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

Clegg

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Clegg wrote: »

Can I say in the relative safety of this thread that I'm unimpressed by all Leinster's competitors for the Champions Cup? Racing and Saracens don't look as strong as last season. Their respective defences look more pourous than last season. And Munster are incapable of playing outside their comfort zone. If their forwards can't gain advantage they really struggle. Their backs are talented but there's no system or plan in place to get the most out of their abilities.

Do I think we are favourites and better than those left in the competition when we're on top form? Yes most definitely.

But in saying that, I don't think we'll be as strong as last year coming into the business end of the competition, mostly due to injuries, and our first choice players not getting as many games together as a unit.

Racing look a complete basket case in defence, and their tactic is just score more than the other team, don't mind how many they let in during the process.

Munster's pack/defence are performing really well at the moment, but their backline is struggling to put points on the board and get things going.

Saracens are very much an unknown. Billy V is coming back into the fold, but on the other hand Farrell was withdrawn with an injury that's required surgery. You just never really know how they'll go.

I added a bit on to my previous post. I don't know if Leinster are favourites either. Last season we looked as if we could beat anyone anywhere. This season if things go against us, especially if we're away, we struggle. It's a mentality issue more than a technical one. We still look very well coached up front, in attack and in defence. But the players have lost their heads a few times this season.

Clegg

FrannoFan wrote: »

Clegg wrote: »

Can I say in the relative safety of this thread that I'm unimpressed by all Leinster's competitors for the Champions Cup? Racing and Saracens don't look as strong as last season. Their respective defences look more pourous than last season. And Munster are incapable of playing outside their comfort zone. If their forwards can't gain advantage they really struggle. Their backs are talented but there's no system or plan in place to get the most out of their abilities.

That's not to say that Leinster are favourites for the trophy. I don't think we're quite as good as last season either. We can get ruffled and lose our cool as evidenced by the away games to Toulouse and Munster. Ability wise Isa Nacewa is one of our greatest ever players. But he was also so cool under pressure. Through his decision making heron us the game against Exter at the Aviva. We were miles behind, but he kept taking, and converting himself, the 3 point penalties. He had faith in the system and his teammates. I don't think that same ice cold decision making and rationality is present this year.

Saracens got 28 of a possible 30 points. That is impressive. Racing been impressive at home.
Haven't seen enough to comment on performance really but both look strong and have booked home semis as a result.

If any of the main challengers look like they have gone backwards it's us. Struggled away to bath. Lost away to toulouse. Look convincing at home. We looked better at same point last year.

I don't think any of the sides are as good as they were in previous seasons. It opens up the competition more. But I feel like if Leinster can peak at the right time they're better coached than any other side in the competition.

FrannoFan

Clegg wrote: »

I added a bit on to my previous post. I don't know if Leinster are favourites either. Last season we looked as if we could beat anyone anywhere. This season if things go against us, especially if we're away, we struggle. It's a mentality issue more than a technical one. We still look very well coached up front, in attack and in defence. But the players have lost their heads a few times this season.

If leinster are to win it we will have to beat racing in France and saracens in England. Looks a talk order at the moment but not impossible.

A lot of the landscape will change over the 6 nations. Form / injuries / mental burn out

Squidgy Black

Clegg wrote: »

I added a bit on to my previous post. I don't know if Leinster are favourites either. Last season we looked as if we could beat anyone anywhere. This season if things go against us, especially if we're away, we struggle. It's a mentality issue more than a technical one. We still look very well coached up front, in attack and in defence. But the players have lost their heads a few times this season.

Yeah I think we're missing Nacewa big time. We don't have that balance of leadership on the field when Johnny gets fired up. We've a young player base though, so hopefully over the next couple of years players they'll start that transition. We've two previous u20 captains as starters in the squad in Luke McGrath and James Ryan, I'm sure overtime they'll become more vocal and take more ownership on that side of things.

Synode

FrannoFan wrote: »

Saracens got 28 of a possible 30 points. That is impressive. Racing been impressive at home.
Haven't seen enough to comment on performance really but both look strong and have booked home semis as a result.

If any of the main challengers look like they have gone backwards it's us. Struggled away to bath. Lost away to toulouse. Look convincing at home. We looked better at same point last year.

