HC semi-final: Leinster v Toulouse 30th April 2011, 1530

bamboozle

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Great clip. What a belt! Main difference between this and SOB is SOB was severely provoked. Just say Toulouse won the game because of that try?

good flankers need to bring niggle to the game, its not as if Nayanga is the only flanker in history to pull a stunt like this, SOB will be very lucky to be playing in the final i fear.

Donnielighto

Has the issue with drico's yellow been sorted?

durkadurka

What issue? It's done and dusted

jacothelad

funky penguin wrote: »

Just on the topic of McFadden.

Jesus that man had an EXCELLENT game when he came on. Clearing rucks single handedly and popping up numerous times in plays. Clearly hungry to make an impression.

As much as I love Fitz (especially his excellent defence), I think McFadden should start the final.

Mcfadden is one of the best performing Irish players of the season. Possibly only SOB is above him. Poor Fitz looks like a fish out of water at the moment. He couldn't wait to get rid of the ball. His confidence seems to have gone down the drain and he is playing like one. McF is operating at a much higher level. I was really surprised when Fitz came back on though Schmidt seems to be a good 'man manager' as it was the right thing to do for Fitz if not for McFadden.

While we need to look after our players welfare, both physically and mentally, sentiment can only get you so far. If Fitz doesn't improve - and there are few games in which to do so - I don't think Ireland can afford to carry a passenger like him at the RWC.

While there is a lot of support for dropping Mincer from the Ireland squad, he hasn't been playing badly and does offer that 10 cover but given any other scenario, I'd have McFadden every time.

ambid wrote: »

t... does anybody else think McFadden would have been the perfect signing for Ulster?

Fixed that for you.

Kaka10 wrote: »

Reddan was definitely cack yesterday. He was incredibly slow getting the ball out, I couldn't believe it at times.

jolley123 wrote: »

I'm finding it hard to decide who would be better to start between Reddan and Boss. It seems that Boss is making a better impact off the bench, but is that because he's in better form or because it's easier to make an impact coming on late? Reddan certainly fluffed a few passes. I prefer Boss because I feel that he gets the forward carriers into the game more. His sniping opens holes for SOB,Strauss and company to go through. But I think that Leinster should use that as a weapon for the hour mark and just leave things the way they have been.

He started the Whittaker two-step, sideways shuffle again. It's infuriating. It just closes down the space immediately. Boss is also prone to do it but seemed o.k. when he came on. His better defence, sniping runs and breaks, his sheer strength near the line and ability to take on bigger players in the loose makes Boss invaluable towards the end of the game. In his years at Ulster, it was often in the last 15 minutes that Boss was at his most impressive. He is a great loss at Ravenhill. Imagine him coming on in the last 20 - 25 with Pienaar moving to 10.

Reddan was o.k. but not at his best. he rarely hits top form though when he does he is the best choice we have in Ireland. boss is clearly second in line - except in Deccieworld where TOL is a scrum half.;)

Dr.Evil

I think we're over analyzing the O'Brien incident too much out of fear he won't make the final. There's been no big media reaction to it as far as I know, and I'm confident enough we won't see any penalties payed for it.

mrboswell

TheHighRoad wrote: »

He won't be cited. The O'Connell incident was much different - it was out of play, was much more force, and was in plain view for everyone to see. O'Brien's incident was in play, he was being impeded from stopping a try which was scored and it looks like he tapped him and Nalanga went down like a sack of spuds. When you consider that Leo Cullen got a full force punch last week and nothing came out of it then it does give you hope.

How do you know he won't be cited? Its not really that different to the O'Connell incident in terms of a citing.

A citing is for an act of foul play as deemed by the citing commissioner, so long as it has not been dealt by the ref.

SOB struck a player - that is foul play, no question. The ref/linesmen missed it. So whether or not the commissioner thinks Nyanga was holding SOB or if he think Nyanga deserved the slap doesn't matter in the slightest.
What it comes down to is whether SOB's as was foul play or not, as deemed by the commissioner.

If he hasn't lost his eyesight then SOB will be sited.

Might not get a ban but if he is sited he probably will.

durkadurka

3 hours to go

danthefan

mrboswell wrote: »

How do you know he won't be cited? Its not really that different to the O'Connell incident in terms of a citing.

A citing is for an act of foul play as deemed by the citing commissioner, so long as it has not been dealt by the ref.

AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

The ref has nothing to do with anything. I don't know how this myth has become so widespread.

totallegend

danthefan wrote: »

AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

The ref has nothing to do with anything. I don't know how this myth has become so widespread.

All sorts of misinformation on this issue. The facts are:
1. The clubs cannot cite a player, only the citing commissioner can.
2. It makes no difference if ref saw/dealt with the incident.
3. A citing is issued if the commissioner feels that an incident merited a red card.

durkadurka

To be honest I think the citing commissioner is down in b&q or something. I reckon this is a non story

GerM

totallegend wrote: »

All sorts of misinformation on this issue. The facts are:
1. The clubs cannot cite a player, only the citing commissioner can.
2. It makes no difference if ref saw/dealt with the incident.
3. A citing is issued if the commissioner feels that an incident merited a red card.

Teams can however request that the citing commissioner view a specific incident. I doubt Toulouse did anything of the sort though.

durkadurka

Wouldnt We have gotten a sniff of it By now?

totallegend

GerM wrote: »

Teams can however request that the citing commissioner view a specific incident. I doubt Toulouse did anything of the sort though.

No, definitely not.

Reading the reaction from Noves and some of the players, I was very impressed by how gracious in defeat they are. Not a word of complaint, no blaming the ref, just acknowledged a great game won by a marginally better team.

Then I thought back to Brendan Venter's interview after Leinster beat Saracens in London, telling us how rugby would die if teams were allowed to play like Leinster did.

What a contrast and what an idiot Venter is.

crisco10

durkadurka wrote: »

Wouldnt We have gotten a sniff of it By now?

here's hoping. I won't rest easy until the time is long gone.

funky penguin

Haha!!

i just noticed SOB pulls on the shirt of Albacete as Nyanaga grabs his!

Quint2010

durkadurka wrote: »

To be honest I think the citing commissioner is down in b&q or something. I reckon this is a non story

Again I think its paranoia on our part. SOB is huge a huge player for us that if he does get banned Leinsters odds will automatically lengthen

laugh

These things are normally extended by a day when its a bank holiday.

Piliger

jacothelad wrote: »

He (Reddin) started the Whittaker two-step, sideways shuffle again. It's infuriating. It just closes down the space immediately. Boss is also prone to do it but seemed o.k. when he came on. His better defence, sniping runs and breaks, his sheer strength near the line and ability to take on bigger players in the loose makes Boss invaluable towards the end of the game.
Reddan was o.k. but not at his best. he rarely hits top form though when he does he is the best choice we have in Ireland. boss is clearly second in line - except in Deccieworld where TOL is a scrum half.;)

I agree completely. This two-step thing is rampant among modern scrum halves and today I have been watching clips on YouTube showing Gareth Edwards pass and also several other scrum halve's passes of that era. They dived and passed all in one motion. No hesitation. This skill appears to have been completely abandoned and I think that it is giving the defence an extra second consistently.

Reddin was particularly poor on Saturday and should have been taken off at half time. His hesitation and his awful passes were sucking the confidence out of the back line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYjc-XkSEJs

Still haven't the foggiest what the last penalty was for.

Kilo

Piliger wrote: »

I agree completely. This two-step thing is rampant among modern scrum halves and today I have been watching clips on YouTube showing Gareth Edwards pass and also several other scrum halve's passes of that era. They dived and passed all in one motion. No hesitation. This skill appears to have been completely abandoned and I think that it is giving the defence an extra second consistently.

Reddin was particularly poor on Saturday and should have been taken off at half time. His hesitation and his awful passes were sucking the confidence out of the back line.

Back then scrum halfs almost never broke with the ball in hand, they just passed to the 10 or forwards. Nowadays, defensive systems are so strong, you can't afford to not have a breaking SH, so the two step keeps the defense on the back foot not knowing whether the SH will break or pass.

