Leinster v Ulster Build Up Thread

bilston

Deleted User wrote: »

Santiago Ashy Caboose wrote: »

I'm aware we all hate Les Kiss and he has to go etc etc but off the top of my head, 4 of the 6 Leinster tries came from just straight up missed tackles. Stockdale missed Larmour, McFadden and Porter, and Piutau missed Daly. This is simple stuff tbh, those guys make their tackles and the tries get prevented. Is Kiss to blame for that?

Of course he is. These guys should be training in an environment where this might happen once in a game.

That said, the only really bad effort was Piatau for the second try and he has a tendency to go missing in defence to be honest, he was guilty of it with Wasps as well at times.

The first try was partially Stockdale's fault but it was a fabulous step to be fair and the 1 on 1 was already conceded in mid field by I think Cave biting in on Ringrose (who could have been pinged for obstruction).

Similarly the third try Stockdale lost his feet (as others did over the night) but where was the fullback in that situation? The ball had gone wide pretty fast but it was still another 1 v 1 for Stockdale and if you watch it back Piatau is on the wrong side and is walking across so is never going to provide cover.

Again the fourth try is a piece of individual excellent from Porter. Cave comes in high for whatever reason on a tighthead which was madness, Stockdale is forced to cover and tries to go low coming in from the side and gets bounced. The major blunder had already happened, not many wingers are going to stop a prop moving at that pace but he could probably have done a bit better.

Fifth try again, Cave sweeping over in the full back slot but where is he when the ball goes wide of Stockdale, totally out of position to cover and get another body in the way and it was so obvious that Leinster had numbers there, what was he doing?

For me Cave's organisational defence and individual effort defensively fell far far short of what you would expect from a 13. Payne alone on the pitch would have halved the Leinster score line.

Similarly Piatau's work rate off the ball is poor and his tackling attempt on Daly was shambolic.

How much of this is Kiss and how much of it is the players is hard to know.

Most of Ulsters problems happened because:

1. Bullied at the breakdown. Leinster scored and made massive ground off turnover ball.

2. Defensive shape. They allowed far too many 1 v 1's with only Stockdale being where he was meant to be.

3. Work rate. Even Stockdale had poor moments, after the kick through for I think the third try, he barely chases back. Pass the buck stuff that isn't good enough at this level.

I've said it before, Kiss may well not be up to it but there is some really poor individual stuff out there.

The pack were to blame for the main woe which was the breakdown and where Leinster did all the damage but the tries were mostly on the back line and Cave
/ Piatau in particular.

The bigger worry to be honest is that Ulster didn't fire a shot going forward. They still had a brilliant back line on the pitch but rarely found much width or shape. Once or twice they looked a bit dangerous but I was never all that concerned. Service from the scrum half was unforgiving which compounded Ulsters inability to get the ball out to the backs accurately and at pace.

There are a lot of issues there. Good bit of it is coaching, good bit is attitude and that is seeping into the players just not operating at the peak of their ability.

The main issue though is a pack that can't impose themselves on the game even for patches. If the pack could raise their game for periods of play to put teams under pressure it would be a different story. Maybe with the likes of Moore and Murphy and Coetzee back available that raised work rate will start delivering patches for Ulster where they can register scores or relieve pressure.

If Ulster do change coach, I'd be going after someone like Conor O'Shea and I'd give them the keys to all the offices to be honest.

Conor O'Shea is a great shout.

MJohnston

molloyjh wrote: »

Is it possible that Kiss isn’t actually looking after the defence? It would seem crazy to have him there and not.

It's a fúcked situation either way - if he is looking after it, then we've got the Director of Rugby priorities wrong. If he isn't looking after it, then arguably he should never have been made DoR.

I seriously don't see the value in a DoR who has to share their time between all the necessary business ****e and actual coaching. It just doesn't work.

I mean, compare Leinster and Ulster - Cullen and Lancaster are the ones that are talked about in terms of being responsible for performances, you don't hear much mention of Easterby even though he's in the exact same position as Kiss.

