Connacht Team Talk Thread VI - Some like it TOH

its_phil

Tonight’s performance means we’re going to be brilliant against Leicester and lose by a score to a bad referee decision. It’s the way we do things in England when we have awful form. Gloucester QF, Gloucester playoff, Northampton Playoff.

Borders no.2

That game just summed up the season.

Honestly I don't care if its a nothing game we should never lose that game. Before the game I wasn't overly bothered about the result but at 33-12 at half time you have to see that out. Some nice attacking play in the first half but the cracks were already appearing in defence. We came out in the 2nd half like it was a done deal. Scarlets were fighting for their lives and were always going to throw the kitchen sink at it.

We just needed to manage the game in the early part of the half and the longer it went on the more desperate they'd become but effectively the game was in their hands within 15 mins of the restart.

Even then we had our chances and messed them up. Scarlets and Edinburgh were both poor sides and we gifted them wins.

There needs to be big questions asked internally about the performance levels in certain games. Treviso was garbage too, we robbed that one.

Probably an unpopular opinion but I am unsure if we are moving forward. Thr squad is stronger and on our day we look a decent team but the wheels come off far too easily for my liking. I don't think the league this year was a proper league. We played 2nd string sides in pretty much 80-90% of games.

UAEguy2020

WallyGUFC wrote: »

Absolutely shameful 2nd half. Leicester will enjoy their run out against us I think.

Yeah I bet the Connacht team are ****ting themselves about playing Leicester all right...

Wegians89

Some individuals from the Connacht squad can feel hard done by not getting more international recognition but either the collective attitude and defensive systems are as bad as last night, it’s no wonder why so little get called up. Big changes need defensively next season

ClanofLams

Wegians89 wrote: »

Some individuals from the Connacht squad can feel hard done by not getting more international recognition but either the collective attitude and defensive systems are as bad as last night, it’s no wonder why so little get called up. Big changes need defensively next season

Game Intelligence or composure too. Presume that is worked and it's probably impossible to go through every scenario but things like McNulty not kicking deep into Edinburgh 22, not going through the backline with two man advantage against Munster in January, etc seem to happen a fair bit.

evil_seed

the story of our season wrapped up in one game. Capable of absolute brilliance in attack and set piece play. Defense an absolute shambles: go wide on us and you are guaranteed a try

RonnieL

It's a real cliche, but we were seriously lacking in leadership last night I felt. As others have said, even when we went a good bit ahead in the first half, you felt we could still go on to lose. There's surely a huge mental aspect to the unbelievable inconsistency we've witnessed this year, which is worrying.

As a slight aside (but sticking with the theme of consistency), the current situation with regard to refereeing in the game is really taking away from my enjoyment. There's an uneasiness watching games as you know there's a pretty good chance a red card will be brandished. I actually feel sorry for the officials, because they're in a very difficult situation. But, all anyone wants in consistency, and we're not getting it. The fact we are likely to be without Bundee in the Leicester game because of an accidental (but dangerous) high tackle, and Genge will be free to play after admitting to elbowing someone repeatedly to the head makes the mind boggle.

Utopia Parkway

You would have got very good odds on Connacht losing both the Edinburgh and Scarlets games from the positions they were in. Not sure how they managed it. Been a good season but it definitely leaves a stinky taste in the mouth to blow games like that. Hopefully can rebound against Leicester but those were two bad games to lose heading into that one.

freyners

Aki suspended for 4 games. Covers the rainbow cup and challenge cup. Don't think last night counts

Larbre34

Thats harsh.

Wegians89

Considering the red at the World Cup, 4 games isn’t too bad. Was expecting 6

Former Former Former

Larbre34 wrote: »

Thats harsh.