Saracens had by far the easiest pool.

antietam1

So artificial turf today?
I think people are forgetting how good Lowe can be after his braindead episode against Munster.

salmocab

antietam1 wrote: »

So artificial turf today?
I think people are forgetting how good Lowe can be after his braindead episode against Munster.

Ricoh is a grass pitch.
Doubt anyone forgets how good Lowe is.

antietam1

antietam1 wrote: »

So artificial turf today?
I think people are forgetting how good Lowe can be after his braindead episode against Munster.

I seem to just have a mental block about the Lowe incident. For me he was where he needed to be to catch that ball, Conway covered more ground in the final second before the collision to get into contention to catch the ball and ultimately he jumped knee first into Lowe's head.

I know the laws relating to the incident but having watched it numerous times I believe that the most reckless thing done in that incident was Conway jumping upto head height and into the space occupied by the player on the ground.

I don't consider it braindead at all by Lowe - he had no reason to jump for a ball that was coming down into his arms and yet had he done so he probably would have gotten no sanction.

We either need to ban jumping in games or we need to be prepared to allow liability to go in all directions and not just to the player who often has the least to do with the resulting collision.

antietam1

Deleted User wrote: »

I seem to just have a mental block about the Lowe incident. For me he was where he needed to be to catch that ball, Conway covered more ground in the final second before the collision to get into contention to catch the ball and ultimately he jumped knee first into Lowe's head.

I know the laws relating to the incident but having watched it numerous times I believe that the most reckless thing done in that incident was Conway jumping upto head height and into the space occupied by the player on the ground.

I don't consider it braindead at all by Lowe - he had no reason to jump for a ball that was coming down into his arms and yet had he done so he probably would have gotten no sanction.

We either need to ban jumping in games or we need to be prepared to allow liability to go in all directions and not just to the player who often has the least to do with the resulting collision.

Braindead in the sense that it is always the guy who stands who gets pinged, get out of the way if you're beaten to the ball.
Anyone remember the Scots prop who Lee Byrne landed on? woke up to find himself yellow carded.
So it's Xtra grass/hybrid thingy , same studs as a grass pitch?

antietam1

antietam1 wrote: »

Braindead in the sense that it is always the guy who stands who gets pinged, get out of the way if you're beaten to the ball.
Anyone remember the Scots prop who Lee Byrne landed on? woke up to find himself yellow carded.
So it's Xtra grass/hybrid thingy , same studs as a grass pitch?

But it's not braindead. Players catch balls in rugby games ALL THE TIME without jumping or needing to look around themselves. 1 second before the collision Lowe was closer to where the ball landed than Conway was and Conway was travelling at a greater speed to get to where the ball was coming down. Conway made the decision to jump to get above Lowe but in making that decision he put himself into a vulnerable position.

I just question a law that punishes one player for another players actions. At the time I knew it was going to be a red - but I had no idea what anyone expects Lowe to do in that instance other than just not be there.

irishbucsfan

You always need to look around yourself. There is no situation where that is not true.

sydthebeat

Deleted User wrote: »

- he had no reason to jump for a ball that was coming down into his arms

without opening this again... but thats patently not correct

he had a vaid reason to jump for that ball... that reason is the copmetition he should expect for teh ball.... he had no divine right to wait for the ball to drop into his arms...

if anything,. the fact he was so fast and got to teh landing spot first worked against him.

he who wins the competition for teh ball deserves to have the weight of the laws on their side.... as competition for the ball is the most basic ethos of the game.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You always need to look around yourself. There is no situation where that is not true.

It's not just looking around, you also need to predict what another player is going to do. Lowe was under the ball, ready to catch and Conway jumped into him. Conway was the one who closed the distance.

Having a responsibility to be mindful of your surroundings does not equate to clairvoyance as to the future actions of other players.

The law as it stands in my opinion is heavily flawed and does little to promote player safety. It adds a number of red cards over a season without addressing the fact that the player jumping for the ball is the one taking the action that leads to the subsequent vulnerability. I'd go so far as to say looking specifically at the Conway Lowe incident that the current laws in fact encourage risk taking.

