We need to talk about Cronin....

sydthebeat

Ok, so it's obvious at this stage that the nugget has a major issue with hooking. I cannot say for certain that it's a deliberate Leinster ploy to secure what may not be the strongest scrum, or it's reactive to reduce hooking mistakes. Either way the issue of Cronins hooking problems are foremost if Leinster and himself want to progress.

Last week against Connacht cronin had a conversation with clancy (the ref) which basically went along the lines of "we don't have to hook do we?" Which to me indicates a deliberate policy not to hook. That's all fine and well if we're pushing teams off the park, but on days like today when we meet our match his hooking issues become a real negative.

Strauss can't come back soon enough imo as as good as nugget is around the pitch, this one issue is really going to restrict his progression with Leinster and Ireland.

How could he have gotten to this level without a working grasp of such a basic hooker skill, I mean, the hint is in the name...

molloyjh

sydthebeat wrote: »

Ok, so it's obvious at this stage that the nugget has a major issue with hooking. I cannot say for certain that it's a deliberate Leinster ploy to secure what may not be the strongest scrum, or it's reactive to reduce hooking mistakes. Either way the issue of Cronins hooking problems are foremost if Leinster and himself want to progress.

Last week against Connacht cronin had a conversation with clancy (the ref) which basically went along the lines of "we don't have to hook do we?" Which to me indicates a deliberate policy not to hook. That's all fine and well if we're pushing teams off the park, but on days like today when we meet our match his hooking issues become a real negative.

Strauss can't come back soon enough imo as as good as nugget is around the pitch, this one issue is really going to restrict his progression with Leinster and Ireland.

How could he have gotten to this level without a working grasp of such a basic hooker skill, I mean, the hint is in the name...

Does Dundon hook when he's on?

sydthebeat

molloyjh wrote: »

Does Dundon hook when he's on?

All I can say on that is that the scrum doesn't seem to be such an issue when he's on, so I'd suggest he does.

.ak

Dundon doesn't hook either.

phog

Didn't Cronin say to a ref recently, do we have to hook? Sounds to me it's a Leinster call/ploy, if it is it didn't work today.

P_1

It strikes me that the game plan for scrums in Leinster is to simply push over the tunnel, which can sometimes be embarrassing when it fails as we saw today.

Mahatma Geansai

He's a very talented rugby player, but not the first cousin of a hooker. Just as his throwing was coming up to standard, his inability to hook has been badly exposed.

molloyjh

P_1 wrote: »

It strikes me that the game plan for scrums in Leinster is to simply push over the tunnel, which can sometimes be embarrassing when it fails as we saw today.

Not only that but it doesn't provide any form of quick ball unless you're really destroying the opposition scrum. Which isn't something we do often. So it basically slows down our set piece ball. How is that a good thing?

yimrsg

phog wrote: »

Didn't Cronin say to a ref recently, do we have to hook? Sounds to me it's a Leinster call/ploy, if it is it didn't work today.

Yeah that was in a recent game, the ref asked him if he missed his hook and he said "we don't hook is that ok?" the ref said yeah. It must be a deliberate Leinster tactic rather than Cronin/Dundon not striking (or being incapable) for the ball and wanting to drive the other pack back.

sydthebeat

.ak wrote: »

Dundon doesn't hook either.

Ok then I suppose the question is, is that a policy despite cronin or because of him?

I can't remember strauss having such problems and quick ball is something we have always profited from. That being said strauss hasn't played much under moc so perhaps it's a policy moc insists on? If so it's a terrible policy that stunts our play.

ScissorPaperRock

It's a pity, because he's phenomenal in the loose for a hooker

.ak

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

He's a very talented rugby player, but not the first cousin of a hooker. Just as his throwing was coming up to standard, his inability to hook has been badly exposed.

Shenanigans. 2nd best hooker in the country currently, and pushing the first. Throwing is very good, and his hooking has been fine when he hooks the ball. He doesn't stick the leg out, he's not even trying because the pack are trying to get an 8 man push.

Tox56

sydthebeat wrote: »

How could he have gotten to this level without a working grasp of such a basic hooker skill, I mean, the hint is in the name...

Because prior to this season he didn't need to hook. The rule change came at a terrible time for him, just as his throwing became solid he has this to contend with

molloyjh

sydthebeat wrote: »

Ok then I suppose the question is, is that a policy despite cronin or because of him?