There's one other comparison, and that's that Leinster have a CEO who used to play.

prawnsambo

MJohnston wrote: »

It's a fúcked situation either way - if he is looking after it, then we've got the Director of Rugby priorities wrong. If he isn't looking after it, then arguably he should never have been made DoR.

I seriously don't see the value in a DoR who has to share their time between all the necessary business ****e and actual coaching. It just doesn't work.

I mean, compare Leinster and Ulster - Cullen and Lancaster are the ones that are talked about in terms of being responsible for performances, you don't hear much mention of Easterby even though he's in the exact same position as Kiss.

There's one other comparison, and that's that Leinster have a CEO who used to play.

Guy Easterby is Team Manager, not DoR.

MJohnston

prawnsambo wrote: »

Guy Easterby is Team Manager, not DoR.

He's head of rugby operations, which sounds like pretty much exactly what a Director of Rugby should be.

Squidgy Black

prawnsambo wrote: »

Guy Easterby is Team Manager, not DoR.

He's Head of Rugby Operations, which is pretty much a different way of say DoR.

What his title is or is meant to be is irrelevant. DoR can mean different things at different teams. Kiss was brought in to be in charge of the rugby team at Ulster, that's his job. If you called him head coach then nothing changes. It is not Easterby's job (to be honest I don't know exactly what Easterby's job is), but you couldn't call him the head coach because he patently isn't the head coach. In fact if you look at the Leinster website, he's not listed as a coach at all.

I'd say Easterby's job is similar to Bryn Cunningham at Ulster if I had to guess.

awec

Santiago Ashy Caboose wrote: »

Piutau missing a simple one-on-one with Daly is nothing to do with the system. You've one attacker and one defender and the defender just failed miserably, same with Stockdale. The players need to take responsibility here.

The Piutau one I agree, that's just a bad missed tackle on his part. That will happen from time to time no matter what the coaches do.

But for Ulster it happens all too often. Many times a match. It all points to there being an underlying problem. The line is broken too often in a match, we have to scramble too much and it leads to mistakes. Players finding gaps that shouldn't exist so defenders have to desperately go for a tackle that they're never making and they miss it.

prawnsambo

MJohnston wrote: »

He's head of rugby operations, which sounds like pretty much exactly what a Director of Rugby should be.

Still sounds like team manager to me. Rugby operations would probably be a better description of what a team manager in old parlance does.

If he was DoR, they'd surely call it that, no? DoR always seems to be a head of coaches role rather than an operational/logistics role.

awec

I don't read too much into the job titles. Kiss is a DoR which just means he's senior to all other coaches.

MJohnston

Santiago Ashy Caboose wrote: »

What his title is or is meant to be is irrelevant. DoR can mean different things at different teams. Kiss was brought in to be in charge of the rugby team at Ulster, that's his job. If you called him head coach then nothing changes. It is not Easterby's job (to be honest I don't know exactly what Easterby's job is), but you couldn't call him the head coach because he patently isn't the head coach. In fact if you look at the Leinster website, he's not listed as a coach at all.

I'd say Easterby's job is similar to Bryn Cunningham at Ulster if I had to guess.

The problem with such an attitude is you lose responsibility and clarity of decision making and it becomes up to the CEO to choose who leads. Which is potentially fine if you have a rugby CEO, but we have a pure businessman.

I have no doubt that our vague and ill defined structure is contributing massively to our ongoing coaching problems, because they aren't new with Kiss.

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

If he was DoR, they'd surely call it that, no? DoR always seems to be a head of coaches role rather than an operational/logistics role.

Not necessarily, even at Ulster they changed the definition of the DoR role after Humphreys left, he had a much more hands-off role when it came to the rugby team.

People are getting too hung up on names. They don't really matter.

MJohnston wrote: »

The problem with such an attitude is you lose responsibility and clarity of decision making and it becomes up to the CEO to choose who leads. Which is potentially fine if you have a rugby CEO, but we have a pure businessman.

I have no doubt that our vague and ill defined structure is contributing massively to our ongoing coaching problems, because they aren't new with Kiss.

