QuoteEurope obviously make or break this year, but how come the two Munster Leinster games last year didn't matter as it was "only the magners" but now their suddenly so big they provide another example of Leinster bottling the big games?
Total crap. Hapless is the worst word I would use to describe Earls. He's not a very tall lad, so therefore is going to be under pressure under high balls, but has reasonably acquitted himself so far, and his attacking play is second to none, Fitzgerald included. Also, bear in mind that he's not a natural full back. Calling him a liability is pure stupidity.Originally Posted by Aberdonian Stu
With the resources, players and back up he has, he should be shot if he doesn't develop them. Leinsters main character flaw over the years has been their propensity to bottle it in big games, and play certain players with a yellow streak down their backs. He is still doing that. True progress can only be judged in the Heineken Cup, and he has made very little progress there.
Strength in depth? Two weeks before the Heineken Cup starts Leinster are in total disarray at Out Half, the most pivotal position on the park and have very little option at reserve hooker and scrum half. Not great preparation for the biggest tournament of the year.
Lunacy might be a bit strong. I believe he either makes the semi final of the HC or he should be shown the door. How long does he need, how much money does he need to spend? He's a bit of a Rafa Benitez type of person to me.
Europe obviously make or break this year, but how come the two Munster Leinster games last year didn't matter as it was "only the magners" but now their suddenly so big they provide another example of Leinster bottling the big games?
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
I for one never would say a Leinster v Munster Magners League game 'didn't matter' and anyone who says so is simply ignorant. These games always matter, especially to the supporters. It stuck in my gut to lose twice to Leinster last season, and thats why Sunday night was particularly sweet.
My reference to Leinster being bottlers still stands. League games are one thing but there is way more pressure in the Heineken Cup and thats where they have always bottled things in the past. I can see this season being no different sadly, but I hope I'm wrong. They have proven that they can do it on the big Heineken Cup occasion (QF V Toulouse in 06) but I believe their mentality is all wrong for these games, be it complacency or fear, I don't know which, but until they get the mental strength required they'll always be nearly men imo.
I don't think I agree with you at all joeSoap. That game against Toulouse was exactly the mentality that needed to be removed from Leinster Rugby (and not just from the players). We beat Toulouse by 6 points that day and outscored them by (I think) 5 tries to 4. It reminds be a bit of how Newcastle used to play under Kevin Keegan in the 1990s, instead of loosing games 2-1 they'd loose 4-3. Playing the ball fast and loose like that will come good on some days and go very badly on others.
Cheika has spent the last 3 years building a team to genuinely compete with the top clubs in europe, rather than trying to win games with 30% or less of the possession. Whether the team he's put together is good enough is a separate question but he's working to the correct plan.
Also, Leinster isn't in total disarray at outhalf. Leinster has 3 senior outhalves, two of them are top international players and one is a young irish prospect. It's perfectly correct to play the irish player in the big league games.
I feel it is the manner in which Leinster lost. I didn't see the start when some penalties missed but from the majority of the remainder of the match Munster bullied them in their own half of the pitch. Munster might have scored late but should have been out of sight by then only for Leinster defence. Leinster also failed to score at home.
Jack Charlton used to say that defence is half the game.
You're right though. Leinster give up a lot of territory in open play. They don't protect the ball well when they take it into contact so you'll often see the receiving player give a few yards to the defence so as to be sure of staying with the support. The defence is similar, they deliberately hold back a yard or two from the gain line to be sure of having two or more tacklers when the time comes. It means that the defence is rarely broken but in exchange they give up a few yards each phase while they wait for the attacking team to make a mistake.
They beat Toulouse in France that day, didn't they??If they played a slower tighter game they would have got hammered like they were in the semi final that year so I fail to see your point. You play to your strengths, and Leinsters main strengths lie with fast ball and attack.
Not if he hasn't got the players or the game plan to win games that way he's not. And Leinster have not been, and imo are still not in a position to compete with the top teams in Europe, namely Munster, Toulouse, Clermont Auvegrne and Stade Francais.
Contepomi: International inside centre converted to out-half. Exceptional centre, questionable out-half. Nacewa: Utility back who has played the majority of his rugby as a centre or full back. Also out for at least ten weeks with a broken arm. Sexton: Now highly tried, yet only proven to be average. Has never had a great game, and won't make it as an international imo. And please don't use the 'he's only a young fella' argument-Rob Kearney, Keith Earls and Luke Fitzgerald are all younger than him and making way more progress and O'Gara was younger than him (22) when he made his Irish debut.
I'd call that disarray at Out-Half.
Last edited by joeSoap; 30/09/2008 at 1:01 PM.
