Leinster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread X: [****]

troyzer

troyzer wrote: »

salmocab wrote: »

Burkie1203 wrote: »

The UK only passport holder players wouldn't be classed as European?

That won’t affect the rules of the competition only working laws. I’d not be too worried about it.

We'd be able to answer it very quickly if anyone can find an example of a French team fielding more than two Georgians in a European game. Because that's the bracket Britain would be in.

Actually no, we can't. Georgia has an AA with Europe meaning they're covered under Kolpak.

Squidgy Black

I would imagine in the case of a hard Brexit there'll be an emergency rule change implemented by the ERC to amend that. There's no way they'll take the UK teams out of the tournament.

troyzer

Squidgy Black wrote: »

I would imagine in the case of a hard Brexit there'll be an emergency rule change implemented by the ERC to amend that. There's no way they'll take the UK teams out of the tournament.

The English teams were prepared to blown up European Rugby to get their way. Do you really think people are going to be happy to do them a favour?

I think you're probably right. But it's clear that English Rugby in particular is going to have to change. Increasing debt loads, a weaker pound, potential new owners and now eligibility issues means the old model isn't going to work anymore.

troyzer

troyzer wrote: »

Squidgy Black wrote: »

I would imagine in the case of a hard Brexit there'll be an emergency rule change implemented by the ERC to amend that. There's no way they'll take the UK teams out of the tournament.

The English teams were prepared to blown up European Rugby to get their way. Do you really think people are going to be happy to do them a favour?

I think you're probably right. But it's clear that English Rugby in particular is going to have to change. Increasing debt loads, a weaker pound, potential new owners and now eligibility issues means the old model isn't going to work anymore.

It's not a hard or soft Brexit issue by the way. This is problem either way because the British are the ones who want to end EU citizenship and freedom of movement. They're also the ones choosing to leave the existing Association agreements.

Burkie1203

troyzer wrote: »

It's not a hard or soft Brexit issue by the way. This is problem either way because the British are the ones who want to end EU citizenship and freedom of movement. They're also the ones choosing to leave the existing Association agreements.

And the common travel area agreement with the GFA means we may see a few more Irish players move too

troyzer

Burkie1203 wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

It's not a hard or soft Brexit issue by the way. This is problem either way because the British are the ones who want to end EU citizenship and freedom of movement. They're also the ones choosing to leave the existing Association agreements.

And the common travel area agreement with the GFA means we may see a few more Irish players move too

They'll be more in demand anyway.

Former Former

troyzer wrote: »

It's all in here in great detail:

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/the-huge-implications-for-english-rugby-posed-by-brexit-that-no-one-is-talking-about-it/

But basically, EPCR rules mean you're only allowed to have two non EU/Kolpak players. British players will no longer be EU players after Brexit meaning that British teams will only be allowed to field a maximum of two British/Australian/Argentine or Kiwi players.

No British team is capable of fielding a team made up of 21 French/Irish/Italian or Kolpak players so they'll have to forfeit their matches.

It's a nonsense article on a dreadful website.

This would only be an issue if the Premiership and EPCR both decide to destroy their own tournaments despite being under no obligation to do so.

If you think that is likely, that they would voluntarily put themselves out of existence, then grand.

Seriously, I don't know why people go to sites like that. You will get infinitely better and more accurate info here. Awful

Burkie1203

Former Former wrote: »

It's a nonsense article on a dreadful website.

This would only be an issue if the Premiership and EPCR both decide to destroy their own tournaments despite being under no obligation to do so.

If you think that is likely, that they would voluntarily put themselves out of existence, then grand.