Reddan (note the spelling :rolleyes:) didn't have his best game, but he still was dengerous going forward and was part of the momentum that led up to Heaslip's try. He's been quicker, but then again, Toulouse were very strong at the breakdown and it wasn't so easy to get quick ball away. Boss's pass that went to ground just before BOD's try was a case in point on the effectiveness (if not occasional stupidity) of Toulouse's tactics.

lologram

Deleted User wrote: »

Still haven't the foggiest what the last penalty was for.

Offside from a knock-on.


11.7 OFFSIDE AFTER A KNOCK-ON
When a player knocks-on and an offside team-mate next plays the ball, the offside player is liable to sanction if playing the ball prevented an opponent from gaining an advantage.
Sanction: Penalty kick

They don't enforce it enough. They enforce it more for when a player is offside from a knock-on following a kick. E.g. a team kicks the ball off, 2 Leinster players lift Leo to catch it, he knocks it on and a Leinster player in front of him tries to play it, rather than leaving it for the opposition

Pretty harsh to judge that as a knock on by the Toulouse defender though.

Its an attempt to intercept the ball, much like a "charge down" in my book anyway...

lologram

I think a lot of times it would be given as a pure knock-on, and that would be fair enough.

There I think Pearson was probably right to give a penalty because of the fact that the knock on and offside stopped a legitimate attack.

Admittedly it's a grey area though, really.

danthefan

Deleted User wrote: »

Pretty harsh to judge that as a knock on by the Toulouse defender though.

Its an attempt to intercept the ball, much like a "charge down" in my book anyway...

The ball came off the Toulouse player last, it was as clear a case of offside as you'll see. The ref could have judged it accidental and given a scrum to Leinster, but play could not have continued with Toulouse in possession

mrboswell

danthefan wrote: »

AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

The ref has nothing to do with anything. I don't know how this myth has become so widespread.

Ok, you are right....but we all know that when an incident is dealt with by the ref it is usually the end of it.

Anyway first citing is out....
"ERC has received a Citing Complaint following the 2010/11 Amlin Challenge Cup semi-finals.

The Citing Complaint is against RODRIGO RONCERO (No 1) – Stade Francais Paris (v ASM Clermont Auvergne, on Friday, 29 April, 2011)

The complaint was made by Citing Commisioner, Alan Mansell (England). Roncero is alleged to have carried out a late body check with his shoulder on the ASM Clermont Auvergne scrum half Morgan Parra in the first half of the game at Stade Charlety, Paris."

danthefan

mrboswell wrote: »

Ok, you are right....but we all know that when an incident is dealt with by the ref it is usually the end of it.

Actually a red card mean you automatically face a disciplinary committee.


That citing is from the game on Friday, right? It's a lot more than 50 hours since the end of that game, so we might be waiting til tomorrow to hear anything about SOB (if there's anything to hear).

mrboswell

danthefan wrote: »

Actually a red card mean you automatically face a disciplinary committee.


That citing is from the game on Friday, right? It's a lot more than 50 hours since the end of that game, so we might be waiting til tomorrow to hear anything about SOB (if there's anything to hear).

Yep, Friday match.
I'll still be surprised if he gets away with it.

Offside

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYjc-XkSEJs

Still haven't the foggiest what the last penalty was for.

It was for offside, ball came off a toulouse hand and caught by a toulouse player in front of him.

JustinDee

laugh wrote: »

These things are normally extended by a day when its a bank holiday.

Nope. 48 hour window regardless.

lologram

JustinDee wrote: »

Nope. 48 hour window regardless.

So do you reckon he's in the clear?

chris85

JustinDee wrote: »

Nope. 48 hour window regardless.

If nothing tomorrow about citing then should be in the clear. The rule is for when he is cited. Could be a little bit of time before broadcast to the media.

pappyodaniel

Kilo wrote: »

Reddan (note the spelling :rolleyes:) didn't have his best game, but he still was dengerous going forward and was part of the momentum that led up to Heaslip's try.

