Aviva Premiership - Round 4 Preview

First topic message reminder :

Table:

Friday 27th September

19:45 Northampton Saints v Sale Sharks (BT Sports)
Saints and Sharks enter this fixture both with two wins and separated by a single point in the table. Do not let that fool you into thinking this will be close. Sale are a decent, workmanlike side - but Saints, always powerful, now have a real sprinkling of stardust. Northampton will be hurting from the nature of their defeat last week, but will hopefully have reflected on the things they failed to do to secure the victory Mallinder felt his team deserved. Mallinder has spoken about the need to rotate his team more than they usually do if they are to reach the end of the season with enough left in the tank to win a trophy. With their smaller than average squad, that may be tricky - and for this game probably just means that the Pisi brothers will return to the team.
Steve Diamond was rather cagy when discussing Danny Cipriani's performance last week. He knows that he has a match winner on his hands, but at the same time there is obviously something about Cipriani's dedication that rubs the Sale boss up the wrong way. With Nick McLeod looking to have picked up a serious injury, their is little alternative to the former england man. I do wonder though just how strong the team around him will be. I can see Diamond resting a number of players ahead of their home fixture next week.

Surely a comfortable win for Saints



Saturday 28th September

15:00 Bath Rugby v London Irish
So, did Gary gold and Mike Ford rest players to save them, or did they really think they had the right tactics last week. Irrelevant now, but Gold looked rather chastened in post match interviews. For the return to the Rec we can expect to see the powerful players omitted last week, and George Ford, re-instated to the starting lineup. The LI old boys will be especially keen to impress against their old team. While Jonathan Joseph is in the EPS and Matt Garvey gets the 606 plaudits I reckon that Anthony Watson will turn out to be the biggest success. I fully expect him to show LI what they are missing.
London Irish of course still have some excellent backs themselves, from the experienced Irish half-backs to the every improving Marland Yarde. With 4 tries in 3 matches Yarde has shown power, pace and an eye for the line. Will surely earn more England caps this season. However in the end, like most matches, this will be decided by the battle up front. Bath's pack looks too big and too strong.

Bath to win by more than 7


15:00 London Wasps v Worcester Warriors
The two bottom teams meet in a vital clash. With the number of points that Warriors have been conceding, DR Dean Ryan should perhaps spend more time working on his team's frailties and less on moaning about referees. Worcester do not look like a side who will score lots of tries, so they must improve their defence.
Wasps have garnered 3 LBPs from their 3 matches - all effectively away from home. As they play yheir first match at their own ground this week, they will feel that they are just a tiny improvement away from winning games. Losing however can become a habit and Wasps will be desperate to win this one and avoid heading to Saracens in round 5 seeking their first win.

Gut feel that Wasps will turn it on for a comfortable win



15:15 Harlequins v Saracens (BT Sports)
Probably the highlight of this rounds fixtures, sees the two losing semi-finallists from last season meet for the first time this season. Against a poor Worcester team, Quins showed championship winning form last week. If they can play at, or close to, their best they should be able to win this match. Saracens however are in stunningly good form. If you cannot dominate them up front, they are very good at steam rollering teams. This has already been demonstrated against three packs which, for various reasons, are not the strongest Sarries will face.
Quins will be the toughest match so far for Sarries, but are they strong enough? Certainly the more technical Quins front row will look to get the ref on their side early, whilke elsewhere they will be looking to move the bigger pack around and tire them out. In the end I feel this match will be decided at the breakdown. Sarries are expert at slowing down opposition ball, some would argue killing the ball and Quins have to counter this.

Saracens continue winning ways




Sunday 29th September

14:00 Exeter Chiefs v Leicester Tigers (BT Sports)
In their first televised match of the season, Chiefs welcome the defending champions looking to replicate the results of two seasons ago. Both sides have two wins, and whoever seals victory in this match will find themselves in the Top4. Both sides have injury issues, but then who doesn't. Tigers will need to play better than they have so far this season if they are to travel home with a win.


Newcastle Falcons v Gloucester Rugby
Gloucester secured their first win of the season in controversial fashion last week, while Falcons appeared to gift tigers victory by resting key players. Falcons have to pick a big pack and hope that Blair and Clegg/Godman can keep them in the right part of the pitch. Thing is, even then Gloucester look to have too much ability.