The point is that the team was ridiculously inconsistent back then. Largely because of the game-plan. Keeping the ball loose and the play broken gives your strike runners a good chance of finding a gap but it also hands easy possession over to the opposition. Against Toulouse they were as quick to hand it back to us and we beat them at a game of who can find the most holes in the opposition defence. The exact same game plan lost the following fortnight because Munster didn't give Leinster any cheap ball. The team was playing to its strengths but those strengths were, by design, unreliable.They beat Toulouse in France that day, didn't they??
I don't agree with saying a team was brilliant because it beat Toulouse and then terrible because it lost to Munster. It was the same team involved in both matches. By the same logic, Leinster didn't get any worse as a team last weekend. They had the deficiencies in their game exposed and it's the job of the management to respond to that. The flaws in the Leinster team today are much smaller and should be easier to fix than compared to Cheika's first season.
I'm not going to go too deeply into a row over who should be Leinster's outhalf. If you don't rate the players, that your opinion but I disagree.
My main problem with Leinster is that they have always lacked the necessary bit of grit required when the going gets tough. They have more than earned their nickname of 'The Ladyboys' over the years through performances like those against Edinburgh in the Heineken Cup in recent seasons and Contepomi's apparent inability to control anything everytime he comes up against a red shirt in a major game
This season they have players like Van de Linde, Elsom, Heaslip, O'Kelly, Jennings, Contepomi, O'Driscoll, Kearney, Horgan, Dempsey and Fitzgerald that should have them challenging for the Heineken Cup. I'll put my house on it that they won't be, and it'll be for the same reasons as usual.
I think we'll just have to disagree. I don't think Leinster was lacking in any grit up front last weekend. The Leinster pack was a match for Munster's, Leinster had the better of the set piece but Munster was stronger in the loose. Both tries came through the backs, the backs had no ideas to break the Munster defence other than to test Earls under high kicks and the penalties were missed by a back.
Leinster were beaten away to Edinburgh and Toulouse last year because the defence (Kearney in particular) gave away stupid tries. We lost to Leicester because the attack couldn't manufacture any type of space, even when they were down to 13 men. Leinster may well go out of Europe early again this year but it'll be for very different reasons than 3 or 4 years ago.
When I was talking about a bit of grit, I didn't mean necessarily from the forwards. Leinster have quite a decent pack actually (LeoCullen excepted) and if anything its the backs that have been lacking the bottle. Contepomi, for all his flair, skill and genius has the most questionable temperament I have ever seen from a back. You never know what you're going to get, and its been pretty fair to say that in the big HC games, he's gone into hiding.
Maybe its because of all the hype regarding O'Driscoll, Kearney, Fitzgerald, Horgan, Dempsey etc, but if I was a Leinster fan I'd be looking for answers as to why these big players don't do it when it counts.
Well on the Horgan front the simple answer is that physically he is clearly getting on. While he isn't that old numbers wise it's clear that he's lost a step of pace and that can be fatal for wingers, though I think he has a couple of good years left in him.
The rest of the players you mentioned have performed well and as for Cullen, who for some reason you seemed to imply was a weak link in the pack (my apologies if I misread you comment) is a rock in the second row.
I stand over my use of the word hapless to describe Earls ability under the high ball. Using his physical characteristics and his recent adoption of the position as an excuse doesn't fly. On the first part, if he's too short to play there then he shouldn't be there. On the second, he needs to show more versatility, he's had only one good performance in that position and there's only so many places on the park to put the man. If full back is where the opportunity lies then he needs to become more of a full back.
Cheika's record in the Heineken Cup is one of progress. He brought a team that had been rubbish in the competition in the two preceding years to the knockout stages in 2 out of 3 seasons and went out in the group of death the other year. In said other year he happend to win the Magners. That's a good return.
On the bottling it front, again Leinster's more high-risk strategy made that far more likely and he's phased a lot of that out to develop a more consistent gameplan.
I'd concur with Bald Student on the depth of Leinster at out-half, and again the current situation is a vast improvement on the days where Option B was Christian Warner.
As for the HC chances. Will Leinster win? I haven't a monkeys but they are far better placed to challenge now than they have been for a long time. Like Bald Student said, if they fall short it will be for far different reasons to the semi final defeat a few years back.
Check out my new sports blog http://www.action81.com
I think you're being a little unfair in Earls. He's not naturally a fullback but he's being played there to give him some game time before moving him into the centre where he'll have a lot less time to think. You saw the same with Trimble a few years back and D'Arcy before that. The Luke Fitzgerald has been playing back three for 2 years now but will almost certainly move into the centre soon.