I can't remember strauss having such problems and quick ball is something we have always profited from. That being said strauss hasn't played much under moc so perhaps it's a policy moc insists on? If so it's a terrible policy that stunts our play.

Strauss didn't have that problem because he's hardly played this season and last season crooked feeds were "allowed".

P_1

molloyjh wrote: »

Not only that but it doesn't provide any form of quick ball unless you're really destroying the opposition scrum. Which isn't something we do often. So it basically slows down our set piece ball. How is that a good thing?

Honestly I don't know, the fact that the back row are often popping up early for set piece moves doesn't help matters much either.

Crazy strategy in my eyes

sydthebeat

P_1 wrote: »

Honestly I don't know, the fact that the back row are often popping up early for set piece moves doesn't help matters much either.

Crazy strategy in my eyes

Agreed, an eight man push is perfectly fine but we need to have common sense prevail and admit when we come up against a better scrum. We need to lock down and get the ball out asap, which actually had always been a positive for us.

molloyjh

sydthebeat wrote: »

Agreed, an eight man push is perfectly fine but we need to have common sense prevail and admit when we come up against a better scrum. We need to lock down and get the ball out asap, which actually had always been a positive for us.

Even against a scrum on par with us all we can get at best is slow set piece ball. How does that help us? This tactic only really makes sense when we're the dominant scrum and we're driving them backwards.

sydthebeat

molloyjh wrote: »

Even against a scrum on par with us all we can get at best is slow set piece ball. How does that help us? This tactic only really makes sense when we're the dominant scrum and we're driving them backwards.

I agree entirely

errlloyd

Cronin is playing fine - his gain line successes today were huge. It's a policy not to hook, that needs to change.

sydthebeat

errlloyd wrote: »

It's a policy not to hook, that needs to change.

Irrespective of or because of Cronins ability?

That's the issue because if it's because of his ability then it's not easy to change that policy is it? If it's irrespective of then it's a shocking decision.

What i don't get either is why it's tried poetry much every time. Like a line out there should be preconceived moves from a scrum, left side hook, central hook, right side hook etc

galwaylad14

I love how ye're all experts on his hooking issues now but I reckon not one of these experts ever noticed this before the overheard conversation with Clancy during the Connacht robbery.

sydthebeat

galwaylad14 wrote: »

I love how ye're all experts on his hooking issues now but I reckon not one of these experts ever noticed this before the overheard conversation with Clancy during the Connacht robbery.

Please don't use this thread to dig up provincial spite.

If you follow Leinster match threads you'd see its been a boiling issue for some time now.

CatFromHue

galwaylad14 wrote: »

I love how ye're all experts on his hooking issues now but I reckon not one of these experts ever noticed this before the overheard conversation with Clancy during the Connacht robbery.

Who got robbed in Connacht?

Connacht got a penalty for the Heaslip tackle and missed it and were behind before Leinster got their try.

errlloyd

sydthebeat wrote: »

Irrespective of or because of Cronins ability?

That's the issue because if it's because of his ability then it's not easy to change that policy is it? If it's irrespective of then it's a shocking decision.

What i don't get either is why it's tried poetry much every time. Like a line out there should be preconceived moves from a scrum, left side hook, central hook, right side hook etc

If the scrum can't hold steady without the hooker driving with both his feet, then the problem is with the tight five as a whole and not just the hooker.

Risteard

galwaylad14 wrote: »

I love how ye're all experts on his hooking issues now but I reckon not one of these experts ever noticed this before the overheard conversation with Clancy during the Connacht robbery.

Many people have commented on it throughout the season.

galwaylad14

CatFromHue wrote: »

Who got robbed in Connacht?

Connacht got a penalty for the Heaslip tackle and missed it and were behind before Leinster got their try.

Oh no I was implying Leinster got robbed. Parks should have been given yellow for simulation for the Heaslip incident and if he had Leinster could have pushed on for the bonus. Also Clancy gave Connacht a couple of penalties too which usually doesn't happen in in the interpro games. Usually the refs arm only works in the Leinster/Ulster/Munster direction.

CatFromHue

galwaylad14 wrote: »

Oh no I was implying Leinster got robbed. Parks should have been given yellow for simulation for the Heaslip incident and if he had Leinster could have pushed on for the bonus. Also Clancy gave Connacht a couple of penalties too which usually doesn't happen in in the interpro games. Usually the refs arm only works in the Leinster/Ulster/Munster direction.