Gloucester to continue the new found winning habit

Geordiefalcon nice post. You make very good points.

My reading GF, is you are saying he is of International Quality in defence, but sub-par on attack - and that we should hide him in attack.

If he is the best we have available - and he may be (but then at the time of the bulk of his caps so was Jamie Noon) then he should be selected. However if we have aspirations to doing well in RWC 2015 then we need more than that summary you gave of him.

Perhaps his attack is good enough - after all ove rteh last couple of season the gameplan imposed at England and Sarries has been like a straitjacket - and now Sarries are trying to expand he is injured.


Any way, as I said earlier, just my personal opiniopn but i feel we need a 12 who offers more than either Barritt or Allen (so no club prejudice from me). We may not have that player.

Agree we do need more then Barrett gives if we want to be the best we can be. Either that means BB showing a lot more ball in hand (like Farrell is now) or someone else comes in to the 12 jersey.

LT, im not defending him or praising him...im merely saying it as it is with Barritt. Ive been critical as i too feel IF we are to move on...we need more than that at 12. BUt we have been very limited in choices over the last few seasons...indeed its only recently that Twelvetrees has put his hand up. Allen was a viable option who just doesnt seem to have been considered.

Personally i would go with Twelvetrees at 12...and Barritts injury has kind of given that one the green light. We will see how he goes against the big boys...if he peforms then he will take the shirt.

I dont think it has helped Barritt being in a team lacking a creative 10 (Farrell has until this season shown barely any attacking instincts) or any genuine carriers in the pack.
Indeed all our backs have suffered due to this...and as result our entire gameplan seemd to die when Ben Morgan got himself injured! A worrying situation that one player out can seemingly derail our entire game.

iv just seen the highlights ozzy.

first try is a bit frustrating but these things happen but according to the law that should of been a scrum.
second try was ridiculously unfair. very harsh.
third try i couldnt quite see to be honest, TMO must of seen it ground, cant say i did. good running from ford but shocking defending from us.
fifth try was abysmal defending from us again.

and yeh bit harsh to yellow hagan.

all in all dont think it made a difference we would of lost regardless but certainly made it an easier game for bath with those decisions and our awful defending in the 1st half.

sounds like subs made a big difference 2nd half. i expect gough, cowan and hagan may all get a start v Quins.

Worcester v Falcons this weekend....is this a relegation decider already, this early in the season?

Our next prem game after that is London Irish...a critical couple of games...

Ozzy3213 wrote:Ok, so have now seen the highlights of our game with Bath and I am going to write this post carefully so as to try to not be seen to be moaning.

First up, Bath were better than us, and in no way did not deserve their win.  However, it is hard enough playing against a good side like them, without getting done over by the officials.

Try 1.  The ball carrier runs into the referee who impedes our tackler from getting to him.  Should be play stopped and an attacking scrum.  Would we have defended it?  Probably not, as our defence in the first half was porous at best.  It would however have been nice to have had a fair chance to do so.

Try 2.  Ball going into touch from a Bath kick touches Topsy Ojo on the way out.  TJ signals Irish throw and Irish stop.  Ford takes a quick one and Mercer goes over unopposed.  Ref goes to TMO who says it was Bath's throw and therefore a try.  No argument that it is Bath's throw, but surely they cannot be allowed to take a quick one when the TJ has informed our players that it's our ball and we therefore stop.

Try 3.  Absolute gash tackling from our lot, so part of me thinks we got what we deserved.  However, the ref is not close enough to make a decision on the grounding, and the TMO gives the try despite there being no camera angle which shows the ball being grounded.

Hagan yellow card.  Attacking scrum to us.  Hagan gets pinged for going down and carded.  Why would he drop it deliberately when we were attacking in the Bath 22 and needed a try to get back in it?  


We played 20 minutes of the second half with 14 men and won it 8-0.  Whilst I accept that Bath took their foot off the gas, I am very disappointed that the team didn't show the same fight in the first half as they did in the second.  A few players really dug in for us, but one or two need to have good long look at themselves in the mirror.  Not good enough for 40 minutes out there, and unless we replicate the second half performance for 80 minutes on a regular basis then we are going to be in trouble this season.

Gutted.