I don't believe there's any lack of clarity what-so-ever in the Ulster coaching setup. Kiss is in charge, Gibbes and then the rest of the coaches are below him.

MJohnston

Santiago Ashy Caboose wrote: »

Not necessarily, even at Ulster they changed the definition of the DoR role after Humphreys left, he had a much more hands-off role when it came to the rugby team.

People are getting too hung up on names. They don't really matter.




I don't believe there's any lack of clarity what-so-ever in the Ulster coaching setup. Kiss is in charge, Gibbes and then the rest of the coaches are below him.

That's just hierarchical clarity, but there's loads more to it - does Kiss have to divide his time between managing the players and coaches, and managing the business side of the rugby for example. Clarity of responsibilities more than anything else.

MJohnston

MJohnston wrote: »

That's just hierarchical clarity, but there's loads more to it - does Kiss have to divide his time between managing the players and coaches, and managing the business side of the rugby for example. Clarity of responsibilities more than anything else.

I haven't seen any indication he does and considering he's spent his whole career as a rugby coach then that would be odd.

MJohnston

Santiago Ashy Caboose wrote: »

I haven't seen any indication he does and considering he's spent his whole career as a rugby coach then that would be odd.

Exactly, it is very odd, but there's nobody in the management structure of Ulster between Kiss and Logan, so it's impossible that he could avoid any business involvement, or indeed having to direct operations on the non-senior teams at the club. Again, if Logan was rugby man that might be avoidable, but imo the man responsible for leading the teams should never be that close to the business side. It's just a distraction.

Which is why I think head coach should be head coach, and not subordinate to anyone where coaching is concerned.

MJohnston

MJohnston wrote: »

Exactly, it is very odd, but there's nobody in the management structure of Ulster between Kiss and Logan, so it's impossible that he could avoid any business involvement, or indeed having to direct operations on the non-senior teams at the club. Again, if Logan was rugby man that might be avoidable, but imo the man responsible for leading the teams should never be that close to the business side. It's just a distraction.

Which is why I think head coach should be head coach, and not subordinate to anyone where coaching is concerned.

Why do you need anyone between Kiss and Logan? I don't really understand this tbh, it seems like pure speculation to me? I doubt there's anyone between Cullen and Mick Dawson either but that seems pretty normal.

Kiss is the head coach. He's called something else but he's the head coach. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary.

MJohnston

Santiago Ashy Caboose wrote: »

Why do you need anyone between Kiss and Logan? I don't really understand this tbh, it seems like pure speculation to me? I doubt there's anyone between Cullen and Mick Dawson either but that seems pretty normal.

Kiss is the head coach. He's called something else but he's the head coach. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary.

Take a look at the IRFU guidelines for Director of Rugby and you'll see all the stuff they are supposed to do that isn't coaching.

If Kiss isn't Director of Rugby, then he didn't need to be given that title.

The Lost Sheep

MJohnston wrote: »

Exactly, it is very odd, but there's nobody in the management structure of Ulster between Kiss and Logan, so it's impossible that he could avoid any business involvement, or indeed having to direct operations on the non-senior teams at the club. Again, if Logan was rugby man that might be avoidable, but imo the man responsible for leading the teams should never be that close to the business side. It's just a distraction.

Which is why I think head coach should be head coach, and not subordinate to anyone where coaching is concerned.

It isnt at all odd. It isnt impossible that Kiss could avoid business involvement as its simply not his duty to be involved in that area.

MJohnston wrote: »

Take a look at the IRFU guidelines for Director of Rugby and you'll see all the stuff they are supposed to do that isn't coaching.

If Kiss isn't Director of Rugby, then he didn't need to be given that title.

That is talking about amatuer rugby. Professional rugby will be quite different naturally.

.ak

Rewatching the game, for the first try Ringrose is an absolute cute hooer. Byrne calls a move off a phase which appears to be a centre runs a short crash diagonal line with a blindside winger coming across. The move almost breaks down due slow ball, but Ringrose rescues it with a really good timed run and completely takes the defender out of the game, and makes sure to hold them after the ball goes. Ferg has a massive gap to run through because of him.