That's what I thought.

galwaylad14

Ah I was only messing with my reply above there by the way. I don't really think we were robbed, just got on the wrong end o a dodgy decision or two but that's the way it goes.

Back on topic though, I reckon that conversation alone is the primary reason this is being pointed out now. I saw a lot of Cronin during his time here, good player but had throwing issues which have been resolved since in fairness. Very dynamic player.

sydthebeat

galwaylad14 wrote: »

Ah I was only messing with my reply above there by the way. I don't really think we were robbed, just got on the wrong end o a dodgy decision or two but that's the way it goes.

Back on topic though, I reckon that conversation alone is the primary reason this is being pointed out now. I saw a lot of Cronin during his time here, good player but had throwing issues which have been resolved since in fairness. Very dynamic player.

This isn't a thread to comment on his over all abilities, it's specifically about his hooking.

I certainly agree that the tight five aren't blameless in this, and that ross got a bit of a pummeling today, but it is an indictment of the hooker if a ball is lost against the head, or that the teams scrum abilities are restricted by an inability to hook.

molloyjh

sydthebeat wrote: »

This isn't a thread to comment on his over all abilities, it's specifically about his hooking.

I certainly agree that the tight five aren't blameless in this, and that ross got a bit of a pummeling today, but it is an indictment of the hooker if a ball is lost against the head, or that the teams scrum abilities are restricted by an inability to hook.

The reason I asked the question about Dundon in post 2 was because if Dundon is doing it then it has nothing to do with Cronin. I;m sure Cronin could hook if he wanted to, but until we see him do so and succeed regularly or do so and fail regularly we simply don't know. Right now it looks more like a tactical thing than anything.

Mahatma Geansai

.ak wrote: »

Shenanigans. 2nd best hooker in the country currently, and pushing the first. Throwing is very good, and his hooking has been fine when he hooks the ball. He doesn't stick the leg out, he's not even trying because the pack are trying to get an 8 man push.

We don't yet know the reasons for Leinster adopting this no hooking policy, but any time Cronin did try hook at the start of the season, Leinster were marched backwards in the scrum. I imagine that the 8 man push may be an adaption to cover Cronin's weakness.

He has been brilliant in the loose around the field (he's not at Best's level in the tight) but he is a huge worry at scrum time. His throwing has been good this season, but the scrum is more important than the lineout.

Mahatma Geansai

galwaylad14 wrote: »

I love how ye're all experts on his hooking issues now but I reckon not one of these experts ever noticed this before the overheard conversation with Clancy during the Connacht robbery.

I've been pointing it out since the beginning of the season. Its been obvious to anyone who has had half an eye on the Leinster scrum this season.

sydthebeat

molloyjh wrote: »

The reason I asked the question about Dundon in post 2 was because if Dundon is doing it then it has nothing to do with Cronin. I;m sure Cronin could hook if he wanted to, but until we see him do so and succeed regularly or do so and fail regularly we simply don't know. Right now it looks more like a tactical thing than anything.

I remember a Leinster scrum a few minutes from the end under the tv cameras and there was a definite hook involved, I didn't record it so I can't check again. If that's the case then it may be Cronin specific.

phog

sydthebeat wrote: »

This isn't a thread to comment on his over all abilities, it's specifically about his hooking.

I certainly agree that the tight five aren't blameless in this, and that ross got a bit of a pummeling today, but it is an indictment of the hooker if a ball is lost against the head, or that the teams scrum abilities are restricted by an inability to hook.

Is the thread only to discuss Cronin's hooking or Leinster's hooking?

To me it seems to be a Leinster decision now it could be based on Cronin not being able to hook or it could be something else altogether.

BTW, I think you're wide off the mark in trying to just discuss Cronin and his non hooking it trying to see why a scrum failed.

sydthebeat

phog wrote: »

Is the thread only to discuss Cronin's hooking or Leinster's hooking?

To me it seems to be a Leinster decision now it could be based on Cronin not being able to hook or it could be something else altogether.

BTW, I think you're wide off the mark in trying to just discuss Cronin and his non hooking it trying to see why a scrum failed.

Cronin hooking and Leinster hooking are intertwined. If the replacement doesn't hook them it's clearly a coaching policy, but I'm not sure that's the case.

