The persistent light rain ruined what would probably have been a good contest between the sides, turning it into a battle of who could hold on to the slippery ball the longest. The reality was that neither side could for more than a few phases and if anyone had been counting the number of knock-ons they would probably have given up somewhere in double figures.
We were guilty of trying to play far too expansively given the difficulties with handling and didn't use the kicking game enough to build territorial pressure. Lymm opted for the kick much more often and it paid dividends for them as a spilt catch set up the position for the only score of the game on 24 minutes. As the ball was moved wide we looked to have full-back David Williamson and Barnes-Smith covered but the drift defence went wrong and Williamson was able to release his winger for a score in the left corner.
We had our best moments of the half in the closing minutes. An accurate kick to touch from a penalty by Stu Waites gave us a great position just 5 metres out but after several surges for the line Adam Coates lost the ball lunging for the try and the opportunity was missed.
Lymm centre Luke Emmitt pushed wide the only penalty attempt of the game 5 minutes into the second half as scoring opportunities for either side were scarce. Waites made the best break of the game up the left flank but couldn't release Andy Cheslin outside him and the chance went begging.
Again it was in the closing stages when we looked most like scoring. Camped on the visitors line for the final 5 minutes we just couldn't find a way over, the Lymm defence holding out despite being down to 14 men after prop Keith Broadbent was sin-binned. With the referee signalling the last play was underway, Andrew Foreman tried one final lunge for the line but he was again kept out and Lymm claimed the victory.
West: Waites, Butcher, Watson (Larkin), G Robinson, A Cheslin, G Foreman, A Foreman, Carr, Bailey, Coates (Wood), Davies, T Dixon (Garside), D Boatman, Taylor, Stockdale.
Lymm: Williamson, Barnes-Smith, T Bray, Emmitt, Johnstone, Knowles, Kinsey, Widdington, Millington, Broadbent, Bennett, Higginson, Millachip, Connelly, A Bray.
Reps: Roberts, Sutton, Crozier
Try: Barnes-Smith
Yellow-card: T Bray, Broadbent
Referee: Simon Lazenby [Northern Group]
West 0 Lymm 5
By El Pedro - October 8 2011
As the scoreline suggests this was hardly a classic. A solitary try from Lymm winger Matthew Barnes-Smith proved all that was necessary to separate the sides.
West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Official West Hartlepool RFC (IP Logged)
Date: 09/10/2011 09:25
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: MikeyBoy (IP Logged)
Date: 10/10/2011 09:37
disappointing result - we tried to play too much rugby in conditions that made holding onto the ball very difficult. We should have been putting a lot more kicks in, making them do something from their own 22 and the mistakes would have come. As it turned out, we didn't really get near their line apart from the 2 brief spells at the end of each half.
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: West Park Allotment (IP Logged)
Date: 10/10/2011 09:50
Cant fault the effort from the lads but it was a game I'd rather forget.
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Supercodhead (IP Logged)
Date: 10/10/2011 12:02
last week their lads were too big and this week the ball was too slippy>>>
what's next week's excuse >>not enough comics on the coach?>>>
what's next week's excuse >>not enough comics on the coach?>>>
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: West Park Allotment (IP Logged)
Date: 11/10/2011 11:03
Very fair report from Lymm and I'm pleased to see they flagged up the bizarre happenings at the very end of the game.
From where I was standing it looked like the big No 5 who had been propping went off with a blood injury so the Ref called back the prop who was half way through serving a yellow card.
Thats's a new one on me, i'm afraid. Surely the prop should have stayed off. If there was no suitable replacement we should have had uncontested scrums?
From where I was standing it looked like the big No 5 who had been propping went off with a blood injury so the Ref called back the prop who was half way through serving a yellow card.
Thats's a new one on me, i'm afraid. Surely the prop should have stayed off. If there was no suitable replacement we should have had uncontested scrums?
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: west girl (IP Logged)
Date: 11/10/2011 11:46
According to the referees assessor he did the right thing bringing the prop back on to the pitch - it was very bizarre to say the least!
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Westy Till I Die (IP Logged)
Date: 11/10/2011 11:57
That was indeed the case. However it would have been better for us if the scrum had been uncontested and a solid base to attack from rather than being a bit disrupted.
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: fix sec (IP Logged)
Date: 11/10/2011 14:25
When we were talking to the assessor after the game he said that he could not talk about the scrum at the end off the game but we put our thoughts of which should have been done and he just rised his eye brows and laughted with no comment
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: touchortackle (IP Logged)
Date: 11/10/2011 17:59
Surely if a player is sin binned he cannot return to the field of play until his 10 minutes is up even if he was the only fit prop left it should of been uncontested scrums until he served his time in the bin.
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Westy Till I Die (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 08:28
I was a strange afternoon. I sit infront of the assessor and usually get quite a bit of feedback as to what the ref is saying and doing. There was nothing on Saturday !
