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

jacothelad

CatFromHue wrote: »

so you have a list of enemies



:P

"Don't give him your name Pike.":D:D

Clearlier

Clearlier wrote: »

I'm climbed back on to the fence about MOC having jumped down on either side of it more than once but this kind of utterance bugs the hell out of me.

Instead of seeing opportunities and solving problems he's identifying difficulties and excuses. It sounds to me like he's focused on the first XV or maybe the first XXIII rather than the whole squad. For my money he should be talking about how to improve the depth and leadership of the squad rather than bemoaning the absence of front line players.



https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/matt-o-connor-blames-player-management-system-for-poor-results-1.2184156

Well on the one hand he is right to challenge the system if he thinks it's a problem and I know there are players that are generally not happy at times with the restrictions.

It marginalises some of the squad members though and if this is the attitude it's no wonder we have zero confidence and a defeatest mindset when we play without the internationals.

I always remember a team mate of mine saying that there isn't a "text box" beside results where all the excuses for why teams or individuals didn't do better can be filled in. The results need to speak for themselves.

He also said that generally the further down the results you went, the bigger the box would need to be and I think this is very true for Leinster. Lot's of excuses and poor results.

irishbucsfan

It would be an excuse if he was asked about the team's performances and he replied talking about the player management scheme. If he's just being asked about the player management scheme, then it's just an answer to a question.

total former

The problem with these media reports is that we only ever hear one side. We have no idea what question was asked.

Yerrah f**k it, no-one cares. MOC out.

redmca2

Deleted User wrote: »

Well on the one hand he is right to challenge the system if he thinks it's a problem and I know there are players that are generally not happy at times with the restrictions.
................................................................
Lot's of excuses and poor results.

While I am a long way from being an MOC fan, I don't see anything wrong with him pointing out the issues (from where he is standing) caused by the national squad having first call on his IQ players coupled with a cap on NIQ players.

It's a battle he will always lose but he is entitled to speak from a perspective of wanting the best for Leinster while having no direct interest in the success or otherwise of the national side.

redmca2

redmca2 wrote: »

While I am a long way from being an MOC fan, I don't see anything wrong with him pointing out the issues (from where he is standing) caused by the national squad having first call on his IQ players coupled with a cap on NIQ players.

It's a battle he will always lose but he is entitled to speak from a perspective of wanting the best for Leinster while having no direct interest in the success or otherwise of the national side.

Yeah I agree with you which is why I can understand why he is pushing back against player management in the linked article.

However there has been a lot of other complaining from MOC during the season. Complaining about Referee's, complaining about injuries before matches, complainging about the player management and regularly complaining about the players not executing the game plan.

Then there was the "faux" team sheets where everyone knew players weren't going to be playing and then the "last minute withdrawl" scenarios which again can't help player confidence.

I'd be super pissed off as a sports person if my coach kept making excuses for me, or was so lacking in confidence that he had to lie about me being in the team.

Buer

awec wrote:

- Ulster get numerous dodgy penalties on Friday - Ulster do not get pinged that often - Ulster are able to designate one player as their joker. At no point during the entire game is Lacey permitted to penalise this player, no matter what illegal move he makes (offsides, hands on the deck etc are all fair game) - Ulster are allowed at least three blatant and deliberate infringements while defending on their try line from which no penalty try is to be awarded. Instead a penalty must be given to Ulster. - Ulster do not need to have control of the ball to score a try. Dropping it will do. - Ulster lineouts need not be straight. Leinster lineouts must be measured with a ruler.

Have they tried being better at rugby?

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd be super pissed off as a sports person if my coach kept making excuses for me, or was so lacking in confidence that he had to lie about me being in the team.

That's a massive assumption to make with regards to those teamsheet shenanigans.

molloyjh

total former wrote: »

The problem with these media reports is that we only ever hear one side. We have no idea what question was asked.

Yerrah f**k it, no-one cares. MOC out.

Well now hang on for a second there now, there's potentially two things that he could be talking about in that interview. As you and IBF pointed out the first is just a comment on the player welfare system as a whole. If that is the case then I'd love to know where the 30% figure he has given comes from. Is it 30% of the league games? By my reckoning it's been a lot closer to 40% for those who have been consistently available. Is it a general figure for the whole season? If so then it factors in injuries which are irrelevant to the player welfare discussion. The point is I'm not sure where exactly that 30% has come from but it doesn't seem very accurate to me.

