Leinster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread VI: End of the MOC [Revenge of the STH]

molloyjh

LorMal wrote: »

I don't think anyone could credibly argue that Joe Schmidts success is all down to the players. He has been obviously instrumental to the success of Leinster and Ireland since he took charge of them respectively.
Therefore, I cannot understand how anyone can credibly argue that Leinster's current failings are all down to the players and not due to the coaching. The same logic applies surely?

I'm not sure anyone is saying that MOC is blameless though. I think some are just arguing that the level of negative impact he's having isn't as high as many think. It's all a matter of degrees. Some will think he's 100% to blame, some 80%, some 60% and some 10%. I've yet to anyone say he's 0% to blame though.

LorMal

LorMal wrote: »

I don't think anyone could credibly argue that Joe Schmidts success is all down to the players. He has been obviously instrumental to the success of Leinster and Ireland since he took charge of them respectively.
Therefore, I cannot understand how anyone can credibly argue that Leinster's current failings are all down to the players and not due to the coaching. The same logic applies surely?

That's a false equivocation.

E[A] : Coaches expected ability - theoretical
E : Players expected ability - theoretical
E[C] : Team's expected ability - theoretical
C = A + B (Team's actual performances) - observable

Scenarios
C <= E[C] (Underperformance)

Implying that A <= E[A] or B <= E

or other combinations of both*

C >= E[C] (Overperformance)

Implying that A >= E[A] or B >= E

or other combinations of both

A and B are unobservable, only C is observable, therefore it is not possible to factor them out.

*eg, A > E[A] but B is so much less than E that C < E[C]

Big Nelly

I just listened to the OTB podcast with BOD and Hickie, discussion about 10,12,13 axis. They are saying nobody agrees with the Jimmy/Madigan/Teo line up but MOC goes with it anyway. Like NOBODY agrees with it but MOC still will go with it unless there is an injury.

Very interesting discussion.....

Quint2010

molloyjh wrote: »

I'm not sure anyone is saying that MOC is blameless though. I think some are just arguing that the level of negative impact he's having isn't as high as many think. It's all a matter of degrees. Some will think he's 100% to blame, some 80%, some 60% and some 10%. I've yet to anyone say he's 0% to blame though.

I think he is 0% to blame. However I am 100% lying.:rolleyes:

Teferi

A coaching ticket is more easily replaced than a squad of players. For whatever reason the players aren't getting the best from themselves. Something needs to change and this is the second year of frustrating play. Really, the buck stops with one man.

mr. pleasant

Let's just say the coach is a factor, because otherwise there would not be any need for a coach.

Let's also agree that some coaches are better than others.

Let's then make up our minds if there are many good signs that point towards MOC being one of the better coaches.

total former

LorMal wrote: »

I don't think anyone could credibly argue that Joe Schmidts success is all down to the players. He has been obviously instrumental to the success of Leinster and Ireland since he took charge of them respectively.
Therefore, I cannot understand how anyone can credibly argue that Leinster's current failings are all down to the players and not due to the coaching. The same logic applies surely?

That would be an excellent point if anyone was arguing that the coaches are completely free of blame and it's entirely down to the players.

But no one is saying that.

molloyjh

Deleted User wrote: »

That's a false equivocation.

E[A] : Coaches expected ability - theoretical
E : Players expected ability - theoretical
E[C] : Team's expected ability - theoretical
C = A + B (Team's actual performances) - observable

Scenarios
C <= E[C] (Underperformance)

Implying that A <= E[A] or B <= E

or other combinations of both*

C >= E[C] (Overperformance)

Implying that A >= E[A] or B >= E

or other combinations of both

A and B are unobservable, only C is observable, therefore it is not possible to factor them out.

*eg, A > E[A] but B is so much less than E that C < E[C]

Ah you're just ripping off what I'm saying and making it look better with equations and indents.

Still no tables though. FAIL.

mr. pleasant

total former wrote: »

That would be an excellent point if anyone was arguing that the coaches are completely free of blame and it's entirely down to the players.

But no one is saying that.

oh have we arrived at the point where we can now agree that the coaches are partially responsible? thats an interesting development in this months-long debate where it seemed for a long time that coaches are generally just around for the craic but are in no way to be looked at when things go wrong.

onwards and upwards!

Quint2010

Joe Schmidt is an absolute workaholic. MOC is as laid back and easy going as they come. To go from one type of coach to a completely different type was asking for trouble and it's showing.

Neil3030

Trying to look at things in the cold light of a Monday lunchtime.

I actually really enjoyed the game, right up to the yellow card. I thought we looked very good moving the ball around, and D'Arcy in particular was a great link man between forwards and backs, fixing defenders, finding gaps and releasing players out wide; something which we really miss with Mads at 12.

T'eo was also a positive. He really showed what an athlete he is, over anything I think we've ever had. The second try in particular showed his strength, skill, footwork and explosion of pace, all in a single line-break. He could really turn out to be something special once he gets the naive 13-man residuals sifted out of his game.

