Munster Team Talk Thread VI - Stander Up and Fight

Jump_In_Jack

budhabob wrote: »

Munster: Mike Haley; Andrew Conway, Sammy Arnold, Rory Scannell, Keith Earls; Joey Carbery, Conor Murray; Dave Kilcoyne, Niall Scannell, John Ryan; Tadhg Beirne, Billy Holland; Peter O’Mahony (C), Chris Cloete, CJ Stander.

Replacements: Kevin O’Byrne, Jeremy Loughman, Stephen Archer, Fineen Wycherley, Arno Botha, Alby Mathewson, JJ Hanrahan, Jaco Taute.

Pretty much as expected.

That looks like a very strong 23, I suppose the only players missing there would Kleyn and Farrell from starting 15, and arguably O'Donnell for Cloete if O'Donnell got back to his best.
And Cronin and Marshall from the bench.
Arguably Jack O'Donoghue for Botha if back to his best, and arguably Dan Goggin for Arnold if he got back to the form he had at the start of this season, and I think Darren Sweetnam would be ahead of Taute on the bench if Sweetnam was fully fit.
Wootton is unlucky to miss out I think.
I think Bleyendaal and Keatley are probably not going to be kept on by the looks of this selection, JJ seems to be the preferred option.

Poorside

Tonight’s result has really opened things up, gives Castres a glimmer of hope that we’ll need to suffocate early on.
They’ll try and rile Cloete up from the start to take him out of his natural game so Pom and Billy need need to keep him close and calm. Play a game to win rather than chasing a TBP and we’ll win, tonight’s result has taken the need for TBP’s away, they’d be nice to get a better seeding but 2 wins out of 3 is all that matters now.

yerrahbah

Currently:

Munster 12pts
Castres 9pts
Exeter 8pts
Glaws 8pts

Round 5

Friday 11th Jan
Glaws vs Munster

Sunday 13th
Exeter vs Castres

You would have to fancy Exeter overcoming Castres, bringing them to 12 possibly 13 points

And if Glaws beat Munster, then we are looking at three of the teams sitting on either 12 or 13 points,

My prediction after round 5

Exeter 13pts
Munster 12pts
Glaws 12pts
Castres 9pts


Round 6

Saturday 19th Jan

Castres vs Glaws

Munster vs Exeter


If Castres are out at that stage then Glaws could pick up 5 points,
meaning Munster would have to do something similar at home to Exeter who could go into the last day top of the group...

ScrubsfanChris

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

yerrahbah wrote: »

Currently:

Munster 12pts
Castres 9pts
Exeter 8pts
Glaws 8pts

Round 5

Friday 11th Jan
Glaws vs Munster

Sunday 13th
Exeter vs Castres

You would have to fancy Exeter overcoming Castres, bringing them to 12 possibly 13 points

And if Glaws beat Munster, then we are looking at three of the teams sitting on either 12 or 13 points,

My prediction after round 5

Exeter 13pts
Munster 12pts
Glaws 12pts
Castres 9pts
.

Pretty defeatist thinking Munster will get nothing against Gloucester no?

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

Munster don't even need to get anything in Gloucester, just need to avoid an annihilation.

That means a BP win in round six will seal the pool and this Exeter team will collapse like a dying star when they come to Thomond.

It really was an incredibly lucky pool draw.

Eod100

Former Former wrote: »

Munster don't even need to get anything in Gloucester, just need to avoid an annihilation.

That means a BP win in round six will seal the pool and this Exeter team will collapse like a dying star when they come to Thomond.

It really was an incredibly lucky pool draw.

Yeah think Gloucester would need to beat us with a tbp and finish 15 points greater than us to finish ahead. Assuming both teams get 5 points in the last round. I'd like to think we could beat Glaws away but could go either way.

If we lose away to Glaws, and Exeter beat Castres at home, they will still have something to play for when they come to TP. I think after drawing with us, they will be up for it too.

So could be this after pool stages:

Munster 17/18
Gloucester 17 (Munster better head to head)
Exeter 12
Castres 9

Dubinusa

Exeter have too much to do. Very disappointing from them. Glaws have been a surprise for me. I thought they'd bring up the rear.
Munster should win the pool. Castre are difficult away and the tie in Exeter was crucial.
It's in Munsters hands and they should pull through.