It was literally the shortest suspension he could have got, unless they overturned the red completely.

connachta

We fix the lineout issue, have a good scrum, these are basics
Mauls, offensive and defensive, are a work in progress
Defence is in shambles

There's also an explaination for the latter. Defence struggles because we have to resist to unending waves. And there are unending waves because NOONE in our squad is able to get turnovers. We need a Beirne, Jenkins, Cloete, VdF, even Heenan

Larbre34

Former Former Former wrote: »

It was literally the shortest suspension he could have got, unless they overturned the red completely.

Yeah well they should've.

I don't see how Aki could've made that belly-to-belly tackle any safer at full tilt. Billy V dipped into him as Aki himself dipped and BV caught a bell ringer for himself as Aki moved to wrap him. It wasn't reckless or malicious and a ban does precisely nothing to avoid such similar occurrences from the same player or any other player in the game. It was accidental and in a full contact sport, accidents will happen, despite all parties' best efforts to minimise them.

connachta

connachta wrote: »

We fix the lineout issue, have a good scrum, these are basics
Mauls, offensive and defensive, are a work in progress
Defence is in shambles

There's also an explaination for the latter. Defence struggles because we have to resist to unending waves. And there are unending waves because NOONE in our squad is able to get turnovers. We need a Beirne, Jenkins, Cloete, VdF, even Heenan

Had a look through the turnover stats and they back up your argument. Thornbury has most turnovers for us with 9 which is 5 behind leader Cloete. Bundee has 8, and then that's all we have in the squad with more than 5 turnovers for the season.

Cardiff, Ulster and Munster have several players each with over 5 turnovers.

Utopia Parkway

marley45 wrote: »

Had a look through the turnover stats and they back up your argument. Thornbury has most turnovers for us with 9 which is 5 behind leader Cloete. Bundee has 8, and then that's all we have in the squad with more than 5 turnovers for the season.

Cardiff, Ulster and Munster have several players each with over 5 turnovers.

Back row has to be better in winning turnovers. Fairly unusual to have a second row leading a team in turnovers I would imagine. Oliver at 5 is our leading back rower.

molloyjh

Larbre34 wrote: »

Yeah well they should've.

I don't see how Aki could've made that belly-to-belly tackle any safer at full tilt. Billy V dipped into him as Aki himself dipped and BV caught a bell ringer for himself as Aki moved to wrap him. It wasn't reckless or malicious and a ban does precisely nothing to avoid such similar occurrences from the same player or any other player in the game. It was accidental and in a full contact sport, accidents will happen, despite all parties' best efforts to minimise them.

Billy V never dipped. Watch it again. His head stayed at the same height the whole time. Aki made zero effort to avoid the head. None. He deserved the card and the ban. He had a responsibility to get lower and not clock Billy V in the head. The damage contact like that can do is very, very serious. The response to it needs to be very, very serious too. That was all on Aki 100%.

Zzippy

molloyjh wrote: »

Billy V never dipped. Watch it again. His head stayed at the same height the whole time. Aki made zero effort to avoid the head. None. He deserved the card and the ban. He had a responsibility to get lower and not clock Billy V in the head. The damage contact like that can do is very, very serious. The response to it needs to be very, very serious too. That was all on Aki 100%.

That's a bit black and white. Aki went low, Billy V went low. Yes it needs to be dealt with but that tackle was high by 2 inches, no more. Let's not make it sound like he tried to kill the guy.

sydthebeat

aki never went low....

this is the point of contact.. aki is practically upright

irishbucsfan

I think the reaction to this ban underlines exactly why the officials deciding these things are independent!

realhorrorshow

marley45 wrote: »

Had a look through the turnover stats and they back up your argument. Thornbury has most turnovers for us with 9 which is 5 behind leader Cloete. Bundee has 8, and then that's all we have in the squad with more than 5 turnovers for the season.

Cardiff, Ulster and Munster have several players each with over 5 turnovers.

I wouldn't mind the lack of turnovers if it was due to a concerted effort to fan out and cover the width of the pitch in defence, however we do neither and that's extremely disappointing.

connemara man

Tacklers need to bend at the hip. No hinge no chance of mitigation if you big a head.

