Munster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread.

Amazotheamazing

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

I'm sure Keatley will find O'Gara helpful too, you don't?

What does this even mean? What is it in response to?

If you want to have reasoned debate, PM me when you aren't going to get overly antsy about absolutely everything that's said that isn't glorifying your heroes. Until then I'm done trying to reiterate everything to you 3 and 4 times. If you don't want to use your own brain, stop bothering mine.

If you can't understand simple rational thoughts about how a team actually grows and needs to be kept afloat, especially when I've taken the time to post good reasoning, using examples from both Leinster and the Ireland team, and being careful not to "Munster bash", then it's not worth my time trying to rewrite every single point.

fwiw, everything that you've questioned is answered before you've questioned it.

Amazotheamazing

Deleted User wrote: »

What does this even mean? What is it in response to?

If you want to have reasoned debate, PM me when you aren't going to get overly antsy about absolutely everything that's said that isn't glorifying your heroes. Until then I'm done trying to reiterate everything to you 3 and 4 times. If you don't want to use your own brain, stop bothering mine.

If you can't understand simple rational thoughts about how a team actually grows and needs to be kept afloat, especially when I've taken the time to post good reasoning, using examples from both Leinster and the Ireland team, and being careful not to "Munster bash", then it's not worth my time trying to rewrite every single point.

fwiw, everything that you've questioned is answered before you've questioned it.

Here's what you wrote

"But being unable to work them alongside a suitable replacement in the final seasons of their careers is almost certainly damaging for a team."

Have you any proof of that?

I pointed out O'gara already works alongside Sexton which Sexton has repeatedly pointed out.

"ROG wants what's best for the team, which is to play every game".

This is blind. That is what I've written.

Amazotheamazing

Deleted User wrote: »

"ROG wants what's best for the team, which is to play every game".

This is blind. That is what I've written.

Every player wants to play every game. You think Trimble (to pick an non Munster/Leinster example) wanted to be dropped?

Every player has to think the team is better with them in it.

GerM

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

The restriction is still there, they can't start every game should the coach want them to. It's no doubt for their own good but it's still a massive limitation on the coach.

It's not really. They can play them for all the HEC games and generally all the inter-provincial games. The games where they're unavailable are the early weeks of the Pro12 and the international windows (when the other Pro12 sides are similarly affected). Aside from that, it's squad management as chosen by the provincial coaches. It didn't seem to hurt Leinster and Munster too much for the first 6 games of this season. It not only gives a little bit of protection to the top level players, it's a great way of developing players. Looking at it as a restriction is a very negative viewpoint. It should be seen as an opportunity. If Leinster hosted a Scottish or Italian side and didn't put out a lot of upcoming players instead of the front line internationals, I'd be disappointed. I'm sure many feel the same in other provinces.

wixfjord

AtItAllDayRef wrote: »

really? so the internationals won't be limited to 6 games between the start of the HC and the end of December? They will all play 4 HC games if fit. The likes of ROG, BOD, POC, Kearney etc are never drafted straight back into HC games.

For Leinster why is Nacewa not at full back for the HC games? (and I'd be fairly sure its not because Kearney is a better full back)

No Nacewa is certainly a better full back, the reason is obvious though, and nothing to do with central contracts, it's about getting your best players onto the pitch.
Kearney is a full back only, and a bloody good one at that, Nacewa can play anywhere, and play very well anywhere, so he's pushed to wing.

If we had Nacewa full back, we'd have to play Carr or D. Kearney on the wing, so it's an obvious choice for Schmidt, and again, nothing to do with your perception of the big bad central contract.

OTHP

GerM wrote: »

It's not really. They can play them for all the HEC games and generally all the inter-provincial games. The games where they're unavailable are the early weeks of the Pro12 and the international windows (when the other Pro12 sides are similarly affected). Aside from that, it's squad management as chosen by the provincial coaches. It didn't seem to hurt Leinster and Munster too much for the first 6 games of this season. It not only gives a little bit of protection to the top level players, it's a great way of developing players. Looking at it as a restriction is a very negative viewpoint. It should be seen as an opportunity. If Leinster hosted a Scottish or Italian side and didn't put out a lot of upcoming players instead of the front line internationals, I'd be disappointed. I'm sure many feel the same in other provinces.