I still don't agree with you joeSoap (and I'm not deliberately being contrary by replying to all your posts). There wasn't any lack of grit from the backs either last Sunday. I don't remember anyone avoiding contact or dropping off a tackle. Sexton regularly had to take a hit from men twice his size when he got slow ball from inside and I don't think he threw a single hospital pass to the centre to avoid it. If anything I think a part of the problem is that BOD has been much to quick to go into contact over his career and he's paying for it now with hamstrings as tight as Tony Mac.
Leo's a bit lighter than most other locks but if he put on any more weight it would damage the lineout. That's a deliberate choice and I think it's been paying dividends, especially now with the new rules making it much easier to challenge opposition ball.
Kicking is a separate skill again and you're right that Contipomi had a 'mare but that happens to every kicker from time to time and I wouldn't write him off after one bad game in over a year.
Well...another interesting Magners League weekend. Munster again, ground out a victory, this time in appalling conditions in a very unsatisfactory performance. Highlight again being Keith Earls performance...quite simply outstanding, and he just keeps on improving. O'Gara was very influential again, and it was good to see Quinny back in the fold.
Ulster too were poor, but ground out a victory.
But what about 14 man Connacht?Quite gritty, ballsy and at times skillful performance. Again they showed up the bottler Ladyboys, and surely Cheika is now treading thin ice. I genuinely fear for them in the Heineken. And before all the ladboyettes here start moaning in between their caviar and Dom Perignon that it was only a reserve side, well, remember that they were playing Connacht...lowly Connacht, they had 7 top internationals in the starting xv and couldn't score a try. Thats 160 minutes of rugby without crossing the line.
And the performance simply re-inforces my arguments about them being in trouble at out half. They're in huge trouble there.
I'm not even going to try to fathom what mutated form of English the term ladyboyette comes from.
Horrible performance and while I'd love to blame it on the reserves there were plenty of first team players out there as well. Leinster's reserves should be well capable beating Connacht, never mind a side with a few first teamers.
Basing Cheika's performance however on, from what I can tell in your posts, 4 games over 3 years is a limited way of judging a performance. The players, fans, and executive branch all think he's doing a good job and you can read my older posts to show why.
I'll address the bottlers half of the other term you used, again this points clearly to the way in which Leinster played pre-Cheika. It was too open and too high risk.
Leinster didn't choke against Munster or Connacht in the last two game, they were outplayed in both cases. Does this annoy me? Of course, a defeat is a defeat. Consistently however Leinster have come out on top in these kinds of encounters more often than not in the past season and a half however. They have been able to outplay opponents, controlling the game more.
When you play a high risk game the level of control you hold over the result is lessened (kind of goes with the whole 'high risk' term), the tighter style Leinster have adopted has stood to them on the whole over the past season and a bit.
Check out my new sports blog http://www.action81.com
Leinster improved this weekend as at least they scored some points although no tries. Only saw the last few minutes but caught the replay of try which was great. I don't see Connacht becoming a mid table side anytime soon but at least they have a fighting chance at the bottom.
Will be interesting to see if Kidney picks form players in his November squad. Some of the Leinster experienced players will surely struggle to make the side.
The Connacht try was great. They've got a big fight on their hands to no finish bottom however. Dragons also have 2 wins while Ulster have usually pulled it out the head-to-heads with Connacht. The big issue for Connacht is depth, come the back end of the season they tend to suffer more from injuries than the other teams down there as they don't have players of a similar standard to come in.
Check out my new sports blog http://www.action81.com
Cheika needs a win against Edinburgh to stay in his job.
He might struggle on until they find someone to fill the role, but I'd say the search for a replacement is about to start.
Leinster have invested far too much not to be competitive. A bit like Munster in years past, mediocrity in the Magners will be tolerated as long as there's a good showing in the Heino (ie qualification from the group stages). If there's neither, its goodnight.
I am very keen to see where all of this 'progress' that the Leinster fans talk about under Cheika actually is.
A major aspect of controlling a rugby game is to have a dominant, take no crap out half in the mould of O'Gara. ROG runs the show start to finish, accepts the plaudits when it goes well, and slates himself when it doesn't. But, and its a big but, he has the balls to stand up and call the shots. I don't mean to harp on about Leinsters difficulties at ten, but Contepomi now is obviously being considered as a centre by Cheika, and Sexton is simply not aggressive or have enough balls and personality for the role. And he's not too young lads, and he's not still 'learning his trade'. If Leinster had O'Gara, or a Steven Jones or James Hook I reckon they'd come mighty close. Now I reckon they won't come out of their group.
Nacewa is the starting out half while fit, he's currently recovering from a little matter of a broken arm.
This 'progress' as you put it was pointed out in the earlier post I made. He's made two knockout phases of the Heineken Cup and won one Magner's League in 3 years, that's a substantial step forward and far more consistent performance than his predecessors.
Check out my new sports blog http://www.action81.com
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks