I managed to catch three games this weekend – my apologies to my fellow Tigers fans, as well as Saracens and Exeter, as I seemed to be the ultimate jinx… all three falling to narrow defeats, having led early on. Tigers lost to Munster 16-25, while Clermont Auvergne edged Saracens 24-21, and Leinster beat Exeter 22-17.
In the three games, there was one common failing that played an important part in the English defeats – namely, poor discipline. Or more accurately, failing to adapt to the referee’s interpretation of the laws.
The standard target for a rugby team is to keep penalties in the single figures. Tigers gave that away in the first half, with Dan Cole contributing an appalling five personally, before going on to concede 14 in total. That still was a way off Saracens effort – they gave away a huge 17 penalties over the course of 80 minutes. Exeter were on the comparatively lower end of the scale – they gave away 12.
Kickable points
Even more crucial was the fact all three teams conceded vital penalties in the danger zone. Saracens gave nine kickable penalties to the dead-eyed Morgan Parra. He duly landed eight of those – 24 points worth – to grant Clermont victory without them ever crossing the whitewash for a try. Leicester coughed up 8 kickable penalties (Munster converting 6 of them) and Exeter gave away five opportunities for a shot at goal – Ica Nacewa converted 100% from the tee.
Saracen’s defence – and Exeter’s, for that matter – is rightly lauded as one of the best in the world, but it doesn’t matter how the big the hits you put in are, if you give away penalties in your own half, teams can punish you without ever fully breaking your defensive line.
Exeter may have come racing out the blocks against Leinster, scoring a try after only five minutes; however, despite their early dominance they never managed to pull away, going into half-time break just 17-9 up. A team packed with as much quality as Leinster is always going to be difficult to contain, but those three first-half Nacewa kicks kept Leinster in touch (despite their own discipline problems and two yellow cards – and Cian Healey was lucky it wasn’t a red) and gave them the platform to win the match.
It is worth mentioning that often an attacking team’s belligerent, phase after phase of attacking play can force a team to concede a penalty, either to necessarily prevent a try being scored or because they cannot keep up and are made to make a mistake. That was the situation for a few of these – but not all, and regardless, the very best teams still find a way to defend without conceding penalties. For the past two years, Saracens were that team.
Unable to adapt to the referee
Now Leicester. And more specifically Dan Cole. For one player to concede five penalties on his own, in the space on one half is not just daft, it is irresponsible. For it to come from a two-time Lion and international with 76 caps, is frankly baffling. It resulted in a yellow card and during his time in the bin, Munster scored 10 points.
Like the other two teams, Leicester may have also got the first try, but they seemed bemused by the referee Mathieu Raynal’s interpretation of the laws.
Tigers’ assistant coach Geordan Murphy spoke to BT Sport midway through the match and said the Tigers’ coaching staff were disappointed with the way Raynal refereed: ‘We’re not getting a lot from the referee. We’re pretty disappointed with the way he refereed the first half. It was a 10-2 penalty count … [recently] I’ve seen a lot of penalties given in lineout maul formation, for the lifter being in front of the catcher. I didn’t see any of those penalised in the first half.
‘[Raynal is] a bit of a conundrum for us, trying to figure him out. But we’ve got to be better with our discipline and territory because we’re getting killed down here.’
Murphy’s complaint slightly missed the point (until the end at least) – Leicester may not have agreed with Raynal, it may have been slightly different to the way the referees in the Premiership were calling things, but he was consistent. Tigers should have adapted.
It was a similar case in the Saracens game, with Andrew Brace – a Pro14 referee – taking charge, while the Exeter match was run by French referee Pascal Gauzere.
I don’t highlight the domestic league of the referee to scapegoat them and let off the players, just to point out that none were usual Premiership referees. They are still all top-class refs, but there are subtle differences in the way the game is being run in the different leagues – different stresses on certain aspects such as the breakdown or maul. This has perhaps been exacerbated this season with the new changes to the rules; there may be currently a higher level of divergence between the different leagues’ approach to the new rules, something that will gradually even out over time.
That is life. As professional rugby players, the English sides’ players should have been able to assess the situation, see how the referee is calling things and play the game accordingly.
In contrast to Murphy, Munster forwards coach Jerry Flannery kept his comments focused on what his side was doing – stating he was disappointed at the way they had conceded a try, but backed his players to adapt and rectify things. Which they did.
Confusion on the pitch
Some of the examples at the weekend, such as a highly experienced player like Dan Cole gifting the ball back like a penalty-piñata, are worrying for me. It reminded me of the England v Italy game in the Six Nations this year – there it was not the referee Romain Poite’s style of adjudicating that was the issue, rather Italy exploiting a loophole in the laws that completely threw England. The sight of James Haskell and Dylan Hartley – each with over a half-century of caps – asking Poite what they should do, would have been comedic were it not disquieting.