The centrally contracted players are limited to a certain number of games a year around 30 or so. If there's a limit on games they play there's obviously a huge influence on games they don't play in. And as they are paid by the IRFU directly (ie not part of the provincial budget) then the national set up want them playing in the top games at club level and also there will be a natural instinct and provincial selection influence to pick a player that the coach and IRFU have invested a lot of money in over a provincial player in form.

In a normal year the central contracted players play about 9 internationals, 6 to 9 HEC games and around 13 Pro12 games including the play offs. Due to the player welfare programme they don't play for the provinces in pre season and are only re-introduced a week or two ahead of the HEC first round. The you have the AI's and HEC rounds 3 and 4 followed by another rest around xmas. then its 6 nations HEC knockouts, rest, HEC final and Pro12 knockouts. By forcing the centrally contracted player into such confined periods they ensure that they play HEC games and stunt the development of players who need to play in HEC games to further their cause for international caps. The system allows for young guys to get experience at Pro 12 level but seriously stunts their chances of progressing. What your left with is guys who have little or no HEC experience hanging around the squads waiting for an injury to maybe get them a start.

Things are changing slowly in the reduction of the numbers of central contracts but the influence of the IRFU and national side on provincial selections is there for everyone to see.

wixfjord

OTHP wrote: »

The centrally contracted players are limited to a certain number of games a year around 30 or so. If there's a limit on games they play there's obviously a huge influence on games they don't play in. And as they are paid by the IRFU directly (ie not part of the provincial budget) then the national set up want them playing in the top games at club level and also there will be a natural instinct and provincial selection influence to pick a player that the coach and IRFU have invested a lot of money in over a provincial player in form.

In a normal year the central contracted players play about 9 internationals, 6 to 9 HEC games and around 13 Pro12 games including the play offs. Due to the player welfare programme they don't play for the provinces in pre season and are only re-introduced a week or two ahead of the HEC first round. The you have the AI's and HEC rounds 3 and 4 followed by another rest around xmas. then its 6 nations HEC knockouts, rest, HEC final and Pro12 knockouts. By forcing the centrally contracted player into such confined periods they ensure that they play HEC games and stunt the development of players who need to play in HEC games to further their cause for international caps. The system allows for young guys to get experience at Pro 12 level but seriously stunts their chances of progressing. What your left with is guys who have little or no HEC experience hanging around the squads waiting for an injury to maybe get them a start.

Things are changing slowly in the reduction of the numbers of central contracts but the influence of the IRFU and national side on provincial selections is there for everyone to see.

Well that fully depends on your manager. A young player playing well in the Rabo shouldn't be automatically dropped for a centrally contracted player because they are contracted, only if they add more to the team.

It's a very negative way that you're looking at it, you could also argue that if the limits were not in place, coaches would play their internationals in every game, and young guys would never get a look in!

Careful management and integrating young players into a 3/4 strength team for a Rabo game pays off, as has been shown by Schmidt at Leinster, I mean what is the alternative? If these guidelines weren't in place, and I think you're overplaying their significance, then you're open to the serious possibility of player burnout, particularly in a season like this. A smart manager would still rest his big stars whenever he could, and carefully rotate, even without the guidelines.

OTHP

wixfjord wrote: »

Well that fully depends on your manager. A young player playing well in the Rabo shouldn't be automatically dropped for a centrally contracted player because they are contracted, only if they add more to the team.

It's a very negative way that you're looking at it, you could also argue that if the limits were not in place, coaches would play their internationals in every game, and young guys would never get a look in!

Careful management and integrating young players into a 3/4 strength team for a Rabo game pays off, as has been shown by Schmidt at Leinster, I mean what is the alternative? If these guidelines weren't in place, and I think you're overplaying their significance, then you're open to the serious possibility of player burnout, particularly in a season like this. A smart manager would still rest his big stars whenever he could, and carefully rotate, even without the guidelines.

A good coach would allow for the internationals to be available for more than just HEC windows and then have free reign over his selections rather things like Kidney insisting on Paddy Wallace playing out half, McLaughlin playing second row, Donnacha Ryan playing blindside.

Examples of guys stuck at Pro12 level - Mcfadden despite being one of the highest paid players not centrally contracted and a natural centre he has only started 3 games at HEC in the centre. Donnacha Ryan - only 2 HEC starts at lock.

wixfjord

OTHP wrote: »

A good coach would allow for the internationals to be available for more than just HEC windows and then have free reign over his selections rather things like Kidney insisting on Paddy Wallace playing out half, McLaughlin playing second row, Donnacha Ryan playing blindside.