Sirius Boner

Have seen the incident where Kockott rakes at the face of Cloete again....it's a red card all day long and Barnes didn't have the balls yesterday to go back and look

Cookiemunster

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

Sirius Boner wrote: »

Have seen the incident where Kockott rakes at the face of Cloete again....it's a red card all day long and Barnes didn't have the balls yesterday to go back and look

The TMO should have seen it and told Barnes to stop play. Card and pen to Munster instead of a try to Castres. The TMO was poorer than Barnes yesterday. When you look at the Leicester game today and see how a TMO can do his job properly.

Sirius Boner

Cookiemunster wrote: »

The TMO should have seen it and told Barnes to stop play. Card and pen to Munster instead of a try to Castres. The TMO was poorer than Barnes yesterday. When you look at the Leicester game today and see how a TMO can do his job properly.

I always remember Jean Dr Villiers being forceful with a ref once telling him, no we want our advantage now, not next week

A case could be made for Conway's disallowed try being given as a penalty try and all...

razorblunt

Sirius Boner wrote: »

I always remember Jean Dr Villiers being forceful with a ref once telling him, no we want our advantage now, not next week

A case could be made for Conway's disallowed try being given as a penalty try and all...

Conway said the same to Barnes as Carbery was lining up the penalty.
How the TMO reviewed the Cloete-Kockett incident and decided there was nothing there that needed further review is still incrompehensible.

It's up there with Barnes watching multiple angle reviews of the knee slide and late hit on Conway.

Poorside

Sirius Boner wrote: »

I always remember Jean Dr Villiers being forceful with a ref once telling him, no we want our advantage now, not next week

A case could be made for Conway's disallowed try being given as a penalty try and all...

The way Barnes went about it was all wrong, if it’s not a try we’ll go and look at the foul play, that’s the wrong way to look at,regardless of score or not he should have been looking at that.

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

Poorside wrote: »

The way Barnes went about it was all wrong, if it’s not a try we’ll go and look at the foul play, that’s the wrong way to look at,regardless of score or not he should have been looking at that.

He would have.

Sirius Boner

Former Former wrote: »

He would have.

He didn't, said as much to Conway on the field

Sirius Boner

razorblunt wrote: »

Conway said the same to Barnes as Carbery was lining up the penalty.
How the TMO reviewed the Cloete-Kockett incident and decided there was nothing there that needed further review is still incrompehensible.

It's up there with Barnes watching multiple angle reviews of the knee slide and late hit on Conway.

I don't think the tmo did... Barnes said he got no notification and that he'd leave it to the citing officer

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

Sirius Boner wrote: »

He didn't, said as much to Conway on the field

No, but you know that as well as I do.

Late one last night? Took you longer than usual to figure out how it was the ref wot robbed ya.

Sirius Boner

Former Former wrote: »

No, but you know that as well as I do.

Late one last night? Took you longer than usual to figure out how it was the ref wot robbed ya.

Yawn

Burkie1203

Poorside wrote: »

The way Barnes went about it was all wrong, if it’s not a try we’ll go and look at the foul play, that’s the wrong way to look at,regardless of score or not he should have been looking at that.

Looks like Conway knocked on a fraction before the Castres player made contact so it couldnt be a PT anyway

Former Former

John Hayes Ligind

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Looks like Conway knocked on a fraction before the Castres player made contact so it couldnt be a PT anyway

The 'foul play' in question was the late tackle on POM.

Barnes said if it wasn't a try, they'd go back for that penalty.

He did it absolutely right.

Sirius Boner

He didn't even see the two footed tackle made on Conway, made as he was gathering the ball... Conway tried telling him but he wasn't listening... again..AR... nowhere to be seen

Akrasia

Guess Who's Back, Back Again? JJ's Back, Tell a Friend

ThreeRedKings have some clips of the dirty play that Castres got away with during the game on his twitter

https://twitter.com/threeredkings/status/1074053342911967232?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

We should still have won if we had made better decisions, but that Conway try should definitely have been a penalty try given that the reason he lost control was an illegal sliding tackle and Castres should have been down to 14 men for at least 10 minutes after 14 minutes after Maama Vaipulu pushed Sammy Arnold's face into the ground and kicked him when he was on the ground and they should have been permanently down another man after 20 minutes for that eye gouging incident.

irishbucsfan

John Hayes Ligind

He was committed to sliding before Conway was in possession of the ball. Both players are entitled to go to ground to win the ball, just as if it was in the air.

