Leinster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread VIII: May the Fourth Star Be With You!

Former Former

Former Former wrote: »

Unless it's someone other than McFadden or Byrne, then it's not a surprise.

Not a surprise so.

molloyjh

sydthebeat wrote: »

Hickeys back!!!

The dream.....

Ferg in ahead of Byrne so. I'd have backed Byrne tbh, but I understand the call.

.ak

Deleted User wrote: »

Conan and SOB both fine. Only one surprise in the starting team on the wing. Ye can guess what that is.

If the wings are made up of any two of isa, Byrne or ferg then there'll be no surprises, they're all in good form.

If ROL, Daly or Kirchner feature then there'll be a head scratcher.

.ak

.ak wrote: »

If the wings are made up of any two of isa, Byrne or ferg then there'll be no surprises, they're all in good form.

If ROL, Daly or Kirchner feature then there'll be a head scratcher.

Ruddock providing second row cover. Byrne is on the bench.

BoardsMember

Deleted User wrote: »

Conan and SOB both fine. Only one surprise in the starting team on the wing. Ye can guess what that is.

Fanning?

CIARAN_BOYLE

.ak wrote: »

If the wings are made up of any two of isa, Byrne or ferg then there'll be no surprises, they're all in good form.

If ROL, Daly or Kirchner feature then there'll be a head scratcher.

Is Dave Kearney not back from injury, he could be the surprise.

CIARAN_BOYLE

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Is Dave Kearney not back from injury, he could be the surprise.

Out for the season from what I'm told

Peregrine

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Is Dave Kearney not back from injury, he could be the surprise.

And straight back into injury. Poor bastard.

Sangre

Peregrine wrote: »

And straight back into injury. Poor bastard.

He must be at be at risk of retirement soon? Maybe they're all unrelated though.

Sangre

Sangre wrote: »

He must be at be at risk of retirement soon? Maybe they're all unrelated though.

Sometimes players get fed up with constant rehab but his injuries aren't chronic. It's been different things.

A lot of it has been bad luck to be honest, much like other "potential" retirees he could have a good pre-season and be back in green next year for all we know.

On a side note, Healy supposedly very angry and general sentiment in the camp is that he has been extremely hard done by. Sounds like a bit of a witch hunt, less about the incident and more about targeting players making big impacts at the breakdown which is something Healy is known for.

Decision has been made not to appeal from what I hear but apparently some clarification on the laws are being sought.

There was no hint that Connacht had any part in the citing nor made any attempt to make it worse. The decision seems to have come from the citing commissioner and the panel.

Kevski

Sangre wrote: »

He must be at be at risk of retirement soon? Maybe they're all unrelated though.

He's had 4 injuries that have kept him out for most of the time since the start of 2016:

Feb 2016 - Shoulder, v France
Oct 2016 - Ankle, v Cardiff
Feb 2017 - Toe, v Edinburgh
Apr 2017 - Ankle, v Connacht

Not sure if it was the same ankle that got injured both times but they're unrelated injuries aside from potentially those. He's had a terrible run of luck.

Former Former

Deleted User wrote: »

On a side note, Healy supposedly very angry and general sentiment in the camp is that he has been extremely hard done by. Sounds like a bit of a witch hunt, less about the incident and more about targeting players making big impacts at the breakdown which is something Healy is known for.

Decision has been made not to appeal from what I hear but apparently some clarification on the laws are being sought.

I'm sure Healy is very angry - but he should be angry at himself. I don't know where your info is coming from, but if lads are sitting around talking about a witch hunt, then they need to cop on.

You go off your feet and lead with your head at a ruck, you've no-one to blame but yourself if you get banned. I'm not sure what clarification on the rules they would be looking for, any forward who isn't aware of the need to bind to a ruck has no business being a pro player.

Deleted User wrote: »

There was no hint that Connacht had any part in the citing nor made any attempt to make it worse. The decision seems to have come from the citing commissioner and the panel.

Of course it did. The possibility of one team citing the other was done away with long ago.

irishbucsfan

Former Former wrote: »

I'm sure Healy is very angry - but he should be angry at himself. I don't know where your info is coming from, but if lads are sitting around talking about a witch hunt, then they need to cop on.

You go off your feet and lead with your head at a ruck, you've no-one to blame but yourself if you get banned. I'm not sure what clarification on the rules they would be looking for, any forward who isn't aware of the need to bind to a ruck has no business being a pro player.

When was the last time a red card was given for this in the Pro 12? It's something that happens in every game, it gets penalised, but this is a red card retroactively for Healy for this.

EDIT: The only reds that I can think of for this type of thing usually involve charging. Healy didn't charge the ruck, he was coming from a standing start.

Former Former

Former Former wrote: »

I'm sure Healy is very angry - but he should be angry at himself. I don't know where your info is coming from, but if lads are sitting around talking about a witch hunt, then they need to cop on.