Like I said - maybe I have a mental block about this and I'm open to being completely wrong, but I just don't see it. We are seeing red cards not for tackling the player in the air, but for being within the jumping players trajectory.

"It was your fault for getting shot, you got in the way of my bullet".

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not just looking around, you also need to predict what another player is going to do.

No, you don't.

sydthebeat

sydthebeat wrote: »

without opening this again... but thats patently not correct

he had a vaid reason to jump for that ball... that reason is the copmetition he should expect for teh ball.... he had no divine right to wait for the ball to drop into his arms...

if anything,. the fact he was so fast and got to teh landing spot first worked against him.

he who wins the competition for teh ball deserves to have the weight of the laws on their side.... as competition for the ball is the most basic ethos of the game.

What if Conway did everything he did but the ball slipped through his hands and into Lowe's? The situation unfolds as it did but Lowe ends up with the ball and Conway still lands on his neck?

Lowe wasn't in a position to compete with Conway because ultimately he didn't need to be to catch the ball. It was Conway's actions that turned the contest into an aerial one, I don't see why Lowe has a responsibility to jump just for the optics of turning it into an aerial contest when he can just catch the ball without interrupting his stride.

It doesn't make any sense to me.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No, you don't.

Oh ok that settles it so.

yerrahbah

This again? Lowe had ran past the ball and was not in a position to catch it. Definite red card.

yerrahbah

yerrahbah wrote: »

This again? Lowe had ran past the ball and was not in a position to catch it. Definite red card.

I'd encourage you to watch it again if that is what you think - Lowe has his hands out to catch and is directly beneath the ball in my opinion.

Stheno

Ah here. Can we not move on?

thegreycity

I think it’s a good laws discussion. It’s not really about the specific incident, which everyone is probably over now and it looks like Leinster didn’t suffer much from the suspension. But the laws around jumping and hitting a player in the air is worth chatting about.

Stheno

thegreycity wrote: »

I think it’s a good laws discussion. It’s not really about the specific incident, which everyone is probably over now and it looks like Leinster didn’t suffer much from the suspension. But the laws around jumping and hitting a player in the air is worth chatting about.

That's what the laws thread is for

Waffletraktor

Who is the likely team for a quarter final if today hopefuly goes to plan?

Former Former

Waffletraktor wrote: »

Who is the likely team for a quarter final if today hopefuly goes to plan?

Toulouse.

Peregrine

Ulster at Lansdowne Road it is.

Squidgy Black

Peregrine wrote: »

Ulster at Lansdowne Road it is.

On the weekend of the Brexit deadline.

Can't wait.

Peregrine

Squidgy Black wrote: »

On the weekend of the Brexit deadline.

Can't wait.

I can think of the perfect neutral referee for this. A Munster man retiring at the end of the season who deserves a final European knock out game for his distinguished career.

Johnny Lacey.

Steve

Squidgy Black wrote: »

On the weekend of the Brexit deadline.

Can't wait.

If brexit happens can they take their game back?? :eek:

I'd be surprised if Boris hasn't thought of this...


In other news,

Stheno wrote: »

Ah here. Can we not move on?

thegreycity wrote: »

I think it’s a good laws discussion. It’s not really about the specific incident, which everyone is probably over now and it looks like Leinster didn’t suffer much from the suspension. But the laws around jumping and hitting a player in the air is worth chatting about.

Stheno wrote: »

That's what the laws thread is for

+1

Yes, Move on, JL was correctly sanctioned for a rule breach, this is not the thread to discuss it in.

stephen_n

Peregrine wrote: »

I can think of the perfect neutral referee for this. A Munster man retiring at the end of the season who deserves a final European knock out game for his distinguished career.

Johnny Lacey.

Ha ha I’d love to see that just for Awecs response :pac:

Steve wrote: »

I'd be surprised if Boris hasn't thought of this...

I think you’re giving Boris far too much credit there

jacothelad

Steve wrote: »

If brexit happens can they take their game back?? :eek:

I'd be surprised if Boris hasn't thought of this...

That fat louse has never had a thought of his own.

Burkie1203

Jaysus

https://twitter.com/VMSportIE/status/1087113792645926914?s=19