Well Ozzy I agree you didn't get the best of luck from the referee. I will attempt to respond without bias.
Try 1 actually came a few phases after the ref got in the way though didn't it? So arguablly not a direct cause. Many refs would have called for a scrum though.
Try 2 was a little odd, is this a case of not playing to the refs whistle? I don't know the rules well enough to comment too much here but the linesmans flag doesnt mean play has to pause does it?
Try 3 looked held up. I can only assume the question was 'any reason I can't award it'.
The yellow card. Well I never understand these. Later in the game after winning 2 penalties in a row against a 7 man scrum, and on a rare 2nd half foray into your 22 Wilson was penalised. Why would he need to bore in when he was already looking fairly confortable?

Anyway I think add up all those and certainly the referee didn't help Irish. I suppose you would like to think that over the season these things even out, even though as supporters we tend to remember those times we feel harshly treated.

The second half should bring some confidence though and better luck for the rest of the season! Until the St Paddies day game of course...

Leicester-Saints looks like the definite highlight of matches next weekend.

Londontiger the thing about Barritt is that like pretty much every other player he did well in the NZ and Scotland games. The Barritt-Manu centre partnership doesn't work but it doesn't mean Barritt is surplus to requirements in my opinion. Barritt seemed to be more effective with 36.

If England's forwards do their jobs properly then whoever we put out in the backs should have the platform to perform.

Even the mighty ABs backs struggled when the England pack had their pack under the cosh.

England need to be getting over the gain line consistently, drag in defenders which will open the gaps and create opportunities.

Bathman_in_London wrote:
Well Ozzy I agree you didn't get the best of luck from the referee. I will attempt to respond without bias.
Try 1 actually came a few phases after the ref got in the way though didn't it? So arguablly not a direct cause. Many refs would have called for a scrum though.
Try 2 was a little odd, is this a case of not playing to the refs whistle? I don't know the rules well enough to comment too much here but the linesmans flag doesnt mean play has to pause does it?
Try 3 looked held up. I can only assume the question was 'any reason I can't award it'.
The yellow card. Well I never understand these. Later in the game after winning 2 penalties in a row against a 7 man scrum, and on a rare 2nd half foray into your 22 Wilson was penalised. Why would he need to bore in when he was already looking fairly confortable?

Anyway I think add up all those and certainly the referee didn't help Irish. I suppose you would like to think that over the season these things even out, even though as supporters we tend to remember those times we feel harshly treated.

The second half should bring some confidence though and better luck for the rest of the season! Until the St Paddies day game of course...

You may be right Bathman that we only remember the harsh treatment but it seems to me it never evens out for Irish ... we get players red carded for perfectly legal tackles whilst other teams can smash our players in the face with their forearms and not even get a card or a citing, the officials seem to go out their way to confuse our players with their incorrect signals (eg in the Sarries match the ref signalled a penalty for LI and then let Sarries play on) and as for TMO decisions this isn't the first time nobody could see the score except apparently the TMO (Austin Healey said he watched it over and over and the ball was held up - which it appeared to be by Yarde getting his leg under it) - although you could be right that Pierce asked 'any reason' in which case he was wrong as he can't have seen it and the TMO should have done what Davey did in another match and said "he didn't ground the ball" which is a good reason for not awarding it.

Don't get me wrong, Bath were good for the win but it's about time the officials got their act together and stopped making these basic mistakes.

Heaf London Irish are hardly angels. I hardly need to remind you about Marland Yarde and his cramp.....

Plus of course you have Halauifa in your side and used to have bad boy Delon Armitage.


Delon Armitage in action:

http://www.rugbydump.com/2011/11/2234/delon-armitage-suspended-for-five-weeks-for-two-incidents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CrND1GQc2w

With the greatest of respect beshocked, wtf are you on about.

Yes, we've had players with questionable disciplinary records, largely because they never get away with anything, they always get punished.

What Heaf is (and I am) saying is that 2 weeks running we have been on the rough end of some shocking refereeing decisions. This week, it wouldn't have mattered, Bath would have beaten us anyway as we did not cope with their power up front in the first 40 minutes, but it doesn't change the fact that we got a little bit stiffed by the officials.

