Leinster v Connu.. Connou... Connaubh... Cannaught Build up thread

MarinersBlues

For the size of him Blade is excellent in those positions

Faugheen

Blade is a very good player. Was quite impressed with him yesterday.

Didn't enjoy his rolling around after O'Loughlins illegal clear out.

stephen_n

MarinersBlues wrote: »

For the size of him Blade is excellent in those positions

Yeah he turned over one in the first have iirc. Very quick.

Dubinusa

After watching that match I gotta say that Blade was brilliant. He has really upped his game.
Connacht were very clinical, but can't close it out. They really brought their best and they had some standout performances.
Carty was brilliant, best game I've ever seen him play.
Thornbury was excellent and Boyle looked really good.
Leader was also very good and Farrell was top class.
On the Leinster side, the center partnership was abysmal defensively. ROL was quite poor. I didn't think Keenan was too bad, but you can see poor performance throughout the 1st half.
Mick Kearney was quite good. His standard has improved and he looks like he could get back to his Connacht form.
As the match progressed, Leinster grew into it. They won collisions and controlled the tempo. Fardy, Ruddock and Leavy started dominating.
Ross Byrne managed the game. He was very good. Not as flashy as Carty was, but he controlled the game in the end. He's very very good and is steadily getting better. His defense is unreal and his tackling is 1st class. He's only 23 and already he plays like a seasoned veteran.
Off course, he's learning from the best in the business and I think he's going to be insanely good.
All in all it was a great match. Leinsters back line will not be comfortable watching the tapes. They were very poor and at times they looked totally out of sorts.
If I was Andy Friend, i'd give Leader more game time at fb and put TOH on the wing.
Fardy must be kept on. The man just grows stronger late in the match as others begin to falter.
What a great spectacle for Irish rugby!!

foxyladyxx

Dubinusa wrote: »

After watching that match I gotta say that Blade was brilliant. He has really upped his game.
Connacht were very clinical, but can't close it out. They really brought their best and they had some standout performances.
Carty was brilliant, best game I've ever seen him play.
Thornbury was excellent and Boyle looked really good.
Leader was also very good and Farrell was top class.
On the Leinster side, the center partnership was abysmal defensively. ROL was quite poor. I didn't think Keenan was too bad, but you can see poor performance throughout the 1st half.
Mick Kearney was quite good. His standard has improved and he looks like he could get back to his Connacht form.
As the match progressed, Leinster grew into it. They won collisions and controlled the tempo. Fardy, Ruddock and Leavy started dominating.
Ross Byrne managed the game. He was very good. Not as flashy as Carty was, but he controlled the game in the end. He's very very good and is steadily getting better. His defense is unreal and his tackling is 1st class. He's only 23 and already he plays like a seasoned veteran.
Off course, he's learning from the best in the business and I think he's going to be insanely good.
All in all it was a great match. Leinsters back line will not be comfortable watching the tapes. They were very poor and at times they looked totally out of sorts.
If I was Andy Friend, i'd give Leader more game time at fb and put TOH on the wing.
Fardy must be kept on. The man just grows stronger late in the match as others begin to falter.
What a great spectacle for Irish rugby!!

Agree with most of this especially about Ross Byrne. I think we got the best one. . how about Frawley at full back?

evil_seed

I've read through most of the post and I'm agreeing with a lot of people in regards to players that performed well, and those that didn't, on both teams. I'm also agreeing with the people saying there's too much whining about the ref.

It's not Clancy's fault. We were up 17 pts with 12 to go. He's not the one that missed to kicks to touch. We were up 17 pts with 12 to go. He's not the one that fell off tackles near the end. We were up 17 pts with 12 to go.

We were up 17 pts with 12 to go. You have to win that, there's no excuse. We were up 17 pts with 12 to go.

Ectoplasm

I think there's a difference between whining about the ref and being critical of the ref. Clancy didn't have a good game and made a lot of questionable decisions. I think it's fair to say that. That said, he didn't make the difference for either team. Both teams had dodgy decisions go for and against them throughout.

I for one would like to see ref standards improved across the Pro14 but at least there was no particular bias in this game.

crisco10

This thread is drifting but I think the focus on refs has become far too strong and it has become all too easy to point at a ref when things aren't going for your team. Rugby is a damn hard game to ref, Clancy is one of the top 10 or 20 refs in the world (has been to last 2 world cups and regular at euro knock out stages) so if he represents the "low standard" of refereeing in pro14, then we are all in trouble.