The other possibility is that he is talking about the impact on our performances. However last season Heaslip played 9 regular season Pro12 games and is very much in line to match that this season. Rob Kearney too is in line to make the same number of appearances for Leinster in the league this year. And we won the league last season. It seems a bit disingenuous to me to blame the issues this season on the player welfare system given that it wasn't a major factor last season. And it's not like we're missing more players this season to last. Where someone like Murphy was involved this season the likes of McFadden and Dave Kearney weren't. We've gotten more use out of Douglas than we ever did out of Quinn Roux as well let's not forget. And Te'o in the centre is a real step up on Brendan Macken.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That's a massive assumption to make with regards to those teamsheet shenanigans.

I can tell you 100% for certain that it was not. There were names on teamsheets this season that absolutely were not going to be taking to the field.

total former

molloyjh wrote: »

Well now hang on for a second there now, there's potentially two things that he could be talking about in that interview. As you and IBF pointed out the first is just a comment on the player welfare system as a whole. If that is the case then I'd love to know where the 30% figure he has given comes from. Is it 30% of the league games? By my reckoning it's been a lot closer to 40% for those who have been consistently available. Is it a general figure for the whole season? If so then it factors in injuries which are irrelevant to the player welfare discussion. The point is I'm not sure where exactly that 30% has come from but it doesn't seem very accurate to me.

The other possibility is that he is talking about the impact on our performances. However last season Heaslip played 9 regular season Pro12 games and is very much in line to match that this season. Rob Kearney too is in line to make the same number of appearances for Leinster in the league this year. And we won the league last season. It seems a bit disingenuous to me to blame the issues this season on the player welfare system given that it wasn't a major factor last season. And it's not like we're missing more players this season to last. Where someone like Murphy was involved this season the likes of McFadden and Dave Kearney weren't. We've gotten more use out of Douglas than we ever did out of Quinn Roux as well let's not forget. And Te'o in the centre is a real step up on Brendan Macken.

They're all legitimate points, but like I said, no-one cares what he says, whether it's justified, whether it's not, whether he's promising a more conservative game plan or he's modelling us on the Fiji Sevens team, people just don't like, don't want him here and will stick the boot in regardless.

Like, the 'late team sheet switch' is being brought up again. Why?? It's ancient history. Except now people are attributing all sorts of meanings to it that were never suggested at the time, because they don't like him and want him gone.

So grand, have at it.

irishbucsfan

There are 22 games in a season. The player welfare scheme allows 8 games. That's about 35%.

These comments from Easterby and MOC are not aimed at fans. They're aimed at Nucifora and Browne, it's part of the negotiations. Those lads couldn't care less about making excuses.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

I can tell you 100% for certain that it was not. There were names on teamsheets this season that absolutely were not going to be taking to the field.

And you can say with 100% certainty that it was because MOC didn't have confidence in the real teamsheet? That's the assumption I'm talking about.

total former

Deleted User wrote: »

I can tell you 100% for certain that it was not. There were names on teamsheets this season that absolutely were not going to be taking to the field.

He means that you have no way of knowing that it was done because MOC had no confidence in the 'dummy' players who were not going to be fielded.

OldRio

Good grief, the boys are still at it. Bless.

total former

total former wrote: »

He means that you have no way of knowing that it was done because MOC had no confidence in the 'dummy' players who were not going to be fielded.

It could very well be taken that way, intentionally or not. I also say this in the context that there have been problems in the camp since early season and a lot of frustration from the players about the results and performances.

Look, he is going to be here next season so this is all just idle conversation, but his negativity and ease of blame is grating.

molloyjh

total former wrote: »

They're all legitimate points, but like I said, no-one cares what he says, whether it's justified, whether it's not, whether he's promising a more conservative game plan or he's modelling us on the Fiji Sevens team, people just don't like, don't want him here and will stick the boot in regardless.

Like, the 'late team sheet switch' is being brought up again. Why?? It's ancient history. Except now people are attributing all sorts of meanings to it that were never suggested at the time, because they don't like him and want him gone.

So grand, have at it.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There are 22 games in a season. The player welfare scheme allows 8 games. That's about 35%.

These comments from Easterby and MOC are not aimed at fans. They're aimed at Nucifora and Browne, it's part of the negotiations. Those lads couldn't care less about making excuses.

Yeah fair enough on both of the above. But I'd much rather negotiations (assuming for the purposes of this post that is what they are) were done behind the scenes and not like that myself. I don't see that kind of thing as being constructive. I know the intent is to put pressure on the IRFU but I can't see that really working tbh. Can you?

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

Yeah fair enough on both of the above. But I'd much rather negotiations (assuming for the purposes of this post that is what they are) were done behind the scenes and not like that myself. I don't see that kind of thing as being constructive. I know the intent is to put pressure on the IRFU but I can't see that really working tbh. Can you?

Yeah, it works, everyone will use all the tools available to them. The IRFU will want it to be completely private I'd say, and so the media becomes leverage at a certain point, I'm sure Easterby had a very specific reason for timing his interview when he did.