The problem, in my humble, armchair positioned opinion, began with the team just trying to be too fancy when basics would have been the right call. I thought we moved the ball quite well in midfield, but once into Dragon territory we were choked up by their blitz. That's where we sorely needed a plan B, even little dinks through to put the squeeze on their fullback, hopefully getting turnovers or a hurried kick for touch to get the maul going from a decent field position. It's Gopperth's biggest weakness for me, or at least, it's the thing he just doesn't seem to do here - chips, dinks and grubbers into the space left by a charging defensive line. If nothing else, this would have kept dragons honest with their blitz, affording us more space for future back play.

MOC's biggest mistake that I could see on Saturday was not bringing Fitz on for Fanning the second that Te'o got binned.

Fanning wasn't having a great time out there, and Fitz's defensive qualities & experience at OC could have been hugely beneficial to the team.

The_Captain

Might put myself forward as coach for next year.
Have a few tricks I learned back in first year that might help with the performances:

Draw and Pass:
Basically teach the guys to wait until a defender is actually stepping toward them before passing to a teammate

Show and Go:
Once they've mastered the draw and pass, they'll learn a new technique where they pretend to pass the ball but actually run past defenders :eek:

Quick Hands:
Short, fast passing to the guy beside you rather than sloooooooooooooooooooooooooow, easily defendable skip passes out to the wing

sydthebeat

reasons leinster have been doing so poorly over the last 2 seasons

1. Loss of senior "leader" players (sexton, leo, bod, isa) over the last few seasons and not replaced with players of similar standard.
2. Long Term injuries to senior players (Luke, FMF, SOB, Healy)
3. Squad decimation due to internationals tests and competitions. Reserves not good enough to compete with less interrupted squads.
4. Aging senior players and standards dropping due to age (Boss, Reddan, Darcy)
5. New coaching set up, MOC head coach, Leo as forwards coach, caputo as scrum coach. Only caputo can point to on field success of his coaching.
6. New league set up where first 6 positions lead to champions cup rugby, thus meaning 'weaker' teams (dragons, Edinburgh, blues, treviso, connacht, zebre) are no longer giving up as the set foot in the RDS. All points are to play for and worth challenging for.
7. no more "marquee" foreign signings due to financial inequality when compared to England and French leagues.

mr. pleasant

The_Captain wrote: »

Might put myself forward as coach for next year.

good idea actually. if it goes well, you get the credit. if not, it's not your fault.

Killser

I ve been reading through the last pages and bar a few folk, it seems to me that many are saying that MOC isn’t the issue and that the players and the rest of the coaching staff need to take some responsibility. From watching the games this season and last, I’d have placed the blame on the Coaching Ticket as a whole, but I do level a lot of blame on the players – skills have really fallen off, and while our defence can be top notch, I’d say our one-on-one tackling can be suspect. Our kicking game really needs to be addressed, a lot of time, we don’t seem to kick for effect. But what really stood out for me recently was the Glasgow game. It struck me that we used to play the way Glasgow do now, where has our dynamism gone, the fast pace, the movement, the accuracy. Glasgow are always entertaining to watch, and have been backing that up with results. I ve heard a lot of talk about expectation, and that Leinster fans have been ‘spoiled’ by recent years of success, like our expectations are too high – I’m sorry, but I don’t see that as a negative. Leinster are one of the top teams in Europe, maybe not top 5, but surely top 10 and the expectations have to be set high, otherwise why have expectations at all! I don’t see MOC as the one cause of the slump in the team’s performance, but turning it around starts with him, and his decisions, and he needs to start making some tough ones – are there players that need to be let go? Are there coaches that need to be let go? Are the tactics right?

The_Captain

MOC advocates 'heads-up' rugby, which is a nice way of saying he doesn't run set plays or tight drills.

The team aren't playing well together as a team. Players aren't going forward because they don't know where their team mates/support wil be, no one seems to know what someone else is going to do.

Look at the ball going back and forth switching outside, inside, back again or a whim, players getting in each others way, players in the wrong place to receive passes etc.

At this point MOC needs to take the team by the scruff of the neck and say "this is what you're doing. this is the play to make in this position." and drill the boys until they all know what they're doing.

It's not a lack of skills, it's a lack of teamwork and creativity, and it's the coaches job to get his team working together

irishbucsfan

.ak wrote: »

He's very much a DOR style coach and I wonder if that's effecting us after having such a hands on guy like Joe.

MOC is a coaches' coach. I would say he's the very opposite of a "DOR" style coach and there have been issues in the past when he's been asked to step away from direct coaching positions, or others encroaching on "his turf". But of course there isn't really such thing as a DOR style coach because it varies massively from club to club what the DOR is expected to do. Some do very little direct coaching, some are on the field in shorts and boots every day. I wouldn't want him as a DOR, I'd have him as head coach under another DOR.

