A whiff of Cordite

[hugonaut]

There's been so many excuses trotted out by the media and Van Graan over the last week or so. Keith Wood was on OTB last week saying that they were so poor against Ulster because they didn't have all of their internationals out but they still had Scannell, POM, Murray, Joey, Conway (who got injured tbf) and Earls. Joe Molloy was saying yesterday that they'd been a bit unlucky with things like the drop goal against Racing and not taking the penalty against Saracens...neither of those things involve luck.

Then there's all the fan stuff about the tv angles and Barnes with Sunday's game. I must have been watching a different game, they had a really good start but couldn't keep it up and Racing started very poorly too. The Conway intercept was totally against the run of play and meant that the scoreline did not reflect the balance of play at all. They were never going to be able to be competitive for 80 minutes because they just don't have the team or depth to do so. They overextended themselves in trying to hang on in the game as it was. It's not like their pack was decimated by injuries, it was only Tadhg Beirne who was really missing.

One thing I haven't heard mentioned is how muddled their attack has been over the last two games. Against Ulster they were going for these big fancy wide and deep passes that looked complex but Ulster knew exactly where the ball was going. Then on Sunday they were far more direct, using the wingers to run off JJ back to the inside. Now I get that they may have felt that they couldn't repeat the tactics from the Ulster game, or that they identified a weakness around Finn Russell, but if it was the latter then they should have used the Ulster game to prep for that a bit. The thinking just seems all over the place to me and I don't think it's because they didn't want to show their hand, I think it's because they don't know what they're doing and are scrambling for answers.

I think van Graan got a bit spooked by the super-negative reaction to the Ulster game and put a limit on the amount of Larkham's tactics that they would use. It's a supposition, but I think he may have instructed them to be ultra-physical and intense and to set aside some of the nuances for another day. It's not unusual for a team to play tighter on the road in Europe than they would at home.

[Plámásing]

Moving Salanoa would be counter-productive. He's in Year One of the academy and is still raw, coming from a non-rugby background. He needs as much technical training, scrummaging work and game knowledge as he can get. Leinster has the best academy, the best senior coaching staff and the most experienced scrum coach in the country ... where is he going to do better?

On the other hand, Jack Aungier would be a good target for a move west. He's in Year Three of the academy, started 8 of 10 games at tighthead for the Irish U20s in 2018. I'd be surprised if he got a contract offer from Leinster this season, but maybe he will. In any case, he would have a better chance of playing more rugby if he moved to Connacht.

Yeah fully agree with all that. I would have thought that consistency would be very important for Salanoa too (remember when Hagan joined us and ruined his game by trying to change his technique?), no point risking his development when things seem to be going pretty well.

As I was saying recently, I think we need to let Fardy and Tomane go in order to keep the players we have in those positions.

But there's still a logjam at 7 and I think we're really vulnerable there because of the gaping hole at Munster. Imagine if Connors had played for them yesterday, he'd have destroyed Finn Russell and Chavancy and that could have been the winning of the game and a QF. I don't want to lose anyone there but I think it's going to happen. The only thing in our favour is the unknown with Leavy. I suggested before that Leavy should go and play Currie Cup or NPC if he recovers in time, but now I'd almost send him to NZ so that we can tell the IRFU that we'll be without him until the end of October when the NPC is finished and therefore we need the others.

I don't think the ten situation is bad enough for guys to move, not if Rob retires and Tomane leaves because then Frawley ends up playing a lot at 12 and 15.

Some outside backs might be up for grabs though. I was hugely impressed by Mullin in the A games (or maybe it was just one, can't remember) I saw him in recently but he's ripe for a move IMO. I certainly wouldn't want to lose TOB or ROL. I wonder if Adam Byrne might be considering his future? I think we both agreed that he could become an important player next season, but DK's resurgence has made me rethink that.

Using hypotheticals to prove your point is nonsense. You can’t say Connors would have been the winning of the game you just don’t know that nevertheless you keep up your inherent touting of a player because it suits your agenda or you are in some way linked to him. Leavy is ten times the player Connors is – he has done it all Grand Slams in Twickenham and tries in European quarters against Sarries, and European Cups. Connors hasn’t even started a European match.

For some reason you incessantly plump for a player who has not shown despite his admittedly very high tackle stats (VDF more consistent in this regard and against better opposition) anything out of the ordinary for a 7. He doesn’t “destroy” people in the tackle – he grabs them around their ankles and trips them up – hardly the monster 7 you are making him out to be. He rarely makes it to the breakdown in keeping up with play a virtue Scott Penny is very good at.

Try and be a bit more balanced undoubtedly you are emotionally attached to Connors getting game time and doing well but just have consideration for the merits of other players before blowing all things Connors out of proportion. Thanks.

[Flash Gordon]

From The42, on Munster:
"the undeniable fact is they have been unfairly penalised by the lottery of the draw.
It simply makes no sense that Gloucester have lost three times in this campaign and yet still have a shot at the quarters, whereas Munster have put it up to Saracens and Racing but don’t have fate in their own hands."
"But what type of conversation would we be having if they were in any of the other four pools? Only a quirk of the system put Racing in as third seeds. Only sod’s law left Munster in the same pool as them and Saracens. "

And then on Northampton:
"And yet Northampton have a stronger chance than Munster of making the quarters. They’ll make it by virtue of having a better draw, not a better team."

That's all fair enough though isn't it?

I mean it comes across a bit 'woe is me' and obviously they could've increased their seeding by doing better in the league, but they were also unlucky with the way the draw panned out in fairness.

And our pool is an easier one to get second place in for Northampton.

Don't think that is fair. Northampton are 2nd in the Premiership currently, they've lost 2 games, just like Saracens so they are a decent team. They ended up in a draw with one of the top teams in France who are 12 points ahead of Racing and Leinster who are absolutely flying. The draw clearly isn't the issue for Munster, the fact that they are 19th on tries scored with just 8 from 5 games says it all - in the same number of games we've scored 26! There's really nothing to be gained on the journey by making excuses, you have to face reality to make it change.

[dropkick]

It doesn't matter what draw munster got as munster won't be winning the competition anyway. Going out early means more concentration on the pro14 and a better chance of a good draw next season.

[dropkick]

There's been so many excuses trotted out by the media and Van Graan over the last week or so. Keith Wood was on OTB last week saying that they were so poor against Ulster because they didn't have all of their internationals out but they still had Scannell, POM, Murray, Joey, Conway (who got injured tbf) and Earls. Joe Molloy was saying yesterday that they'd been a bit unlucky with things like the drop goal against Racing and not taking the penalty against Saracens...neither of those things involve luck.

Then there's all the fan stuff about the tv angles and Barnes with Sunday's game. I must have been watching a different game, they had a really good start but couldn't keep it up and Racing started very poorly too. The Conway intercept was totally against the run of play and meant that the scoreline did not reflect the balance of play at all. They were never going to be able to be competitive for 80 minutes because they just don't have the team or depth to do so. They overextended themselves in trying to hang on in the game as it was. It's not like their pack was decimated by injuries, it was only Tadhg Beirne who was really missing.

One thing I haven't heard mentioned is how muddled their attack has been over the last two games. Against Ulster they were going for these big fancy wide and deep passes that looked complex but Ulster knew exactly where the ball was going. Then on Sunday they were far more direct, using the wingers to run off JJ back to the inside. Now I get that they may have felt that they couldn't repeat the tactics from the Ulster game, or that they identified a weakness around Finn Russell, but if it was the latter then they should have used the Ulster game to prep for that a bit. The thinking just seems all over the place to me and I don't think it's because they didn't want to show their hand, I think it's because they don't know what they're doing and are scrambling for answers.

James Coughlan on Second Captains podcast yesterday was bemoaning how they're not testing defences and are far too easy to predict in attack.

What's new? Since the internationals came back it coincided with a hard run of games and I think they abandoned the early season progress. And there was progress, which gives me optimism that Larkham will turn things around when given enough time with the players. The next block of games gives them opportunity to play youth and be more expansive although I think JVG is allergic to dropping the senior players.

[Peg Leg]

There's been so many excuses trotted out by the media and Van Graan over the last week or so. Keith Wood was on OTB last week saying that they were so poor against Ulster because they didn't have all of their internationals out but they still had Scannell, POM, Murray, Joey, Conway (who got injured tbf) and Earls. Joe Molloy was saying yesterday that they'd been a bit unlucky with things like the drop goal against Racing and not taking the penalty against Saracens...neither of those things involve luck.