I'm not surprised to hear from Kearney on it again as well, he's pretty strategic with his media quotes and selecting when he says what (he spoke on the Euro issue as well), he's surprisingly sharp for a Clongowes lad.

.ak

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There are 22 games in a season. The player welfare scheme allows 8 games. That's about 35%.

These comments from Easterby and MOC are not aimed at fans. They're aimed at Nucifora and Browne, it's part of the negotiations. Those lads couldn't care less about making excuses.

This! I don't see why people are getting so hot under the collar. MOC has to make these comments, he's trying to get a better deal/situation for his team so he can get better results. Why is there all this "oh well other coaches got on fine so shut up" attitude? He's not making excuses - he's arguing that the situation needs to be looked at, and it does! It needs an update and badly. Schmidt said the same thing before, just probably said it in a more friendly manner.

CatFromHue

Heaslip is shortlisted for the EPCR player of the year along with B.Vunipola, Fritz Lee, S. Armitage, and Abendonan.

Buer

CatFromHue wrote: »

Heaslip is shortlisted for the EPCR player of the year along with B.Vunipola, Fritz Lee, S. Armitage, and Abendonan.

He's freakishly consistent. This is the 3rd time he has been nominated and made the shortlist (as opposed to the longer initial list that has a glut of players on it).

All the more impressive when two of those nominations have come in seasons when Leinster have probably had their best days behind them (2013 and 2015). He'd almost certainly have been nominated in 2009 and 2010 if the award was around then.

CatFromHue

Interesting that 4 of the 5 are back rowers with 3 No.8's!

Fireball07

I thought Fritz Lee was outstanding to date, but missing the quarter-final may hurt his chances. Will he be back for the final?

Vunipola's had a great tournament, as had Heaslip but Abendanon has been so important for Clermont who have been hugely, hugely impressive.


But I'd give it to Lee if Clermont win, Armitage if Toulon do tbh.

Clearlier

.ak wrote: »

This! I don't see why people are getting so hot under the collar. MOC has to make these comments, he's trying to get a better deal/situation for his team so he can get better results. Why is there all this "oh well other coaches got on fine so shut up" attitude? He's not making excuses - he's arguing that the situation needs to be looked at, and it does! It needs an update and badly. Schmidt said the same thing before, just probably said it in a more friendly manner.

I don't think that Schmidt did complain about it that much and not nearly as much as MOC. My concern is that he's focused on that as the reason for Leinster not doing so well this year when there are so many areas that he has much greater influence over that need improvement. It's also just a bad message to send the squad.

I can't collate all the respective quotes so I can only go on what I perceive with a little anecdotal evidence to back up my perception of Joe's attitude towards the player welfare programme. When asked about it I thought he largely focused on the positives.

Here's my piece of anecdotal evidence about Joe's comments on the player welfare programme.

http://www.pro12rugby.com/news/9007.php#.VTij3Er9yF8#85xMESApWvZAPcew.97

There will be changes because a number of international players are missing, so that will present an opportunity for others

I do want MOC to shut up and get on with it by the way. I'm a Leinster fan but I'm also an Irish fan and I've little interest in Leinster getting more of the players time at the expense of the national side. He knew the deal before he joined.

Podge_irl

Clearlier wrote: »

I'm a Leinster fan but I'm also an Irish fan and I've little interest in Leinster getting more of the players time at the expense of the national side.

I, and others, question how much of an expense to the national side it would really be though.

I think the process is too restrictive and on top of that if it discourages us from being able to hire top level coaching talent at the provinces I think that will hurt Ireland in the long run as well.

irishbucsfan

I don't see what the "expense" to the national side is at all. Our players don't seem to be injured any less than any of our local rivals and the conditioning doesn't seem to be massively different. It doesn't prolong player's careers, as we've seen. If I was someone like Flannery or Ferris I'd look back with regret at games missed before being forced to retire anyway. It's completely in the interests of the provinces for their players to remain healthy anyway, it's not like teams who aren't being held to a player welfare scheme don't treat their players well.

thomond2006

The least ye could do for me is win tomorrow. Just saying.

Synode

Has anyone ever done a comparison of how the national side has done since the introduction of the player welfare scheme. Or does anyone have a link to details of when it was introduced and what the limits to playing are. Been googling but can't find anything useful

padser

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Those lads couldn't care less about making excuses.

For someone who couldn't care less about making excuses, he spends a lot of time making them.

He may have more than one motive for doing so, but it certainly appears that one motive is to in a public way defend his record.

Mahatma Geansai

thomond2006 wrote: »

The least ye could do for me is win tomorrow. Just saying.

Leinster have only won twice on the road in the Pro12 this season. A win up in Ravenhill is a huge ask.