Against the Head - RTE

Tim Robbins

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I don't see why that is a good question.

What it comes down to ROG is a superb tactical kicker, an awful tackler and a very good passer. He also has a very good rugby brain. So is he better than other players for...

Her question takes the technical aspects out of rugby and tries to just simplify it to form and then she personalises the issue.

Kidney knows more than everyone on against the head on managing rugby teams. And the Rugby public are becoming more like the soccer public where when a team looses a few matches they want the manager sacked.

I was never a Kidney fan because I don't like his type of Rugby. Others do. But having a go at Kidney soccer style is well out of order. Most people haven't a clue about rugby and any fool can blame a ref, manager whoever. I prefer the tradition of respect that rugby seems to be losing.

I disagree with you. Whilst O'Gara is all the things you mentioned, this seasons it has become noticeable that his body is letting him down. He seem uncomfortable with the pace of many of the games he is playing in and his inability to do what he *wants* to do quickly enough means he is making decisions he wouldn't otherwise have to.

He is still a terrific player but the decline is honestly very noticeable at this point. For that reason - his form is worse in my opinion than other OH in Ireland and Kidney has said previously that he picks on form.

It was a good question and I haven't heard many others in the rugby media asking it.

Tim Robbins

Deleted User wrote: »

It was a good question and I haven't heard many others in the rugby media asking it.

That's because Irish rugby is small and the media put kid gloves on so that they get interviews with players. I suppose if you have a contract from RTE, you are able to take chances asking risky questions. However, I still don't see why it is a good question. Let me elaborate.

I read most of the posters here before I bother reading the media. Why? Because they know about rugby and they don't put on the kid gloves. Similarly, I listen to the talking rugby podcast.

I can get all this for free and I hear people who are genuinely passionate about the sport. When I turn to the media that has lots of money behind it I expect something better than the internet.

For example, I like that frontline slot where say you might have an expert in the scrum showing you things that a web forum with rugby fans won't be able to do.

I don't see what is so good about asking who is "on form"? How does that enlighten my rugby experience?

Tim Robbins

Tim Robbins wrote: »

That's because Irish rugby is small and the media put kid gloves on so that they get interviews with players. I suppose if you have a contract from RTE, you are able to take chances asking risky questions. However, I still don't see why it is a good question. Let me elaborate.

I read most of the posters here before I bother reading the media. Why? Because they know about rugby and they don't put on the kid gloves. Similarly, I listen to the talking rugby podcast.

I can get all this for free and I hear people who are genuinely passionate about the sport. When I turn to the media that has lots of money behind it I expect something better than the internet.

For example, I like that frontline slot where say you might have an expert in the scrum showing you things that a web forum with rugby fans won't be able to do.

I don't see what is so good about asking who is "on form"? How does that enlighten my rugby experience?

Would you accept given the above that you are more the exception than the rule - and for much of the rugby viewing public it would be a question that is relevant and unanswered?

Tim Robbins

Deleted User wrote: »

Would you accept given the above that you are more the exception than the rule - and for much of the rugby viewing public it would be a question that is relevant and unanswered?

Absolutely. The tactics used by RTE are those used to get the most people viewing.
If they could have a topless presenter they would do that too.
But for now it is really to get someone who doesn't know that much about rugby to ask simple questions.

However, these tactics also don't generate any real interest in rugby. If they explained the game by dealing with specific rugby issues rather than generic sport questions - I think the benefit would be greater.

A few of my Hurling mates have it in their heads all Rugby is a version of British Bulldog and when the coverage is so non-technical, it enforces that opinion.

sydthebeat

and it doesnt help that the most common phrases used to describe games are so obscure...
such as "his crash ball was getting them on the front foot all day" or ""his box kick wasnt allowing the chase" or "he was tackling high which bought time for the choke" etc.
There should be more actual tactical nuance shown both through the game and during the analysis, rather than the bland punditry which is only any way entertaining because of hookys nonsense.