The previous week, I am still not sure how Tom Johnson stayed on the field after forearm smashing Eamonn Sheridan in the face, which was seen by the TJ and a penalty given. Had that been Hala'ufia or Armitage I am in now doubt that a card and potentially a citing would have ensued.

Precisely ... and BTW beshocked these officiating blunders have nothing to do with LI player discipline

Ozzy You're happy to support your player when he does something questionable yet when certain things don't go your way you blame the ref.

It's not one rule for Irish and one rule for the rest even if you believe that. It's just you don't seem to acknowledge that not every thing went Bath's way.

Bath won comfortably it did not affect the result.

Bathman_in_London wrote:
Try 2 was a little odd, is this a case of not playing to the refs whistle? I don't know the rules well enough to comment too much here but the linesmans flag doesnt mean play has to pause does it?

As soon as the TJ puts his flag up to signify the ball is out of play then the game has to stop and be restarted with a lineout (or 22/scrum if touch in goal). However the direction he points his flag is merely an indication, not gospel - you often see them change. If the lineouts had started to form (not seen it so do not know) a quick throw should not have been allowed. If however they had not then yes there is a case to say that LI shoudl keep playing till the ref has confirmed whose lineout it is.

Mate, you are the only person who seems to think what Yarde did was questionable in relation to the laws of the game. The reason for this is because it wasn't. It was perfectly legal, albeit opportunistic. The referee made the correct decision as per the laws of the game.

As highlighted, in the Bath match the referee and his officials, including the TMO made 3 decisions that were not consistent with the laws of the game, and on each occasion it resulted in a try to Bath.

There were bits that went our way of course, as there were other bits that went Bath's way that did not result in tries. It doesn't alter the fact that we've had the rough end of the stick the last couple of weeks from the officials.

I am of course terribly sorry that Marland had the audacity to get up of the floor when he had cramp and score against your team. Clearly this has upset you greatly and you now cannot possibly see that we might have had the wrong end of any refereeing decisions. No worries.

LT

Agreed, you play to the whistle. The aggravating factor here though is the ball goes out of play and the linesman as well as indicating Irish ball appears to say something to Ojo and make some other indication to him, which stopped him from just picking the ball up which was at his and Ford's feet.

Like I say, bath were the better side and good value for their win, but it's left a little bit of a sour taste that there is some controversy over their first 3 tries.

Ozzy3213 actually Londontiger and Portnoys Complaint both said they thought it looked wrong - what Yarde did. I also feel it was unsporting. Not blaming the ref. Blaming Yarde for his behaviour. I think he is a cheat.

Definition of cheat:

To deceive by trickery; to mislead,fool

to deceive or practise deceit, esp for one's own gain; trick or swindle

No it doesn't upset me greatly. It's yours and Heaf's arrogance. You don't seem to even comprehend why someone might not approve of what Yarde did and equally you don't seem to acknowledge that London Irish are not angels.

You do not seem to acknowledge my point of view. I see that as arrogance. You also are acting in a patronising manner.

beshocked, a few points for you.

1. Neither Heaf nor myself have ever said that our team are angels.

2. Portnoy and LT did indeed say they thought it looked wrong, and then when the laws were clarified both conceded that in terms of the laws of the game, none were broken Yarde.

3. Well done on looking up the definition of cheat, clearly you are not a front row forward otherwise you'd know it by heart anyway. In relation to Yarde and that definition, what exactly did he do that amounted to deceiving by trickery, or misleading anyone? he was down with cramp, saw an opportunity was coming his way, ran the try in, went down again with cramp and then went off injured with it. I'm not sure what deceipt there is there chap.

4. And on the arrogance, I'd just like to say, hello pot, I'm kettle, nice to meet you.

BS I've never said LI are angels - I'm more than happy to accept some of our players have done things wrong in the past - I doubt any team can say none of their players has ever done anything wrong.

Re Marland I honestly don't believe he was acting to deceive - I believe he was being treated for a genuine injury/cramp but seeing play coming towards him was not so badly affected by whatever he was being treated for that he was able to get up and rejoin play - I really don't see that as being so impossible to believe - but I can see you are not going to accept that.  The truth is we will never know either way.

My issues are with the officials making obvious blunders week after week - this is nothing to do with any player behaviour, good, bad or otherwise.

As for being patronising - quoting a definition of the word cheat in case we didn't understand what a cheat was?