Burkie1203

Ectoplasm wrote: »

I think there's a difference between whining about the ref and being critical of the ref. Clancy didn't have a good game and made a lot of questionable decisions. I think it's fair to say that. That said, he didn't make the difference for either team. Both teams had dodgy decisions go for and against them throughout.

I for one would like to see ref standards improved across the Pro14 but at least there was no particular bias in this game.

I'm not too sure on the "lot of questionable decisions" part. Rugby is very subjective in that laws are open to interpretation. Clancy pinged DK for a counter ruck which was wrong. Other calls were hardly outrageously wrong IIRC.

Like I've seen a few Connacht fans claim the Binder steal near the end wasn't a knock on but it looked clear to me. Aki knew himself too.

Think there is too much focus on the ref on 50-50 calls.

Former Former

The standard of refereeing is the best it's ever been.

Professional refs, more proactive touch judges and video reviews, the chances of a bad decision are the lowest they've ever been.

Unfortunately we are now in a totally different era when it comes to scrutiny of refs and decisions. It's the default position now that when Ireland or a province lose, it's the ref wot robbed us, it's just a matter of figuring out how.

Social media is a big part of it. You might think a ref was grand until you check boards and you find that actually he was TOTALLY OUT OF HIS DEPTH. 99% of the time it's straw-clutching bollocks. "He didn't cost us the game but..." basically means "yeah, he cost us the game". Another one is "we just want consistency" which translates to "I don't care if it's right or wrong, I just want it to go in our favour".

It doesn't help that coaches have really started laying into refs now, some being a lot worse than others.

Clancy was grand the other night. The problem is us. We're a bunch of whining saps.

nice_guy80

A lot of those Connacht kicks were outside the 22, so where else could they go, except long?
Carty isn't capable of an angled low kick that bounces into touch.
Pat Lam had the right idea - the best way to stop the opposition scoring was to not give them the ball.

Clegg

stephen_n wrote: »

Looks like Clancy just doesn’t like jackals, 79 mins on the clock in the run up to the last try, Blade gets over the ball, is on his feet and supporting his weight. Clancy eventually tells him to let it go, no idea why.

He doesn't manage the breakdown well. During the game he awarded a turnover pen to Connacht, but their tackler never rolled away and stopped a quick release by the Leinster player. I've lots of sympathy for players in these instances. They've no idea what the ref wants.

Dubinusa

evil_seed wrote: »

I've read through most of the post and I'm agreeing with a lot of people in regards to players that performed well, and those that didn't, on both teams. I'm also agreeing with the people saying there's too much whining about the ref.

It's not Clancy's fault. We were up 17 pts with 12 to go. He's not the one that missed to kicks to touch. We were up 17 pts with 12 to go. He's not the one that fell off tackles near the end. We were up 17 pts with 12 to go.

We were up 17 pts with 12 to go. You have to win that, there's no excuse. We were up 17 pts with 12 to go.

Sitting in the pocket and kicking a win away!! Very poor overall. But, you could see Leinster getting on top. Ruddock and Leavy were dominant and Deegan added some firepower.
Connacht should have played a set piece game the last quartet. Everything into the stands. That way the clock runs and Leinster have to win the l/o. Frawley set Leinster up very nicely running the ball back. Leinster for the most part were on the front foot and played fluid and expansive.
Friend made substitutions? Didn't he tell Carty to go for touch? Even if kicking to touch is not an option, don't give it to Frawley with options all over and acres of space. Up and unders would have been an option. 50/50 ball is a better option than giving Leinster unimpeded access to multiple attacking options.

Dubinusa

Clegg wrote: »

He doesn't manage the breakdown well. During the game he awarded a turnover pen to Connacht, but their tackler never rolled away and stopped a quick release by the Leinster player. I've lots of sympathy for players in these instances. They've no idea what the ref wants.

His directions to the front rows was gas. He told them several times what he wanted, but all he said was "space".
Nothing about the early push or the binding. He's pissah is Mr Clancy.

