Leinster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread.

Cpt_Blackbeard

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

Of course it doesn't and know one but you has said it does.

Rugby is a physical sport that is known for incidents like that. Someone should have put their hand up at some stage and said "I'm going to take a preventative step and rest BOD for a few weeks. He is clearly operating at 60% and he will only get worse if he continues to be played every week. We don't want to get the stage where he is incapable of tackling with one shoulder and he has to be dropped because he is a complete liability"

How did that validate your point? That would only only validate your point if you, of sound body and mind, honestly believed that Horan is 100% responsible for BOD's injury troubles.

Talk about hyper-sensitivity... :rolleyes:

1 - Find me one similar incident in any of the games that either Leinster, Munster, Ulster or Connacht have played this season. Blindsiding a player is not a regular occurance.

2 - Please stop ignoring my analogy of the drunk driver to explain the issue of calculated risk.

3 - My point was that you were using BOD's calculated risks as a way to mitigate Horan's ridiculous "tackle" during the game. That was it, purely and simply. You've managed to cement this opinion repeatedly since.

4 - back on the list

MaryKing

MaryKing wrote: »

Well, I would suggest that Schmidt badly miscalculated playing Brian in the Magners Final so soon after his original injury.

Its not as if Leinster are lacking with options there. As it turned out, Munster had a fairly inexperienced player, so it would have been good experience for one of the up and coming young Leinster backs.

Goodnight folks

phog

Deleted User wrote: »

What's wrong with my statement? Was Horan's hit not directly involved in BOD's injury? Is that not what Schmidt referenced?

Did I say that Horan was solely responsible for BOD's injury?

I am directly involved in the bottom line of my company, but I sure as **** amn't solely responsible for it. If you need any more clarifications, please feel free to ask away.

I suppose it's all down to an understanding

solely [ˈsəʊllɪ]
adv
1. only; completely; entirely
2. without another or others; singly; alone
3. for one thing only

di·rect·ly (d-rktl, d-)
adv.
1. In a direct line or manner; straight: The road runs directly north.
2. Without anyone or anything intervening: directly responsible.

Enjoy Countdown phog, I'll be sure to cheer you on.

Here's two more words for you to take into account.

petty
pet·ty (pt)
adj. pet·ti·er, pet·ti·est
1. Of small importance; trivial: a petty grievance.
2. Marked by narrowness of mind, ideas, or views.
3. Marked by meanness or lack of generosity, especially in trifling matters.
4. Secondary in importance or rank; subordinate. See Synonyms at trivial.
5. Law Variant of petit.

pathetic
pa·thet·ic   
adjective
1. causing or evoking pity, sympathetic sadness, sorrow, etc.; pitiful; pitiable: a pathetic letter; a pathetic sight.
2. affecting or moving the feelings.
3. pertaining to or caused by the feelings.
4. miserably or contemptibly inadequate: In return for our investment we get a pathetic three percent interest.

:pac:

.ak

Lads, think you're all a bit guilty of getting a bit caught up in the provincial debate.

Let's take province and tribalism out of it for minute, step back and let's go to a third party.

I suggest you all think about Armitage's citing in the WC. Is there much difference between what he did and what Horan did? In my opinion no. I'd almost compare it to Lately Lawes tackle as well.

Why were they cited and not Horan? Let's be realistic. If all the late tackles in the Magners League were cited we'd have hearings every day of the week for players. The WC is the ideal place to make an example of this kind of thing and so every off the ball incident was cited.

I think Horan deserved a citing, but a very low end one - one match ban etc., etc. Maybe the citing commissioner thought the same. What's the point of chasing a one match ban at the end of a season?

shuffol

It was a cheap shot by Horan, not pretty but it happens, fact is that if he'd done it to any other player we wouldnt be discussing it as in all likelyhood it wouldnt have led to a serious injury, the reason it did lead to injury is because BOD was already carrying a knock in that area, now if Horan was aware of this in advance of the incident and deliberately targetted that area then he's a dirty scoundrel and deserves to have the book thrown at him, I doubt he did though and is probably going to be unfairly victimised if it turns out that BOD will be out for the season.

Burgo

.ak wrote: »

Lads, think you're all a bit guilty of getting a bit caught up in the provincial debate.

