Oh Well - Match Thread!

[Heathen]

Pleased with the result. Well fought for. Second half energy levels were several notches up from the first.

JTA was my MOTM as well. Lima has gained in confidence and his 6/6 today will given him even more.

Very pleased to see Zak walking and smiling. Guess he will be out for a week or two as he was out cold. Alfie’s injury was cruel. Depending on the severity he could be out for months. Charlie is really showing great promise.

Hopefully with Joe, Jacob, Jack, Matteo and a few others available for selection next week, we can give Exeter a decent game.

CML enough said.

[mike909]

Great news about Zach - and it was a fantastic result. But losing Alfie won't be easy and we're going to have to pull together. Which is what these recent results have shown - we can pull together and get results - just like last season

The game showed our belief in ourselves is looking a bit more polished and the level of "cheek" we were showing, even when facing another reffing performance that I wouldn't want on my cv......was good to see, JTA especially!

Injuries - the pitch was a factor in both, and you could see how poor it was when Bassett got caught you could see sand and bits flying up as he tried to get traction to accelerate. Zach's feet were at least partly lost by a lack of traction and Alfie was caught in the surface - and as noted above, he ought not to have been tackled like that.

Sale pushed to the limit and beyond and the ref was allowing too much chaos at the breakdown and bottled doing anything about Faff's foot in the air. You owe at least a duty of care to your fellow players.....and the penalties given for "tackling player without the ball" were like a ref looking to give penalties against us. If I pull out of the tackle and get run into, how is that a penalty? Especially if the opposition is running what are near like "blockers" in the centres. Ditto offside. A joke. We were penalised for one that cost 3 points - Sale were metres offside at the end and nothing said (and the whole game was blighted by lack of space, often linked to offside)

Rugby is under scrutiny for safety - reffing like that won't make it any easier to show that injuries - of all sorts - are seen as a real issue.

Really pleased with the win and the attitude. V pleased Zach is up and ok.

[Neils]

BBC News just shown a still photo of Yarde diving on top of Zac with the ball well gone.

[petros]

BBC News just shown a still photo of Yarde diving on top of Zac with the ball well gone.

I saw that but can't find it on line. Seeing that I wonder if a citing will follow and hopefully one for De Klerk's reckless footup jump

[RBB]

I just watched the incident on BT Sport and Yarde does look to dive onto Zach instead of giving up the chase, I think that will be looked at, as will De Klerk's high boot. TBH, there wasn't much between the two sides. We were less profligate than Sale and Steve Diamond's departure seems to have upset the camp. Big positives for me JTA (agree on MoM, and i was surprised when Rowlands got it), Charlie what a back up for Jacob and Lima (notwithstanding the stepping in) but his kicking and all round play was much improved. Sale with all of their Saffa firepower always looked second best.

Barbeary's ankle is a worry but we are well covered in the back row, so not overly worried, depends on the injury of course.

[Bloke in North Dorset]

BBC News just shown a still photo of Yarde diving on top of Zac with the ball well gone.

I saw that but can't find it on line. Seeing that I wonder if a citing will follow and hopefully one for De Klerk's reckless footup jump

Even if De Klerk doesn't get cited the authorities need to have a long hard look at what's happening in that space because its becoming more common for defenders to jump with one leg up and studs showing.

Furthermore, they're sometimes not jumping upwards but more like a long jump so they are going forwards at quite a rate and even if they wanted to chasers can't get out of the way and then get pinged for contact with player in the air.

[MarleyWasp]

Apparently de Klerk didn't see Will Porter. Not sure I agree with that...

[13thWarrior]

I was watching on TV live and saw the replays and I don't think Yarde did anything wrong. Kibirige dived for the ball without contact from Yarde, and Yarde went over the top (not surprising given you're going at full pelt and a player in front of you suddenly hits the deck). Guess I need to see more replays to be certain but I don't think we should be demonising Yarde here. Glad Kibirige is OK.