Then there's all the fan stuff about the tv angles and Barnes with Sunday's game. I must have been watching a different game, they had a really good start but couldn't keep it up and Racing started very poorly too. The Conway intercept was totally against the run of play and meant that the scoreline did not reflect the balance of play at all. They were never going to be able to be competitive for 80 minutes because they just don't have the team or depth to do so. They overextended themselves in trying to hang on in the game as it was. It's not like their pack was decimated by injuries, it was only Tadhg Beirne who was really missing.

One thing I haven't heard mentioned is how muddled their attack has been over the last two games. Against Ulster they were going for these big fancy wide and deep passes that looked complex but Ulster knew exactly where the ball was going. Then on Sunday they were far more direct, using the wingers to run off JJ back to the inside. Now I get that they may have felt that they couldn't repeat the tactics from the Ulster game, or that they identified a weakness around Finn Russell, but if it was the latter then they should have used the Ulster game to prep for that a bit. The thinking just seems all over the place to me and I don't think it's because they didn't want to show their hand, I think it's because they don't know what they're doing and are scrambling for answers.

Jerry Flannery and Andrew Trimble have given some really good analysis over the past 3 weeks on the joe.ie podcast (Baz and Andrews house of rugby), particularly around basic skills and passing. Interesting stats too, zero plays with more than 3 passes v Leinster, twenty something plays with more than 3 passes v Ulster.

[Jcahill1]

For some reason you incessantly plump for a player who has not shown despite his admittedly very high tackle stats (VDF more consistent in this regard and against better opposition) anything out of the ordinary for a 7. He doesn’t “destroy” people in the tackle – he grabs them around their ankles and trips them up – hardly the monster 7 you are making him out to be. He rarely makes it to the breakdown in keeping up with play a virtue Scott Penny is very good at.

Try and be a bit more balanced undoubtedly you are emotionally attached to Connors getting game time and doing well but just have consideration for the merits of other players before blowing all things Connors out of proportion. Thanks.

This seems like a very strange take to me. Whatever about comparisons to Leavy, I would say that it's been very widely observed that Connors has been making a huge amount of dominant tackles this season. I for one have noticed them, and think he has shown more than Penny (who is also excellent) so far this season.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Using hypotheticals to prove your point is nonsense.

Using three (at least) accounts to keep trolling is nonsense too. Were you really so annoyed that Pilotman was largely being ignored that you felt it was worth it to set up yet another one? As someone with nearly 13,000 points on a rugby forum who probably has only a handful of people reading my posts, even I can see that what you're doing is pathetic. Please stop, for your sake as much as everyone else.

[Plámásing]

Using hypotheticals to prove your point is nonsense.

Using three (at least) accounts to keep trolling is nonsense too. Were you really so annoyed that Pilotman was largely being ignored that you felt it was worth it to set up yet another one? As someone with nearly 13,000 points on a rugby forum who probably has only a handful of people reading my posts, even I can see that what you're doing is pathetic. Please stop, for your sake as much as everyone else.

You essentially try to single handedly destroy someone’s place in the pecking order and then turn around in your reply post as if you are a victim and I am some kind of troll? I am a long time lurker on this forum and see inherent bias creep into your posts. Passively aggressive. Discredit a player and big up someone else in his place. All the positive (or negative depending your standpoint) propoganda you put up online, where I know players and journalists read, won’t catch on because there are people like me willing to speak out and stand up to people like you trolling for 1300 posts. How anyone who doesn’t have an agenda online can have 13000 posts is beyond me. You’re not making friends you’re here to put your point across and hope it catches on or is read by the right people. I am here to ensure any of those people in influential positions know that there is opposition to your viewpoint and to make their decisions with that in mind.

[RoboProp]

Using hypotheticals to prove your point is nonsense.

Using three (at least) accounts to keep trolling is nonsense too. Were you really so annoyed that Pilotman was largely being ignored that you felt it was worth it to set up yet another one? As someone with nearly 13,000 points on a rugby forum who probably has only a handful of people reading my posts, even I can see that what you're doing is pathetic. Please stop, for your sake as much as everyone else.

You ain't pathetic LRIP, a bit tapped maybe, but never pathetic

[ronk]

The cattle trading of Leinster players is getting tiresome.
The argument of game time, player development is a crock of 8 week old camel plop. Name a solitary player whose development catapulted them into the national spotlight by jumping ship. Go on I'll be waiting. Conway? He's only coming into his own now, if he stayed and fought for his position here he'd probably be the incumbent by now. Enough with our players being taken already, where the fudge is Liam Neeson when ya need him.