Let's take province and tribalism out of it for minute, step back and let's go to a third party.

I suggest you all think about Armitage's citing in the WC. Is there much difference between what he did and what Horan did? In my opinion no. I'd almost compare it to Lately Lawes tackle as well.

Why were they cited and not Horan? Let's be realistic. If all the late tackles in the Magners League were cited we'd have hearings every day of the week for players. The WC is the ideal place to make an example of this kind of thing and so every off the ball incident was cited.

Well the difference from what I can remember is that the paterson had the ball when he was tackled, BoD didn't.

danthefan

Burgo wrote: »

Well the difference from what I can remember is that the paterson had the ball when he was tackled, BoD didn't.

Was just about to say this, I don't think the fact Armitage was late was a huge deal because marginally late tackles go in all the time, and Paterson as the ball carrier should obviously expect to be tackled.

decisions

errlloyd wrote: »

Everyone else should just concede that Carr probably should have worked harder to secure a contract at a club that didn't have 900 up and coming wingers.

I don't think he made the right choice coming to Leinster I think he should have gone to Ulster. I think himself Gilroy and Spence could gave been a great attacking group. But hindsight is a wonderful thing, if only he were a center...

.ak

Burgo wrote: »

Well the difference from what I can remember is that the paterson had the ball when he was tackled, BoD didn't.

True. Which only point out what Horan did was worse than what Delon did.

funky penguin

Looks like BOD's definitely going to have surgery (and right he should too, no point in maiming himself unnecessarily).

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1107/1224307166366.html

His period away from the game has yet to be confirmed I think, but either way it's going to be tough.

It's imo because this is the situation we've all been fearing. While he hasn't retired, we're going to find out what life after BOD is like over the coming months, and it really is time for someone to step up and say 'Number 13 is mine. I want it'.

One of McFadden, EOM, Fitz imo.....or D'Arcy? I hope it isn't the latter. I love D'Arcy, but we need to start thinking long term here. BOD will be back, but now is a great time to nurture someone so that when he does eventually retire in a year or two, the shoes will be a size or two smaller.

One thing's for sure, I really don't feel worried with Schmidt in charge.

Horgan's case is looking grim. Hopefully he can get fit for the second half of the season.

padser

The tribal petty nature of the comments from the munster fans on this thread really don't enhance the forum / thread / them.

A "has been" in Irish (and indeed munster) rugby in a cynical dirty piece of play may have cost the Irish captain the chance to operate at 100% at the rwc (and with it Ireland a semi final place) and an entire season following it (which is disasterous for Leinster despite comments from Munster fans to the effect that we are "better off without him" - bullsh1t).

Was the play by Horan a 20 week ban offence? Of course not. No one is suggesting it was. But it was dirty. It has had severe consequences and Horan the largest culprit.

If you are not able to constructively add to a thread - consider not posting.

justsomebloke

ok final warning, we have given you plenty of warnings so far, if any one continues with the sniping they will be looking at bans

peterako

Good to see that BOD is getting his shoulder operated on.

Generally, if the ligaments are stretched/damaged that's the only way to get that 'joint' functioning properly again.

If left it'll will never be right again.

Here's to a speedy recovery!!

GerM

To be honest, if BOD is out then fair enough. It's an opportunity and should be used as such to develop his replacement which looks like it's McFadden. I see it as a similar scenario to Wallace in Munster. I won't hide that I've issues with McFadden in the centre, particularly at 12 but I'm not against him at 13. He's a beast with the ball in hand for someone of his size and has a fair bit of pace. He also has a natural flair for getting on the shoulder of a carrier and always has. I wish he was a better handler of the ball but hopefully another season with Schmidt will improve that further. His defence will only improve if he gets time in the position. Silver lining, the new generation of Leinster centres starts now if BOD is out. Regardless, if we rely so heavily on the influence of one player to get out of the pool we're in, we don't deserve to be HEC contenders.

totallegend

funky penguin wrote: »

Looks like BOD's definitely going to have surgery (and right he should too, no point in maiming himself unnecessarily).

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1107/1224307166366.html

His period away from the game has yet to be confirmed I think, but either way it's going to be tough.

It's imo because this is the situation we've all been fearing. While he hasn't retired, we're going to find out what life after BOD is like over the coming months, and it really is time for someone to step up and say 'Number 13 is mine. I want it'.