Just the way it is

RonnieL

Different angles can be chosen to suit your preferred narrative. Bottom line is, players are being asked on one hand to lower tackle height, and on the other to contribute positively to the "dominant tackle" stats. The language we hear before/after games against bigger teams all surrounds the need for the players to "front up", not get bullied, impose themselves physically etc. Everyone who watches enough rugby knows that games are won up front, and if the opposition are allowed to get over the gain line at will, then you're going to lose. I'm in no doubt that Bundee was out there doing precisely what Andy Farrell and the coaches wanted him to do. The margins are just too fine. I watched the highlights of the game last night, and Robbie Henshaw was immense, but he put in some very upright tackles which could easily have resulted in nasty head clashes. They didn't, and Robbie won man of the match.

sydthebeat

RonnieL wrote: »

Different angles can be chosen to suit your preferred narrative..

:rolleyes:

... but nothing can change the images of what actually happened ....

It was a risky tackle attempt that bundee couldnt control.
It would be considered unlucky but you must take into account the fact he was sent off not 20 months ago for an extremely similar tackle.. so he really should have known better.

hopefully he will learn going forward

salmocab

I think ultimately the only issue is some people are getting away with these incidents and some are getting punished, Akis ban is fair and whilst it might seem unfair that someone else got away with it that’s their own good luck, not Aki being treated harshly.

ShineyShiney

It will eventually become the norm to put the attacker down while ceeding the gain line until that time it's going to be difficult for 10,12,13 to meet the coaches expectations of holding that line against hard carries.

Cast iron red, but I wouldn't be too hard on any player getting caught with these at present, too many inconsistencies in interpretation from refs to force coaches to plan for multiple line dominant carries from opposition.

When every tackle like this leads to a card then style of play will change.

molloyjh

Zzippy wrote: »

That's a bit black and white. Aki went low, Billy V went low. Yes it needs to be dealt with but that tackle was high by 2 inches, no more. Let's not make it sound like he tried to kill the guy.

Ah yeah, I def made out like he tried to kill him. That's absolutely what I was saying. Yeah.

Aki did not go low. He did clock Billy V on the chin. And that may have caused a concussion. And concussions do, have and will cause very, very serious damage. There was nothing in my post that isnt well known by all and sundry and nothing to suggest Aki tried to do anything at all other than make a poor tackle.

Zzippy

sydthebeat wrote: »

aki never went low....

this is the point of contact.. aki is practically upright

Aki's leg is bent and his knee is about 6 inches off the ground there. That photo is not showing what you think it is. Vunipola is also clearly bent forward and not upright or at his full height either. It's hard to tackle an attacker going low. Aki obviously needs to improve his tackling further and get lower again but he was low there.

Former Coach

molloyjh wrote: »

Ah yeah, I def made out like he tried to kill him. That's absolutely what I was saying. Yeah.

Aki did not go low. He did clock Billy V on the chin. And that may have caused a concussion. And concussions do, have and will cause very, very serious damage. There was nothing in my post that isnt well known by all and sundry and nothing to suggest Aki tried to do anything at all other than make a poor tackle.

Don’t really know why you are persisting with this rot!
Bundee clearly dipped as he attempted the tackle. Problem was that Vunipola also dipped as he braced himself for contact. There was contact with the head and a red card was inevitable but to suggest that it was deliberate is just nonsense.

Zzippy

molloyjh wrote: »

Ah yeah, I def made out like he tried to kill him. That's absolutely what I was saying. Yeah.

Aki did not go low. He did clock Billy V on the chin. And that may have caused a concussion. And concussions do, have and will cause very, very serious damage. There was nothing in my post that isnt well known by all and sundry and nothing to suggest Aki tried to do anything at all other than make a poor tackle.

He tried to make a poor tackle? Come on man, this is getting ridiculous.