Show Spoiler:

someone's going to say Cooney aren't they

And if we have a better academy, we should get the pick of young players from other provinces.

[Oldschool]

My agenda has always been to educate the ignorant while making as many friends as possible while doing so.
The moral of the above so far.
I've come to realise that to succeed in the first part of my agenda is impossible and that the second part is going to require a miracle which I believe might take even longer.

[paddyor]

Shot there’s people watching us?

*puts on ties*

[bluemagic]

Ruairidh O’Connor on the left wing saying that Leinster will lose a 7,8 and 10. The IRFU media machine is in full swing. You’d be a fool to not think we’re going to lose a few most probably to the IRFUs darlings in Munster

[mildlyinterested]

Absolute bullshit if true.

[A-Train]

Absolute bullshit if true.

I 100% agree with you. It's getting tiresome now with the constant kite flying by the IRFU's chosen journo's. The reward for developing players through the academy/sub-academy and then with senior gametime to constantly ship them off to other provinces.

I know the IRFU wants good players playing however it never seems to tackle the problem of player development elsewhere and just keeps rewarding the others.

[blockhead]

Ruairidh O’Connor on the left wing saying that Leinster will lose a 7,8 and 10. The IRFU media machine is in full swing. You’d be a fool to not think we’re going to lose a few most probably to the IRFUs darlings in Munster

https://www.the42.ie/andy-friend-connac ... 4-Jan2020/

Friend says hes talking to a chunk of blokes.

[johng]

Props obviously......

Has Alan Jacobson got a son?

And would that make him Alan Jacob's grandson?

[Dave Cahill]

Heres the problem though. Taking the positions mentioned above

We have 4 number 7s - Leavy, vd Flier, Connors, Penny

We have 3 number 8s - Conan, Deegan, Doris

We have 4 outhalves - Sexton, Byrne, Frawley, Byrne

We play 32 games.

The problem is that we don't have enough games for the players we have. Now, 12-15% of players will be injured at any one time, that provides opportunities but it isn't something you can plan a career around.

The other big opportunity is as much a problem as it is an opportunity. International windows. There is gametime available during international windows. But for many of the players listed above - in fact probably for all but two or three, that opportunity to play is a negative, because it means you haven't made the national squad. And if one of the reasons you feel you haven't made the squad is because you haven't had enough gametime and exposure, then it becomes a loop of disgruntlement. No matter how professional the players are, and they are, they're going to be pissed off.

And the reality of Irish Rugby is that we exist to service the national team.

Another problem is that amongst the many things Nucifora is demonstrably sh!t at, is managing this process in a way that doesn't create resentment like the way it was done when Carbery was moved, or the way it's being done now

[bluemagic]

Heres the problem though. Taking the positions mentioned above

We have 4 number 7s - Leavy, vd Flier, Connors, Penny

We have 3 number 8s - Conan, Deegan, Doris

We have 4 outhalves - Sexton, Byrne, Frawley, Byrne

We play 32 games.

The problem is that we don't have enough games for the players we have. Now, 12-15% of players will be injured at any one time, that provides opportunities but it isn't something you can plan a career around.

The other big opportunity is as much a problem as it is an opportunity. International windows. There is gametime available during international windows. But for many of the players listed above - in fact probably for all but two or three, that opportunity to play is a negative, because it means you haven't made the national squad. And if one of the reasons you feel you haven't made the squad is because you haven't had enough gametime and exposure, then it becomes a loop of disgruntlement. No matter how professional the players are, and they are, they're going to be pissed off.

And the reality of Irish Rugby is that we exist to service the national team.

Another problem is that amongst the many things Nucifora is demonstrably sh!t at, is managing this process in a way that doesn't create resentment like the way it was done when Carbery was moved, or the way it's being done now

How many games did Bill Johnston get down in Munster before he was shipped out to Ulster? Why would Harry Byrne coming in get any more game time?

The reality is the best place for players to develop is at Leinster because they have the best coaching and are afforded more game time than any other province.

If players are forced to move on it should be players like McFadden, Adam Byrne, Bent rather than the young guys we are developing.

Also, as a young player how many of the moves to different teams have been a success? Maybe Conway?