Examples of guys stuck at Pro12 level - Mcfadden despite being one of the highest paid players not centrally contracted and a natural centre he has only started 3 games at HEC in the centre. Donnacha Ryan - only 2 HEC starts at lock.

But that's what I'm saying, these guys have (or had in both cases) better alternatives ahead of them, so even if the restrictions weren't in place, they would still be playing. In fact, if the restrictions weren't in place, they'd be playing less because Darce and Bod would be starting Rabo games! McFadden benifitted hugely from BOD and Darce's presumeably enforced absence over the last few years, as has O Malley. Moving back to our previous point, do you think ROG would happily sit on the bench for Rabo games if the restrictions weren't in place? Judging by his WC interview, I don't.

As for your first point, the first two have only been tried in meaningless games, and Ryan is a viable option at blindside. I think there's not half as much pressure on provincial managers as we would think. I'm sure JustinDee would have something to say on the matter.

durkadurka

The vibe for Ronan seems to be changing on here. All I've ever heard up to now is the rather damning ' he's a good magners player'.

justsomebloke

Can we please keep this to Munster talk only. If people continue posting off topic I will delete posts or start infracting people

Fireball07

durkadurka wrote: »

The vibe for Ronan seems to be changing on here. All I've ever heard up to now is the rather damning ' he's a good magners player'.

He's a decent player but so far behind the likes of David Wallace. So he's really not an acceptable replacement. But he has done well in the last 2 games.

durkadurka

ROG was just on off the ball there talking about his drop goals. Said the Northampton one was one of the best he ever hit but castres was easy.

I didn't see a massive difference- they were both on the 10m line and both looked savage to me.

Amazotheamazing

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Every player wants to play every game. You think Trimble (to pick an non Munster/Leinster example) wanted to be dropped?

Every player has to think the team is better with them in it.

Trimble will play for Ulster for 8 more years! It's completely incomparable!

Instead how about we use someone coming to the end of their career, who's been integral to everything their team has achieved in previous seasons, akin to ROG.

You yourself gave an absolutely spot on example of Foley.

Anthony Foley did the same, he only really lost his place in the 2008 season. Looking back, we could have done with him around the younger players in a playing capacity for a bit longer. However, these guys are too competitive for that I guess.

In 2 or 3 years time, when ROG retires, would you prefer to look back, and say "it's a pity we never really gave much gametime to Keatley while ROG was about". Or would you rather say, "delighted that we've managed to get Keatley loads of exposure at Pro12 and HEC level, and that ROG has passed his boots onto a willing heir"?

Again, I'm certainly not advocating ROG be dropped, nor the term dropped ever be used when ROG doesn't start. Sharing the Jersey is absolutely essential, and if ROG is going to start every single game, then that's going to make it really very tough to do that.

GerM

OTHP wrote: »

The centrally contracted players are limited to a certain number of games a year around 30 or so. If there's a limit on games they play there's obviously a huge influence on games they don't play in. And as they are paid by the IRFU directly (ie not part of the provincial budget) then the national set up want them playing in the top games at club level and also there will be a natural instinct and provincial selection influence to pick a player that the coach and IRFU have invested a lot of money in over a provincial player in form.

In a normal year the central contracted players play about 9 internationals, 6 to 9 HEC games and around 13 Pro12 games including the play offs. Due to the player welfare programme they don't play for the provinces in pre season and are only re-introduced a week or two ahead of the HEC first round. The you have the AI's and HEC rounds 3 and 4 followed by another rest around xmas. then its 6 nations HEC knockouts, rest, HEC final and Pro12 knockouts. By forcing the centrally contracted player into such confined periods they ensure that they play HEC games and stunt the development of players who need to play in HEC games to further their cause for international caps. The system allows for young guys to get experience at Pro 12 level but seriously stunts their chances of progressing. What your left with is guys who have little or no HEC experience hanging around the squads waiting for an injury to maybe get them a start.

If POC player plays 30 games a season made up of 9 internationals, 8 HEC games and the top 13 Pro12 fixtures that is a massively attritional season. He shouldn't be playing anything more than that and if Munster were to play him any more than that, they would burn him out. Players in the massively attritional T14 don't play that much in terms of minutes on the pitch.