You go off your feet and lead with your head at a ruck, you've no-one to blame but yourself if you get banned. I'm not sure what clarification on the rules they would be looking for, any forward who isn't aware of the need to bind to a ruck has no business being a pro player.

Apparently they were able to show a number of very similar incidents during the game on both sides that were reviewed and deemed fine. They are looking for further clarification.

There doesn't appear to be evidence of head on head contact. It seems the confusion on here is mirrored within the camp is all I'm saying.

Former Former wrote: »

Of course it did. The possibility of one team citing the other was done away with long ago.

There were suggestions on here that one team might have raised the issue or that without video evidence that player testimony may have had an impact. I'm just pointing out that that doesn't seem to be the case.

Quint2010

Healy has a bit of previous of being reckless at a ruck. Ask Dan Cole about that.

Former Former

Deleted User wrote: »

Apparently they were able to show a number of very similar incidents during the game on both sides that were reviewed and deemed fine. They are looking for further clarification.

There doesn't appear to be evidence of head on head contact. It seems the confusion on here is mirrored within the camp is all I'm saying.

The only angle we have doesn't show evidence of head on head contact, but nor does it show Healy binding properly to the ruck. We don't have all the camera angles that the disciplinary committee would have. You charge into a ruck, you're asking for trouble.

As well as Healy's own past record, Leinster have a record of fighting like dogs when they believe there's been an injustice. No appeal would seem to indicate they don't feel that hard done by.

Quint2010

SOB out. Feck.

Former Former

Former Former

Shiiiiiite

Slightly surprised to see Strauss starting too.

Kevski

O'Brien out. Balls.

Clegg

Heaslip and now SoB missing the game is a huge blow.

Former Former

Kayser, Zirakashvili and Vahaamahina all named. #mindgames

Buer

That's a huge blow. The pendulum has swung significantly back towards Clermont.

I think they've made the right call by picking Ruddock, though.

The knock on impact is massive. Changes the dynamic of our bench completely. We've now lost Healy and SOB in the space of 48 hours.

irishbucsfan

Very good call on Ruddock starting, Buer. Probably for the exact reason you suggest but also I think down to pure physicality.

CMOTDibbler

Former Former wrote: »

The only angle we have doesn't show evidence of head on head contact, but nor does it show Healy binding properly to the ruck. We don't have all the camera angles that the disciplinary committee would have. You charge into a ruck, you're asking for trouble.

As well as Healy's own past record, Leinster have a record of fighting like dogs when they believe there's been an injustice. No appeal would seem to indicate they don't feel that hard done by.

The danger of fighting a two week ban is ending up with a bigger one. When was the last time Leinster appealed a ban? I'm struggling to remember.

As for whether Healy bound or not, the camera angle showed his arm in position to bind. It was subsequently impossible to see that bind as both Healy and the player he 'bound to' collapsed.

Clegg

Not a fan of Adam Byrne being out of the squad entirely.

vienne86

SOB one.....sod it anyway.

Ruddock starting - he deserves it.

irishbucsfan

Buer wrote: »

That's a huge blow. The pendulum has swung significantly back towards Clermont.

I think they've made the right call by picking Ruddock, though.

The knock on impact is massive. Changes the dynamic of our bench completely. We've now lost Healy and SOB in the space of 48 hours.

I wonder if the loss of impact on the bench might have influenced Strauss starting. Maybe move Cronin to the bench to increase our options in the final 20 minutes.

Former Former

Clegg wrote: »

Not a fan of Adam Byrne being out of the squad entirely.

Wow, I saw Ross Byrne's name and processed it as Adam.

That's a harsh call on Adam.

Clegg

Clegg wrote: »

Not a fan of Adam Byrne being out of the squad entirely.

Neither am I, very disappointed at that tbh.

I think the starting XV is fine but the impact from the bench in the pack has taken a bit of a pasting. Gone from Cronin/VdF/Ruddock/Healy to Cronin/VdF/Moloney/Dooley.

irishbucsfan

Is Debaty injured?

molloyjh

I've lost a lot of the confidence I had about our ability to win this one seeing those 2 line ups. Missing Murphy, Heaslip and now SOB from our back row is frightening. Thank God we have the depth there that we do. Losing Healy on top of those is massive as well. That's a hell of a lot of experience out of the pack. I don't see where we can win this now unfortunately. We've almost no impact from the bench really either.

Quint2010

molloyjh wrote: »

I've lost a lot of the confidence I had about our ability to win this one seeing those 2 line ups. Missing Murphy, Heaslip and now SOB from our back row is frightening. Thank God we have the depth there that we do. Losing Healy on top of those is massive as well. That's a hell of a lot of experience out of the pack. I don't see where we can win this now unfortunately. We've almost no impact from the bench really either.

