RugbyRebels

Saracens: M. Vunipola, George, Riccioni, Hunter-Hill, Swinson, Isiekwe, Earl, B. Vunipola, Davies; Farrell (capt), Maitland, Lozowski, Morris, Lewington, Malins.

Replacements: Woolstencroft, Mawi, Clarey, Reffell, Christie, Van Zyl, Goode, Tompkins.

Newcastle: Brown, Radwan, Stevenson, Lucock, Earle, Connon, Schreuder; Brocklebank, McGuigan, Davison, Fuser, Robinson, Graham, Welch (capt), Chick.

Replacements: Blamire, Cooper, Mulipola, Montgomery, Basham, Nordli-Kelemeti, Haydon-Wood, Wacokecoke.

Eh, I'm pretty sure Mako hasn't been chronically overplayed and doesn't need a rest. He's fine!

Puja

The players want it, Puja. The players. Definitely not the coaches. The players. And really coaches have no control over that. It's not like they pick the team or anything.

Think Saracens are a couple of loose heads down. But yes, Mako could do with a bit more downtime.

The Newcastle team talk has to be along the lines of, "We'll not get a better chance to beat the bastards," doesn't it?

Peej wrote:The players want it, Puja. The players. Definitely not the coaches. The players. And really coaches have no control over that. It's not like they pick the team or anything.

In which case, I'd like to start a board running joke about Itoje being unmotivated and slovenly, cause he clearly doesn't want it. Actually, wouldn't surprise me if it is Itoje's decision to stick to the full rest period - he's got the class and reputation to be able to stick to his guns without fear of losing his position (for Sarries or England) and strikes me as intelligent and savvy enough about his career to make the decision that he'll get better value out of being rejuvenated superstar/having an extra year at the top level than he would out of getting a few more weeks of match-fees.

fivepointer wrote:Think Saracens are a couple of loose heads down. But yes, Mako could do with a bit more downtime.

I had forgotten that Adams-Hale had broken, which does put them in a bit of trouble. However, that's exactly why the rest period should never have had exemptions (or at least far more stringent criteria for them) - player welfare goes out of the window when the club needs them to play.

Puja

Always tempting to assume Mako is on the verge of a physical breakdown, but over the last year he’s probably had it easier than at any other point in his career. He’s started 14 games in 12 months, 8 of which were in the Championship. And that’s with him being virtually injury free.

Commentator's curse for billy v.

Farrell utterly demonstrating why he shouldn't be a captain in that game. He's got no ability to read people and tell why he should push it and when he should shut up - there was one occasion where the ref was clearly done with him and had lost patience and Farrell just kept trying to complain at him. Absolutely dire.

Puja

It was awful the way Farrell barked at Tempest. I was willing the ref to tell him to belt up and penalise the gobby so and so.

To compound that bad sight and sound we had the most inane commentary possible from a clearly uninterested Dallaglio, who cannot even get basic facts right at times. Why does this guy still have a contract with BT?

My biggest bugbears with BT Sport’s rugby coverage are letting analysts commentate on their old/own teams, Dallaglio and Healey, in that order.

fivepointer wrote:It was awful the way Farrell barked at Tempest. I was willing the ref to tell him to belt up and penalise the gobby so and so.

Farrell (interrupting): Can I just ask something?
Tempest: Let me talk first.
Farrell: But can I just ask something?
Tempest: No! I'm talking. (Proceeds to give standard lecture about no more pushing and shoving) Okay? (Clear dismissal)
Farrell: But can I just ask you something?
Tempest: (Looks like his eyes might pop out of his head, visibly calms himself) Fine.
Farrell (aggressively): What are our guys supposed to do when someone shoves them in the back? Are they just supposed not to react to that?
Tempest: Yes. You have to trust that we will see it and deal with it. (Walks away)
Farrell (calls after him): But you didn't see it though ref. You're not dealing with it.
Tempest keeps walking, presumably to restrain himself from twatting the England captain.


The worst part of it was that Farrell was actually right - Newcastle had come in and "celebrated" by giving a Saracens player a shove in the back. However, it should've been clear and obvious that Tempest was not in the mood to be talked to and now was not the time. As I tell my team most weeks, it doesn't matter if the ref has made the most basic and obvious error, complaining won't change the decision.

As it happened, about 5 minutes later, a Saracens player pushed a Falcons one after winning a penalty and Tempest immediately reversed it. I can't say for certain it was because Farrell pissed him off, but it probably didn't hurt.

fivepointer wrote:To compound that bad sight and sound we had the most inane commentary possible from a clearly uninterested Dallaglio, who cannot even get basic facts right at times. Why does this guy still have a contract with BT?

