Leinster v Ulster, Sat 30th March, 18.15 RDS RTE/BBCNI

Podge_irl

Well technically Clancy shouldnt have blown up for the end in the first place as Leinster weren't held up.

Buer

Podge_irl wrote: »

Well technically Clancy shouldnt have blown up for the end in the first place as Leinster weren't held up.

Wouldn't really have mattered. Ball was off the deck, held up so not a ruck and not coming back so would have been a scrum and therefore final whistle.

.ak

Buer wrote: »

Wouldn't really have mattered. Ball was off the deck, held up so not a ruck and not coming back so would have been a scrum and therefore final whistle.

It was coming back tho, Clancy blew it up straight away.

trouttrout

.ak wrote: »

It was coming back tho, Clancy blew it up straight away.

Does it matter if it's coming back if it's held up over the line though?

Buer

trouttrout wrote: »

Does it matter if it's coming back if it's held up over the line though?

Wasn't over the line.

For Paws

mfceiling wrote: »

How can you not "deserve" to win a match but come to the idea that it is somehow "fairer" to have a draw?

Also regarding the "barely" being offside...rules are rules...a barely forward pass is still a forward pass. Barely being outside your 22 means you can't kick directly into touch.

Well good man mfceiling,
as they say in the crisps ad, there's always one

That's why the word fairer is in quotation marks (Geddit ?)

Of course the two penalties awarded were correctly awarded.
My point being that they were 'soft' in comparison to the penalties conceded by Ulster, particularly those conceded in the last few minutes.

Oh and yeah, Laws are Laws

mfceiling

For Paws wrote: »

Well good man mfceiling,
as they say in the crisps ad, there's always one

That's why the word fairer is in quotation marks (Geddit ?)

Of course the two penalties awarded were correctly awarded.
My point being that they were 'soft' in comparison to the penalties conceded by Ulster, particularly those conceded in the last few minutes.

Oh and yeah, Laws are Laws

Well laws are laws as you say but i don't understand how you can say that one team cannot or do not deserve to win however a draw is somehow fair? Don't really see how quotation marks make a difference.

mfceiling

For Paws wrote: »

From a neutral's pov.

(1) A lot of posters noting that Ulster deserved the win. Crap. 'Deserve' ain't got nothing to do with it.
The scoreboard is the only indicator.
(2) Possibly the reason Leinster remained in contention on the scoreboard was because Ulster preferred to concede penalty chances rather than quick ruck ball. Leinster did not offend as often and Ulster were able to run the ball more often.
(3) A question hangs over the award of 3 points for a 'wide', and the concession of 2 further 3 pointers to Ulster for a Leinster player being (barely) in front of Boss's box kick & an innocuous challenge on Jackson when he was still (again barely) 'in the air' call into question some poster's contention that Ulster created more scoring chances.
(4) Neither side dominated and imo a draw would have been a 'fairer' outcome.

It's on again on setanta now - you should re-watch it and count how many try scoring opportunities leinster created in the first 70 minutes. Then compare this to Ulster.

Buer

mfceiling wrote: »

It's on again on setanta now - you should re-watch it and count how many try scoring opportunities leinster created in the first 70 minutes. Then compare this to Ulster.

In fairness, whilst Leinster's back line was not particularly incisive, a massive reason why they didn't have try scoring opportunities was due to the regular infringements at the breakdown. Ulster conceded 11 or 12 penalties in their own half which is a fairly huge number.

matthew8

For those who want to see the missed kick, it's 1 hour and 15 minutes in on this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFHsC13N6Os

Looks just missed to me, they have a decent angle on the replay from under the posts. Not sure a tmo would overturn it.

bilston

Buer wrote: »

In fairness, whilst Leinster's back line was not particularly incisive, a massive reason why they didn't have try scoring opportunities was due to the regular infringements at the breakdown. Ulster conceded 11 or 12 penalties in their own half which is a fairly huge number.

They were adjudged to have. In fairness it didn't take much for Clancy to penalise Ulster players for not moving away when it wasn't physically possible for to do so. I think Boss played a pretty cute game in this regard.

It's funny when you read here and then you read UAFC and you can see that both sides felt cheated by Clancy! Maybe that's the sign of a good ref...hmmmm maybe not then...