Ive been in the company of friends who would have more than a passing interest in the game but still wouldnt be able to see an "in from the side" or "sealing off" offence during a game, leading to a "the refs a bollox" calls all round

Tim Robbins

sydthebeat wrote: »

and it doesnt help that the most common phrases used to describe games are so obscure...
such as "his crash ball was getting them on the front foot all day" or ""his box kick wasnt allowing the chase" or "he was tackling high which bought time for the choke" etc.
There should be more actual tactical nuance shown both through the game and during the analysis, rather than the bland punditry which is only any way entertaining because of hookys nonsense.

Ive been in the company of friends who would have more than a passing interest in the game but still wouldnt be able to see an "in from the side" or "sealing off" offence during a game, leading to a "the refs a bollox" calls all round

Absolutely. If they did a segment at half time where they went thru referee decisions it would be much better.

But they prefer the Tom and George show. I am passionate about rugby and I don't even bother watching OTH. Shows how good their programming is.

P_1

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Absolutely. If they did a segment at half time where they went thru referee decisions it would be much better.

But they prefer the Tom and George show. I am passionate about rugby and I don't even bother watching OTH. Shows how good their programming is.

The problem is that they are trying to appeal to the 'everyman'. They know that rugby fans are going to watch the matches so why are they going to bother their holes appealing further to them?

Tim Robbins

P_1 wrote: »

The problem is that they are trying to appeal to the 'everyman'. They know that rugby fans are going to watch the matches so why are they going to bother their holes appealing further to them?

Their job should be to explain to the 'everyman'. I don't believe rugby is beyond the comprehension of most people.

Think about this way - do you know anyone who genuinely likes rugby who hasn't a clue about rugby? And do you know anyone absolutely anyone who understands rugby and doesn't enjoy it?

The more I think about this, I think it is happening because they are just lazy. It would be too much work to go for a Brian Cox approach - explain something complicated. They can get their ratings by being simple and it is less work for them.

Podge_irl

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Their job should be to explain to the 'everyman'. I don't believe rugby is beyond the comprehension of most people.

Think about this way - do you know anyone who genuinely likes rugby who hasn't a clue about rugby? And do you know anyone absolutely anyone who understands rugby and doesn't enjoy it?

The more I think about this, I think it is happening because they are just lazy. It would be too much work to go for a Brian Cox approach - explain something complicated. They can get their ratings by being simple and it is less work for them.

I remember when I first started watching rugby. It took me about 2 years to learn all the laws from just watching games and trying to figure out what's going on (well, most of them. I still don't know them all). The basic premise of the game is simple, but I couldn't agree more that the occasional segment explaining what's going on would be enormously helpful.

RTÉ seem pretty happy to focus on simply providing a bland "entertainment" program though. Its a big contrast with, for example, Sky's more technical analysis of games.

Tim Robbins

Podge_irl wrote: »

I remember when I first started watching rugby. It took me about 2 years to learn all the laws from just watching games and trying to figure out what's going on (well, most of them. I still don't know them all). The basic premise of the game is simple, but I couldn't agree more that the occasional segment explaining what's going on would be enormously helpful.

RTÉ seem pretty happy to focus on simply providing a bland "entertainment" program though. Its a big contrast with, for example, Sky's more technical analysis of games.

In the first world cups 87 and 91 RTE used to have someone on explaining things like "gain line" etc and I remember I was playing at the time and wasn't even sure what it meant.

It's like this, everything RTE do, they try dumb it down to the average man. Their science programs are the same. Their political programs are the same.

In the last few years they ditched John Bowman and replaced their best program with Frontline and then ditched that for more Miriam and now Clare Byrne. I remember once seeing Clare Byrne on Vincent Browne and she came across as clueless and terrified. And I really struggle to think of a good science program ever to come from RTE.

I would say Alan Lewis would be super on TV and if they gave him a slot every big game explaining laws and things the ref was doing people would find it really interesting. So many decisions the commentators don't even realise the what the ref's hand signal is for and call it for something else.

Piliger

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Her question takes the technical aspects out of rugby and tries to just simplify it to form and then she personalises the issue.

