Rate the match in the poll below, then leave your thoughts on the game in the comments section.
Loading ...Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
Rate the match: Bath vs Saracens, Aviva Premiership Final
Loading ... Loading ... Loading ... Loading ...
As you know by now, we are hilarious, and you should be following us on Facebook and Twitter. 
Webber lineout throwing has always been crappy. The only 2 people capable of catching it are Parling & Attwood. Feel sorry for baths backs been given terrible ball, but Rokoduguni was great showed some reasons why he should had been in the 50.
I wanted bath attacking rugby to win as it would’ve send a message to Lancaster. but now that Sarries have won certain players will be complimented by Lancaster, such as Goode, Barritt, Ashton, when they really should never play for England.
Also Sarries tactics are not going to work for England. NZ are not going to give away free tries.
The earlier comment makes little sense. Why have Sarries been branded a negative team when they have scored more tries than any other and completely outplayed Bath at their own game in the first half while maintaining their structure thus not allowing Bath to play. Makes very good sense to me.
Also Farrell shown to be as good if not better playmaker than Ford.
Farrell a better playmaker than Ford? Really? 2 if the 3 tries came from intercepts rather than play making. Ford didn’t have a great game, there seemed to be a tactic not to kick, which was odd as they were playing in the wrong areas. He and Bath were much better in the second half but every time they got momentum via a penalty Webber effed up the line out and they were back in their own half. Hardly Fords fault.
John Dab Get a TV & watch a S15 game or 2.
When teams have dominant forwards, they tend to get more ball & deny the opposition ball. Besides this was club rugby, not an Int’al game.
Bath lacked the nous to change what wasn’t working, i.e., being beaten @ the breakdown. Also @ most scrums. Less could be done with the latter as they weren’t strong enough, although quicker feeds & hooking might have helped.
After 10 minutes or so Bath ought to have gambled everything on flooding the ruck (the game was almost up, so little to lose), thus denying Saracens so much ball. Also Bath’d have surely then won more of their own ball (it would needed to have been quick as well) & thus caught the Saracens’ ‘D’ more out of position, creating miss-matches out wide. Didn’t happen… & so they lost. Maybe if Joe Schmidt had been @ Bath…?
Saracens also got a couple of breaks (like, almost, Watson’s jaw) & the ball bounced their way a couple of times early on. Them’s the breaks. On the other hand they’d have been unlucky to have lost
It’s the route 1 set piece, endless, predictable driving & kicking like clock work that is negative.
It worked this yr, but not over the past 3/4. And it didn’t work in the Euro Cup. When held up front, where’s their guile? Plan ‘B’?
They’ve also have/had oodles of Saffas & Int’als in their team/s. Had to tell @ some point.
As for the MotM Farrell, he’s also PREDICTABLE… & everyone sings when their forwards are on top. Where were the wrap arounds, his side stepping line breaks, his pace off the mark, his standing on the gain line etc? A goal kicker, line kicker & a tackler. If that’s what you need… for a looming WC?
Saracens 3 tries. Defence a thing of beauty. Farrell out played Ford. Enough said. Winning rugby is what it’s about
So why hasn’t it worked over the last 3 or 4? Read my response to John Dab.
Farrell to replace Ford at outside half. Another backward step for an England team without a plan B.
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/may/30/owen-farrell-citing-anthony-watson
A little bit one sided to be given such generous scores. It’s a shame really but Bath really played into Sarries hands. No doubt Saracens played well, but they were gifted 2 tries by a naive Bath side and were running on empty in the second half, but they had too much of a cushion to be a concern, but I wouldn’t be too OTT as some fans are above about this being “winning” rugby. I doubt these tactics would work against the best sides and clearly Bath were below their best, not helped by losing Watson and having a malfunctioning line out. Seriously how Webber can be in England’s squad is baffling.
Completely agree, Sarries defended brilliantly but were helped by Bath playing very poorly, the best sides won’t play like that.
Losing Watson was definitely a turning point, especially as I feel Farrell should’ve gone for a 10 minute break, he stayed on, scored a try in those next 10 minutes and went on to win man of the match and Bath lost a key player. I wouldn’t say that made the difference by any stretch of the imagination but it was certainly a big moment.
