Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Clock-in-the-red Hougaard try denies Bristol at Saracens

By PA
(Photo by PA)

Francois Hougaard scored a dramatic winning try on his Saracens league debut as the Gallagher Premiership leaders edged out Bristol 20-19 at StoneX Stadium. South African Hougaard struck with the clock almost three minutes in the red, rounding off a spell of relentless pressure that broke a resilient Bristol. It was Saracens’ 12th Premiership win of the season, but Bristol remain rooted at the basement, having lost eight from their last 10 league games.

ADVERTISEMENT

The visitors led by nine points midway through the final quarter, yet wing Rotimi Segun followed up hooker Theo Dan’s earlier try with Saracens’ second touch down before Hougaard struck, while full-back Alex Goode kicked a penalty and conversion.

Hooker Harry Thacker and wing Gabriel Ibitoye touched down for Bristol, with centre James Williams kicking two penalties and fly-half AJ MacGinty one. Saracens were without their sizeable England contingent ahead of next weekend’s Guinness Six Nations kick-off, with flanker Jackson Wray captaining the team on his 300th first-team appearance, packing down alongside Andy Christie and Billy Vunipola.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Bristol skipper Steven Luatua returned from injury, while Ibitoye was recalled on the wing and Williams made a first Premiership start. Despite starting the game 31 points behind Saracens in the table, the Bears gave as good as they got during fast and furious initial exchanges and MacGinty kicked them into a 12th-minute lead after Thacker charged down an attempted defensive clearance.

Saracens were disjointed and untidy, with Bristol monopolising territory as strong-running backs Semi Radradra and Siva Naulago tried to make headway. Radradra breached Saracens’ defence midway through the half, touching down one-handed, but referee Anthony Woodthorpe disallowed the try following a knock-on by Bristol full-back Rich Lane.

Related

Lane was involved in the action again 10 minutes before half-time, but he could not finish off a thrilling move started by Radradra, conceding a penalty instead following a double movement close to Saracens’ line. Saracens were not helped by a horribly-misfiring lineout, yet Bristol failed to punish their opponents despite setting up camp inside the home team’s 22.

A handful of chances went astray before Bristol finally claimed the try their dominance warranted when a lineout drive ended in Thacker claiming his sixth Premiership score of the season, and the league strugglers led 8-0 at half-time. Thacker went off at half-time, being replaced by Bryan Byrne, and Bristol were immediately on the back foot as a Goode penalty attempt hit the post and Vunipola began making considerable ground through his trademark power.

ADVERTISEMENT

But Saracens’ set-piece continued to malfunction, with Bristol gaining a long-range penalty chance that Williams accepted to put them 11 points clear midway through the third quarter before a Goode strike opened Saracens’ account. Williams then found his range again, landing a second successful penalty from just inside Saracens’ half, and it generated a response with Bristol’s defence finally breached after 58 minutes.

In a carbon copy of Bristol’s try, Saracens drove a lineout and it was Dan who touched down, and Goode’s conversion cut the deficit to four points. It was a worrying spell for Bristol as Saracens strived to wipe out their advantage, yet the visitors moved back upfield and delivered a second try nine minutes from time.

The source was another attacking lineout, although Bristol moved possession wide on this occasion, with Ibitoye finishing off after receiving Radradra’s pass. There seemed no way back for Saracens after that, despite Segun’s late score, and Bristol looked as though they would be able to celebrate a rare Premiership victory on the road – but Hougaard gate-crashed their party.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 13 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen."


That's not quite my idea.

For a 20 team champions cup I'd have 4 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 4 from the previous years challenge cup. For a 16 team champions cup I'd have 3 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 1 from the previous years challenge cup.


"The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime."

If teams get a tough draw in the challenge cup quarters, they should have won more pool games and so got better seeding. My system is less about finding the best teams, and more about finding the teams who perform at the highest level in european competition.

54 Go to comments
f
fl 49 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Would I'd be think"

Would I'd be think.


"Well that's one starting point for an error in your reasoning. Do you think that in regards to who should have a say in how it's setup in the future as well? Ie you would care what they think or what might be more fair for their teams (not saying your model doesn't allow them a chance)?"

Did you even read what you're replying to? I wasn't arguing for excluding south africa, I was pointing out that the idea of quantifying someone's fractional share of european rugby is entirely nonsensical. You're the one who was trying to do that.


"Yes, I was thinking about an automatic qualifier for a tier 2 side"

What proportion of european rugby are they though? Got to make sure those fractions match up! 😂


"Ultimately what I think would be better for t2 leagues would be a third comp underneath the top two tournemnts where they play a fair chunk of games, like double those two. So half a dozen euro teams along with the 2 SA and bottom bunch of premiership and top14, some Championship and div 2 sides thrown in."