If Munster want it to be a non-issue, they need to use it as an opportunity. They put out several reliable yet uninspiring sides last season instead of blooding players like Murray when they could. I've already highlighted the likes of Leamy, DOC, Stringer all being dropped for HEC games. If players are playing better than them, they'll get their chance. POM and Ryan are in with DOC benched now. TOL got in ahead of Stringer when he showed he was the right man. If players show they're good enough they'll get their chance. The issue in Munster wasn't that they were being shoved back down the pecking order when the internationals returned, it was that the journeymen players were getting the slots in the Pro12 games and the young lads weren't able to actually show their ability. That's down to provincial selection.

Look at Munster's selections in the last two games before the Leinster match in the Aviva last season (which is a HEC match in intensity):

http://www.rabodirectpro12.com/matchcentre/2648.php?section=lineups&fixid=145006

http://www.rabodirectpro12.com/matchcentre/2648.php?section=lineups&fixid=144999

Munster simply need to manage their squad better if they feel central contracts are damaging them. They need to stop going with the old player who can give them 70% every week and go with the young lad that will give 50% at first but will give 100% with some exposure. Luckily it's changing now but central contracts (of which not many players are actually on anymore) shouldn't really affect provinces.

GerM

OTHP wrote: »

Mcfadden despite being one of the highest paid players not centrally contracted

Entirely untrue.

GerM

durkadurka wrote: »

ROG was just on off the ball there talking about his drop goals. Said the Northampton one was one of the best he ever hit but castres was easy.

I didn't see a massive difference- they were both on the 10m line and both looked savage to me.

Perhaps he was referring to pressure. There simply wasn't the same intensity and magnifying glass on the Castres game. You could feel it from the atmosphere and see it in his respective reactions. Northampton after 41 phases, everyone in the stadium was a nervous wreck, ROG must have been tortured knowing that this was it and there was so much riding on it.

CIARAN_BOYLE

GerM wrote: »

Perhaps he was referring to pressure. There simply wasn't the same intensity and magnifying glass on the Castres game. You could feel it from the atmosphere and see it in his respective reactions. Northampton after 41 phases, everyone in the stadium was a nervous wreck, ROG must have been tortured knowing that this was it and there was so much riding on it.

I think he was referrring to wind. He previously mentionend in another interview that he had a strong wind behind him and it was like taking a drop goal on the 22.

MaryKing

Emmet - worth listening to Trevor Hogan who was on the Marion Finucane show last Sunday (mainly about Israel), but there was a discussion about Ronan O'Gara. Trevor said he was a very humble, very grounded and never dwelt on his success. Said the same of Brian O'Driscoll - both would go out of their way to make sure that no one put them on a pedestal in the dressing room. He talked a bit about everyone being equal on a team and that is the only way it will work.

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/marianfinucane/ about 1.18 hr in.

Otherwise, Anthony Foley said he was not physically able to carry on playing at that level. Apparently, he always found training hard going. It should also be remembered that he was going straight into coaching with Munster, so it would not have been such a big change for him. I'd imagine it was the same for Shaun Payne. They were not leaving.

@thehighground

@thehighground, I don't have any issues with O'Gara, he doesn't pick the team.

It's up to the manager to organise the team in terms of development. A very very big part of this is ensuring that any players that are coming to the end of their tenure have an adequate replacement developed by being given exposure to all walks of the game.

Repeating the mistake that we discussed Re:Foley would be pretty ridiculous imo.

MaryKing

GerM wrote: »

If POC player plays 30 games a season made up of 9 internationals, 8 HEC games and the top 13 Pro12 fixtures that is a massively attritional season. He shouldn't be playing anything more than that and if Munster were to play him any more than that, they would burn him out. Players in the massively attritional T14 don't play that much in terms of minutes on the pitch.

If Munster want it to be a non-issue, they need to use it as an opportunity. They put out several reliable yet uninspiring sides last season instead of blooding players like Murray when they could. I've already highlighted the likes of Leamy, DOC, Stringer all being dropped for HEC games. If players are playing better than them, they'll get their chance. POM and Ryan are in with DOC benched now. TOL got in ahead of Stringer when he showed he was the right man. If players show they're good enough they'll get their chance. The issue in Munster wasn't that they were being shoved back down the pecking order when the internationals returned, it was that the journeymen players were getting the slots in the Pro12 games and the young lads weren't able to actually show their ability. That's down to provincial selection.

Look at Munster's selections in the last two games before the Leinster match in the Aviva last season (which is a HEC match in intensity):

http://www.rabodirectpro12.com/matchcentre/2648.php?section=lineups&fixid=145006

http://www.rabodirectpro12.com/matchcentre/2648.php?section=lineups&fixid=144999

Munster simply need to manage their squad better if they feel central contracts are damaging them. They need to stop going with the old player who can give them 70% every week and go with the young lad that will give 50% at first but will give 100% with some exposure. Luckily it's changing now but central contracts (of which not many players are actually on anymore) shouldn't really affect provinces.

I think Munster have their own way of bringing players through. Take Conor Murray for instance - B+I Cup start of last season. Plenty of games with Garryowen (which would have been hard going last season for any young player), on the bench against Australia, then he got a couple of games in the Magners where he played really well and kept his place. He actually earned his starting spot. All the non-starters in the Magners are being toughened up in the AIL and it seems to work. Kidney sent Keith Earls back to the AIL to learn how to defend for a season, he was starting Heineken Cup the following season as a 20 year old. Seems to me if you are good enough, you will get your chance. But the important thing is that you have to earn it. Munster always send a young team up to Ravenhill every year with someone like Alan Quinlan or Mick O'Driscoll and they have come away with some great wins. I think Ulster are doing the same now, but getting destroyed because they haven't included a few experienced heads with them.

Amazotheamazing

Deleted User wrote: »

Trimble will play for Ulster for 8 more years! It's completely incomparable!

Instead how about we use someone coming to the end of their career, who's been integral to everything their team has achieved in previous seasons, akin to ROG.

You yourself gave an absolutely spot on example of Foley.


In 2 or 3 years time, when ROG retires, would you prefer to look back, and say "it's a pity we never really gave much gametime to Keatley while ROG was about". Or would you rather say, "delighted that we've managed to get Keatley loads of exposure at Pro12 and HEC level, and that ROG has passed his boots onto a willing heir"?

Again, I'm certainly not advocating ROG be dropped, nor the term dropped ever be used when ROG doesn't start. Sharing the Jersey is absolutely essential, and if ROG is going to start every single game, then that's going to make it really very tough to do that.

Who's saying Keatley shouldn't get to share the jersey?

ormond lad

MaryKing wrote: »

I think Munster have their own way of bringing players through. Take Conor Murray for instance - B+I Cup start of last season. Plenty of games with Garryowen (which would have been hard going last season for any young player), on the bench against Australia, then he got a couple of games in the Magners where he played really well and kept his place. He actually earned his starting spot. All the non-starters in the Magners are being toughened up in the AIL and it seems to work. Kidney sent Keith Earls back to the AIL to learn how to defend for a season, he was starting Heineken Cup the following season as a 20 year old. Seems to me if you are good enough, you will get your chance. But the important thing is that you have to earn it. Munster always send a young team up to Ravenhill every year with someone like Alan Quinlan or Mick O'Driscoll and they have come away with some great wins. I think Ulster are doing the same now, but getting destroyed because they haven't included a few experienced heads with them.

We do and it isnt working that well, if murray is as good as he is being made out to be by many(and hopefully he is) the garryowen AIL games are not going to be as much of a challange as you make it out to be. Too much is being emphasised on how the AIL is so great for the development of players for the pro game. It is strong enough in div 1A but is it for the most part good enough for future pros to be playing in regularly, would a higher standard of rugby surely not be better??
Munster have a huge problem in always picking the older player and not giving the younger players enough of a chance
If Ian Nagle/Dave Foley were in other clubs they would have many more first team caps, yes you do have to earn your spot on the first team but munster nearly always seem to prefer the old reliables than the younger player

Amazotheamazing

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Who's saying Keatley shouldn't get to share the jersey?

by your account, ROG.

I'm done with this conversation btw, it's as if you're deliberately being completely contrary because you don't want to actually resolve that players that aren't "the best possible players" are going to have to play now in order to get worthwhile experience, before they are catapulted into being first choice by retirement.