It’s that sort of smarts/Rugby IQ that was mentioned earlier on the thread that will make Ringrose an Irish great for years to come.

molloyjh

.ak wrote: »

Rewatching the game, for the first try Ringrose is an absolute cute hooer. Byrne calls a move off a phase which appears to be a centre runs a short crash diagonal line with a blindside winger coming across. The move almost breaks down due slow ball, but Ringrose rescues it with a really good timed run and completely takes the defender out of the game, and makes sure to hold them after the ball goes. Ferg has a massive gap to run through because of him.

It’s that sort of smarts/Rugby IQ that was mentioned earlier on the thread that will make Ringrose an Irish great for years to come.

I was looking at that earlier and thought Ringrose was lucky to get away with it. He wasn't though. Cave bought the dummy line hook, line and sinker, taking himself out of the game.

.ak

Other notes from rewatching it...

Scott Fardy is some sort of rugby demigod. Larmour may have put on the dazzle but Scott was everywhere. That pass to McFadden for his try was seriously impressive, what’s even better is he calls it with McFadden a phase earlier. Good communicators on a rugby field are winners.

Henshaw may no longer utilize the flashy plays that brought him into the limelight for Connacht, but he’s just such an intelligent player. His carrying, tackling and work rate make up for the lack of guile and zip. His passing is so clean and crisp. That pass-on for larmours second was world class. Without making the headlines he quietly went around his business and allowed everyone else around him to shine. Another motm preformer for me.

Ringrose did a lot better than people are giving him credit for, No trade mark line breaks but consistently spotted soft shoulders, made yards, and sucked in defenders. His reaction to turn overs a d sloppy ball was incredible, for the larmour almost try he dives on a loss ball and is popping it up for a support runner without even looking, pity about the injury cuz he’s looking sharp.

Jack Conan seemed to be on JVDF duty. Tackles everything that moved was given freedom to leave the line at will, like letting a dog off a leash. Ulster were wary of any quick play because of him.

We picked up so many injures but never looked troubled. Our depth is truly a massive asset to me.

Stheno

.ak wrote: »

Other notes from rewatching it...


Henshaw may no longer utilize the flashy plays that brought him into the limelight for Connacht, but he’s just such an intelligent player. His carrying, tackling and work rate make up for the lack of guile and zip. His passing is so clean and crisp. That pass-on for larmours second was world class. Without making the headlines he quietly went around his business and allowed everyone else around him to shine. Another motm preformer for me.

Ringrose did a lot better than people are giving him credit for, No trade mark line breaks but consistently spotted soft shoulders, made yards, and sucked in defenders. His reaction to turn overs a d sloppy ball was incredible, for the larmour almost try he dives on a loss ball and is popping it up for a support runner without even looking, pity about the injury cuz he’s looking sharp.

Jack Conan seemed to be on JVDF duty.

We picked up so many injures but never looked troubled. Our depth is truly a massive asset to me.

thought all three were great posted that Ringrose seemed to be getting back to form just as he got injured so deleted it

Henshaw has been outstanding this season. Just has such an all-action game, does everything well and he's an insanely good defender.

Tim Robbins

.ak wrote: »

Other notes from rewatching it...

Scott Fardy is some sort of rugby demigod. Larmour may have put on the dazzle but Scott was everywhere. That pass to McFadden for his try was seriously impressive, what’s even better is he calls it with McFadden a phase earlier. Good communicators on a rugby field are winners.

Henshaw may no longer utilize the flashy plays that brought him into the limelight for Connacht, but he’s just such an intelligent player. His carrying, tackling and work rate make up for the lack of guile and zip. His passing is so clean and crisp. That pass-on for larmours second was world class. Without making the headlines he quietly went around his business and allowed everyone else around him to shine. Another motm preformer for me.

