Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

The 'sign of growth' that Bath have taken from their latest loss

By PA
(Photo by Gareth Copley/Getty Images)

Bath head coach Johann van Graan urged his side to continue fighting after suffering a last-gasp 30-27 defeat to high-flying Sale at the AJ Bell Stadium. A 17-point haul from visiting captain Ben Spencer looked to have secured Bath victory after they fought back from 22-3 down to lead 27-25, despite losing Max Ojomoh and Cameron Redpath to yellow cards.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, Arron Reed snatched a dramatic win for the Sharks when he dived over in the corner in the final minute. “That’s a difficult one to take, specifically the way we fought back, got ourselves ahead and then defended so well with 13 men,” said van Graan, whose Bath side remain second-bottom of the Gallagher Premiership.

“Across the 80, we have to be better. We conceded a yellow card within a minute and they scored a try because you don’t have your blind winger to cover that – minus those five points and you win the game. The positive for me is the way we stayed in the fight, we had to stop a maul and defend with five backs and that is a sign of growth, but I would have loved to win that one.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

“We are fighting and that is all I’m looking for. We are not going to be perfect in the first season but you put yourselves in the position, tonight, to beat Sale second in the league away. This competition is definitely not over for us this season. There is a lot of rugby left this season.”

First-half tries from Joe Carpenter, Sam Dugdale, Tom Roebuck and Tommy Taylor had put the hosts in control though Niall Annett’s try on the stroke of half-time offered the visitors some hope. Jonathan Joseph’s try continued the fightback, and despite yellow cards to both Ojomoh and Redpath, Spencer’s conversion of his own try saw the visitors lead only for Reed’s late score to snatch the full five points.

Victory for Sale continues their strong season to date, and director of rugby Alex Sanderson believes the late win could prove crucial as the season progresses. He said: “When we look back on the season, if we are lucky enough to earn ourselves a home semi-final, it’s on nights like tonight that you do that, you earn it. It’s quite significant I feel.

“It’s a decent sign of where we are going – hopefully if we keep them together this group can do special things, not just this year but for years. I knew we’d be digging in that second half, really digging in and that’s all I asked of them. I didn’t ask them to win, just dig in and they did.

ADVERTISEMENT

“You see how much it matters to them on the sideline, me included, over-exuberant celebrations but it matters, it really matters them fighting for each other.”

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

J
JW 12 minutes ago
How law changes are speeding up the game - but the scrum lags behind

Too much to deal with in one reply JW!

No problem, I hope it wasn't too hard a read and thanks for replying. As always, just throwing ideas out for there for others to contemplate.


Well fatigue was actually my first and main point! I just want others to come to that conclusion themselves rather than just feeding it to them lol


I can accept that South Africa have a ball in play stat that correlates with a lower fitness/higher strength team, but I don't necessarily buy the argument that one automatically leads to the other. I'd suspect their two stats (high restart numbers low BIPs) likely have separate causes.


Graham made a great point about crescendos. These are what people call momentum swings these days. The build up in fatigue is a momentum swing. The sweeping of the ball down the field in multiple phases is a momentum swing. What is important is that these are far too easily stopped by fake injuries or timely replacements, and that they can happen regularly enough that extending game time (through stopping the clock) becomes irrelevant. It has always been case that to create fatigue play needs to be continuous. What matters is the Work to Rest ratio exceeding 70 secs and still being consistent at the ends of games.


Qualities in bench changes have a different effect, but as their use has become quite adept over time, not so insignificant changes that they should be ignored, I agree. The main problem however is that teams can't dictate the speed of the game, as in, any team can dictate how slow it becomes if they really want to, but the team in possession (they should even have some capability to keep the pace up when not in possession) are too easily foiled when the want to play with a high tempo.

152 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
How law changes are speeding up the game - but the scrum lags behind

The essence of rugby a fair physical competition for the ball?

No, that's describing League. Rugby is a beautiful game about executing scoring maneuvers. You should take up league, right up your ally as a physical contest imo.

If that is so using the scrum as just a reset takes out the competitiveness

If we forget (or even use to help understand) your first question, I still don't understand where you're going/what you're thinking.


What do you mean by just a reset? Like league where the ball is rolled/placed at the 8s feet to play with? I don't agree with any of those crazy suggestions here (even as a reward to the team that wins the scrum, I'm not even sure it would be a reward), no ones talking about depowering the scrum. At least not in this article/instance.

If there is no penalty for being beaten in the scrum we might as well just restart with a tap

To who? The team that was previously in possession? A scrum is a means of contesting for possession after play stops in open field (as apposed to when the ball goes dead, where it's a lineout). Are you proposing that core basis of the game is removed? I think it would make a much better game to just remove the knock on, as someone has already said, scrums resulting in a penalty as punishment for knocking the ball on is ridiculous. If you want to turnover the ball when someone looses it, you simply have to regather it before they do. That's how ever other game I can think of other than League works. So just get rid of the problem at the roots, it would be a much better "drastic" change than removing the contest from restarts.

In the lineout ruck and maul successful competition gets rewarded and illegal competition gets penalised no one is arguing about that. So is the scrum different?

No one is arguing that removal from scrums either. It is the plethora of nothing offences, the judgmental "technical" decisions by a referee, that are in the middle that are being targeted. Of course this is not a unique problem to scrums, lineouts will result in penalties simply from a contact of arms by jumpers, or rucks whenever a play hangs an arm over someones shoulder when cleaning them out. This article is about tackling the 'major' offences hindering the quality of the game.


But other than these questions, if you want to know my main opinions in my post you will see I agree that the ball should need (always and in every type of circumstance) to be played if it is available at scrum time.


Otherwise the TLDR of all my comments (even thoughts in general) on this particular question is that I agree advantage should be had in instances were the team with the ball 'won' the 'advantage' and where some sort of advantage was 'taken' away. In this respect the scrum had to be rolling forward to win an advantage. But I'm flexible in that if it speeds up the game to award a penatly, that's great, but if they also stop the clock for scrums, I'm happy with way instead. That is very few instances by the way, the majority of the time the ball is able to be played however.


The big question I have asked Bull about is what advantage or opportunity was taken away from a strong scrumming team when opposition causes the scrum to collapse? What sort of advantage was taken away that they need to be a penalty reward, that would seem to be way over the top for most offences to me.


So on that point, I'll like your perspective on a couple of things. How do you think lineouts compare to scrums? Do they offer you enough reward for dominance, and do you think all such meaningless offences should be lessoned (slips or pops while going backwards, contact with the jumper, closing the game, good cleanouts to some fool whos ducked his head in a ruck etc)?

152 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Jordie Barrett gesture singled out by Ronan O'Gara after loss Jordie Barrett gesture singled out by Ronan O'Gara after loss
Search