Buer

bilston wrote: »

They were adjudged to have. In fairness it didn't take much for Clancy to penalise Ulster players for not moving away when it wasn't physically possible for to do so. I think Boss played a pretty cute game in this regard.

It's funny when you read here and then you read UAFC and you can see that both sides felt cheated by Clancy! Maybe that's the sign of a good ref...hmmmm maybe not then...

I don't think Leinster were cheated by him. I think both sides suffered at his hands. I think a few of the penalties were harsh against Ulster. Williams was done a little over zealously but I do think he can be lazy at the breakdown in terms of not making a good enough show of getting out of the way. Some harsh ones against Leinster too. The only query I'd really have of him from a Leinster perspective is that if a side concedes 12 penalties in their own half including penalties in their own 22 how does the referee never consider a card? I found that odd.

.ak

Just watching it again there, and Conway was on-side for that penalty to me.... Bizarre.

Buer

.ak wrote: »

Just watching it again there, and Conway was on-side for that penalty to me.... Bizarre.

It was Goodman coming from behind Clancy and called by the touch judge.

Podge_irl

I don't think we were hard done by Clancy but I think Ulster were extraordinarily fortunate not to be carded before they were (and I don't just mean on the goal line stand) and Clancy messed up the endgame call. Don't really have any complaints beyond those two though I think BBC:NI's pathetic assertion that Ulster were playing 16 men was well wide of the mark.

Tomtom364

.ak wrote: »

It was coming back tho, Clancy blew it up straight away.

Ah on fairness Clancy had a good look at it before blowing, he didn't blow straight away.

And the ball wasn't over the line when the player first went to ground but Leinster then drove into their player to push him over the line (as often happens, very regular thing). That caused it to be over the line and held up. Right call by Clancy in the first place. (And he mad a lot of bad calls don't get me wrong, the going to tmo was a joke after he made his mind up)

tolosenc

.ak wrote: »

Just watching it again there, and Conway was on-side for that penalty to me.... Bizarre.

The scrum right as the clock went 80, can't see how that's not a penalty try. Leinster were having their way with Ulster, driving them back, inside 5m, but just a regular penalty.

bilston

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't think we were hard done by Clancy but I think Ulster were extraordinarily fortunate not to be carded before they were (and I don't just mean on the goal line stand) and Clancy messed up the endgame call. Don't really have any complaints beyond those two though I think BBC:NI's pathetic assertion that Ulster were playing 16 men was well wide of the mark.

I was a bit surprised at Bryn's 16 man comment as he is usually pretty good, if a little Ulster biased however I guess he just got carried away with the excitement.

And yes we were lucky not to get a yellow.

Another incident that I would like to see again from an Ulster perspective was Isa's "tackle" on young Olding, there didn't seem to be many arms involved! It was a bit like BOD on Roussouw in the 2nd Lions test in '09, that could easily have been a penalty to Ulster. No more than that though. Anyway it was a welcome to Inter Pro rugby moment for Olding an he just about survived!

Nacewa certainly added some
Solidly to Leinster's midfield defence in the second half.

[Jackass]

matthew8 wrote: »

For those who want to see the missed kick, it's 1 hour and 15 minutes in on this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFHsC13N6Os

Looks just missed to me, they have a decent angle on the replay from under the posts. Not sure a tmo would overturn it.

No question that goes between the posts imo.

I think Leinster had stupid decisions against them in the sense that they were extremely stupid penalties to give away, unforced and usually the type we would never give away so many cheap points, so that was frustraiting. The only annoying one about Clancy was when he could have done a Nigel Ownes - "NO THREE - MOVE AWAY" - for one of the penalties, Mike Ross looked for instruction, got nothing, so picked for the ball and was pinged, but it was still an infringement.

As for the yellow card, he could have given a few of them and much sooner in the final 10 minutes, but to be honest, that's only really clutching at straws. All said and done, the better team on the night won, I don't think there's any need to disect it.

Buer

bilston wrote: »

Nacewa certainly added some
Solidly to Leinster's midfield defence in the second half.

I think Nacewa's presence helped but there was certainly a wholesale, tactical change at half time where Leinster stopped their passive drift trying to shepherd Ulster into touch and came up to kill the space. It worked much better.

Regarding the tackle, it was certainly borderline. The arms did come up to wrap but the impact was such that Olding was well gone before the arms could wrap. I'd need to see it again but it could have been slightly high also.