As for Webber he’s behind Batty at Bath so how he can be in the England squad is beyond me. I think (hope) Cowan-Dickie and George will get into the World Cup ahead of him
Farrell was lucky not to be red carded there and then. 10 minute break,I dont think so.He says there was no intent. Aye right as they say in Scotland. If Stuart Hogg was red carded 2 seasons ago for his incident( red card justified) why was Farrell not sent off? That would have made a whole difference to the game given the points he scored. It was willful and reckless. End of story
ps I am a Glasgow Warriors supporter so no bias in this comment
Lets start with the simple stuff, Farrell’s high tackle on Watson. If you watch the replay its clearly high but its not that bad. If Watson had not been knocked out then no one would be arguing. The medical team (after Watson clearly was KO’d) allowed him to continue and he was then later groggy for when Farrell scored his try. The hit went to the TMO and it was agreed by two officials that it was a penalty only so……. spilled milk?
Second point, Bath played high risk and unfortunately let in two tries which should have been avoided. Hooker sprinting 25 meters against 4 back? Really?
Point the third, Josephs Try was a beautiful example of the simple things done well. He has nailed that 13 shirt and really he needs to be paired with Eastmond but I don’t understand the negativity towards Barritt. Burrell didn’t thrive in the six nations but i think that is due to a contrast in styles between 10-12 and 13. So Eastmond.
Fourth, Standoff……..Ford with Cips on the bench but Farrell to be used in the ‘lesser’ games to keep him in the loop and shake off the injury rust.
Fifth – what have we learned?……. nothing. Apart from Strettle the wings didn’t shine (I’m focusing on England and the world cup as Wyles is a walk in. Its a pity Watson had to leave so early and I do feel both Rocko and Bannahan should have been in the England 50 but we can’t have everything.
10 Ford V Farrell. We have to remember that these two are friends have played together for years. They know each other inside out. Ford is the more natural 10 as thats where he started but I don’t think all of Farrell’s good work in the past should account for nothing. Ford should start but Farrell should have some time too.
Slamming Sam! He stopped and knocked back Billy! Billy Knocked back Burgess. Stick em in a team together. Unfortunately that means Wood or Haskell loses their place but at least try it.
think thats everything. sorry about the length.
Like Dylan Hartley’s head butt wasn’t that bad either.
It was an illegal ‘tackle’, Watson went off. Farrell didn’t, courtesy of the impeccable Barnes.
Farrell has some petulant history. Or would you rather wait until someone gets a broken jaw?
Ford was in a losing team which substantially changed nothing, Farrell was behind a dominant pack, although Ford kicked aimlessly deep x3 (?) in a row, when they needed POINTS… & missed touch, again! ‘Budding genius’? Not yet.
Banahan’s missed, almost sideways, kick, also to touch, resulted in a Saracens’ try. Fairly pivotal. Bit worrying if he can’t play basic rugby like that, although he looked & was good v Leicester.
Easier when winning. Cracks aren’t so exposed… or are forgotten.
Pretty sure I was the only neutral wanting to see Saracens win on Saturday. Really enjoyed watching Saracens play (again I think I’m the only one).
They play rugby properly, in the right areas of the field and score plenty of tries. Defensively they were great to watch and when they had opportunities they finished them.
Embarrassing for Ford to claim Bath gave Sarries 17 points; that pressing defense led to indecision on the gainline from Bath which led to points. Sarries earned every one of them.
Bath seemed to fling it around in the wrong areas. They went wide before the earned the right to (by drawing the defense in tight) and it ultimately led to their attack being shut down easily. Ford did the same thing during the 6 nations in an England shirt (particularly against Ireland), so I hope he addresses this and quickly.
Farrell may not be everyone’s cup of tea but he does put his team in the right areas of the field.
I am by no means a neutral, and as such am slightly biased towards Sarries, but you’re right. Two of our tries came from the defence working extremely hard and getting in Bath’s faces. Spilt ball from confusion and lack of communication in attack, and Sarries took their chances. The other try came from some pressing attack and good hands (and poor defence), and finished off by Farrell.
Hearing Mike Ford talking before the game, he seemed pretty sure that their style of play and ability in attack would win them the match. Seems like he underestimated the ferocity of that defence, and the damage it could cause to the communication of his team.