I have a few people I'd like to fill either role though. A realistically achievable setup I'd love to see in action would be Colin McEntee as DOR (if we could get him back from the overlords) with a Mr. Ronan O'Gara as head coach, that'd be fun.

total former

mr. pleasant wrote: »

oh have we arrived at the point where we can now agree that the coaches are partially responsible? thats an interesting development in this months-long debate where it seemed for a long time that coaches are generally just around for the craic but are in no way to be looked at when things go wrong.

onwards and upwards!

We arrived there a long, long time ago.

The issue is that a lot of posters seem to get confused when people (e.g. me) say "the coach is not entirely to blame", they seem to read this as "the coach is not to blame".

irishbucsfan

total former wrote: »

We arrived there a long, long time ago.

The issue is that a lot of posters seem to get confused when people (e.g. me) say "the coach is not entirely to blame", they seem to read this as "the coach is not to blame".

I would agree with you if it weren't for my fear of being labelled a ((MOC apologist) apologist).

.ak

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Generally we been playing an out , out , in ball. A major reluctance on getting the ball wide . kicking it (generally aimlessly) after we've used all the options in tight.

That doesn't apply to half of our games (if at all). Pretty vague analysis if I'm being honest!

SaveOurLyric

sydthebeat wrote: »

reasons leinster have been doing so poorly over the last 2 seasons

1. Loss of senior "leader" players (sexton, leo, bod, isa) over the last few seasons and not replaced with players of similar standard.
2. Long Term injuries to senior players (Luke, FMF, SOB, Healy)
3. Squad decimation due to internationals tests and competitions. Reserves not good enough to compete with less interrupted squads.
4. Aging senior players and standards dropping due to age (Boss, Reddan, Darcy)
5. New coaching set up, MOC head coach, Leo as forwards coach, caputo as scrum coach. Only caputo can point to on field success of his coaching.
6. New league set up where first 6 positions lead to champions cup rugby, thus meaning 'weaker' teams (dragons, Edinburgh, blues, treviso, connacht, zebre) are no longer giving up as the set foot in the RDS. All points are to play for and worth challenging for.
7. no more "marquee" foreign signings due to financial inequality when compared to England and French leagues.

You missed the main one !

0. MOC hasnt a rashers.

The other 7 are just minor contributers or excuses .

Synode

I don't see MOC turning things around. It's been 2 years of steady decline. Why don't we try a new coaching ticket and if it's the same in two years time, we'll know that we're just not that good anymore (which I don't believe to be the case)

total former

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I would agree with you if it weren't for my fear of being labelled a ((MOC apologist) apologist).

You shouldn't have to apologise for being a MOC Apologist Apologist

Neil3030

A small aside, but could we impose an instant 6-month ban for using the phrase 'coaching ticket'?

It's the Thornleyest Thronleyism that ever Thornleyed.

mr. pleasant

total former wrote: »

We arrived there a long, long time ago.

The issue is that a lot of posters seem to get confused when people (e.g. me) say "the coach is not entirely to blame", they seem to read this as "the coach is not to blame".

hmhm I'm not really buying that. From my perspective the debate has slightly shifted from:

"gosh, leinster are unrecognizable these days. i think the coach is to blame for that. (MOC out)" vs "You guys have no idea how great a coach MOC is and in general have little to no understanding of rugby. the problems are everywhere but the coach."

to:

"gosh, leinster are unrecognizable these days. i think the coach is to blame for that. (MOC out)" vs "You guys have no idea how great a coach MOC is and in general have little to no understanding of rugby. the problems are everywhere including the coach, but the coach is only a small part therefore he has to stay."

SaveOurLyric

mr. pleasant wrote: »

hmhm I'm not really buying that. From my perspective the debate has slightly shifted from:

"gosh, leinster are unrecognizable these days. i think the coach is to blame for that. (MOC out)" vs "You guys have no idea how great a coach MOC is and in general have little to no understanding of rugby. the problems are everywhere but the coach."

to:

"gosh, leinster are unrecognizable these days. i think the coach is to blame for that. (MOC out)" vs "You guys have no idea how great a coach MOC is and in general have little to no understanding of rugby. the problems are everywhere including the coach, but the coach is only a small part therefore he has to stay."

I am not sure what it will take for the second cohort to agree that MOC is the problem. It seems nothing.
Even if he isnt, he should be sacked anyway - to find out. You dont keep plugging away with him in case he is not the problem.
I believe he is. But acknowledge that he may not be - nevertheless, I would still sack him as the most likely and doable step to make a difference.

I'm a member of the People's front of Matt O'Connor. That Matt O'Connor peoples front are a shower of SPLITTERS

Noopti

Neil3030 wrote: »

A small aside, but could we impose an instant 6-month ban for using the phrase 'coaching ticket'?

It's the Thornleyest Thronleyism that ever Thornleyed.

"Brains Trust" is far far worse

SaveOurLyric

Neil3030 wrote: »

A small aside, but could we impose an instant 6-month ban for using the phrase 'coaching ticket'?

It's the Thornleyest Thronleyism that ever Thornleyed.

Its still a step above John Delaney's "world class management team" explanation for the Staunton's appointment.