Dallaglio drives me spare. A penalty is given for an obvious offence, like a high tackle. The referee declaims the offence. Sometimes even another commentator mentions it's for a high tackle. Then Dallaglio comes in and summarises with, "Newcastle penalised for holding on at the bottom of that ruck, they've got to make sure they release there." Just consistently factually wrong, like he's only been half watching the game and is having to make a guess from context.

Puja

I was going to say something very similar about Dallaglio the other day. He’s just an embarrassment. He’s almost always wrong.

Puja wrote:

fivepointer wrote:It was awful the way Farrell barked at Tempest. I was willing the ref to tell him to belt up and penalise the gobby so and so.

Farrell (interrupting): Can I just ask something?
Tempest: Let me talk first.
Farrell: But can I just ask something?
Tempest: No! I'm talking. (Proceeds to give standard lecture about no more pushing and shoving) Okay? (Clear dismissal)
Farrell: But can I just ask you something?
Tempest: (Looks like his eyes might pop out of his head, visibly calms himself) Fine.
Farrell (aggressively): What are our guys supposed to do when someone shoves them in the back? Are they just supposed not to react to that?
Tempest: Yes. You have to trust that we will see it and deal with it. (Walks away)
Farrell (calls after him): But you didn't see it though ref. You're not dealing with it.
Tempest keeps walking, presumably to restrain himself from twatting the England captain.


The worst part of it was that Farrell was actually right - Newcastle had come in and "celebrated" by giving a Saracens player a shove in the back. However, it should've been clear and obvious that Tempest was not in the mood to be talked to and now was not the time. As I tell my team most weeks, it doesn't matter if the ref has made the most basic and obvious error, complaining won't change the decision.

As it happened, about 5 minutes later, a Saracens player pushed a Falcons one after winning a penalty and Tempest immediately reversed it. I can't say for certain it was because Farrell pissed him off, but it probably didn't hurt.

fivepointer wrote:To compound that bad sight and sound we had the most inane commentary possible from a clearly uninterested Dallaglio, who cannot even get basic facts right at times. Why does this guy still have a contract with BT?

Dallaglio drives me spare. A penalty is given for an obvious offence, like a high tackle. The referee declaims the offence. Sometimes even another commentator mentions it's for a high tackle. Then Dallaglio comes in and summarises with, "Newcastle penalised for holding on at the bottom of that ruck, they've got to make sure they release there." Just consistently factually wrong, like he's only been half watching the game and is having to make a guess from context.

Puja

He is manifestly not the first choice anything. The English RFU should sign up for the flat earth society if the current state of affairs persists. Not a slight on young Owen, but I mean, fuck.

Mellsblue wrote:My biggest bugbears with BT Sport’s rugby coverage are letting analysts commentate on their old/own teams, Dallaglio and Healey, in that order.

Dayglo because he is at the mic willing Wasps to win. Austin because in his eyes Tigers are crap and nowhere near as good as the golden age when he played and in his mind he was the star player.

That can get frustrating.

Austin I don't mind as much because he obviously has a passion for the game. His ideas and his rants are generally a bit left field and sometimes pointless but he at least cares. Dayglo just treats it like a jolly he's getting paid for, he certainly doesn't sound like he does any prep before the game.

I'm a little disappointed Flatman wasn't brought in to do more commentary. Just hope BT keep BOD on after Monye comes back from his dancing sabbatical.

Oh that’s where Monye’s gone? Christ.

BOD is always great - of course. Flatman is generally great but has also succumbed to the cringey bantz a bit. I know it shouldn’t bother me as much as it does but all the “that pass was pure filth”, “that sidestep was naughty” stuff just kills me a little inside.

Healey is frustrating because he can be fantastic to listen to when he’s actually analysing the game, but has clearly been given the impression people love his comedy routines. I guess maybe they do. I can’t say I noticed any difference with Leicester games - you’d think he used to play for Sarries if you didn’t know better.

Dallaglio is annoying/dull but not to those extremes, consistently a bit wrong about basically everything which can be entertaining in its own way, but I’d take that all day over Kay and Healey doing their love/hate lad-banter stuff.

Don't pretend you don't watch strictly....

Puja wrote: Just consistently factually wrong, like he's only been half watching the game and is having to make a guess from context.

There is scope to miss much more and still work in sports commentary, the crowning achievement so far remains: