Over Harsh on Leinster

anonymous_joe

premierstone wrote: »

Does this not then justify the perceived media bias towards Munster if they are consitently out performing a team of similar standard, while i admit it is unfair on Leinster to be continously compared to Munster its like you said yourself they're the most obvious comparison

But here's the thing - it's the question of being overly harsh. Leinster deserve some criticism for underachieving, but it's a bit excessive. A part of that comes down to the fact that Leinster are associated with a satirical character in Ross O'Carroll-Kelly - no-one's actually like that, but people will quite happily read about Leinster being a shower of primadonnas who aren;'t real men because it fits in with their prejudices.

Erin Go Brath

I don't subscribe to this nonsense about Leinster being the most unpopular team in the Irish media at all. This plucky salt of the earth types versus silver spoon, cappucino drinking, floppy haired types is just overplayed nonsense.

Munster currently have the respect becaue they've lifted the Heineken Cup twice in the last few years, whilst Leinster have consistantly failed in the big tests despite showing a lot of potential in the earlier rounds.
If/when leinster can win the Heinken Cup they'll be the media darlings, and the media will dump on Munsters underperformers!

premierstone

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

I don't subscribe to this nonsense about Leinster being the most unpopular team in the Irish media at all. This plucky salt of the earth types versus silver spoon, cappucino drinking, floppy haired types is just overplayed nonsense.

Munster currently have the respect becaue they've lifted the Heineken Cup twice in the last few years, whilst Leinster have consistantly failed in the big tests despite showing a lot of potential in the earlier rounds.
If/when leinster can win the Heinken Cup they'll be the media darlings, and the media will dump on Munsters underperformers!

Agree, cos god knows if there is one thing more fickle than fans its the media

Amazotheamazing

anonymous_joe wrote: »

History might have something to do with it. The two teams are suprisngly evenly matched on paper too. Munster outperform Leinster consistently, but as individuals there team really isn't that much better.

Are they really evenly matched on paper?

I don't think they are. I think this era's Munster team is a level above Leinster's, and I'm equally sure that that could change over the next few years given the strength of the various Leinster underage squads.

It's an interesting point about the various individuals though, rugby has never been a game for individuals, the most important skill a rugby player can have, imo, is the ability to play in a team.

Amazotheamazing

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Are they really evenly matched on paper?

I don't think they are. I think this era's Munster team is a level above Leinster's, and I'm equally sure that that could change over the next few years given the strength of the various Leinster underage squads.

It's an interesting point about the various individuals though, rugby has never been a game for individuals, the most important skill a rugby player can have, imo, is the ability to play in a team.

I think the teams are fairly evenly matched.If you said we could swap this minute I wouldnt.

As has been done before on this site,comparisons gave man for man your better in some aread and were better in others.

As for Leinster getting a harder time i the media,they most certainly do as Gerry Thornley pointed out on off the ball on monday.So its not just Leinster fans bitching,its plainly obvious for everyone to see tbh and any fan that doesnt think so is lying tbh.

Leinster have been called the Ladyboys by every journalist in ireland,they have constantly insinuated that the team lacks heart,the fans are wealthy arrogant snobs that every Leinster fan or player lives in D4 and looks down at everyone else at some point or another.
Can you imagine the uproar from Munster fans if they were called the Bog Hoppers every second week and their fans refered to as working class farmers,they would not be pleased .

After reading negative articles about Leinster for years in the paper,your left with a bitter taste in your mouth as a fan and I actually think it stokes an uneeded rivalry with Munster tbh.

anonymous_joe

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Are they really evenly matched on paper?

I don't think they are. I think this era's Munster team is a level above Leinster's, and I'm equally sure that that could change over the next few years given the strength of the various Leinster underage squads.

It's an interesting point about the various individuals though, rugby has never been a game for individuals, the most important skill a rugby player can have, imo, is the ability to play in a team.

On paper and so to be taken with a pinch of salt. :P

• 15. Keith Earls 15. Rob Kearney - Kearney
• 14. Howlett 14. Shane Horgan - Howlett
• 13. Tipoki 13. Brian O'Driscoll - O'Driscoll
• 12. Mafi 12. Gordon D'arcy - Dunno, d'arcy?
• 11. Dowling 11. Fitzgerald - Fitz
  
• 10. O'Gara 10. Contepomi - Close. Rog
• 9. O'Leary 9. Whitaker - Not Whitaker :P
  
• 8. Wallace/Diack 8. Heaslip - Munster
• 7. Ronan/Wallace 7. Shane Jennings - Jennings maybe
• 6. Quinlan 6. Rocky Elsom - Elsom
• 5. O'Connel 5. Mal O'Kelly - POC
• 4. O'Callaghan 4. Leo Cullen - Dunno
• 3. Hayes 3. CJ - van der Linde
• 2. Flannery 2. Jackman - Flannery
• 1. Horan 1. Stan Wright - Horan

Those are opinions, some of which are very much debatable. That's not the point. The point is, is there really that massive a difference?

Munster have about 6 first choice internationals in their pack and Leinster maybe 3 to 5.

Half backs, RoG versus Contepomi is very close, Whitaker's not as good as Munster's half backs.

In terms of the centres and the backs, I'd say Leinster would edge it, but then, packs are almost always more important. So there ya go, not that big a gap.

sm.org

Always bee the way hasn't it if we could get the Blue backs and the Red forwards to consistently play well together then we'd be in business.

anonymous_joe

anonymous_joe wrote: »

On paper and so to be taken with a pinch of salt. :P

• 15. Keith Earls 15. Rob Kearney - Kearney
• 14. Howlett 14. Shane Horgan - Howlett
• 13. Tipoki 13. Brian O'Driscoll - O'Driscoll
• 12. Mafi 12. Gordon D'arcy - Dunno, d'arcy?
• 11. Dowling 11. Fitzgerald - Fitz
  
• 10. O'Gara 10. Contepomi - Close. Rog
• 9. O'Leary 9. Whitaker - Not Whitaker :P
  
• 8. Wallace/Diack 8. Heaslip - Munster
• 7. Ronan/Wallace 7. Shane Jennings - Jennings maybe
• 6. Quinlan 6. Rocky Elsom - Elsom
• 5. O'Connel 5. Mal O'Kelly - POC
• 4. O'Callaghan 4. Leo Cullen - Dunno
• 3. Hayes 3. CJ - van der Linde
• 2. Flannery 2. Jackman - Flannery
• 1. Horan 1. Stan Wright - Horan

Those are opinions, some of which are very much debatable. That's not the point. The point is, is there really that massive a difference?

Munster have about 6 first choice internationals in their pack and Leinster maybe 3 to 5.

Half backs, RoG versus Contepomi is very close, Whitaker's not as good as Munster's half backs.

In terms of the centres and the backs, I'd say Leinster would edge it, but then, packs are almost always more important. So there ya go, not that big a gap.

15. Keith Earls 15. Rob Kearney - Kearney

14. Howlett 14. Shane Horgan - Howlett

13. Tipoki 13. Brian O'Driscoll - O'Driscoll

12. Mafi 12. Contepomi - Contepomi

11. Dowling 11. Fitzgerald - Fitz

10. O'Gara 10. Nacewa- Nacewa(better at running the ball)

9. O'Leary 9. Whitaker - both of munsters

8. Wallace/Diack 8. Heaslip - Walace

7. Ronan/Wallace 7. Shane Jennings

6. Quinlan 6. Rocky Elsom - Elsom

5. O'Connel 5. Mal O'Kelly - POC

4. O'Callaghan 4. Leo Cullen - Cullen

3. Hayes 3. CJ - van der Linde

2. Flannery 2. Jackman - Jackman

1. Horan 1. Stan Wright - Horan


I would have nacewa at 10 and i from what ive seen of him in the super 14 at 10 and at leinster at,i would choose him over rog,especially for the type of game we are trying to play.Obviously alot of people will disagree but as i say the team are trying to play different games and both 10's have their own strengths.

Contepomi at 12 is better than mafi.

I would have jackman over flannery.
I would also have cullen over DOC.

Personal opinions but if added up the total based on that its 10 for Leinster and 5 for Munster,as ive said thats my personal opinion and thats why I said i wouldnt swap.

premierstone

Louis White Antifreeze wrote: »

I would have nacewa at 10 and i from what ive seen of him in the super 14 at 10 and at leinster at,i would choose him over rog,especially for the type of game we are trying to play.Obviously alot of people will disagree but as i say the team are trying to play different games and both 10's have their own strengths.

Contepomi at 12 is better than mafi.

I would have jackman over flannery.
I would also have cullen over DOC.

Personal opinions but if added up the total based on that its 10 for Leinster and 5 for Munster,as ive said thats my personal opinion and thats why I said i wouldnt swap.

Dont worry about it Kid not too many down here would swap either

Podge_irl

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Are they really evenly matched on paper?

I don't think they are. I think this era's Munster team is a level above Leinster's, and I'm equally sure that that could change over the next few years given the strength of the various Leinster underage squads.

I don't think Leinster are as good a team as Munster (I don't think there is a massive amount in it, but definitely not as good). Mind you, the press and the general populace often seem to under-rate Munster and portray games as the local country boys against the big rich Europeans. Munster in the HEC has rarely been a David versus Goliath affair - they have a fully international 1-10 more often then not! Whereas for some reason Leinster are expected to compete when they quite frankly had (and unfortunately still have) some massive problems. Its amazing they got as far as they did in 2006 given the pack they had.

I'm a little less annoyed this time around because Leinster should be a lot better on paper at the moment given the improvements made to the pack (though scrummy is still a huge problem) so they definitely deserve criticism. Munster are receiving less criticism then Leinster did last week though. While Castres are clearly no Clermont, Leinster beat them comfortably while Munster struggled against 14 men! More then once Munster really should have been in a better position coming into the last game of the group stages, yet that's forgotten with another miracle match in Thomond (not that those games weren't impressive).

old boy

i.m.o. a 13 man claremont would beat castres any time

premierstone

premierstone wrote: »

Dont worry about it Kid not too many down here would swap either

Alright kid.

sock puppet

old boy wrote: »

i.m.o. a 13 man claremont would beat castres any time

Results say otherwise

anonymous_joe

sock puppet wrote: »

Results say otherwise

Have Castres beaten Clermont lately? Cos I know they're second last in the Top 14...

anonymous_joe

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Have Castres beaten Clermont lately? Cos I know they're second last in the Top 14...

They beat them at home 12-6 on the 20th september.

Their record is shocking but against most teams they seem to lose by only 10 points or so.So its not as if they have been getting hammered off the pitch.Most of their matches are quite high scoring aswell.

sock puppet

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Have Castres beaten Clermont lately? Cos I know they're second last in the Top 14...

They have this season. I know Castres are in poor form and I'm not saying they're better than Clermont but they did just sack their coach and I thought they played quite well. I just don't think losing to Castres away after they've had the boost of a change of management is a total disaster. The manner of the defeat was bad but I think they'll recover for the wasps match.

anonymous_joe

Louis White Antifreeze wrote: »

They beat them at home 12-6 on the 20th september.

Their record is shocking but against most teams they seem to lose by only 10 points or so.So its not as if they have been getting hammered off the pitch.Most of their matches are quite high scoring aswell.

Ah cool.

They;'re a tough organised team, no doubts there.

sock puppet wrote: »

They have this season. I know Castres are in poor form and I'm not saying they're better than Clermont but they did just sack their coach and I thought they played quite well. I just don't think losing to Castres away after they've had the boost of a change of management is a total disaster. The manner of the defeat was bad but I think they'll recover for the wasps match.

They weren;t bad, but they didn't really deserve a win. In that regard Leinster should have put them to the sword.

old boy

+ i think(maby i am wrong) wasps had lost 5 gp games in a row before leinster beat them,
i am not bashing leinster, at the end of every season cold hard facts are staring everyone in the face,
30 years coaching different sports, sihte days glory days etc, at the end of each season, i have had to look back and say, when and how did i fkuck up,
but then there is no day gone out of the next 2 years,

old boy

old boy wrote: »

+ i think(maby i am wrong) wasps had lost 5 gp games in a row before leinster beat them,
i am not bashing leinster, at the end of every season cold hard facts are staring everyone in the face,
30 years coaching different sports, sihte days glory days etc, at the end of each season, i have had to look back and say, when and how did i fkuck up,
but then there is no day gone out of the next 2 years,

premierstone

old boy wrote: »

+ i think(maby i am wrong) wasps had lost 5 gp games in a row before leinster beat them,
i am not bashing leinster, at the end of every season cold hard facts are staring everyone in the face,
30 years coaching different sports, sihte days glory days etc, at the end of each season, i have had to look back and say, when and how did i fkuck up,
but then there is no day gone out of the next 2 years,

Alcohol and d'internet not a good mix imo

kingking85

RTE Website is the worst for coverage - - Leinster beat Wasps massively - however, there were no less than 3 articles about Munster plus 20 pics of Munster with nothing about Leinster, Connacht or Ulster.

BIAS!!

zenmonk

premierstone wrote: »

Dont worry about it Kid not too many down here would swap either

Hear hear.

Nacewa ahead of ROG at 10?
Based on about 5 minutes of evidence - Ridiculous.

Pshan

kingking85 wrote: »

RTE Website is the worst for coverage - - Leinster beat Wasps massively - however, there were no less than 3 articles about Munster plus 20 pics of Munster with nothing about Leinster, Connacht or Ulster.

BIAS!!

There was I thinking it was the other way round with headings like "understrength Leinster lose to Dragons" and "Munster fail to win in Wales" with no metion that Munster were understrength. I suppose we like to see our province portrayed in a positive way.

anonymous_joe

zenmonk wrote: »

Hear hear.

Nacewa ahead of ROG at 10?
Based on about 5 minutes of evidence - Ridiculous.

I wouldn;t have Nacewa over RoG at 10. I'd consider Contepomi over him.

It's easy to pick individual mistakes out of such a line up, but in my mind it says that Leinster's team is made up of players who are in no way at all inferior to the Munster players. One team however, outperforms the other. That's definitely worth examining.

thehighground

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I wouldn;t have Nacewa over RoG at 10. I'd consider Contepomi over him.

It's easy to pick individual mistakes out of such a line up, but in my mind it says that Leinster's team is made up of players who are in no way at all inferior to the Munster players. One team however, outperforms the other. That's definitely worth examining.

Now that you mention examining - Donal Linehan has a good analysis (not OTT criticism) on Leinster in the Examiner today and well worth reading.

Just the final paragraph quoted here which sums up his opinion. In the article he makes some interesting observations on the difference in Shane Jennings' form in Leinster & Leicester.

Leinster invariably produce less than the sum of their parts and you have to ask why. Last Friday’s defeat was a typical case in point. Leadership, a willingness to take responsibility, composure under pressure and a never-say- die attitude that extends to every individual within the group are all key ingredients in what makes Munster what they are. Leinster are lacking in all those areas. If they want to succeed in Europe then these issues need to be addressed. Time is running out for an exceptionally talented group of players.

Full article here:

http://www.examiner.ie/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=sport-qqqm=sport-qqqa=sport-qqqid=80242-qqqx=1.asp

zenmonk

zenmonk wrote: »

Hear hear.

Nacewa ahead of ROG at 10?
Based on about 5 minutes of evidence - Ridiculous.

Based on watching a a whole super 14 season ( I take it you dont watch super 14?) where when he played for the blues he kept luke mcalister out of the 1st 5 8th slot and reserved him to the 2nd 5 8th,to where he now plays all his rugby.
Graham henry said before that he would be the first name on the AB team sheet because of his versatility and its well known the NZ rugby union were paying for his court case to try to get the IRB rule changed,after he played for fiji for 10 minutes.Rog wouldnt even get in the AB reserves.

Dont label me ridiculous when its down to your ignorance of the SH game that you have only seen him play 10 for one match.

He is miles better than ROG as a running 10,which is what Leinster need but I never said he was better for a Tactical game because rog is unbelievable at playing that sort of a game,which is Munsters game.So he wouldnt suit Munster but he will be a better 10 for what Leinster are trying to do,especially playing with Gaffneys stupid flat backline philosophy,I think he is the only 10 we have that can make that idea work.

Chucky the tree

thehighground wrote: »

Full article here:

http://www.examiner.ie/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=sport-qqqm=sport-qqqa=sport-qqqid=80242-qqqx=1.asp

Most of it seemed pretty accurate I think, especially the part on Jennings. However I'm an idiot.

louthandproud

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Most of it seemed pretty accurate I think, especially the part on Jennings. However I dont what he was thinking on this piece.





They had 2 tries up until then, if there's 5 seconds left it aint going to be possible to score a 3rd and then complete a re-start.

5 Seconds on the stadium clock, I think there were still a couple of minutes on the official match clock.

premierstone

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Most of it seemed pretty accurate I think, especially the part on Jennings. However I dont what he was thinking on this piece.





They had 2 tries up until then, if there's 5 seconds left it aint going to be possible to score a 3rd and then complete a re-start.

Wallace, Horan and Ronan - thats three chucky 1 more equals 4 :D

Chucky the tree

louthandproud wrote: »

5 Seconds on the stadium clock, I think there were still a couple of minutes on the official match clock.

premierstone wrote: »

Wallace, Horan and Ronan - thats three chucky 1 more equals 4 :D

I completely mis-read the piece.