Bath Game

[Rossm]

Well, I watched the game and I must admit, I found it hard to get enthusiastic, so I can't blame the players. Put simply, it  was a dead rubber. It would have been nice to get a win but there was nothing riding on it. Both sides were poor but we were worse. It's the type of game that the home side usually wins.
I thought Dai was in error leaving Lima off the field after his binning was up. It looked pretty clear to me that the game was going to come down to a kicking contest, so I was surprised that our best kicker didn't return.
Bertie seems to have gone off the boil. He no longer seems to try and step the tackler. I know our centres didn't give him much space but still......
Apart from the final penalty which appeared to baffle everybody, the ref was a bit strange. Twice he called maul and neither side seemed to hear him. There were other instances when he seemed alien but I can't bring them to mind now. I guess it's probably down to him being a Pro 14 ref. Other posters have described us as less than the sum of the parts. Sums it up really.

I wonder what Dai's going to do for the Leinster game?

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Pretty much my view. It was boring to watch. There were positives about our play, but we simply failed to attack with any flair or invention.

On a separate point, I see that Umaga has gone back to Carnegie as full back (and again played very well this weekend). And that Dai has confirmed most of our leavers will be known in the next few days.

All very unsettling. It looks like we simply don't and can't have a 'plan B' right now.

[RBB]

We are an 80% team at the moment, the final product never comes or on a lot of occasions is not even attempted, as per this game. With Gopps, ED and WLR we would have blitzed Bath, that is the story of our season IMO. The key absences highlight the lack of depth in terms of imagination, flair and invention. Our decision making is flawed, example, a 54m kick was never on for Lima, it is ED distance and he wasn't playing. I see the forwards improving but not getting the chances, when we did score a try is was graft from the forwards that made it. So the 2 x missed pens should have been kicks to the corner as we were bossing Bath even with Faletau and Mercer in.

The backs worry me enormously, where we were once immense and expansive we are now average and limited. Umaga going back to Carnegie is worrying, as Dai clearly sees something in Miller that I don't. Even with an error prone (at the moment) WLR it is a better option than Miller. Gaby is finished, sad but true, he looked erratic and nervous, and we have a wing issue as Bassett seems to be only able to run straight and Rosco drifts back into the centres after what was a promising start.

And, is it just me or does Charlie Matthews appear to gather the ball only to take a tackle and fall over after 2 metres? If he watched Launch he would see that making 4 or 5 is where you should be aiming and where differences are made. Final rant, can our forwards please start running onto passes, taking them standing still means we are always on the back foot and turning attack into defence.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Would Umaga have gotten those two missed kicks? Probably. See him in action (at 15 in blue and white) last weekend:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=255&v=aYsf37j2Tuo

One of those kicks would make Elliott proud.

[Rossm]

BTW: What happened to Gaby? He came on the replace Campagnero then apparently Campo was back on. Did Gaby go off for an HIA?

[RBB]

Would Umaga have gotten those two missed kicks? Probably. See him in action (at 15 in blue and white) last weekend:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=255&v=aYsf37j2Tuo

One of those kicks would make Elliott proud.

Interesting style, he is getting distance at the right height. Putting his effort into the length and accuracy, meaning he makes the distance and keeps the line straight. Not too much backlift either. We are missing a trick, as the short glimpses you see of him in this clip, he is talking and directing - what we need talent, creativity, guts and leadership. Dai is puzzling me, we have someone who could change a game with clear ability being held back. The example is Marcus Smith, Quins had a talent and played him, now look at him now.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

BTW: What happened to Gaby? He came on the replace Campagnero then apparently Campo was back on. Did Gaby go off for an HIA?

He appeared to slip as he tried to make a tackle. Looked like he had pulled a hamstring in his left leg.

[BG]

BTW: What happened to Gaby? He came on the replace Campagnero then apparently Campo was back on. Did Gaby go off for an HIA?

He appeared to slip as he tried to make a tackle. Looked like he had pulled a hamstring in his left leg.

Campo wouldn't have been allowed to come back on for an injury to Gaby, only a HIA. (only frontrow can come back on to replace an injured sub).


Of course a medic could says it was a HIA when it was obviously a leg injury to allow a substituted centre to come back on as cover.

[wasps]

Would Umaga have gotten those two missed kicks? Probably. See him in action (at 15 in blue and white) last weekend:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=255&v=aYsf37j2Tuo

One of those kicks would make Elliott proud.

Interesting style, he is getting distance at the right height. Putting his effort into the length and accuracy, meaning he makes the distance and keeps the line straight. Not too much backlift either. We are missing a trick, as the short glimpses you see of him in this clip, he is talking and directing - what we need talent, creativity, guts and leadership. Dai is puzzling me, we have someone who could change a game with clear ability being held back. The example is Marcus Smith, Quins had a talent and played him, now look at him now.

That doesn't mean that it's the right approach for every player.

As it stands, Umaga is getting a lot of game time, and has also had experience overseas
In the long run, we may reap greater benefits from him seeing and playing with different styles of teams and players

[RBB]

Good point, but if we don't try, we won't know. Same goes for Porter who is behind Hampson, puzzling.

[wasps]

It's one of those delicate balancing acts.

Is it worth letting him play a season or 2 for a couple of different clubs and let him come of age and then reap the benefits for the next 10 years.
or chuck him straight into the 1st team and keep your fingers crossed that he's not too small, that he doesn't lose confidence in a losing team which then takes a couple of years to repair?
Ultimately, he's getting game time which should make him realise that he's in the club's thoughts.

As for Porter, I don't know.
I've never been entirely convinced by Hampson, but have been happy with him as 3rd choice.
If the coaches feel that Porter is behind Hampson in the pecking order, and if we're still looking at the likes of Vellacott then that might answer the Porter question.
The coaches obviously get a far better view of players than we do. Although I haven't seen much of him in the A league games, our overall performances against other A league teams suggest that very few of the players are head and shoulders above the rest of the squad.
If we were dominating these games and winning by 20 points, then it's a clear sign that the majority of the academy are ready for the step up.
As it is, we're looking at maybe 1 or 2 who might be ready to start getting chances.... but usually at <20 years old, it usually means a gradual introductions like we've seen with Jack Willis and to a degree Tom.


When it comes to head injuries, we talk about how players need protecting from themselves.
Often it's the case with the academy kids too. They need protecting from their own enthusiasm. I'm sure most would play 3 games a week given a chance, but that kind of hammering on a developing body won't necessarily be a good thing

[Heathen]

All very unsettling. It looks like we simply don't and can't have a 'plan B' right now.

Do we have a Plan A?

[coddy]

I thought Rob Miller played very well, good under the high ball, kicked his goals and made a couple of very decent try saving tackles against their big back row runners. Can't blame him for our lack of attacking prowess as the backs as a whole were absent as a attacking force.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

I thought Rob Miller played very well, good under the high ball, kicked his goals and made a couple of very decent try saving tackles against their big back row runners. Can't blame him for our lack of attacking prowess as the backs as a whole were absent as a attacking force.

I agree.

[mike909]

I thought Rob Miller played very well, good under the high ball, kicked his goals and made a couple of very decent try saving tackles against their big back row runners. Can't blame him for our lack of attacking prowess as the backs as a whole were absent as a attacking force.

I agree.

So do I, thought he looked keen, if a little rusty occasionally.