Dubinusa

crisco10 wrote: »

This thread is drifting but I think the focus on refs has become far too strong and it has become all too easy to point at a ref when things aren't going for your team. Rugby is a damn hard game to ref, Clancy is one of the top 10 or 20 refs in the world (has been to last 2 world cups and regular at euro knock out stages) so if he represents the "low standard" of refereeing in pro14, then we are all in trouble.

I thought he let the match flow. Which made it a great spectacle. I thought his instructions to the front rows for the scrums was confusing but consistent, lol.

The Lost Sheep

Wegians89 wrote: »

I hate the ref blaming culture. I’ve noticed due to success more people who would have been previously die hard soccer fans have been showing up at rugby matches. Blaming the ref is part and parcel with soccer and I think that’s also helping it creep in. Not saying all soccer fans are the problem but I’ve noticed a few loud mouths from Terryland park are showing up at the sports grounds and are always keen to shout abuse at the ref

Its nothing to do with soccer fans.

Dubinusa wrote: »

His directions to the front rows was gas. He told them several times what he wanted, but all he said was "space".
Nothing about the early push or the binding. He's pissah is Mr Clancy.

Because you try focus on one thing and fix that before even attempting to sort other issues. Sort spacing and then the other problems

Shefwedfan

Former Former wrote: »

The standard of refereeing is the best it's ever been.

Professional refs, more proactive touch judges and video reviews, the chances of a bad decision are the lowest they've ever been.

Unfortunately we are now in a totally different era when it comes to scrutiny of refs and decisions. It's the default position now that when Ireland or a province lose, it's the ref wot robbed us, it's just a matter of figuring out how.

Social media is a big part of it. You might think a ref was grand until you check boards and you find that actually he was TOTALLY OUT OF HIS DEPTH. 99% of the time it's straw-clutching bollocks. "He didn't cost us the game but..." basically means "yeah, he cost us the game". Another one is "we just want consistency" which translates to "I don't care if it's right or wrong, I just want it to go in our favour".

It doesn't help that coaches have really started laying into refs now, some being a lot worse than others.

Clancy was grand the other night. The problem is us. We're a bunch of whining saps.

100% agree


Especially the whining saps bit :P

Burkie1203

nice_guy80 wrote: »

A lot of those Connacht kicks were outside the 22, so where else could they go, except long?
Carty isn't capable of an angled low kick that bounces into touch.
Pat Lam had the right idea - the best way to stop the opposition scoring was to not give them the ball.

Some weren't. And the key one was Kelleher. And he could have gone into the stands with his kick as Leinster had just scored and his kick just allowed Leinster to keep the momentum going

stephen_n

Clegg wrote: »

He doesn't manage the breakdown well. During the game he awarded a turnover pen to Connacht, but their tackler never rolled away and stopped a quick release by the Leinster player. I've lots of sympathy for players in these instances. They've no idea what the ref wants.

I just thought the breakdown was a mess with him. You could see some very confused reactions at times from players. It didn’t ruin the game, nor did it really affect the outcome of it. Though it seems any criticism of referees is taboo now.

Burkie1203

stephen_n wrote: »

I just thought the breakdown was a mess with him. You could see some very confused reactions at times from players. It didn’t ruin the game, nor did it really affect the outcome of it. Though it seems any criticism of referees is taboo now.

It's more the micro analysis. Apparently the ref only allows one team away with a certain offence at rucks such as side entry when the truth is he/she is fairly consistent with what happens just one team is usually a bit more efficient with their breakdown work so benefit more as a result

Shefwedfan

Are you still posting about the ref...

molloyjh

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Are you still posting about the ref...

People can discuss a referees performance and be critical of it without being OTT. They perform on the day the same way that the players do. They are every bit as valid a discussion point as any player.

stephen_n

Burkie1203 wrote: »

It's more the micro analysis. Apparently the ref only allows one team away with a certain offence at rucks such as side entry when the truth is he/she is fairly consistent with what happens just one team is usually a bit more efficient with their breakdown work so benefit more as a result

Don’t think there’s much mention of inconsistency. I don’t think Clancy was inconsistent, I think he was very consistently poor at the breakdown all night. To both sides.

Shefwedfan

stephen_n wrote: »

Don’t think there’s much mention of inconsistency. I don’t think Clancy was inconsistent, I think he was very consistently poor at the breakdown all night. To both sides.