Hmmmm ...  I believe someone else (not me nor Ozzy) said you were making yourself look silly last week?

beshocked wrote:Ozzy3213 actually Londontiger and Portnoys Complaint both said they thought it looked wrong - what Yarde did. I also feel it was unsporting. Not blaming the ref. Blaming Yarde for his behaviour. I think he is a cheat.

Definition of cheat:

To deceive by trickery; to mislead,fool

to deceive or practise deceit, esp for one's own gain; trick or swindle

No it doesn't upset me greatly. It's yours and Heaf's arrogance. You don't seem to even comprehend why someone might not approve of what Yarde did and equally you don't seem to acknowledge that London Irish are not angels.

You do not seem to acknowledge my point of view. I see that as arrogance. You also are acting in a patronising manner.

So he decided to take himself out of the game momentarily to gain the advantage of getting up should the play suddenly swing over that side in a minute's time? What would have said if he'd got up and made a tackle - most people then say 'Oh, what bravery' - presume you'd cry cheat?

Ozzy3213 wrote:
2. Portnoy and LT did indeed say they thought it looked wrong, and then when the laws were clarified both conceded that in terms of the laws of the game, none were broken Yarde.

Just to clarify, I said it wasn't breaking the offside law, just that it looked wrong (even though it wasn't).  ie I never felt that the offside law had ever been broken.

beshocked wrote:Ozzy3213 actually Londontiger and Portnoys Complaint both said they thought it looked wrong - what Yarde did. I also feel it was unsporting. Not blaming the ref. Blaming Yarde for his behaviour. I think he is a cheat.

Definition of cheat:

To deceive by trickery; to mislead,fool

to deceive or practise deceit, esp for one's own gain; trick or swindle

Just to clarify, and re-iterate the point I made just above. I said that it was not wrong just looks wrong. The two are very different. there are plenty of times when something looks wrong to the oberver, but is actually OK. I even highlighted the laws that show why he was never offside.

As to calling him a cheat - well the only way, by your own definition, he could be a cheat is if he pretended to have cramp - thus was in an advantageous position by deceit. Otherwise it is, at worst, opportunistic.

Now there are players all over the pitch who deliberately break the laws or try to deceive the ref usually front and back row forwards.

I would suggest you need look no further than Matt Stevens and Jacques Burger to find two such. To counterbalance I also offer Dan Cole and Julian Salvi as prime examples.

Londontiger  I already said that you thought it looked wrong. That is a correct statement if you want to back track and change your mind that's your opinion. I also thought that when you said it looked wrong I thought you meant it was a morally ambiguous act.

Yes those players mention do bend the laws but I think it's a different to using an "injury" to one's benefit.  If you don't see what's morally wrong with what Yarde did that's your opinion.

Yes I do happen to think this is different to what the likes of Stevens,Burger,Salvi and Cole do.

Hood83 he still gained an unfair advantage. Well getting up to tackle is different. It's not the same as getting up as if not injured and racing away for a try.

Ozzy3123 just because something doesn't necessarily break the law doesn't make it right.

No I don't think it's right that he just pops up from an "injury" runs as if there is no injury - it doesn't allow the defence properly to set because they don't expect someone who is meant to be injured getting up because they of areformentioned injury.


Heaf I actually put down the definition of cheat not because I didn't think you knew what it meant - I put it down to highlight where I believe it refers to Yarde.

You can't just pick and choose when an "injury" is convenient or not.

Yarde did deceive though - he deceived the defence by getting back up when the opposition thought he was "injured". Of course he knew what he was doing. This is not something I want to see more of in the AP. It is not an action I approve of.

To me it is as unsporting as diving is in football.

Official's blunders against London Irish of course.

beshocked wrote:...You can't just pick and choose when an "injury" is convenient or not...

Well, that's what you are doing in your own way when you say:

beshocked wrote:...getting up to tackle is different...

Players go down with cramp when it hits them. They are more likely to succumb when the play has moved away, because the effort to get back in position can seem too tall an order. When the play moves back your way again, the adrenalin can kick in and you see if you can get involved.

If it's all right for a player to jump up to make a last-ditch tackle, then it's inconsistent to rail against Yarde for doing the same thing in an attacking role.