Still could have been a penalty though so a penalty try would have been possible. It’s just not very clear cut.

If Conway was in possession of the ball and slid in to score then it’d be clear cut.

stephen_n

On the Conway thing, that’s not a sliding tackle he’s trying to kick the ball out. Natural thing to do in that situation, just Conway is brave and gets there first. You can even see the Castres player trying to change direction when he’s not getting there.

Akrasia

Guess Who's Back, Back Again? JJ's Back, Tell a Friend

Eh, you've just described what a sliding tackle is. In soccer, it's diving feet first in order to kick the ball out of reach of an opposing player. That's exactly what Urdipilleta was trying to do. That's illegal in rugby, and would even be illegal in soccer given that he didn't get the ball, he got the man.

It doesn't matter what his intention was, the end result was the Castres player dove in feet first and made contact with Conway as he was about to gather the ball. I've seen penalty tries given for way less than that.

If he hadn't slid in there and hit Conway, It was a very likely that Conway would have scored that try

Burkie1203

Akrasia wrote: »

It doesn't matter what his intention was, the end result was the Castres player dove in feet first and made contact with Conway in as he was about to gather the ball. I've seen penalty tries given for way less than that.

If he hadn't slid in there and hit Conway, It was a very likely that Conway would have scored that try

Conway knocked on marginally before contact IMO. So cannot award PT

Akrasia

Guess Who's Back, Back Again? JJ's Back, Tell a Friend

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Conway knocked on marginally before contact IMO. So cannot award PT

The contact was actually before Conway even gathered/touched the ball. Watch the clip on that twitter again and you can freeze the frames

The Lost Sheep

A new born king to see POM POM POM POM POM

Akrasia wrote: »

Eh, you've just described what a sliding tackle is. In soccer, it's diving feet first in order to kick the ball out of reach of an opposing player. That's exactly what Urdipilleta was trying to do. That's illegal in rugby, and would even be illegal in soccer given that he didn't get the ball, he got the man.

It doesn't matter what his intention was, the end result was the Castres player dove in feet first and made contact with Conway as he was about to gather the ball. I've seen penalty tries given for way less than that.

If he hadn't slid in there and hit Conway, It was a very likely that Conway would have scored that try

That wasnt anything more than what the officials gave. He slide in to contest for the ball. It wasnt illegal. You could never give anything like a penalty try for a decision like that

Psycho Killer - "Hands Away" (Prop-Prop-Prrrroppp-Prop, Prop-Prop-Prop-Prrrrrrop-Prop)

I saw the incident at the time, and from reading online presumed that the Conway incident referred to something else involving Conway.

Very little in it, probably two penalties in a row on POM and Conway - both with potential to be a yellow but neither with the potential to be red.

The hand on Cloete's face could well have been a red, it's quite overt but also something that may well have happened accidentally.

The shenanigans on the side line could have gotten the Castres player in trouble but we're talking a penalty, at most a soft card for nudging the player with his knee. Red 13 was acting the bollox lets not forget.

Three red kings not covering themselves in glory to be honest, some questionable stuff there but individually nothing overly heinous.

Who is the Munster kicking coach at the moment?

Akrasia

Guess Who's Back, Back Again? JJ's Back, Tell a Friend

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I saw the incident at the time, and from reading online presumed that the Conway incident referred to something else involving Conway.

Very little in it, probably two penalties in a row on POM and Conway - both with potential to be a yellow but neither with the potential to be red.

The hand on Cloete's face could well have been a red, it's quite overt but also something that may well have happened accidentally.

The shenanigans on the side line could have gotten the Castres player in trouble but we're talking a penalty, at most a soft card for nudging the player with his knee. Red 13 was acting the bollox lets not forget.

Three red kings not covering themselves in glory to be honest, some questionable stuff there but individually nothing overly heinous.

Who is the Munster kicking coach at the moment?

How was Arnold acting the Bollox?. He didn't release the ball immediately but there's no law that says he has to allow the other team to take a quick lineout.

stephen_n

Akrasia wrote: »

How was Arnold acting the Bollox?. He didn't release the ball immediately but there's no law that says he has to allow the other team to take a quick lineout.

They can’t take a quick lineout, he’s in touch holding the ball.