Was it worth the effort?

Much like St Alban himself being led to his death at Verulamium, those 2’s who arrived at St Albans (Hatfield) RFC for Nick’s absurdly early meet time had little idea of quite what was awaiting them. As we waited for our esteemed leader to arrive his customary 30 minutes late, we had a quick look at their results, were slightly concerned by the number of points they’d scored, but approached the game with customary optimism. We were the Fins! We’d just play our way, quick ball, and run them off the park. Admittedly, this approach hadn’t worked so well this season… but the theory works and (as every good Marxist knows) eventually the theory will work out provided you try it enough times.

Fortunately, our saviour had arrived. Jonathon ‘Lomu’ Dixon, former Park 1st XV 10 in his thinner days (and when we only had one side and no 10’s…), arrived with his usual confidence and immediately promised that he reckoned he would score at least one try. In recognition of his skills, we put him in the second row in the hope he wouldn’t do too much damage. He was, at least, the largest player on the team (AT excepted).

So to the game. The referee (more about him later) turned up with a good five minutes before kick off, informed us about some rather unusual interpretations about the advantage rule and blew the kick off. I tried to remember where the 9 stood to receive. Park quickly established possession and managed an excellent 10+ play attack in which we gained around -10 meters. It was our most substantial period of possession of the match.

I should say at this point that St Albans (Hatfield) were an excellent side and far better than we are As always, they outmuscled us in the pack but were also well-drilled and had some fantastic backs, particularly at 15, outside centre and 10. They played good, structured rugby with hard carrying through the middle, some excellent lines and pace outside.

For the first 20 minutes, though, we dealt with them well. Our swarming defence took down their big runners and we disrupted their mauling game. We had little possession ourselves (mainly because we kept dropping it) but we felt comfortable. Our only real concern was their 15, who had already shown strength in contact and a fantastic inside step. If we could keep it away from him, though, a close game seemed in prospect. Indeed, Jon had taken the pre-match opportunity to remind us all of the importance of ruck defence and the guards holding position – it seemed that for once he may have had a point.

It was then that the referee chose to show his unique interpretation of the ruck rules for the first time. (we would soon see some singular interpretations of the maul rules, the forward pass rule, the knock on rule, the lineout rules and the high tackle rule. In fact, the general rules of rugby where shamelessly misinterpreted.) I’m usually loath to criticise the referee too heavily – it’s an incredibly tough task - but this referee seems not to have paid any attention to any of the rule changes over the past ten years and, indeed, seems to have invented several novel laws himself.

We first got a clue of the odd interpretations when St Albans (Hatfield) spilled the ball forward and our esteemed 10 picked up the ball, was tackled, presented and St Albans (Hatfield) threw 4 men over the breakdown and sealed the ball. The ref blew a penalty – to us, I assumed, grabbing the ball and looking for a quick tap. No. Apparently it was against Nick for not releasing – difficult to see how he could with 4 players lying on top of him. On the way to the subsequent lineout, Nick asked for clarification about the interpretation and was told to go away and that he’d used one of his 5 allowed questions – a rule I wasn’t hithero aware of.

We held their maul and drove them back until Graham was pinged for not rolling away – harsh given he had several of their forwards laid on top of him. They kicked for the corner and we had a repeat performance, with Graham again pinged for same offence, again harshly. A third attack, another excellent round of defence and another ping for not rolling away – this time against Will Monk. They tried again and rolled their maul to our line, before it was held up by some desperate defence. They moved the ball wide, found an overlap and scored in the corner. Still, as Jon informed us, this had been their 6th visit to our 22 and they’d only managed a single score.

Nick kicked deep and we chased hard, Aaron putting in a huge hit which jarred the ball loose and led to a scrum on the St Albans (Hatfield) 22. Finally, good field position and a chance to hit back immediately from the scrum. As it turned out, this was probably the high point of the game for us. During the break, when the injured player was removed, Jon took the opportunity to dispense some advice on how best to play 9.

Reader, we immediately dropped it. Fortunately, Jon had some advice for the centres about how best to catch the ball and hold the opposition drift to work the ball wide effectively.

The game resumed in its pattern of St Albans (Hatfield) attacks, tenacious defence and brief period of Finsbury possession before we gave away some form of penalty or dropped it. Eventually they drove us deeper and deeper into our own half, crashing over for two more scores before the half. 21 – 0 at the break.

Still, at half time, we felt pretty positive. Despite St Albans (Hatfield) having overwhelming possession, we were only three scores down, the sun had come out and (if we could get some ball) we felt we’d be able to come back at them. According to Jon, we just needed to try and run a blitz defence with a greater umbrella to cut off their wide ball, kick more and run blue balls.

His wise tactical advise was soundly ignored and the match resumed its previous pattern with a new and added wrinkle - the ref had now discovered the high tackle rule. Despite seemingly not noticing the repeated slightly high hits by both sides in the first half, he suddenly developed a short-lived zeal for high tackles, penalising Rich for going high on a man twice his size first, then awarding a penalty try against Cotton for a seatbelt tackle on a St Albans (Hatfield) player who was diving for the line. This one, at least, was justified – though a penalty try seemed harsh given the player had been going down when Cotton caught him.

A couple of moments later, I hit the St Albans (Hatfield) centre at chest level and drove him into touch, sliding slightly high as he dug in to try and avoid the touchline. Getting up, I was surprised to see a yellow card being waved for what had to be the softest high tackle yellow yet awarded. A few choice words where aimed at the referee. With the card awarded, it seemed that he felt the high tackle had been duly stamped out of the game and no further penalties where awarded for the offence – despite Rich almost being decapitated at one point. Jon proceeded to give us all an impromptu coaching session on correct form tackling.

Down 28-0 and down to 14 men, Finsbury promptly totally lost their heads and decided that tackling was now an optional extra in a game of rugby. St Albans (Hatfield) kicked deep and Rich with a three man overlap decided to try a cross-field kick to Toby, who was 10 yards ahead of him. Penalty to St Albans (Hatfield). They went quickly, moved to ball to the 15 and he promptly skinned our entire backline including, remarkably, Shin to score.

The next seven minutes didn’t go well. Whether it was the realisation that we couldn’t come back, the loss of my cover tackling (unlikely) or just St Albans (Hatfield) playing particularly well, we collapsed. St Albans ran in three further tries, putting the game well out of the reach.

To our credit, we ended strongly. We got some ball, ran some phases and made ground, breaking the St Albans (Hatfield) line consistently for the first time in the game. Finally we worked the ball out to Toby, who cut inside and started a maul which we managed to roll forward to the St Albans (Hatfield) line before the ref called it dead with no warning. Still, at least we’d have a scrum, momentum and a strong attacking platform…

It wasn’t to be. The referee, against all the rules of the game, awarded the scrum to the opposition explaining his decision as being because ‘it wasn’t worth the effort’. I’m not sure quite where this appears in the rule book. Rule 5.67: complete bullshit?

After that, there was just enough time for Jon to give our wings some advice about how to run a more effective umbrella defense, St Albans (Hatfield) to run in a pair of excellent tries (one assisted by Ross’ eccentric decision to try to blitz the St Albans (Hatfield) 10 from the wing – he was following Jon’s advice) and for the referee to mangle the quick throw in rule (this time to our advantage).

Final score: 61-0. Well beaten.

PotM: Aaron – for some classically bullish carries, a few big hits and some remarkably inventive swearing at the ref

DotD: Ross – for his crossfield kick to a man who was 10 yards offside (note: This wasn’t actually Ross. After the game, Rich denied all knowledge of it and blamed Ross for the kick – framing him.)