One of McFadden, EOM, Fitz imo.....or D'Arcy? I hope it isn't the latter. I love D'Arcy, but we need to start thinking long term here. BOD will be back, but now is a great time to nurture someone so that when he does eventually retire in a year or two, the shoes will be a size or two smaller.

This could be a blessing in disguise, like when D'Arcy transformed from a wing/full-back to a world-class centre in 2003/4, again due to an injury to O'Driscoll.
Of the three named above, I think Luke is the best prospect. I think EOM is still a little off the pace in terms of the physicality required for top-level rugby and McFadden is more of a 12, IMO. I don't think Luuuuke's future is on the wing either, plus it's a position in which Leinster have decent cover wiith McFadden, Dave Kearney and Fionn Carr, so he would get my vote for Saturday.

funky penguin wrote: »

One thing's for sure, I really don't feel worried with Schmidt in charge.

Agreed.

funky penguin wrote: »

Horgan's case is looking grim. Hopefully he can get fit for the second half of the season.

I will be absolutely gutted if Horgan doesn't get to make some sort of a comeback. If he misses the rest of this season, it's hard to see him ever coming back, given his age and the obvious seriousness of his injury. Such a shame too, the guy was in possibly the best form of his life last season.

funky penguin

totallegend wrote: »

This could be a blessing in disguise, like when D'Arcy transformed from a wing/full-back to a world-class centre in 2003/4, again due to an injury to O'Driscoll.
Of the three named above, I think Luke is the best prospect. I think EOM is still a little off the pace in terms of the physicality required for top-level rugby and McFadden is more of a 12, IMO. I don't think Luuuuke's future is on the wing either, plus it's a position in which Leinster have decent cover wiith McFadden, Dave Kearney and Fionn Carr, so he would get my vote for Saturday.

Agreed, I think Luke is wasted on the wing, he has arguably the best step in the squad, and his defence is BOD-like. Only real problem is is seeming reluctance to play there.

wixfjord

funky penguin wrote: »

Agreed, I think Luke is wasted on the wing, he has arguably the best step in the squad, and his defence is BOD-like. Only real problem is is seeming reluctance to play there.

That's one thing I don't like about Fitz. He should play where the manager thinks he will be best.
Already in his career, he's made noise about wanting to play 15, where he bombed, and not wanting to play 12.

Podge_irl

totallegend wrote: »

McFadden is more of a 12, IMO

I don't really agree with this McFadden as a 12 thing. He was a 13 coming through the ranks and was only shoved inside to 12 when both himself and O'Malley started playing as he was clearly the more suited of the two to that role. He is however, an excellent strike runner who runs good support lines and has the gas for an outside break. He also shows good composure ball in hand. I think, given a consistent run, he'll be a very good 13. The only concerns are his passing - which would be far more of a problem at 12 anyway - and his defence which is more an alignment issue then technique. He needs to stop running out of the line (or at least learn when to do it).

.ak

I really do hope BOD takes the surgery and comes back 100%, but honestly I can't see it happening. How many of our 'all star' players taken a serious knock and gone for surgery, missed a season, and then struggle to come back into form? He'll be 33/34 before he's back on form, if he ever does come back. Could the defeat to Wales be his last match?

It's a great shame. But I still believe he should get the surgery - mostly because he needs to think of his future and his body before thinking about his rugby.

chancer12

Ref Wixjford's comments on Luke, Schmidt sees him as a great team man, see below

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1010/1224305516791.html

.ak

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't really agree with this McFadden as a 12 thing. He was a 13 coming through the ranks and was only shoved inside to 12 when both himself and O'Malley started playing as he was clearly the more suited of the two to that role. He is however, an excellent strike runner who runs good support lines and has the gas for an outside break. He also shows good composure ball in hand. I think, given a consistent run, he'll be a very good 13. The only concerns are his passing - which would be far more of a problem at 12 anyway - and his defence which is more an alignment issue then technique. He needs to stop running out of the line (or at least learn when to do it).