Seriously, I don't know why people go to sites like that. You will get infinitely better and more accurate info here. Awful

Remember the Heineken Cup.
Is now the Heineken Cup again because in the intervening 5 years the much promised plethora of sponsors never materialised and we are stuck with BfookingT sport as broadcaster


I do think thwre will be a contingency plan. But there could also be a few issues too

Podge_irl

The EPCR rule is a limit on non-European players. It doesn't mention EU. Brexit doesn't change geography

troyzer

Podge_irl wrote: »

The EPCR rule is a limit on non-European players. It doesn't mention EU. Brexit doesn't change geography

It's not really clear but the article quotes a sports lawyer who think it's interpretated as meaning EU.

You have to remember that the premise of this entire issue is that national unions want to ban foreigners in their domestic games but can't because of EU rules.

The EU part is critical and it's probably why European has been taken to mean EU for a lot of people.

You could be right of course but at the very least EPCR will have to issue a clarification and it's amazing that we're this late in the day.

I think there's some value to the article even if it does end up being alright. It just shows how disorganised the RFU is.

Podge_irl

troyzer wrote: »

It's not really clear but the article quotes a sports lawyer who think it's interpretated as meaning EU.

You have to remember that the premise of this entire issue is that national unions want to ban foreigners in their domestic games but can't because of EU rules.

The EU part is critical and it's probably why European has been taken to mean EU for a lot of people.

You could be right of course but at the very least EPCR will have to issue a clarification and it's amazing that we're this late in the day.

I think there's some value to the article even if it does end up being alright. It just shows how disorganised the RFU is.

EU law restricts their ability to discriminate against certain nationalities. It does nothing to stop them allowing whoever they want. The rule says European, not EU and the argument in that article makes absolutely no sense. The argument essentially boils down to "because EU law precludes them from restricting Kolpak players, it follows that the definition of European is EU". Which makes zero sense.

We've had this discussion before in relation to Irish qualified players not being subject to restriction despite not being Irish citizens.

Granny15

Shefwedfan wrote: »

It will be a 7 next year, the year after it will be an 8, then year after, sorry they already have a 9 and 10.....in a few seasons you might have Munster team full of exLeinster and foreign players and not a single player from Munster

They are all Irish players and if good enough to get first team rugby elsewhere in Ireland then they should go if they are being promised a chance at international honours if they move. What's the point in a player sitting on his 8rse for 3/4 seasons filling in in international windows only if he's good enough for other teams.

This idea that Leinster rugby should not give out excess players is nosh. We are giving them players that are not good enough and will not be good enough for first team rugby in most cases. We have sufficient depth to cover the loss of these players in most instances. I say in most cases because Carberry is the exception. He was given away with the hope of first team rugby at flyhalf which he wasn't getting at Leinster even though he may prove he was good enough to be considered first/second option there.

Shefwedfan

Granny15 wrote: »

They are all Irish players and if good enough to get first team rugby elsewhere in Ireland then they should go if they are being promised a chance at international honours if they move. What's the point in a player sitting on his 8rse for 3/4 seasons filling in in international windows only if he's good enough for other teams.

This idea that Leinster rugby should not give out excess players is nosh. We are giving them players that are not good enough and will not be good enough for first team rugby in most cases. We have sufficient depth to cover the loss of these players in most instances. I say in most cases because Carberry is the exception. He was given away with the hope of first team rugby at flyhalf which he wasn't getting at Leinster even though he may prove he was good enough to be considered first/second option there.

I agree, Leinster need to share out players but it should not mean the other provinces just shut up shop on trying to develop their own players.

Connacht and Ulster both have pushed youth into their team, young talent that has come via their academy.



Connacht coach made a good point recently, about a loan system for like 3 years. Players move but if they become good enough then Leinster have option to resign, but of course the province would have the option to keep. Whatever would be the best for the player

Granny15

I agree that we should be given a clause to re-sign the player if they substantially improve. I agree with your point on Ulster but for some reason they are relcutant to give McPhillips game time there. He seems to have been identified as not being good enough for them. Shanahan Lowry etc all deserve game time and are getting it. Trust needs to be placed in the youth otherwise they will never develop.