Sale were much more physical than us, especially after Barbeary went off. But their lack of creativity cost them I feel. We on the other hand hand enough magic (Atkinson, Barbeary) to find the space for a couple of tries and good work by players like Young meant we won penalties in kickable positions. Thought Odogwu keeps growing into the 13 position and did well there. Sops was good aside from stepping in to hit MLB's man and leave space for Yarde to score. Agree that JTA was huge, seeing him constantly offer himself in the last few minutes to carry having played the entire game at prop was amazing.

[RBB]

From that angle, Bruce Lee would be pleased with that. Seriously, he does seem to be looking directly at Will.

[Horusthewasp]

I was watching on TV live and saw the replays and I don't think Yarde did anything wrong. Kibirige dived for the ball without contact from Yarde, and Yarde went over the top (not surprising given you're going at full pelt and a player in front of you suddenly hits the deck). Guess I need to see more replays to be certain but I don't think we should be demonising Yarde here. Glad Kibirige is OK.

Agree I don’t see Yarde’s action as malicious. He was committed to what would of been a try saving tackle and travelling at speed. You could hear Tempest say he wouldn’t air the in goal angle replay because of the nature of the injury but that he did review it and that he deemed there was no obvious foul play.

BBC News just shown a still photo of Yarde diving on top of Zac with the ball well gone.

I saw that but can't find it on line. Seeing that I wonder if a citing will follow and hopefully one for De Klerk's reckless footup jump

Even if De Klerk doesn't get cited the authorities need to have a long hard look at what's happening in that space because its becoming more common for defenders to jump with one leg up and studs showing.

Furthermore, they're sometimes not jumping upwards but more like a long jump so they are going forwards at quite a rate and even if they wanted to chasers can't get out of the way and then get pinged for contact with player in the air.

I’ve replayed the clip and in my mind there is no doubt he should of been carded. Even if he hadn’t seen Atkinson (which is unlikely because humans have peripheral vision), raising the leg to that extent when you know full well that the opposition will be about to rumble you is clearly an intentional and aggressive action that is designed to illegally fend off a tackle and possibly cause serious injury.

[MarleyWasp]

It's worth reading Paolo's disciplinary judgement from last season, specifically:

Findings of Fact

The panel did not accept that the Player's action in raising his left leg, with studs directed towards the oncoming players, was anything other than intentional. The panel found that the leg had been raised to deliberately fend off potential oncoming players. With that said, the panel did NOT find that Mr Odogwu had deliberately raised his leg so as to specifically kick out and into the face of the Sale No 12.

This was an extremely serious and dangerous incident of foul play. Whilst the panel freely concede that in the current game players are vulnerable when they jump to catch a high kick; this vulnerability cannot, in our opinion, justify preventative measures such as raising an outstretched leg to occur. To do so would simply allow one form of vulnerability to create another.


The panel found that Mr Odogwu deliberately raised his left leg with studs up so as, at the least, to deter an oncoming attacker. In so doing he ran the risk that his outstretched leg would culminate in a kick to the head or upper body of an oncoming player, as occurred here.

The Player's actions following the award of a red card were utterly unacceptable and not in the spirit of the game. Mr Odogwu laughed at the referee and continued for some time to mock the decision and provoke the home crowd who were, rightly, displeased by his conduct. The panel felt, pursuant to Regulation 19.11.8(m), that this was plainly a case where "any other features of the Players conduct in relation to or connected with the offending" justified an increase in terms of sanction. Whilst we felt that the kick alone justified a Top End entry point, the actions immediately following the imposition of the red card only served to re-inforce our view.

And

Reasons for selecting entry point:

Any kick to the head is serious. By deliberately extending an outstretched leg with studs showing, in the knowledge there would be oncoming players, Mr Odogwu risked causing serious injury to his opponents. Whilst we did not find that he deliberately sought to kick the Sale No 12 in the face, he deliberately raised his studs knowing full well that that might be the consequence. Thankfully the injury sustained was not serious; had it been then we would have been considering a higher start point.

I cannot see how de Klerk can escape a ban.

[13thWarrior]

It's worth reading Paolo's disciplinary judgement from last season, specifically:

Findings of Fact

The panel did not accept that the Player's action in raising his left leg, with studs directed towards the oncoming players, was anything other than intentional. The panel found that the leg had been raised to deliberately fend off potential oncoming players. With that said, the panel did NOT find that Mr Odogwu had deliberately raised his leg so as to specifically kick out and into the face of the Sale No 12.