I don't agree. It is a personal issue because his form has been so bad for more than a year. 'Form' is what matters and your splitting of his talents is only of use when assessing his overall form. Kicking and passing are useless if he can't read the game, change and direct the back line tactics and kick tactically. All of these areas he has failed in for too long.

Kidney knows more than everyone on against the head on managing rugby teams. And the Rugby public are becoming more like the soccer public where when a team looses a few matches they want the manager sacked.

Wrong. No one is challenging his knowledge. What people are challenging is his failure. Failure to beat teams with lesser or equal quality players. Thats what it adds up to and that is where he is failing. His knowledge doesn't win us any points.

Tim Robbins

Piliger wrote: »

Wrong. No one is challenging his knowledge. What people are challenging is his failure. Failure to beat teams with lesser or equal quality players. Thats what it adds up to and that is where he is failing. His knowledge doesn't win us any points.

Yeah but the way he is been challenged is simplistic. Rugby is a very technical game.

Some things are not Kidney's fault - the lack of props, the way the provinces play different types of rugby, the way provinces buy expensive imports in key positions instead of developing their own, the fact very few people play rugby in Ireland, the professional contracts and the inevitable politics surrounding it, bad ref decisions (two recent games against wales), captains not stepping up to it, players under performning, an injury crisis (currently sexton, bowe, ferris, strauss, paul o'connell to name a few), ...

Like I said, I don't like Kidney's approach to Rugby but the tabloid RTE media reck my head.

No-one on that panel has even managed a J2 team.

I'll tell you why I don't rate Kidney.
1. He does things like sticking up newspaper clipings that slag players in the dressing room to motivate them more. This works really well with some players but not all players.

2. When he was at Leinster the team went backwards. No player developed and some really lost form e.g. D'Arcy. Jennings and Cullen went off to Leicester. He was too conservative to pick Felipe at 10 and always saw him as a 12.

3. Any manager who has been either Leinster or Munster manager is up against it. Such is the politics of Irish Rugby.

4. The Rugby he is into is ugly. It is all about posession, tactical kicking, up the jumper, pick and driver, being a cute whore and all that. It is effective with some teams:Munster but not with others.

He is not into offloads, changing the point of attack, quick rucking, decoy runners they kind of rugby I am into.

But I respect the bloke because of his achievements.

Podge_irl

Tim Robbins wrote: »

He was too conservative to pick Felipe at 10 and always saw him as a 12.
.

I can't stand Kidney, and he infuriated me even when he was coach of Munster. I agree wholeheartedly with him on the above though. Leinster were fantastically entertaining with Contempomi at 10, but there were a better team with him at 12 and Sexton at 10.

awec

Just watched this now.

Ridiculous altogether.

durkadurka

I've just noticed that frankie has blocked me on twitter . All for pointing out his bias for his own players in a non abusive way. Once.

To be honest I'm more inclined to have a right go at rte now.

irishbucsfan

Podge_irl wrote: »

I can't stand Kidney, and he infuriated me even when he was coach of Munster. I agree wholeheartedly with him on the above though. Leinster were fantastically entertaining with Contempomi at 10, but there were a better team with him at 12 and Sexton at 10.

They definitely were.

Actually under Kidney Contepomi was on the bench. It was Holwell at 10 and D'Arcy at 12 for the big games

Tim Robbins

irishbucsfan wrote: »

They definitely were.

Actually under Kidney Contepomi was on the bench. It was Holwell at 10 and D'Arcy at 12 for the big games

Yes and a well coached Kidney team made mince meat of a Leinster one in that infamous day in 2006.

Podge_irl

Was Kidney's season in charge the one where they forgot to register conters for the HEC?

irishbucsfan

Podge_irl wrote: »

Was Kidney's season in charge the one where they forgot to register conters for the HEC?

Think it might have been the one before. It was around the time of the 2003 RWC anyway, thats all I remember.

jm08

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I'll tell you why I don't rate Kidney.
1. He does things like sticking up newspaper clipings that slag players in the dressing room to motivate them more. This works really well with some players but not all players.