The AIL and B&I Cup are not the place to blood future Heineken Cup winners. It's a level that is miles below what is needed.

bamboozle

ormond lad wrote: »

We do and it isnt working that well, if murray is as good as he is being made out to be by many(and hopefully he is) the garryowen AIL games are not going to be as much of a challange as you make it out to be. Too much is being emphasised on how the AIL is so great for the development of players for the pro game. It is strong enough in div 1A but is it for the most part good enough for future pros to be playing in regularly, would a higher standard of rugby surely not be better??
Munster have a huge problem in always picking the older player and not giving the younger players enough of a chance
If Ian Nagle/Dave Foley were in other clubs they would have many more first team caps, yes you do have to earn your spot on the first team but munster nearly always seem to prefer the old reliables than the younger player

In fairness to the AIL the standard has picked up considerably, unfortunately by doing away with the play offs i think a lot of the games in the final 30% of the season will be uncompetative as teams will have nothing to play for.
Its the best option for provincial squad players to pick up some decent game time.
I was at Con v Clontarf a few weeks back, Con had Deasy, Ryan, Archer and Zebo playing, while Tarf had Dundon, Chipman (last season's captain of NZ NPC side Manawatu),Leinster Academy players Noel Reid, Collie O'Shea, Des Merry propped for tarf due to injury, for 50 minutes he held his own against Archer, great experience for a 19 year old sub academy prop.

the only draw back i consistently find with the AIL is the dreadful standard of referring, the above game was ruined by a whistle happy referee, the ref's highlight/lowlight being the binning of clontarf's sub prop being after slipping in his first scrum

Amazotheamazing

Deleted User wrote: »

by your account, ROG.

I'm done with this conversation btw, it's as if you're deliberately being completely contrary because you don't want to actually resolve that players that aren't "the best possible players" are going to have to play now in order to get worthwhile experience, before they are catapulted into being first choice by retirement.

The AIL and B&I Cup are not the place to blood future Heineken Cup winners. It's a level that is miles below what is needed.

How so? O'Gara doesn't pick the team.

Of course O'Gara wants to be ahead of keatley, same way Keatley wants to be ahead of O'Gara.

Amazotheamazing

bamboozle wrote: »

In fairness to the AIL the standard has picked up considerably, unfortunately by doing away with the play offs i think a lot of the games in the final 30% of the season will be uncompetative as teams will have nothing to play for.
Its the best option for provincial squad players to pick up some decent game time.
I was at Con v Clontarf a few weeks back, Con had Deasy, Ryan, Archer and Zebo playing, while Tarf had Dundon, Chipman (last season's captain of NZ NPC side Manawatu),Leinster Academy players Noel Reid, Collie O'Shea, Des Merry propped for tarf due to injury, for 50 minutes he held his own against Archer, great experience for a 19 year old sub academy prop.

the only draw back i consistently find with the AIL is the dreadful standard of referring, the above game was ruined by a whistle happy referee, the ref's highlight/lowlight being the binning of clontarf's sub prop being after slipping in his first scrum

Where to Clontarf get the money, they've a big amount of former Con players with them too?

bamboozle

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Where to Clontarf get the money, they've a big amount of former Con players with them too?

they've 3 former Con lads who moved to Dublin for work not rugby.
At a time when club rugby is struggling Clontarf has continued to thrive, the clubs bars turn in a healty profit each year, the rest of the money comes from sponsorship and donations i presume. Clontarf's youth set up is very good and by under 20's they've a lot of good players coming through from Belvedere, Mount Temple & St Pauls. The catchment area for the club is huge considering apart from suttonians its the only AIL team on the northside hence the amount of members and adult teams turning out each weekend down to J5's.

GerM

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Where to Clontarf get the money, they've a big amount of former Con players with them too?

As far as I'm aware they don't really get the money. Academy players are encouraged to join one of several clubs normally so they play with a better standard. I know Tom Sexton was told to leave Suttonians back in the day to play a higher level and, in fairness, it's needed. There is a similar level of talent at Blackrock, Lansdowne and Belvedere and certainly more money. Clontarf don't have any big benefactor like some other teams. Clontarf have traditionally relied far more on a community based approach than the other big Dublin teams in the top flight. It's only in recent years that the contracted players have been pushed towards them.

What I never understood was the monopoly that Cork Con have on contracted players in Cork. Dolphin and Con are both top flight teams yet the disparity between the number of contracted players is ridiculous.