Hahaha

durkadurka

Or the citing above is the only one for the weekend and thEy waited for 24 hours after Northampton match to allow both teams to complain.

Quint2010

durkadurka wrote: »

Or the citing above is the only one for the weekend and thEy waited for 24 hours after Northampton match to allow both teams to complain.

Do you think Northampton would/could complain about SOB not being cited or bring the incident to the citers attention?

durkadurka

From my scanning of the rules that's not possible. Otherwise Leinster would go through the Northampton match looking for any stray fist. It could get a bit stupid!

Quint2010

durkadurka wrote: »

From my scanning of the rules that's not possible. Otherwise Leinster would go through the Northampton match looking for any stray fist. It could get a bit stupid!

I am sure if they did complain it would be in the form of a sly little nudge in the direction of the incident rather than a full on press release

gosplan

Pah ha ha. If we're this nervy about the incident, imagine what the last two days have been like for SOB.

twinytwo

Quint2010 wrote: »

Do you think Northampton would/could complain about SOB not being cited or bring the incident to the citers attention?

Lol if they did it would only be because they fear the man beast:pac:... personally i think even without SOB leisnter will still give northampton a spanking... And if one of them decides to kick the head off hartly along the way ill buy a leinster jersey:cool:

durkadurka

I dunno about a spanking but were well covered at back row so it wouldnt be a disaster.

twinytwo

durkadurka wrote: »

I dunno about a spanking but were well covered at back row so it wouldnt be a disaster.

The way i see it,leinster took out the only 2 decent teams left in the HC. While SOb would be a loss like you said leinster are well covered. However i cant see them not turning up for the final and leinster even at half steam will be one hell of a handfull for northampton.

Quint2010

twinytwo wrote: »

Lol if they did it would only be because they fear the man beast:pac:... personally i think even without SOB leisnter will still give northampton a spanking... And if one of them decides to kick the head off hartly along the way ill buy a leinster jersey:cool:

Off course they do. If I was them I would kick up a fuss. O'Brien would get into a world 15 at the moment

Conchir

What did people think of Horgan? I can hardly believe the switch kick-off to him still works, it's so over used. Just shows how deadly he is in the air, I suppose.

wixfjord

Think it's hilarious that Sexton still tries to disguise it too!
Great tactic too, he's brilliant in the air. He even catches cleanly, and doesn't just knock back, which is invaluable!
Would like to see a crossfield kick or two if he's on Diggin in the final...

durkadurka

Sexton double bluffed it too iirc which I think fooled our boys too.

sock puppet

durkadurka wrote: »

From my scanning of the rules that's not possible. Otherwise Leinster would go through the Northampton match looking for any stray fist. It could get a bit stupid!

Actually I'd say one of the Northampton physios will be banned. Clancy said something about it to him.

tolosenc

Deleted User wrote: »

Its an attempt to intercept the ball, much like a "charge down" in my book anyway...

How often do you see what looks like an attempted intercept get called an intentional knock on? Almost always.

funky penguin

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand breathe.

Teferi

funky penguin wrote: »

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand breathe.

Awesome.

pappyodaniel

funky penguin wrote: »

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand breathe.

Delighted.

irishbucsfan

lologram wrote: »

Offside from a knock-on.


11.7 OFFSIDE AFTER A KNOCK-ON
When a player knocks-on and an offside team-mate next plays the ball, the offside player is liable to sanction if playing the ball prevented an opponent from gaining an advantage.
Sanction: Penalty kick

They don't enforce it enough. They enforce it more for when a player is offside from a knock-on following a kick. E.g. a team kicks the ball off, 2 Leinster players lift Leo to catch it, he knocks it on and a Leinster player in front of him tries to play it, rather than leaving it for the opposition

If that was what the penalty was given for then it was incorrect. Sean O'Brien played the ball after the knock on and with that he brought the Toulouse players back into play. Incorrect decsion.

EDIT: Just watched the video and I'm wrong. The offside came from the knock-on in the tackle, which I missed when I was at the game. So right decision, well given.