If it motivates players, that is the right thing to do (and it would seem to be a common enough thing to do as you often hear the media referring to it).

2. When he was at Leinster the team went backwards. No player developed and some really lost form e.g. D'Arcy. Jennings and Cullen went off to Leicester. He was too conservative to pick Felipe at 10 and always saw him as a 12.

The season before Kidney joined Leinster (late in the season when he would have had no say in who was signed):

a) Leinster were 8th in the League (improved to 3rd with Kidney)
b) Failed to make the knockouts of the HCup (QFs with Kidney).

Edit: Should have added got their Coach sacked as well. Leinster were in a very low place when Kidney came in.

Jennings was up against Keith Gleeson - it was a good career move for him.
I suspect that Cullen thought that Leinster were going no where and wanted to have a go with a verysuccessful team. (Leicester had just won back-to-back Heineken Cups).

Kidney isn't the only coach to see him as a 12. His national manager and his Toulon manager put him there as well. He got shortlisted for international Player of the Year at 12.

3. Any manager who has been either Leinster or Munster manager is up against it. Such is the politics of Irish Rugby.

Why is that?

4. The Rugby he is into is ugly. It is all about posession, tactical kicking, up the jumper, pick and driver, being a cute whore and all that. It is effective with some teams:Munster but not with others.

Fair enough if you want pretty rugby (though I think Munster played some pretty nice rugby under Kidney). Have a look at John Hayes try against Toulouse in 2000.

He is not into offloads, changing the point of attack, quick rucking, decoy runners they kind of rugby I am into.

Bringing in Rua Tipoki & Mafi to Munster suggests he has lots of time for an offloading game. I'd say he'd be happy enough if the players had the ability to offload a bit more!

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Think it might have been the one before. It was around the time of the 2003 RWC anyway, thats all I remember.

It was the year before (03-04). Leinster were a shambles both on and off the pitch then.

jm08

durkadurka wrote: »

I've just noticed that frankie has blocked me on twitter . All for pointing out his bias for his own players in a non abusive way. Once.

To be honest I'm more inclined to have a right go at rte now.

Did he even mention any of his players in Against the Head?

From what I can see, he generally accentuates the positives in all players, not just his own.

Teferi

jm08 wrote: »

I'd say he'd be happy enough if the players had the ability to offload a bit more!

Leinster have been offload machines for the last 3 years. The ability is very much there.

Tim Robbins

jm08 wrote: »

If it motivates players, that is the right thing to do (and it would seem to be a common enough thing to do as you often hear the media referring to it).

Absolutely. I could see it working really well with the Munster - cheap on the shoulder pysche. But I can't see it working with the D4 brigade. I would suspect they don't give a cr*p what journo's say about them. If you told them they had to live on some kip in the Northside you'd get more of a reaction.

The season before Kidney joined Leinster (late in the season when he would have had no say in who was signed):

a) Leinster were 8th in the League (improved to 3rd with Kidney)
b) Failed to make the knockouts of the HCup (QFs with Kidney).

Edit: Should have added got their Coach sacked as well. Leinster were in a very low place when Kidney came in.

Jennings was up against Keith Gleeson - it was a good career move for him.
I suspect that Cullen thought that Leinster were going no where and wanted to have a go with a verysuccessful team. (Leicester had just won back-to-back Heineken Cups).

Kidney isn't the only coach to see him as a 12. His national manager and his Toulon manager put him there as well. He got shortlisted for international Player of the Year at 12.

Leinster were cr*p under Kidney. It is not just results they played awful rugby and did not fulfill potential. It was the usual get hammered in the QF of the H Cup even thou you were at home.

Why is that?

Because Irish rugby is small. And for such a small player base we have very different styles and way of looking at the game. The Leinster / Munster style difference is huge.

Fair enough if you want pretty rugby (though I think Munster played some pretty nice rugby under Kidney). Have a look at John Hayes try against Toulouse in 2000.

Absolutely - you'll pick some gems from hours and hours of video tape. But you'll also get some dire games where it's stick it up the jumper. I remember one game Kidney was manager of Ireland and we kicked the ball over 100 times.