This was an extremely serious and dangerous incident of foul play. Whilst the panel freely concede that in the current game players are vulnerable when they jump to catch a high kick; this vulnerability cannot, in our opinion, justify preventative measures such as raising an outstretched leg to occur. To do so would simply allow one form of vulnerability to create another.


The panel found that Mr Odogwu deliberately raised his left leg with studs up so as, at the least, to deter an oncoming attacker. In so doing he ran the risk that his outstretched leg would culminate in a kick to the head or upper body of an oncoming player, as occurred here.

The Player's actions following the award of a red card were utterly unacceptable and not in the spirit of the game. Mr Odogwu laughed at the referee and continued for some time to mock the decision and provoke the home crowd who were, rightly, displeased by his conduct. The panel felt, pursuant to Regulation 19.11.8(m), that this was plainly a case where "any other features of the Players conduct in relation to or connected with the offending" justified an increase in terms of sanction. Whilst we felt that the kick alone justified a Top End entry point, the actions immediately following the imposition of the red card only served to re-inforce our view.

And

Reasons for selecting entry point:

Any kick to the head is serious. By deliberately extending an outstretched leg with studs showing, in the knowledge there would be oncoming players, Mr Odogwu risked causing serious injury to his opponents. Whilst we did not find that he deliberately sought to kick the Sale No 12 in the face, he deliberately raised his studs knowing full well that that might be the consequence. Thankfully the injury sustained was not serious; had it been then we would have been considering a higher start point.

I cannot see how de Klerk can escape a ban.

Agreed, seems a word-for-word description of the same incident.

[Heathen]

The AJB pitch was awful. How much sand is underneath the surface? I always thought it was a 3G pitch but clearly not. Josh looked as though he was caught up in the quicksands of Morecombe Bay when he was caught going for a try he would have got 99/100.

[hookender]

Problem is any ban (if it is cited) will only benefit other teams not us

[DGP Wasp]

It's worth reading Paolo's disciplinary judgement from last season, specifically:

Findings of Fact

The panel did not accept that the Player's action in raising his left leg, with studs directed towards the oncoming players, was anything other than intentional. The panel found that the leg had been raised to deliberately fend off potential oncoming players. With that said, the panel did NOT find that Mr Odogwu had deliberately raised his leg so as to specifically kick out and into the face of the Sale No 12.

This was an extremely serious and dangerous incident of foul play. Whilst the panel freely concede that in the current game players are vulnerable when they jump to catch a high kick; this vulnerability cannot, in our opinion, justify preventative measures such as raising an outstretched leg to occur. To do so would simply allow one form of vulnerability to create another.


The panel found that Mr Odogwu deliberately raised his left leg with studs up so as, at the least, to deter an oncoming attacker. In so doing he ran the risk that his outstretched leg would culminate in a kick to the head or upper body of an oncoming player, as occurred here.

The Player's actions following the award of a red card were utterly unacceptable and not in the spirit of the game. Mr Odogwu laughed at the referee and continued for some time to mock the decision and provoke the home crowd who were, rightly, displeased by his conduct. The panel felt, pursuant to Regulation 19.11.8(m), that this was plainly a case where "any other features of the Players conduct in relation to or connected with the offending" justified an increase in terms of sanction. Whilst we felt that the kick alone justified a Top End entry point, the actions immediately following the imposition of the red card only served to re-inforce our view.

And

Reasons for selecting entry point:

Any kick to the head is serious. By deliberately extending an outstretched leg with studs showing, in the knowledge there would be oncoming players, Mr Odogwu risked causing serious injury to his opponents. Whilst we did not find that he deliberately sought to kick the Sale No 12 in the face, he deliberately raised his studs knowing full well that that might be the consequence. Thankfully the injury sustained was not serious; had it been then we would have been considering a higher start point.

I cannot see how de Klerk can escape a ban.

Thanks for digging that out. Interesting reading. I guess the key difference is that Odogwu did actually make contact with the head whereas Faf's boot only appeared to catch Porter's shoulder. However, in terms of degree of intent and recklessness the 2 incidents are otherwise remarkably similar.