Bath Rugby: How young players deal with stick at away grounds

Bath Rugby’s Ethan Staddon and Ryan Davis have revealed how the club’s young players deal with, and can be prepared for, any stick they might suffer at away grounds.

Bath Rugby’s Ethan Staddon, left, and Ryan Davis face the media at the club’s pre-PREM Rugby Cup Round 5 press conference on Tuesday 18th November | Photo © Bath Rugby

At the club’s pre-PREM Rugby Cup Round 5 press conference on Tuesday 18th November, the Echo brought up the jeering – akin to that at a rugby league or soccer stadium and at odds with rugby union’s ethos of respect – that the Blue, Black & White were subjected to by Gloucester Rugby fans when they made mistakes at Kingsholm Stadium the previous Friday, and how it could affect the players on the receiving end.

Teenage fly-half James Linegar was particularly targeted by supporters of the Cherry & Whites during Bath’s 19-17 defeat in Round 4 of the competition on 14th November.

At the age of 23, Dorchester-born back row Staddon was one of the more experienced heads in the youthful Bath side playing at Kingsholm.

And he told the Echo: “I think with any away game, there’s an atmosphere that I don’t think there’s anything you can do to prepare for other than your first time experiencing it. And then after that, you go ‘Oh, that’s what it’s all about’.

“I’m head down and I just laugh. If someone shouts something about the colour of my boots or I need a haircut, I just think it’s funny.

“But then again, I’ve had that experience a few times now. I’m lucky that I’ve got experience under my belt these days.”

Coach Davis, who is leading Bath in the current block of PREM Rugby Cup games, told the Echo: “Each player is probably different.

“What we do as coaches is know which players would be going to that fixture, probably being a little bit more sensitive to that environment, and then you kind of reassure them, either around focusing on your job, the next job if you do make a mistake, give them any kind of triggers that they can pinch themselves, look into the sky, find a place in the stands, just take away that moment of feeling overwhelmed.

“I agree with Ethan – if it’s the first experience, first time, I don’t think you really can prepare too much. You’ve just got to know which players might need your support in the moment.”

The reception will be much more friendly for Bath in their next fixture, when they take on Sale Sharks at The Rec on Saturday 22nd November in Round 5.

And the match will be Davis’ debut at the stadium in what is effectively a head coach role – and that is something he is relishing.

He said: “I’m just going to be living the moment, be excited.

“It’s at The Rec, I’ve played there plenty of times and coached, but not as a head coach.

“But it’s about the boys, so I’m going to be geeing them up and I want them to go out there and get ready to rip in.”

Davis said that he will handing over the reins to Mark Lilley for Bath’s next block of PREM Rugby Cup matches, which will be played in February.

“Mark is doing the second block so he can get experience of a kind of head coach role,” said Davis.

Meanwhile, the Rugby Football Union announced on 18th November that the high challenge that put Bath prop Scott Kirk out of the Round 4 game at Kingsholm has earned the tackler, Gloucester’s former All Black Nepo Laulala, a three-match ban. Initially, Laulala was yellow-carded for the fourth-minute incident.

A statement from the RFU said: “The case of Nepo Laulala, Gloucester Rugby, was heard by an independent panel chaired by Oliver Clark, sitting with Kylie Hutchison and Vicky Irwin.

“Laulala was cited for a dangerous tackle, contrary to World Rugby Law 9.13, during a game against Bath Rugby on Friday 14th November.

“The citing was upheld and Laulala received a three-match ban, which will be reduced to two if he successfully completes the World Rugby Coaching Intervention Programme (CIP).

“Matches missed: 29th November 2025 v Harlequins, 7th December 2025 v Castre, 13th December 2025 v Munster (subject to completion of CIP).”

In the full judgement, it was stated: “There were two useful video angles. The angle showing footage from the MO’s [referee’s] perspective suggests that what he would have seen was GR3’s [Laulala’s] arm initially making contact with BR1’s [Kirk’s] shoulder and then following through to make contact with the head, thus confirming the MO’s belief that this was secondary contact to the head.

“Seen from the other side, it was the view of the panel that GR3’s shoulder had made direct contact to the head.

“Put together this represented GR3 driving upward with force and through BR1, making direct contact to the head. This was a dynamic attempt at a dominant tackle at speed, all of which resulted in a high degree of danger. The starting point therefore was that this was a red-card offence.

“Although not wrapped at point of contact, the panel felt that there was a genuine attempt at a tackle rather than this being a shoulder charge that was always illegal. The panel therefore considered what mitigation, if any, was available.

“The panel considered written submissions that BR1 made a sudden and/or significant drop in height that left GR3 with no time to adjust.

“The panel agreed that there was a change in height, but it was neither sudden nor significant.

“GR3 had a clear unobstructed view of BR1, and given the timing and direction of the tackle, as well as the probability that BR1 would brace for such a tackle, it was likely that the point of impact would be high up on the chest of BR1 at best.”