I don't know if Championship sides want to be commuting to Georgia every other week.


"my thought was just to create a middle ground now which can sustain it until that time has come, were I thought yours is more likely to result in the constant change/manipulation it has been victim to"

a middle ground between the current system and a much worse system?

54 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Huh? You mean last in their (4 team) pools/regions? My idea was 6/5/4, 6 the max, for guarenteed spots, with a 20 team comp max, so upto 5 WCs (which you'd make/or would be theoretically impossible to go to one league (they'd likely be solely for its participants, say 'Wales', rather than URC specifically. Preferrably). I gave 3 WC ideas for a 18 team comp, so the max URC could have (with a member union or club/team, winning all of the 6N, and Champions and Challenge Cup) would be 9."


That's a lot of words to say that I was right. If (e.g.) Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.


"And the reason say another URC (for example) member would get the spot over the other team that won the Challenge Cup, would be because they were arguable better if they finished higher in the League."

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.


"It won't diminish desire to win the Challenge Cup, because that team may still be competing for that seed, and if theyre automatic qual anyway, it still might make them treat it more seriously"

This doesn't make sense. Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't. Under my system, teams will "compete for the seed" by winning the Challenge Cup, under yours they won't. If a team is automatically qualified anyway why on earth would that make them treat it more seriously?


"I'm promoting the idea of a scheme that never needs to be changed again"

So am I. I'm suggesting that places could be allocated according to a UEFA style points sytem, or according to a system where each league gets 1/4 of the spots, and the remaining 1/4 go to the best performing teams from the previous season in european competition.


"Yours will promote outcry as soon as England (or any other participant) fluctates. Were as it's hard to argue about a the basis of an equal share."

Currently there is an equal share, and you are arguing against it. My system would give each side the opportunity to achieve an equal share, but with more places given to sides and leagues that perform well. This wouldn't promote outcry, it would promote teams to take european competition more seriously. Teams that lose out because they did poorly the previous year wouldn't have any grounds to complain, they would be incentivised to try harder this time around.


"This new system should not be based on the assumption of last years results/performances continuing."

That's not the assumption I'm making. I don't think the teams that perform better should be given places in the competition because they will be the best performing teams next year, but because sport should be based on merit, and teams should be rewarded for performing well.


"I'm specifically promoting my idea because I think it will do exactly what you want, increase european rugyb's importance."

how?


"I won't say I've done anything compressive"

Compressive.

54 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Generally disagree with what? The possibility that they would get whitewashed, or the idea they shouldn't gain access until they're good enough?


I think the first is a fairly irrelevant view, decide on the second and then worry about the first. Personally I'd have had them in a third lvl comp with all the bottom dwellers of the leagues. I liked the idea of those league clubs resting their best players, and so being able to lift their standards in the league, though, so not against the idea that T2 sides go straight into Challenge Cup, but that will be a higher level with smaller comps and I think a bit too much for them (not having followed any of their games/performances mind you).

Because I don't think that having the possibility of a team finishing outside the quarter finals to qualify automatically will be a good idea. I'd rather have a team finishing 5th in their domestic league.

fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen.


The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime.

54 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Well I was mainly referring to my thinking about the split, which was essentially each /3 rounded up, but reliant on WCs to add buffer.


You may have been going for just a 16 team league ranking cup?


But yes, those were just ideas for how to select WCs, all very arbitrary but I think more interesting in ways than just going down a list (say like fl's) of who is next in line. Indeed in my reply to you I hinted at say the 'URC' WC spot actually being given to the Ireland pool and taken away from the Welsh pool.


It's easy to think that is excluding, and making it even harder on, a poor performing country, but this is all in context of a 18 or 20 team comp where URC (at least to those teams in the URC) got 6 places, which Wales has one side lingering around, and you'd expect should make. Imagine the spice in that 6N game with Italy, or any other of the URC members though! Everyone talks about SA joining the 6N, so not sure it will be a problem, but it would be a fairly minor one imo.


But that's a structure of the leagues were instead of thinking how to get in at the top, I started from the bottom and thought that it best those teams doing qualify for anything. Then I thought the two comps should be identical in structure. So that's were an even split comes in with creating numbers, and the 'UEFA' model you suggest using in some manner, I thought could be used for the WC's (5 in my 20 team comp) instead of those ideas of mine you pointed out.


I see Jones has waded in like his normal self when it comes to SH teams. One thing I really like about his idea is the name change to the two competitions, to Cup and Shield. Oh, and home and away matches.

54 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Jamie Cudmore: I want to help rescue Canada from a 'slow agonising death' Jamie Cudmore: I want to help rescue Canada from a 'slow agonising death'
Search