Clegg

Funny thing is that Leinster are better at using their academy players than the other provinces. They'll get more opportunities if they stick where they are.

Granny15

Clegg wrote: »

Funny thing is that Leinster are better at using their academy players than the other provinces. They'll get more opportunities if they stick where they are.

Yes and generally if they perform they are selected next week to reward them. If young and able to pull out a string of performances in which you deserve to be re-selected you will be. Larmour is the prime candidate I'm thinking of here most recently. Exceptions made for European games.

Clegg

More injury worries for Leinster.

Jack McGrath had a minor procedure on his hip and will be unavailable for 4-6 weeks. Guess we'll see Dooley as replacement loosehead. The bigger problem is Nick McCarthy with a sprained foot. He'll be assessed later in the week but if he's out one of Lowe or Fardy makes way for JGP. Fardy and Lowe are both in excellent form so it's a tough decision. Both would be well suited for playing Bath. They look rather flimsy up front and pourous out wide.

Buer

I think for the away game, we could see Lowe make way. He's electric but if that pitch is in bits and we're looking at a slug fest, I would want Fardy involved. We can't go without JGP either if McCarthy is out. If Leavy hasnt' recovered in time, I think Fardy has to be there regardless.

McGrath is a big loss. Healy is the form loosehead but McGrath has found form again and gone very well for us, offering a real 1-2 combination. I'd be tempted to go for Byrne ahead of Dooley.

Dave Kearney looked fit and sharp at the weekend; I could see him stepping into the side on the wing too for this one. His experience would be beneficial. Adam Byrne has gone really well of late too but I'm not sure about him against some of those Bath backs.

I'd be happy enough for us to play a similar game to how we approached Glasgow last season and look to bully them up front. A pack of Healy, Cronin, Furlong, Ryan, Toner, Fardy, VDF and Ruddock would be a right handful.

EDIT: Just looking at the injury update, I think we can rule out Conan and Leavy for this weekend. Good to see ROL back available though. I imagine he'll be in the 23 jersey. Larmour's looks slightly more promising but I think he might have to play if he's 80% given how short we are in the back three unless we go with Adam Byrne or ROL on the wing.

errlloyd

I pretty much agree with everything you just said, but I would give Adam Byrne the start if we're leaving Lowe. He beat 9 defenders last week, he's been good under the high ball, and if it's a slug fest I reckon we will box kick like crazy.

Buer

errlloyd wrote: »

I pretty much agree with everything you just said, but I would give Adam Byrne the start if we're leaving Lowe. He beat 9 defenders last week, he's been good under the high ball, and if it's a slug fest I reckon we will box kick like crazy.

Largely agree. I thought he went really well and had a bit of his confidence back. I think he might have to start given the lack of game time for ROL and Larmour possibly being ruled out. But I still would have concerns about him up against Rokoduguni or Cokanasiga. Those two boys are absolute tanks.

Cokanasiga is 18 stone...I don't fancy Byrne up against him. But I suppose this game isn't going to be won/lost out on the wing.

Clegg

Fardy, VdF and Ruddock would be an interesting backrow Very bruising and gives a decent lineout option especially with Ryan and Toner also starting. Would still much prefer it if Leavy were fit, but it's not bad all the same.

Richie_Rich89

I think Leinster's new guys stepping in look good because Lancaster's high-intensity unstructured training prepares them really well for the step up in level. Who's to say he couldn't do the same at a different province with their academy players?

stephen_n

So we are potentially missing SOB, Leavy, Conan, McGrath and Larmour. The AI’s did us no favors at all

arsebiscuits1

Clegg wrote: »

More injury worries for Leinster.

Jack McGrath had a minor procedure on his hip and will be unavailable for 4-6 weeks. Guess we'll see Dooley as replacement loosehead. The bigger problem is Nick McCarthy with a sprained foot. He'll be assessed later in the week but if he's out one of Lowe or Fardy makes way for JGP. Fardy and Lowe are both in excellent form so it's a tough decision. Both would be well suited for playing Bath. They look rather flimsy up front and pourous out wide.

I think Ed Byrne is firmly ahead of Dooley in the pecking order

stephen_n

stephen_n wrote: »

So we are potentially missing SOB, Leavy, Conan, McGrath and Larmour. The AI’s did us no favors at all

The AI's did us an absolutely massive favour.

It's no coincidence that the squad is brimming with confidence at the moment. Leinster had a big chunk of players in the team that outplayed the All Blacks. Those guys spend most of their training time with Leinster embedded within the overall squad. Imagine knowing that the camp you are in is producing that level of talent - the belief it gives you.

That's a game changer for a lot of these guys, watching the likes of Luke McGrath taking down some of the World best players and looking comfortable and controlled doing it. It's going to result in huge buy in from the wider squad, that knowledge that the system not only works but is producing serious world beaters.

It's elevated Leinster and all the provinces by default of them being the feeder teams who collectively beat the best team in the world.

Ospreys and Dragons have been poor - but Leinster are playing confident, skilful and accurate rugby and doing so with a lot of belief in where that might take them.

Clegg

stephen_n wrote: »

So we are potentially missing SOB, Leavy, Conan, McGrath and Larmour. The AI’s did us no favors at all

Don't forget Henshaw. He's the biggest loss of all.

stephen_n

Deleted User wrote: »

The AI's did us an absolutely massive favour.

It's no coincidence that the squad is brimming with confidence at the moment. Leinster had a big chunk of players in the team that outplayed the All Blacks. Those guys spend most of their training time with Leinster embedded within the overall squad. Imagine knowing that the camp you are in is producing that level of talent - the belief it gives you.

That's a game changer for a lot of these guys, watching the likes of Luke McGrath taking down some of the World best players and looking comfortable and controlled doing it. It's going to result in huge buy in from the wider squad, that knowledge that the system not only works but is producing serious world beaters.

It's elevated Leinster and all the provinces by default of them being the feeder teams who collectively beat the best team in the world.

Ospreys and Dragons have been poor - but Leinster are playing confident, skilful and accurate rugby and doing so with a lot of belief in where that might take them.

Yes the mental aspect is there, as it is from wining the double. You can see that through out the squad, right down to the kids.


However, that’s 6 players from what would be our first choice 23, that’s a heavy toll.

Clegg wrote: »

Don't forget Henshaw. He's the biggest loss of all.

I did forget Robbie, I knew there was someone else but couldn’t remember

Burkie1203

Richie_Rich89 wrote: »

I think Leinster's new guys stepping in look good because Lancaster's high-intensity unstructured training prepares them really well for the step up in level. Who's to say he couldn't do the same at a different province with their academy players?

Leinster should rebrand as Munster so...

Shefwedfan

stephen_n wrote: »

Yes the mental aspect is there, as it is from wining the double. You can see that through out the squad, right down to the kids.


However, that’s 6 players from what would be our first choice 23, that’s a heavy toll.


I did forget Robbie, I knew there was someone else but couldn’t remember

Next you will say "you can't win anything with kids" :P


Henshaw is a big loss, especially with Tomane out as well...


But we need to get used to it, Leinster will be bulk supplier for 6 nations as well and I would guess players will be rested more during the season to build up to World Cup

Faugheen

This talk of Leinster losing a 7.

If it is a possibility. I'd be sending the IRFU a strongly worded email about what one or two injuries does to our back-row options, like this week.

I don't like the idea that Leinster should just share their players around. They've set the standard, it's up to the others to reach it, not up to Leinster to provide players to help create a level playing field.

If a player wants to leave then they shouldn't be stopped going. But these meetings with Carbery to convince him to go to Ulster/Munster were a load of absolute bollocks and sets an awful precedent.

Munster have plenty of 7s. They don't need another one. SOB will probably be gone after the World Cup so I don't see why Leinster should give up another one.