Of course I am examining a small pool of games here, but in 2017 there have been a few examples of highly-experienced players failing to adapt to unfamiliar referees’ interpretation, or work out for themselves how to overcome a problematic tactic of their opponents.
What is for certain, is in the three European matches I watched this weekend, the discipline of the Premiership teams let their opposition back into the match and cost them dearly. Taking a quick glance at two winning English teams, both Bath and Wasps kept their penalty count to under 10 (nine each).
No one can tell the players what to do when they are on the pitch, they have to work it out for themselves. Three of the Premiership’s biggest sides let themselves down in that respect this weekend, not only denying the likes of Saracens and Exeter famous wins away to big European sides, but denting their chances or progressing. For the next round, they must sort out this issue. Meanwhile, for the Tigers, it certainly looks like the end of the European road.
By Henry Ker
The comment for many years has been that the AB’s win games by using the top 6 inches better than anyone else. Admittedly amazing ball skills, acceleration, game plans, etc all help. I fear that the stereotype of the muscle bound but slightly clueless English player does have some validity. Sweeping generalisation I know, but this article does explore the fact that when you take the player out of his comfort zone, he doesn’t react and change quick enough.
Now for the real question though – what can you/rugby/RFU do about it?
To chuck a pet suggestion of mine into the ring. If we had weight grade rugby rather than age grade, children would be playing against similar size players and would have to think more about the game more to gain the advantage. Not sure if this has any scientific validity, but probably worth a discussion.
I think its a bit of a sweeping generalisation to say that the English are often muscle-bound and clueless, there have been and are still a lot of very intelligent English players. But in Dan Coles case this comment seems to be justified; it seems he slipped back to his old ways, constantly infringing and eventually getting carded.
I think the point Henry makes on foreign referees is a very valid one. Whenever the NH teams tour the SH, and vice versa, there always seems to be a slight advantage for the home team due to home referees interpretation of the laws of the game. This is probably the case for different domestic leagues too, where referees focus on different areas, whether it be breakdown, set piece or in open play. Some referees, Poitre for example, are so critical of the scrum, yet don’t seem as interested in actions that could be considered infringements around the breakdown. It is down to the team to adapt and play to the referee, and there seems to be an inability to do this at times.
Saying that, a lot of these players are full internationals who have been officiated by many of these referees, so there really is no excuse.
I think that you will find “stereotype” and “sweeping generalisation” in my post. To be fair, I did make all of the comments to start a conversation, so I should expect what I get back!
Agree that different leagues tend to referee to different interpretations and players not used to playing under those regularly struggle. However it has always seemed to me that we struggle to adapt as well as other teams when faced with this difficulty. This may be due to a rose tinted filter. Not sure. Anyone else think the same.
As an aside, this may be where this forum is weaker for adopting an Anglo centric approach as we don’t get so much input from other nationalities and sometimes it is good to see ourselves from some else’s perspective. (Albeit, sometimes it isn’t!)
This article s talking about a lack of discipline in English clubs and among English players. What do players aspire to, to represent their country. What example is given them: the captain of England is a player who has been suspended more than anyone else I can think of for cheap hits, gouging,, thuggery in general, all lack of discipline. What s the message from the top ?
To attribute all of the premiership teams’ poor discipline to Dylan Hartley is pretty naive. No players were actually sent off either so to suggest that the infringements were malicious/dirty is wrong as well.
@Craggy Yet again, Dylan Hartley’s disciplinary record at test level is nearly flawless. Infact, the dirtiest player (by numbers of yellow cards) in test rugby history is Michael Hooper, an Australian, so I’m not sure what your point is….
My view: The new laws have deemphasised the breakdown. Particularly in the English game, and in the coaching of coaches I have been involved in recently, the edict is that fewer players at the ruck, equates to more players in the defense line, equates to greater linespeed, and the opportunity to effect pressure turnovers leading to tries and or penalties. In France and in Celtic leagues, there is still more of a contest for the ball. Munster, in Muster, vs Leicester was the perfect example of this….an Irish team, applying massive pressure here. This obviously led to a week of analysis with the Leicester players vowing to make the breakdown a contest. Again, Saracens, with Will Skelton. He was nausing every ruck, over the edge, and I felt this was a reaction to the passive ruck policing we have in England.
The reactions from Cole, Skelton, etc are a consequence of that disparity in ruck contest and policing.
It is worth mentioning that often an attacking team’s belligerent