"There comes a time in every man's life when man looks in the abyss, there's nothing staring back at him. At that moment, man finds his character."

Dave_The_Sheep

molloyjh wrote: »

We've almost no impact from the bench really either.

Cronin and VdF aren't exactly bad impact options, and JGP can speed things up if we need him to (hopefully it'll be the good JGP and not the sh*t one). The rest are a bit 'meh' though, agreed.

Kauto

Former Former wrote: »

Wow, I saw Ross Byrne's name and processed it as Adam.

That's a harsh call on Adam.

Not harsh at all. We are going to be under serious pressure on Sunday and his defense is not up to it. McFadden has looked very sharp in recent games.

thomond2006

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Is Debaty injured?

I can't find anything after a quick google but perhaps he's down the pecking order. He's 35 and leaving at the end of the season.

Former Former

Former Former wrote: »

The only angle we have doesn't show evidence of head on head contact, but nor does it show Healy binding properly to the ruck. We don't have all the camera angles that the disciplinary committee would have. You charge into a ruck, you're asking for trouble.

As well as Healy's own past record, Leinster have a record of fighting like dogs when they believe there's been an injustice. No appeal would seem to indicate they don't feel that hard done by.

If there was no procedural issue with the citing it's usually fruitless making an appeal and at this stage it would interrupt preparation so they left it.

With previous citing's they've certainly done their utmost to contest the ruling but this is the only time I've heard of that senior players are calling BS.

Also, he didn't charge into anything, he was already at the breakdown.

whatawaster

Kauto wrote: »

Not harsh at all. We are going to be under serious pressure on Sunday and his defense is not up to it. McFadden has looked very sharp in recent games.

He was trusted against Wasps, possibly the team with the best attack in the competition. I think it's harsh, and a very negative call. I don't see what impact Zane offers from the bench. Adam could come on and win the game potentially.

Quint2010

Whats the story about picking Leavy over VDF? Is it because Leo is looking for pace off the bench and VDF that bit quicker?

Kauto

whatawaster wrote: »

He was trusted against Wasps, possibly the team with the best attack in the competition. I think it's harsh, and a very negative call. I don't see what impact Zane offers from the bench. Adam could come on and win the game potentially.

In his brief time on the pitch against Wasps he fell off a few tackles, one particular bad one if i recall correctly.

irishbucsfan

Quint2010 wrote: »

Whats the story about picking Leavy over VDF? Is it because Leo is looking for pace off the bench and VDF that bit quicker?

I think Leavy is a little bit more effective against more physical opposition. But who knows really.

Jaysus our back row options are good though. I can't wait to see how they get on.

Got that wrong on SOB, must have been something fairly late in the day as he was in the team on Tuesday and no word of a change late Wednesday.

Quint2010

Quint2010 wrote: »

Whats the story about picking Leavy over VDF? Is it because Leo is looking for pace off the bench and VDF that bit quicker?

It's because Leavy has been fooking savage this season and VdF was unlucky to get injured at a really bad time.

Kauto

Think we have a massive chance. If we can go into the last 10 Mins within a score i would fancy us to come out on top. I think we should be looking to target Rougerie. 36 Years old. Hopefully Ringrose can get plenty of chances to run at him!!

Clegg

Quint2010 wrote: »

Whats the story about picking Leavy over VDF? Is it because Leo is looking for pace off the bench and VDF that bit quicker?

Leavy is having every bit as good a season as VdF. Doesn't have two great performances against the All Blacks to his name like VdF, but his performances for Leinster this season have been excellent.

irishbucsfan

Don't worry lads, it sounds like SOB is just a tight hamstring and he's a good chance of being back for the big game against Glasgow next weekend. Probably not worth risking him against a team like Clermont anyway, give the young lads a runout.

Winters

Out of the Leinster Rugby 23:

70% (16) have represented Ireland;
61% (14) have only ever played for Leinster;
65% (15) were developed in Leinster;
74% (17) were developed in Ireland; and
83% (19) are Ireland eligible.

sydthebeat

leinster lose 2 points from the bookies after teams named... go from +2 to +4

i certainly think we have the upper hand in midfield in regards to guile and speed.
I still call this as a one score game, hopefully to leinster and not hopefully balanced on a poor referee call.

edit: and we've better goal kickers too

shuffol

Are we missing a trick not having Byrne up against Abendanon. Has a good advantage in size though Abendanon is a fine player in his own right.

Winters

Winters wrote: »

Out of the Leinster Rugby 23:

70% have represented Ireland;
61% have only ever played for Leinster;
65% were developed in Leinster;
74% were developed in Ireland; and
83% are Ireland eligible.

Would be interesting to see a similar breakdown of Clermont's, They've at least 8 eligible players in the starting 15.