Ringrose did a lot better than people are giving him credit for, No trade mark line breaks but consistently spotted soft shoulders, made yards, and sucked in defenders. His reaction to turn overs a d sloppy ball was incredible, for the larmour almost try he dives on a loss ball and is popping it up for a support runner without even looking, pity about the injury cuz he’s looking sharp.

Jack Conan seemed to be on JVDF duty. Tackles everything that moved was given freedom to leave the line at will, like letting a dog off a leash. Ulster were wary of any quick play because of him.

We picked up so many injures but never looked troubled. Our depth is truly a massive asset to me.

And what Josh Murphy and Conor Oliver down in Munster - the talent coming out of Leinster is simply outstanding.

Thankfully, lads will move to other provinces now which might help cut out a bit of inter provincial cr*p as well... Make it more about rugby.

.ak

The other thing worth noting is our back three, as a unit, were outstanding. Larmour’s positioning was really good, couple of times he trusted the wind a bit too much but in terms of off the ball work it was outstanding. Obviously everything that has been said about his footwork and attack has been said but I was left speechless at times. Daly was seriously impressive for a guy that has been out injured for month, few bits to tidy up but he was causing issues every time he got clean ball.

McFadden tho... that was some performance. Forget the two tries, his work rate was outstanding. In the 2nd half when we decided to pick it up another gear he was a man possessed. At one stage he runs a latch on a prop pick n drive, carries him over the line, another forward pod run the next phase and he’s the first man to clear out! At the time I thought it was Deegan or someone but watching back I was surprised to see a 14 on the back! He had a massive, massive performance, and aside from the line breaks and tries he rolled up his sleeves and delivered total Rugby performance.

molloyjh

On Larmours positioning that's something that has improved really noticeably in the last month. He's looking more and more assured in the back field with the game time he's getting. I really am delighted with how he's progressing.

Also, Deegan is awesome.

irishbucsfan

Great talent alright.

I wonder if we'll start hearing those GAA arguments for Leinster to be split up. The South Dubs split off to form the Cappucheensters while the North Dubs and the rest of the province move to Donnycarney.

Yeah_Right

.ak wrote: »

McFadden tho... that was some performance. Forget the two tries, his work rate was outstanding. In the 2nd half when we decided to pick it up another gear he was a man possessed. At one stage he runs a latch on a prop pick n drive, carries him over the line, another forward pod run the next phase and he’s the first man to clear out! At the time I thought it was Deegan or someone but watching back I was surprised to see a 14 on the back! He had a massive, massive performance, and aside from the line breaks and tries he rolled up his sleeves and delivered total Rugby performance.

I agree. It was a fantastic all round performance by McFadden. If Adam Byrne played like that, everyone would be going full Venjur over it and we'd all be drowning.

Yeah_Right

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I agree. It was a fantastic all round performance by McFadden. If Adam Byrne played like that, everyone would be going full Venjur over it and we'd all be drowning.

Former Former

Ricky Lutton was very vocal about the non-native character of the Ulster line-up. Considering he was an Ulster player up to 8 months ago, I think it's fair to assume that others in the current squad would share his feelings.

irishfan9

Former Former wrote: »

Ricky Lutton was very vocal about the non-native character of the Ulster line-up. Considering he was an Ulster player up to 8 months ago, I think it's fair to assume that others in the current squad would share his feelings.

Yeah, Ulster of anywhere are probably the most tribal.

After all aren't Leinster lads Mexican :rolleyes:

awec

Academy discussion moved to it's own thread: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057828083

swiwi_

Buer wrote: »

I think Lowe will have next week off, actually. McFadden, Larmour and Daly all looking comfortable along with RK and Nacewa. Lowe looks great but if they were going to drop JGP they wouldn't have left McCarthy on the bench until very late and the game was long won.

Always a wee frisson when Buer is wrong :P

Bazzo

swiwi_ wrote: »

Always a wee frisson when Buer is wrong :P

First Nahologate and now this. He's losing it.

irishbucsfan

Bazzo wrote: »

First Nahologate and now this. He's losing it.

Not to mention our Bernard

Buer

Even a working clock is wrong twice a day.

Wait. That's not it.