnson out of Red Rum??

She did actually say that a rate like that for an elite Olympic athlete would be impressive but unfortunately ....

Explained why it took me ages to on a pair of socks on first thing - I just put it down to getting old. And the cardiogram was basically flat, rising to 38 max on an average day. Quite amusing at the time but really highlights the importance of regular health checks at all stages of life

Hoping to take up my place in the London marathon in October. Had got up to 20 miles in training last year and then hamstring went 4 weeks before so had to defer

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 12/03/2022 02:26

Quote:
gaz59
Quote:
Optimist
Quote:
gaz59
So I rang Eddie and to be fair he took it well

Spluttered me coffee there gaz! Glad to hear you’re all sorted. 28bpm - Zeus!! did your gp consider the possibility that you are Michael Johnson out of Red Rum??

She did actually say that a rate like that for an elite Olympic athlete would be impressive but unfortunately ....

Explained why it took me ages to on a pair of socks on first thing - I just put it down to getting old. And the cardiogram was basically flat, rising to 38 max on an average day. Quite amusing at the time but really highlights the importance of regular health checks at all stages of life

Hoping to take up my place in the London marathon in October. Had got up to 20 miles in training last year and then hamstring went 4 weeks before so had to defer

I'd be interested to know what your O2 sats we're at the time. My brother, who is a very high level rock climber, also has a very low heart rate which is of concern to his physicians.

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 14/03/2022 10:29

No idea joe. It was diagnosed as sick sinus syndrome and pacemaker fitted solved problem immediately.

As said before [and apologies for digression away from thread] but it is a big lesson, typically for males, to get regular health check ups and not just assume it is all ok. Another 6 - 12 months or so of further decline and it could have been a very different outcome I was told

Operation was done under sedation and I was able to watch everything on big TV screen- extraordinary viewing

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: joethefanatic (IP Logged)

Date: 15/03/2022 05:22

Quote:
gaz59
No idea joe. It was diagnosed as sick sinus syndrome and pacemaker fitted solved problem immediately.
As said before [and apologies for digression away from thread] but it is a big lesson, typically for males, to get regular health check ups and not just assume it is all ok. Another 6 - 12 months or so of further decline and it could have been a very different outcome I was told

Operation was done under sedation and I was able to watch everything on big TV screen- extraordinary viewing

Thanks gaz and I'm delighted that you have made a great recovery. I strongly concur on the recommendation on check ups for men. A routine examination for me a couple of years ago led to something, which could have been very nasty indeed, being literally snipped in the bud!

If its not too much information, I tend to stay awake during colonoscopies and the sight of the inside of one own intestines in real time is a thought provoking experience. It also allows you to ask questions of your physician, which tends to disconcert them a bit smiling smiley

... IMHO, of course.

Now in Honolulu

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022:03:15:05:25:47 by joethefanatic.

Re: SHAPE UP: FASHION A WIN! BATH v BRISTOL BEARS

Posted by: gaz59 (IP Logged)

Date: 15/03/2022 10:41

[quote joethefanatic][quote gaz59]No idea joe. It was diagnosed as sick sinus syndrome and pacemaker fitted solved problem immediately.

As said before [and apologies for digression away from thread] but it is a big lesson, typically for males, to get regular health check ups and not just assume it is all ok. Another 6 - 12 months or so of further decline and it could have been a very different outcome I was told

Operation was done under sedation and I was able to watch everything on big TV screen- extraordinary viewing[/quote]

Thanks gaz and I'm delighted that you have made a great recovery. I strongly concur on the recommendation on check ups for men. A routine examination for me a couple of years ago led to something, which could have been very nasty indeed, being literally snipped in the bud!

If its not too much information, I tend to stay awake during colonoscopies and the sight of the inside of one own intestines in real time is a thought provoking experience. It also allows you to ask questions of your physician, which tends to disconcert them a bit smiling smiley

[/quote