Also, I've already said that the tight five aren't blameless. At no stage have i or we
Claimed it was the reason the scrum had so many problems, we've actually said that if we are trying to give an eight man push and out still doesn't work then it's a bad sign. We're just trying to discuss whether the policy for the non hook is as a result of Cronins issues or regardless of it.

padser

molloyjh wrote: »

Even against a scrum on par with us all we can get at best is slow set piece ball. How does that help us?

How important is quick ball at scrum time though? That point has come up a few times in this thread but I don't really get it.

Normally you want quick ball because slow ball gives the defense more time to organize but that doesn't apply at scrum time. Why is quick ball of a scrum better than slow ball (as implied above)?

sydthebeat

padser wrote: »

How important is quick ball at scrum time though? That point has come up a few times in this thread but I don't really get it.

Normally you want quick ball because slow ball gives the defense more time to organize but that doesn't apply at scrum time. Why is quick ball of a scrum better than slow ball (as implied above)?

A few things.

A slow scrum is an indication that the scrum is under pressure. This allows the defending flankers to fan out while bound and play heads up.
Also if the scrum is clean and quick the defending line is a guaranteed five metres back giving a running back line like ours more space to achieve moves.
When a scrum is under pressure the ref is focused on the scrum and you get inevitable encroaching however subtle, it always happens.
Once the eight breaks the bind the scrum is over and the defending line can rush. If that eight is under pressure that gives them more time thus reducing space for the second team.

In a game of inches quick ball is a godsend... unless of course you scrum is bossing the opposition. Then you keep it in there and march on.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

We don't yet know the reasons for Leinster adopting this no hooking policy, but any time Cronin did try hook at the start of the season, Leinster were marched backwards in the scrum. I imagine that the 8 man push may be an adaption to cover Cronin's weakness.

Leinster aren't using a 8 man scrum push thats one of my major problems with them. The backrow are popping up and hanging out of the scrum all too often in recent weeks.

who_me

I think quick ball at a scrum can make a difference. The longer the ball takes to get back to the 8, the more he has go digging for it instead of shoving, the more time for the opposition flankers/9 to edge forwards making a nuisance for themselves, the more opportunity for the scrum to wheel/collapse.

With very quick ball you always have a chance the 8/9 can break while the opposition flankers are (genuinely) bound into the scrum. Plus, remember the ball sets the offside line for the opposition 9, so if it comes back quickly enough you've bought yourself a couple of metres of space (or maybe an extra second of time) to get the ball away.

Woody1997

I find it very difficult to believe that Cronin has come all this way as a hooker without being able to hook. I don't remember it being a problem with Ireland so it could just be a Leinster tactic

sydthebeat

Woody1997 wrote: »

I find it very difficult to believe that Cronin has come all this way as a hooker without being able to hook. I don't remember it being a problem with Ireland so it could just be a Leinster tactic

it could be a case that the law amendments that came in this season have shown up what hookers have avoided for years.... the crooked put in was a band aid for many.

Woody1997

sydthebeat wrote: »

it could be a case that the law amendments that came in this season have shown up what hookers have avoided for years.... the crooked put in was a band aid for many.

Good point. I still feel somewhere along the line his hooking would have been tested

Risteard

Woody1997 wrote: »

I find it very difficult to believe that Cronin has come all this way as a hooker without being able to hook. I don't remember it being a problem with Ireland so it could just be a Leinster tactic

There was an interview with Stephen Moore at the start of the season saying he didn't know how to hook and had to adjust to the increased scrutiny on straight feeds, and he's arguably one of the best hookers of the last few years.

Whether it's a tactic or not, I think it's important that they have to hook. It's alright when your scrum is one top but as said, if your being driven backwards or even just steady, not hooking is just going to create risk.

AbusesToilets

I saw a few times today where the ball came across the tunnel to Ross's side and what looked like someone (not Cronin) sticking the boot out in an attempt to strike the ball back to Heaslip. You could see the problems the scrum was having when we were under pressure and the players were trying to get the ball to the back; ball is liable to squirt out and they definitely weren't getting an eight man push at that point.

Phoeey

P_1 wrote: »

It strikes me that the game plan for scrums in Leinster is to simply push over the tunnel

I'd say it's this. And I'd say it's as a consequence of other members of the front-row/tight-five rather than our hookers. If I remember correctly at the start of the season we did attempt to hook and our scrum was demolished.