Rugby - The Game They Play In Heaven II

[kittenOFchaos]

Hartley's actually improved his discipline in that regard, though he remains a mouthy cheap-shot merchant.

Much to my disappointment.

[finbar]

Well, Leicester's tough, disciplined second half won them the match, even if with 15 on the field. Pity, because it taints things. Young Manu revealed some inner thug. Hopefully we won't be seeing him again for about six months (worth of matches). The key, though, was Youngs' return to form, going with his instincts, not trying too hard, and his performance lifted Flood's. They kept Saints on the back foot. Just a shame that utterly inept officiating didn't let the game play out as it should have.

[kittenOFchaos]

Well, Leicester's tough, disciplined second half won them the match, even if with 15 on the field. Pity, because it taints things. Young Manu revealed some inner thug. Hopefully we won't be seeing him again for about six months (worth of matches). The key, though, was Youngs' return to form, going with his instincts, not trying too hard, and his performance lifted Flood's. They kept Saints on the back foot. Just a shame that utterly inept officiating didn't let the game play out as it should have.

Some punches from Manu, those South Sea Islanders are something else. Ashton did well to stay standing, but really, he didn't do anything to avoid getting hit (was he wanting to get Manu send off as a tactic?). Manu clearly has a short fuse and can get easily riled - that has been totally exposed today and teams will play on it, in the same way teams exploited it in Grewcock. Was nice they kissed and made up at the end.

[Havak]

Well certainly if it were boxing then Ashton should draw all the criticism. Sadly it is Rugby Union and I can really do without what Manu showed today. He has this one chance to learn from it - undoubtedly talented but that red mist could be the end of him.

I rather expect it will be Sarries again - which will make the final a dour afiar as they try to starve us of ball. Still we can win ugly.

[finbar]

Agree on both points. Manu's older brother, who should know better, had his own head-high crack at Ashton later on. Ashton showed a lot of class accepting Manu's handshake and embrace afterwards.

[Havak]

That is one of Unions great strengths don't you think? What happens on the field stays there.

Now Manu deserves a lengthy ban for what he did but the situation is interesting. The RFU's own disciplinary processes do not allow for them to punish a player for an incident for which the ref has taken action on the field by issuing a card. That the linemans got it wrong is NOT grounds to review a referees decisions after the game.

They however set a precedent over the issue where Robbie Russell climbed on Jonno's back way back in 2002. That was dealt with on the field then dealt with again afterwards and a ban handed out.

We need to bit a bit careful though - how long before a result is overturned by lawyers after the game?

The linesman got it inexplicably wrong. I want to see the lad punished for his behaviour - but I do not want to set grounds for losing teams to revisit results. fifteen against fifteen Tigers did an almost perfect job on Saints in that second half - the better side won. Manu has tainted what was an excellent win.

*addendum - And Sarries are dragging the English game back decades. Dour boring attritional starving oppo of the ball. They concede very few tries - and score even less. it makes for a unique situation of Tigers being the "flair" side in a final for once rather than the "boring attritional" side our opponents so often paint us as!

[finbar]

I don't think anyone is calling for overturning the result and I doubt anyone ever will. Well, there was that Leicester official who talked about overturning a result because Ospreys briefly had an extra player on the field. "Tainted" sums up the result nicely. There's every chance, also, that Cockerill could be cited. Good thing. A serial foul-mouthed abuser of officials. A seriously unpleasant, graceless individual - I recall him publicly undermining his predecessor - who transcends any jokes about hookers and their personalities.

The only thing that yesterday's match proved was my contention of a month or so ago - that Leicester and Saints are/were the two best teams in the comp. Saturday's game should have been the final. If Sarries had converted even half of their ludicrously high number of missed penalty kicks, Glos wouldn't have been in the hunt. It was a dire, second-rate game of rugby.

It's a shame young Farrell's old man is installed at Sarries because it means he's stuck there. He deserves a better team around him. I've seen him get better and better this season. His maturity, for his age, is remarkable. And he's a more natural 10 than Toby Flood will ever be.

[Havak]

I've had an extended and robust debate with a Saints fan of my acquantance who was seriously arguing the result should be overturned. Mind you I probably stoked the fires unnecessarily by suggesting he was just practicing the ploy they will need to try next weekend

Is that really how you read Cockerill? He is normally very measured in what he says to the media and has worked hard to control his temper (which did plague him as a player). It comes out occassionally however. What did he do Saturday to earn your ire?

The Ospreys thing was a nonsense said in haste and repented thereafter.

[finbar]

His performance on Saturday was pretty much par for the course - harassing officialdom, graceless, and - in terms of the Manu incident - disingenuous to the point of stupidity. I went off him around the time he deliberately, publicly undermined his predecessor. It was a low, self-serving act. I've not seen much since that redeems him. I can admire the club enormously, I can do without its coach.

[Havak]

Fair enough. I don't view him quite so harshly but would agree he needs to stop harassing officials.

He arguably undermined both previous coaches. It doesn't excuse it but I actually understand why that was the case. Neither were Tigers you see. Nepotism to the extreme is the order of the day at the club. It is a massive strength and a significant weakness all in one. There is however no denying that our major successes have been achieved under coaches who were Tigers players - and our more notable failures under those who were not (this would include Bob Dwyer who finished fourth in the league and lost the European cup final to a comparatively minor French side).

I myself have some issues with the executives - most particularly our commercial director who came from footy - but there is no denying they have the club on a solid footing.

So it works for us but makes us few friends. Even so we have more friends right now that Sarries - some interesting comments from the Gloucester camp about the Saracens approach to the game.

[finbar]

Pat Howard was obviously the exception. The others - the Argie, the Bok - were poor choices. Bob Dwyer? He had a decent old Wallabies team second time around. Later failed at the Waratahs. How good a coach actually was he? Mmmm. These days he's a very boring grumpy old man taking pot shots at anyone and everyone. He's inherited Campo's mantle.

On that basis, I think the inhouse success has had more to do with less-than-stellar outside choices. I understand the nepotism thing. Leicester aren't the only ones who deal in it. Fine when it produces results, not so when the incestuous nature of it becomes a weakness. Fresh eyes and perspective and all that. Anyway, I don't think it any way justifies the current coach's white-anting and undermining. That's just an individual climbing the ladder by any means possible.

[Havak]

Pat Howard was actually part of the nepotisim though - serving as a player before serving as coach.

Sorry a bit rushed here - the post deserves a better response which i will craft in due course.

[finbar]

I knew Pat Howard played, I don't know why I highlighted him. Silly me. Good coach, too, wasting his time in business in Australia making a fortune now as far as I know.

[Havak]

Silly boy - making money when he could be being pilloried by the rugger press. Did you say his family are in the Pharmaceutical business?

I'm still starved for time but to clarify my definition of Tigers nepotism is that it is a case of "you are one of us - or nothing" and to be one of us you need to have been a player. It will have made life very difficult for the previous two coaches I am sure. Most of the executive are former players (notably excepting Clayton the commercial chap). I think - and I'll need to check the annual report - that Sir Clive is on the board (again a former player). Even Deano is being slowly rehabilitated becuase once a Tigers always a Tiger (despite the hugely acrimonious parting of ways).

*edit* And yes time is the only starvation I am familiar with.

[kittenOFchaos]

Poor Ashton, hit so hard that he requires knee surgery.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-1387764/England-fear-Chris-Ashton-knee-surgery.html