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Ref (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 09:10
Are you sure it was the assessor? My records show that on Saturday the only person watching the ref was his coach, who I would expect would not make comment until he has spoken with his referee
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: MikeyBoy (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 09:12
I looked at the laws and they don't mention that specific scenario - but I think the fact that there's no suggestion of the sent-off/yellow carded player coming back on means that it shouldn't have been allowed.
having said that, it made no difference because we got the ball cleanly out of the scrum anyway and, if anything, it was an advantage for us that their prop was back on as by that stage he was doing nothing except walking very slowly from one scrum to the next!
having said that, it made no difference because we got the ball cleanly out of the scrum anyway and, if anything, it was an advantage for us that their prop was back on as by that stage he was doing nothing except walking very slowly from one scrum to the next!
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Dave Picken (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 09:23
There wasn't an assessor at the game.
The Ref was quite happy to explain everything at the end of the game.
Basically, he sent their prop off to the sin bin. He was replaced in the front row by the No 5 who promptly suffered a nasty facial injury. He wasn't bleeding much, if at all, but had quite a large hole in his face which sadly may need plastic surgery.
He wanted to continue playing, but our front row was unhappy to prop against him because of the injury. So the Ref reconciled things by asking the 5 to leave the pitch and asking the prop to return.
The Ref was quite happy to explain everything at the end of the game.
Basically, he sent their prop off to the sin bin. He was replaced in the front row by the No 5 who promptly suffered a nasty facial injury. He wasn't bleeding much, if at all, but had quite a large hole in his face which sadly may need plastic surgery.
He wanted to continue playing, but our front row was unhappy to prop against him because of the injury. So the Ref reconciled things by asking the 5 to leave the pitch and asking the prop to return.
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: KOlly (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 09:25
Advantage to us??
An uncontested scrum, playing against 13 for the last couple of minutes or playing against 15, as allegedly their second row also came back on(I didnt see it... as Arsen Wenger would say)
I know people are talking about appealing but we had plenty of possession to win this game before this happened, would be harsh on Lymm to take that route,
An uncontested scrum, playing against 13 for the last couple of minutes or playing against 15, as allegedly their second row also came back on(I didnt see it... as Arsen Wenger would say)
I know people are talking about appealing but we had plenty of possession to win this game before this happened, would be harsh on Lymm to take that route,
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Carlo03 (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 14:46
Hash on us if we needed points for play off or survival though! Rules is rules.
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: MikeyBoy (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 15:17
The "advantage to us" comment was tongue in cheek based on the fitness of their prop! Although I had forgotten that they would have been down to 13 if the number 5 had to leave the field due to his injury, and the prop had not been allowed back on.
Uncontested scrums should have been the decision although, as I said, we still had our chance at the end and didn't take it.
So who was this person who was going round telling people he was the assessor if there wasn't one at the match?! I might try that next time.
Uncontested scrums should have been the decision although, as I said, we still had our chance at the end and didn't take it.
So who was this person who was going round telling people he was the assessor if there wasn't one at the match?! I might try that next time.
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Westy Till I Die (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 15:50
My fault slip of the key board Assessor / Coach whatever
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Numpty Nuts (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 16:35
west girl started it not you!!!
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Stan the Camel (IP Logged)
Date: 12/10/2011 22:43
I totally agree with Olly - it would be poor to appeal the result, but this does need sorting out for the future.
The Lymm player was badly cut and it was a genuine set of circumstances on this occasion, but a rule where faking an injury would allow you to have a player brought back on seems contrary to the spirit of the game and is surely open to abuse.
(Just to be absolutely clear..... the Lymm boys - players and officials - were a good set of lads and I am certainly not accusing them of anything merely making the point that in a crucial promotion/relegation tussle later on this needs properly sorting out.)
Best of luck to the Lymm 2nd row, by the way.
The Lymm player was badly cut and it was a genuine set of circumstances on this occasion, but a rule where faking an injury would allow you to have a player brought back on seems contrary to the spirit of the game and is surely open to abuse.
(Just to be absolutely clear..... the Lymm boys - players and officials - were a good set of lads and I am certainly not accusing them of anything merely making the point that in a crucial promotion/relegation tussle later on this needs properly sorting out.)
Best of luck to the Lymm 2nd row, by the way.
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: Carlo03 (IP Logged)
Date: 13/10/2011 08:00
My point remains that regardless of the ethical/moral stance on appeal, points are points! If it was the last game of the season when this happened and we needed 2/3 points for survival, would we be as noble about it?
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: west girl (IP Logged)
Date: 13/10/2011 09:42
Numpty Nuts Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> west girl started it not you!!!
It was Westie til I Die who told me lol
-------------------------------------------------------
> west girl started it not you!!!
It was Westie til I Die who told me lol
Re: West 0 Lymm 5
Posted by: West Park Allotment (IP Logged)
Date: 13/10/2011 09:53
Time to move on I think. Let's channel the energy into playing the league leaders.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.