Last ditch tackle is the same as racing away for a try as if not injured? Really?

They are quite clearly different.

Yarde did not break any rugby laws - but yes it looks wrong (ie it looks like he may have done). Sorry if you misunderstood my meaning - but at no point have I ever tried to suggest that it was wrong. No backtracking whatsoever - my very first post on the subject outlined why it was ok according to the law, while conceding that (effectively to those with little knowledge of the lawbook) it looks wrong. Looks are deceiving after all.

Definition of cheat:

To deceive by trickery; to mislead,fool

to deceive or practise deceit, esp for one's own gain; trick or swindle

In what way did he deceive anyone - unless you are suggesting he faked cramp so he could be in an advatageous position? Yes he gained an advantage - hence why I say opportunistic. Equally he was always onside.



this is very different from when Geordan Murphy got up from treatment to impede Ben foden two season ago - because there Murphy did deliberately break the laws of the game, knowing the ref was looking elsewhere. He did cheat - and got away with it.

Im not sure he was being deceitful...i just think he had cramp, suddenly the ball was just there with a clear line to the try line ...he saw the opportunity and took it. Im pretty sure i would, and most people i know would...and im pretty sure a sarries player, a AB's, a Bok etc would do the same.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Im not sure he was being deceitful...i just think he had cramp, suddenly the ball was just there with a clear line to the try line ...he saw the opportunity and took it. Im pretty sure i would, and most people i know would...and im pretty sure a sarries player, a AB's, a Bok etc would do the same.

Agree 100%

an opportunity arose and he took advantage - without actually breaking any laws, even though it may look as if he did.

Simply running ahead off the ball is not, of itself, offside.

At the ruck before the ball swings right, he is being treated in an offside position, but is not offside as not participating in play. When he stands up it is open play. In open play you cannot be offside unless the ball is played forward - ie by kicking or passing forward.

I really am not sure that the offside law was breached at all -- but it does look wrong

My original post on the subject. The last 5 words being the ones that have been misconstrued I guess. I coudl have worder it slightly better.. but hey ho, people will still read into things what they want to see.

Londontiger perhaps the rugby laws need changing....

Deceived the opposition side. They thought he was "injured". You evidently don't see anything wrong with what he did now but that doesn't make it right.

We are obviously not going to agree. I don't approve of what Yarde did and never will. You cannot change that.

Geordiefalcon you probably don't believe me but if a Sarries player did that I wouldn't be pleased. I don't think it's something that should be acceptable.

No to deceive them he has to be faking the injury - that is the whole point and that is what you are accusing him of. Now you should be very careful of making allegations like that. Libel laws affect internet posts as well.

Equally it is no different at all from any player jumping up from an injury to participate in the game. Whether it was scoring a try or stopping one, both are opportunistic. Yet you accept one not the other. Yes we will not agree - and personally on this issue I believe you are very slightly hypocritical in that one opportunistic action is bad and one is ok.

It is only cheating if either they faked the injury or they knowingly break the laws.

So you can decry his opportunism (and hopefully would do the same if a Sarries player got up from treatment to affect the play, whether in defence or attack).

You can find it morally wrong - after all it is your moral compas. I just find it bemusing that you object to this, and not aggressive cheating.

But to accuse someone of faking an injury with no evidence - well actually that seems morally wrong to me.

Well, maybe you wouldnt BS...thats good to hear. I would hope most fans wouldnt be happy to see cheating like that coming in to the game. I would be disgusted if genuine injury faking (ironic given who my teams coach is) came into the game. Though im sure its happened with props etc when a pack has been on the end of a pasting to take it to uncontested scrums...

In this case though i genuinely dont believe it was cheating...and im actually pleased to see that a young England international was so quick to see an opportunity and take it. As i said had that been a Aussie, AB, Bok etc we'd have been fawning over their quick thinking etc...

Surely he was putting his team at a disadvantage by being a defender down,IIRC it was only due to a turn over & break that the situation arose.

LondonTiger wrote:So you can decry his opportunism (and hopefully would do the same if a Sarries player got up from treatment to affect the play, whether in defence or attack).

You can find it morally wrong - after all it is your moral compas. I just find it bemusing that you object to this, and not aggressive cheating.

But to accuse someone of faking an injury with no evidence - well actually that seems morally wrong to me.