I agree that Sarries defence was hugely impressive and a huge contributor to the errors that resulted in the tries. Likewise, Bath’s poor tactical decision making and trying to throw passes that were not on in dangerous areas contributed to the tries. I by no means want to take away from Sarries, but I would agree with Ford that Bath “gave” Sarries 14 points. Even with the pressure it required handling errors to turn the ball over.
I agree with what seems to be the general assessment, that Bath failed to “earn” the right to play expansively. Not sure it hase to be physically earned (it was not against Leicester) but it does have to be on. If the defence is organised and up quickly they are better either kicking or playing it through the forwards. when they did this they ended up scoring a try.
Sarries were deserved winners, but I think Bath will be really disappointed that they let the game get away from them in the first 30mins.
Slightly out of place but wanted some informed opinion, hoping someone will oblige. Thinking about the 31 man squad and the versatility required, can Morgan play 2nd row? We seem to have a surfeit of options at 6 who can also play lock or 8, but would Morgan be effective other than as an 8?
He’s a bit too big to lift in the lineout so would narrow our options there too much
Hmm. I’m leaning more and more towards Itoje starting at 6 and not taking Wood at all. Can’t see it happening.
Wood is actually a pretty good line out jumper, and is vastly more experienced. As an extra ball carrier I would rather see Itoje or Burgess in there. Itoje can cover second row, and Burgess can cover centre. Both offer more around the park than Wood for me, but I suspect neither Burgess or Itoje will make the final 31.
I expect to see Wood and Haskell as the 6 cover. Don’t forget both Lawes and Launchbury are very capable at 6.
Itoje must offer a pretty decent lineout option though, as well as a fair bit more than Wood has recently. So many possible inclusions who could in theory cover blindside – Haskell, Robshaw, Burgess, Parling, Vunipola, Itoje, Launchbury, Lawes, all of whom cover another position…I think Lancaster rates Wood too highly to drop him, but there’s an argument for it.
Totally out of place! Meant to put this in the Barbarian’s ‘rate the match.’ Terrible etiquette, this.
The citing commission will let you off with a warning this time :-)
Two articles in the Telegraph today talk about earning the right to play and that Bath didn’t do that – that’s a picture of experience and the total (naive) self-belief that playing from anywhere all the time will win you the game. The All Blacks kick more than any other team and focus on playing in the right areas of the pitch both of which Saracens do too.
Bath are a good team and have played really well during the season but, as Saracens found out last year, playing in a final is very different. Bath will learn from this and, if they continue in the same vein, will be strong contenders for next year’s final.
With regard to foul play, I felt that Wayne Barnes got it right both times and neither Farrel’s nor Webber’s incidents were anything other than penalties.
What would a final be without some contentious points for us fans to talk about after:).
David I think you miss some points a bit. Bath didn’t flood the breakdown to either deny Sarries or gain themselves more, QUICK ball. Gave the Sarries defence TIME to assemble. And it took a few yrs for Saracens to win… @ last… & their game still hasn’t worked in Euro.
Regds the ABs kicking MORE(?) than other teams is also to partially miss the point. Don’t they also score more TRIES than other teams (ask Julian Savea)? Are you saying that they get lots of lucky bounces, or do they kick only with intent… to retrieve the ball & then attack through their backs… & or forwards (front, 2nd rows included)? They look to score whether it’s from their own 22, if it’s likely on, up to the opposition’s. To simply compare kicking stats only, is surely miss leading?
Barnes got it wrong twice. Deliberate shoulder charge & a head high tackle being condoned? Intent, or severity doesn’t come into it. If these incidents had happened against Wales, perpetrated by England, what would yr reaction have likely have been then? ‘…contentious points for us fans to talk about after’, Maybe?
We need more than one 10 coming into the World Cup. Cipriani is likely now out and I don’t see any of the skills you mention in Steven Myler. Personally I think it’s excellent to see our second choice fly half putting in such a fantastic display in a winning game and with a very strong end to the season. Coming into the warm up games he will be full of confidence and in his best form. I really can’t understand why this can be seen as a bad thing.
oops that was meant to be a reply to a Farrell detractor and has ended up at the end, so now makes no sense :-\