Spot on. I used to be a believer of McFadden taking over from Darce, but now I'm far more inclined to believe he's a 13. I think he's a little wasted on the wing due to his skillset, and whilst he has plenty to work on, I can only imagine a good run in a spot will do him no harm. He's constantly been moved around the backline over the past two seasons.. Maybe this will be a season where he can iron out his issues if he's played in one position for the majority of it.

.ak

chancer12 wrote: »

Ref Wixjford's comments on Luke, Schmidt sees him as a great team man, see below

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1010/1224305516791.html

I think that was the article Wixjford was referring to actually. In reference to Luke making it known he doesn't want to play at 12.

Joe Schmidt wrote:

He was probably more disappointed, visibly, when I said ‘Well, what about 12, Luke?’ Really (he responded)?”

wixfjord

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't really agree with this McFadden as a 12 thing. He was a 13 coming through the ranks and was only shoved inside to 12 when both himself and O'Malley started playing as he was clearly the more suited of the two to that role. He is however, an excellent strike runner who runs good support lines and has the gas for an outside break. He also shows good composure ball in hand. I think, given a consistent run, he'll be a very good 13. The only concerns are his passing - which would be far more of a problem at 12 anyway - and his defence which is more an alignment issue then technique. He needs to stop running out of the line (or at least learn when to do it).

Spot on with that, I've never seen him as a twelve.
He's got searing pace and great power too.

wixfjord

chancer12 wrote: »

Ref Wixjford's comments on Luke, Schmidt sees him as a great team man, see below

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1010/1224305516791.html

That's part of what I was referring to. Being dissapointed to be placed at 12, a central position where he might have flourished with Darcy in poor form, after a year of poor games at wing and FB wouldn't be great for me.
I can see his point but has he earned the right to ask to play in a certain position?
I know he's a great player, and not a bit like that, but he has done that twice now imo.

totallegend

wixfjord wrote: »

That's part of what I was referring to. Being dissapointed to be placed at 12, a central position where he might have flourished with Darcy in poor form, after a year of poor games at wing and FB wouldn't be great for me.
I can see his point but has he earned the right to ask to play in a certain position?
I know he's a great player, and not a bit like that, but he has done that twice now imo.

Well look at it from Luke's point of view, he's been through a rough few months with his form and he's then told that he's going to be shifted to a new position to fill in for a guy who will, more than likely, walk back into the team when he comes back from the RWC, which is what happened. Meanwhile, guys like Kearney and Carr are getting their chance on the wings.
If I was Luke, I wouldn't care where I was playing so long as I was given a shot at making the jersey my own; he possibly (rightly) didn't see that happening at 12. And if you're viewed as a versatile guy who can play anywhere, then a lot of the time you'll end up with the #23 jersey (just ask McFadden).

But I think the important thing is that whether he was or was not happy with it, he went out and did a pretty good job at 12, it's not like he threw a strop and didn't try.

molloyjh

GerM wrote: »

Regardless, if we rely so heavily on the influence of one player to get out of the pool we're in, we don't deserve to be HEC contenders.

+1

wixfjord wrote: »

That's one thing I don't like about Fitz. He should play where the manager thinks he will be best.
Already in his career, he's made noise about wanting to play 15, where he bombed, and not wanting to play 12.

Like Ferg at 13, Luke hasn't had a whole lot of time at 15 (other than his return from injury). He was always going to be a little slow back at the start of the year and shifting him into a position he wasn't overly familiar with for his first few weeks can't have helped any. With Isa and R Kearney there though I can't see any need to move Fitzy to FB.

I'd like to see Ferg get a run of games at 13 now too. BOD needs to get himself sorted. He won't do himself or anyone else any good playing with a dodgy shoulder.

Kinger83

According to http://talkingrugbyunion.co.uk/ BOD is out for 6 months and is having surgery next week.

wixfjord

Sinead Kissane on Twitter confirms:

sineadkissane Sinéad Kissane
Breaking: Brian O'Driscoll says he will be out of action for at least 6 months. He will have surgery next week

O'Driscoll will have surgery on trapped nerve. He said it's very frustrating but needs to look after future well-being

Joe Schmidt said from the medical feedback they've got, O'Driscoll's surgery is not career-threatening

6 months would be May. 6N and everything up to possible HEC Semi Final gone. Even then he'd be pushing it, but imagine the boost of bringing BOD on in a big game!

thomond2006

Same backline for Montpellier then?