It is deception when you don't think someone will be a threat because they are "injured". If someone is on the floor with an "injury" surely they shouldn't be an attacking threat?

Deception comes from him getting up as if fine and scoring a try.

I don't actually think Yarde was faking the cramp but if he has cramp he shouldn't be getting up and racing away for a try as if he has no cramp.

I do think it was dishonest and not in the right spirit. It wasn't technically illegal but in my opinion was morally ambiguous.

As I have said it's my opinion.

It's not as if he'd put on an invisibility cloak ... the defence will have seen he was there and could have taken account of the fact that he could re-join play at any point - cramp after all is not a permanent condition ... or are you advocating a new law that says if you have cramp you have to stay on the floor for a minimum length of time before it's acceptable to get up?

Yes they saw he was on the floor being treated. You really think players expect Yarde to pop up as is unaffected by cramp and race away for a try? I think most of the focus would be on tackling the players not on the floor to be honest!

Well while he was on the floor Sarries had an extra man so maybe they should have done a better job of stopping it before it got to him ...

Cramp is not the same as say a broken leg, I have played on with cramp before. Many players take only a moment to stretch before returning to the game. I see nothing wrong with Yarde's actions, he'd need to be able to see in to the future to be able to plan that move.

On a similar note props will often go down injured before scrums to get a rest and more importantly allow the water boy to come on with a whole heap of information on the opposition. Surely that is cheating?

Not in beshocked's eyes yappy, unless of course it happens against Saracens!  

From the OED

Deceive: deliberately cause (someone) to believe something that is not true, especially for personal gain

Thus for Yarde to have deceived he would have had to go down seeking treatment with the intention of fooling the opposition.



Finally please, please explain how you are OK with a player jumping up and making a try saving tackle? How can that be any different? Surely both are wrong if one is? I just cannot understand?

Ozzy3123 can you please get it into your skull that it's not because it happened vs Saracens?

Equally I doubt you would still be responding if it wasn't a London Irish player.

Yappysnap did you lay on the floor "injured" then suddenly pop up as if there was nothing wrong with you to score a try? Never said he planned it but nonetheless he did it.

Anyway, back to my initial point relating to this weeks game, I have re-watched the clips for the first 3 tries scored by Bath, and we were seriously stiffed by some shocking refereeing. Hopefully it will 'even itself out' when we face off against the Hairy Queens this week!  

 COME ON YOU IRISH!!! 

Sorry, but if this had been David Lemi against Falcons you would not have given a flying f......


Ever since people started talking about him as an England contender you have been disparaging Yarde.

Ozzy3213 wrote:Anyway, back to my initial point relating to this weeks game, I have re-watched the clips for the first 3 tries scored by Bath, and we were seriously stiffed by some shocking refereeing.  Hopefully it will 'even itself out' when we face off against the Hairy Queens this week!  

 COME ON YOU IRISH!!! 

It is unlikely to even itself out, as dominant teams tend to get the rub of the green with decisions. LI will fight liek mad this season, but there will be few games where they dominate the opposition.

beshocked wrote:Ozzy3123 can you please get it into your skull that it's not because it happened vs Saracens?

Equally I doubt you would still be responding if it wasn't a London Irish player.

Yappysnap did you lay on the floor "injured" then suddenly pop up as if there was nothing wrong with you to score a try? Never said he planned it but nonetheless he did it.

I'm only responding for two reasons beshocked...

1. I believe firmly that you are talking nonsense (I may be wrong, but it's my opinion and you won't change it)

and

2. You are talking nonsense!!!

Have a nice day!  

Can we lock this thread now please - before I say something really silly

LondonTiger wrote:Sorry, but if this had been David Lemi against Falcons you would not have given a flying f......


Ever since people started talking about him as an England contender you have been disparaging Yarde.

That wouldn't be because he may dislodge one of Ashton or Strettle from the England team is it? Now I wonder who they play for, let me go and check..........

I think that you've been rumbled Beshocked. Was starting to wonder if it was just me - I'm feeling slightly saner now

LondonTiger wrote:Sorry, but if this had been David Lemi against Falcons you would not have given a flying f......

Ever since people started talking about him as an England contender you have been disparaging Yarde.

No but i flippin well would !!