Now you can turn around and say we won. But you see I care more about playing nice rugby and would happily loose a few games rather than waste my time watching murder ball.

Bringing in Rua Tipoki & Mafi to Munster suggests he has lots of time for an offloading game. I'd say he'd be happy enough if the players had the ability to offload a bit more!

You'll always find exceptions. But, the thing is Munster rugby is very different to Leinster Rugby. It's one reason why it's always hard for the Irish team to benefit from strong Leinster / Munster teams.

When Earls ran that line against Scotland the ball should have come back in to Drico who ran a brilliant support line. But it was never going to come back in. The most likely think was Earls was going to grubber and Drico would chase it.

Neil3030

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Absolutely. I could see it working really well with the Munster - cheap on the shoulder pysche. But I can't see it working with the D4 brigade. I would suspect they don't give a cr*p what journo's say about them. If you told them they had to live on some kip in the Northside you'd get more of a reaction.

Leinster players in the squad for Ireland this weekend:

Brian O'Driscoll - Clontarf
Sean O'Brien - Tullow
Mike Ross - Cork
Rob Kearney - Louth
Cian Healy - Clontarf
Fergus McFadden - Kildare?
Jamie Heaslip - Newbridge
Eoin Reddan - Limerick

A "D4 brigade" indeed... :rolleyes:

Tim Robbins

Neil3030 wrote: »

Leinster players in the squad for Ireland this weekend:

Brian O'Driscoll - Clontarf [Rock]
Sean O'Brien - Tullow [Agree]
Mike Ross - Cork [Not Leinster]
Rob Kearney - Louth [Clongows]
Cian Healy - Clontarf [Belvo]
Fergus McFadden - Kildare? [Clongows]
Jamie Heaslip - Newbridge [Newbridge]
Eoin Reddan - Limerick [Not Leinster]

A "D4 brigade" indeed... :rolleyes:

I had my tongue in my cheek. But I think you'd struggle to name people to have played for Leinster who went to a public school on the Northside in Dublin.

awec

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I had my tongue in my cheek. But I think you'd struggle to name people to have played for Leinster who went to a public school on the Northside in Dublin.

Are there any big rugby schools on the northside?

siltirocker

awec wrote: »

Are there any big rugby schools on the northside?

Belvo.

Podge_irl

awec wrote: »

Are there any big rugby schools on the northside?

The only non-private rugby school I know of on the northside is St. Paul's (and they're not very good). It's very much GAA country.

OldRio

WE seemed to have been derailed a little.
Anyone remember RTE. Against the Head.

Podge_irl

OldRio wrote: »

Anyone remember RTE. Against the Head.

I'd rather not to be honest :P

Neil3030

I haven't lived in Ireland for some time now, but does the term "D4 brigade" now encompass all native Leinster people who didn't go to public school on the Northside of Dublin?

Look, I appreciate your tongue was in your cheek, so forgive me if I appear to be on some moral crusade, but it's a generalisation that I don't have an enormous amount of time for. If Leinster are to tap into the vast resources of potential young players throughout the entire province, and build a province-wide fanbase, it's important that they move away from this perception as representing only a subsection of South Dublin.

Further, many people (and I am not putting you in this camp, don't get me wrong) have a vested interest in not seeing Leinster achieve a wider resource pool of young players, and a wider fanbase, and such characters would only be too happy to keep this perception alive.

Thus, 'D4 brigade', as describing Leinster players, is typically an imputation that's used either by the misinformed or the devious.

Tim Robbins

Neil3030 wrote: »

Thus, 'D4 brigade', as describing Leinster players, is typically an imputation that's used either by the misinformed or the devious.

You make some good points. But what started this was that I made the point that Kidney's chip on the shoulder psychology is not going to cut it with Leinster.

Even loaded people in Cork have a chip on their shoulder.

Whether you, me or anyone else like it or not there is a correlation between Leinster and private schools. There will always be exceptions however when a taxi driver who used to play for Clontarf asked me name anyone who played for Ireland who went to a public school in Dublin, and I went for the usual Trevor Brennan, Sean O'Brien, Shane Horgan etc I then realised none of them went to a public school in Dublin and he had a very good point.

This is always something I want to see change but you can't deny facts either.

The majority of people who like rugby in Leinster come thru an elite system. Their pysche is not chip on shoulder. So using chip on the shoulder motivation tactics are not going to work. Even thou they work really well somewhere else.

So one of Kidney's massive strengths is wiped as soon as he leaves Munster.

jm08

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Absolutely. I could see it working really well with the Munster - cheap on the shoulder pysche. But I can't see it working with the D4 brigade. I would suspect they don't give a cr*p what journo's say about them. If you told them they had to live on some kip in the Northside you'd get more of a reaction.

I'd disagree with you on that. The Leinster lads are fairly sound. Sticking stuff on the notice board was also a feature of Leicester (who Munster modelled themselves on). Anyway, this chip stuff (Anthony Foley) with regard to rugby would mainly have come from the Limerick players who traditionally had to be about 4 times better than anyone else to make an Irish team.

Leinster were cr*p under Kidney. It is not just results they played awful rugby and did not fulfill potential. It was the usual get hammered in the QF of the H Cup even thou you were at home.

It wasn't the usual 'get hammered' in the QFs at all - Leinster didn't qualify the previous year.

Because Irish rugby is small. And for such a small player base we have very different styles and way of looking at the game. The Leinster / Munster style difference is huge.

How is this Kidney's fault?

Absolutely - you'll pick some gems from hours and hours of video tape. But you'll also get some dire games where it's stick it up the jumper. I remember one game Kidney was manager of Ireland and we kicked the ball over 100 times.

And you think Kidney told them to kick the ball away 100 times? Over on twitter at the moment, Brian O'Driscoll is extolling the virtues of kicking the ball infield, and putting the opposition under pressure to kick out and win so you win a lineout!

Now you can turn around and say we won. But you see I care more about playing nice rugby and would happily loose a few games rather than waste my time watching murder ball.

You must have found Leinster's first HC win particularly gruesome then!

You'll always find exceptions. But, the thing is Munster rugby is very different to Leinster Rugby. It's one reason why it's always hard for the Irish team to benefit from strong Leinster / Munster teams.

I think Irish rugby benefitted from a very strong Munster dominated pack & Munster halfbacks for the best part of the 00s.

When Earls ran that line against Scotland the ball should have come back in to Drico who ran a brilliant support line. But it was never going to come back in. The most likely think was Earls was going to grubber and Drico would chase it.

Just like Brian O'Driscoll should have passed the ball to Earls about 5 mins into the game when Earls would have been straight in from about 5 metres out! (Brian tried to go for it himself, ball recycled. He also kicked the ball out instead of passing it on another occasion with one of those grubber kicks that went wrong). Earls is just following his example.

Your point about Leinster having an offloading game. I just checked the HC stats to compare their offloading game to a top team (Clermont QF that Leinster won away). Leinster 6 offloads. Clermont 21 offloads. Munster v Leinster semi in 09 (Leinster won): Leinster 5, Munster 10.

jm08

Neil3030 wrote: »

I haven't lived in Ireland for some time now, but does the term "D4 brigade" now encompass all native Leinster people who didn't go to public school on the Northside of Dublin?

The term 'D4' according to Risteard Cooper means a stretch of Dublin that starts at Terrors Wine Shop in Donnybrook and stops at Foxrock church!

Its a lifestyle thing, rather than a line on a map (though I find it hard to understand why people keep denying it because all Leinster supporters 'worship' in D4 (your homeground, the RDS is in D4).

Tim Robbins

jm08 wrote: »

I'd disagree with you on that. The Leinster lads are fairly sound. Sticking stuff on the notice board was also a feature of Leicester (who Munster modelled themselves on). Anyway, this chip stuff (Anthony Foley) with regard to rugby would mainly have come from the Limerick players who traditionally had to be about 4 times better than anyone else to make an Irish team.

Absolutely they are sound. But they don't have chips.

How is this Kidney's fault?

Not his fault. Just that things are going to be harder for him or any Irish Manager.

And you think Kidney told them to kick the ball away 100 times? Over on twitter at the moment, Brian O'Driscoll is extolling the virtues of kicking the ball infield, and putting the opposition under pressure to kick out and win so you win a lineout!

Well he is the one who should be telling them the type of rugby they want to play. If you are going to base a game on kicking that's the manager's call.

I think Irish rugby benefitted from a very strong Munster dominated pack & Munster halfbacks for the best part of the 00s.

Absolutely.

Your point about Leinster having an offloading game. I just checked the HC stats to compare their offloading game to a top team (Clermont QF that Leinster won away). Leinster 6 offloads. Clermont 21 offloads. Munster v Leinster semi in 09 (Leinster won): Leinster 5, Munster 10.

Good stats.
But it is not just about off loading. It's about decoy runners, changing the point of attack and wrap arounds.
If you want to believe that Kidney's rugby is just as expansive as Schmits I am not going to stop you.

jm08

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Absolutely they are sound. But they don't have chips.

Do you seriously think Paul O'Connell, David Wallace, Jerry Flannery had a chip on their shoulders to perform? And do you seriously think these guys need motivation to play for Ireland?

Good stats.
But it is not just about off loading. It's about decoy runners, changing the point of attack and wrap arounds.
If you want to believe that Kidney's rugby is just as expansive as Schmits I am not going to stop you.

International defences are way better than club ones. I've seen Sexton attempting a wrap-around once or twice and he was nailed at international level. I was reading an article recently by Shaun Edwards where he went into the detailed analysis that they do internationally which they don't bother to do at club level.

.ak

jm08 wrote: »

Do you seriously think Paul O'Connell, David Wallace, Jerry Flannery had a chip on their shoulders to perform? And do you seriously think these guys need motivation to play for Ireland?



International defences are way better than club ones. I've seen Sexton attempting a wrap-around once or twice and he was nailed at international level. I was reading an article recently by Shaun Edwards where he went into the detailed analysis that they do internationally which they don't bother to do at club level.

Sexton's wrap around works better for Leinster because the whole team is clued into it. For Ireland it's something that Gaffney seemed to try and implement but came across difficulties when it the entire team wasn't involved in it. The only way a wrap around works is with dummy runs. We rarely do that with Ireland.

Losty Dublin

Podge_irl wrote: »

The only non-private rugby school I know of on the northside is St. Paul's (and they're not very good). It's very much GAA country.

Mount Temple, down the road from Raheny, while not a strong school in rugby history, has given rugby a few development youth officers and pro coaches and punched above it's weight over the last 20 years. There are a few development schools as well, Portmarnock are one to mind.

jm08

.ak wrote: »

Sexton's wrap around works better for Leinster because the whole team is clued into it. For Ireland it's something that Gaffney seemed to try and implement but came across difficulties when it the entire team wasn't involved in it. The only way a wrap around works is with dummy runs. We rarely do that with Ireland.

An Ireland team that could have had O'Brien, Heislip, Reddan, Sexton, D'Arcy, BOD and Kearney couldn't pull off a wrap-a-round?

Leinster don't attempt it anymore against Munster (not sure about Ulster or Connacht), so they must know immediately what they are going to do.

Chucky the tree

Neil3030 wrote: »

I haven't lived in Ireland for some time now, but does the term "D4 brigade" now encompass all native Leinster people who didn't go to public school on the Northside of Dublin?

Look, I appreciate your tongue was in your cheek, so forgive me if I appear to be on some moral crusade, but it's a generalisation that I don't have an enormous amount of time for. If Leinster are to tap into the vast resources of potential young players throughout the entire province, and build a province-wide fanbase, it's important that they move away from this perception as representing only a subsection of South Dublin.

Further, many people (and I am not putting you in this camp, don't get me wrong) have a vested interest in not seeing Leinster achieve a wider resource pool of young players, and a wider fanbase, and such characters would only be too happy to keep this perception alive.

Thus, 'D4 brigade', as describing Leinster players, is typically an imputation that's used either by the misinformed or the devious.

The 'D4 brigade' has always referred to image of Leinster rugby fans/players rather then their actual physical location.

Tim Robbins

jm08 wrote: »

International defences are way better than club ones. I've seen Sexton attempting a wrap-around once or twice and he was nailed at international level. I was reading an article recently by Shaun Edwards where he went into the detailed analysis that they do internationally which they don't bother to do at club level.

Send on the article.

I think the wraps around work with schmit because the players are doing them every day at training so it becomes second nature to the team and any mistakes can be ironed out.

Agree to disagree.

.ak

jm08 wrote: »

An Ireland team that could have had O'Brien, Heislip, Reddan, Sexton, D'Arcy, BOD and Kearney couldn't pull off a wrap-a-round?

Leinster don't attempt it anymore against Munster (not sure about Ulster or Connacht), so they must know immediately what they are going to do.

Where did I say they couldn't pull it off? I most certainly didn't suggest they couldn't pull it off due to lack of skills.

jm08

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Send on the article.

I think the wraps around work with schmit because the players are doing them every day at training so it becomes second nature to the team and any mistakes can be ironed out.

Agree to disagree.

We're all consulting our analysts – to get that extra edge over rivals

And that's not the half of it, although I hope you are beginning to see how thorough this stuff is. In fact, far too thorough for club rugby. I know from my years with Wasps that if you try to provide this level of analysis for between 30 and 35 league games a year, you are talking information overload.
However, for three or four games in a series, that's something different and the very thoroughness of the operation gives some indication of what the unions that stand behind the national sides are prepared to spend for a winning team.

Full article here:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2012/nov/01/analysts-edge-autumn-tests-shaun-edwards?INTCMP=SRCH

jm08

.ak wrote: »

Where did I say they couldn't pull it off? I most certainly didn't suggest they couldn't pull it off due to lack of skills.

You said that Ireland couldn't pull it off because there were no dummy runners. I'd imagine if that you'd get a few dummy runners from those Leinster players - Sexton is making the calls for both teams.

Tim Robbins

jm08 wrote: »

You said that Ireland couldn't pull it off because there were no dummy runners. I'd imagine if that you'd get a few dummy runners from those Leinster players - Sexton is making the calls for both teams.

So jm08 what exactly are you saying?

Kidney is perfect for every time of rugby and say if you want to play a running game Joe Schmidt is no better? And that when Leinster got much better under Cheika or Schmidt than they were with Kidney that had nothing to do with having a coach that suited the players strengths?

.ak

jm08 wrote: »

You said that Ireland couldn't pull it off because there were no dummy runners. I'd imagine if that you'd get a few dummy runners from those Leinster players - Sexton is making the calls for both teams.

Because they don't use dummy runners. Because our back play is shockingly one dimensional. Also if you think the OH calls the shots on how the team conjures up an attacking play you're completely wrong. Sexton can't pull players into attacks unless that move has been drilled.

jm08

Tim Robbins wrote: »

So jm08 what exactly are you saying?

Kidney is perfect for every time of rugby and say if you want to play a running game Joe Schmidt is no better? And that when Leinster got much better under Cheika or Schmidt than they were with Kidney that had nothing to do with having a coach that suited the players strengths?

Nope. My original point was that the analysis is far greater in international rugby than it is in club rugby. Its like Ireland look fantastic against Fiji, but not so good against the ABs (Wales etc) because they will have done so much analsysis on players that they know exactly what to do to snuff out a move.

Against England the problem was none of the players (and that includes Leinster players) could hold a pass and kept dropping balls, knocking on etc.

ScissorPaperRock

I think dummy runners were used quite well in the Argentina match in the November series last year.

prospect

jm08 wrote: »

Against England the problem was none of the players (and that includes Leinster players) could hold a pass and kept dropping balls, knocking on etc.

So, you reckon that all 15 players (19 if you include subs iirc) either consciously decided, or through a massive dose of bad luck, to suspend their ability to make or take a pass for those 80 odd minutes?