So why the complaining, both teams could take advantage of it.....

Connacht didnt complain in first 60 and once they bottled it suddenly the ref was the issue

Faugheen

In fairness most of the complaints about the ref have been coming from those who are neither fans of Connacht nor Leinster.

Shefwedfan

Faugheen wrote: »

In fairness most of the complaints about the ref have been coming from those who are neither fans of Connacht nor Leinster.

Munster fans up to their old tricks

Shelflife

Always amuses me that the more vocal someone is in their criticism of a referee the less likely it will be that they have a seen law book or a law app never mind read it!

People tend to see what they want as opposed to the truer picture. So Leinster fans will see Connacht players going off their feet and sealing off and Connacht fans will see Leinster players coming in from the side!

Ref sees a reasonably fair contest for the ball and plays on! Both sets of fans think the ref is an ass !

It was ever thus ....

stephen_n

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So why the complaining, both teams could take advantage of it.....

Connacht didnt complain in first 60 and once they bottled it suddenly the ref was the issue

Why comment on any aspect of the game? Think you need to learn the difference between complaining and commenting, while you’re looking up those words, check out hypocrisy too

Burkie1203

Shelflife wrote: »

Always amuses me that the more vocal someone is in their criticism of a referee the less likely it will be that they have a seen law book or a law app never mind read it!

People tend to see what they want as opposed to the truer picture. So Leinster fans will see Connacht players going off their feet and sealing off and Connacht fans will see Leinster players coming in from the side!

Ref sees a reasonably fair contest for the ball and plays on! Both sets of fans think the ref is an ass !

It was ever thus ....

The big thing after this game on social media from quite a few Connacht fans was Clancy awarded the try but he should have gone to TMO because TV footage was inconclusive. Totally ignoring that Clancy was approx 1.5m away from Porter with a clear unobstructed view. Basically accusing him of either bias or corruption.

The VDF try of 2016 was brought up too. Despite Clancy getting into a perfect position to see it, and several Connacht players immediate reactions upon seeing the ball be grounded.

Shefwedfan

stephen_n wrote: »

Why comment on any aspect of the game? Think you need to learn the difference between complaining and commenting, while you’re looking up those words, check out hypocrisy too

Look at any match thread, you could have 200 post....maybe 60% will be about the ref, nothing about the player. Just the ref.



It is so boring. Pages and pages of cr*p, all about 1 person when their is 30 other people on the field.



Maybe for this forum all discussion about ref during match's should be banned. Or even discouraged.



On the point of not going to the TMO. Every other days fans are booing and complaining when refs are constantly going to the TMO when they can see the try scored.



Another case of the whiny Irish fan syndrome.

jacothelad

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Look at any match thread, you could have 200 post....maybe 60% will be about the ref, nothing about the player. Just the ref.



It is so boring. Pages and pages of cr*p, all about 1 person when their is 30 other people on the field.



Maybe for this forum all discussion about ref during match's should be banned. Or even discouraged.



On the point of not going to the TMO. Every other days fans are booing and complaining when refs are constantly going to the TMO when they can see the try scored.



Another case of the whiny Irish fan syndrome.

Whoosh.................................................

Zzippy

troyzer wrote: »

It looks like his hand loses the ball in mid air and then gathers it again before grounding it. Which is technically a knock on. It was right in front of me in the RDS.

Been offline a few days and only saw this now. This is incorrect. If the ball doesn't touch the ground or another player before being regathered, it is not a knock-on. It is not "technically" anything. The player retains possession until another player touches it, or it hits the ground. End of.
Luke Fitz on commentary was claiming it was a knock-on, then on the final replay angle he saw the hand with downward pressure and said it was a try.

irishbucsfan

Zzippy wrote: »

Been offline a few days and only saw this now. This is incorrect. If the ball doesn't touch the ground or another player before being regathered, it is not a knock-on. It is not "technically" anything. The player retains possession until another player touches it, or it hits the ground. End of.
Luke Fitz on commentary was claiming it was a knock-on, then on the final replay angle he saw the hand with downward pressure and said it was a try.

This is not clear cut and not always true, its just generally allowed as play on

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

This is not clear cut and not always true, its just generally allowed as play on

Zzippy has correctly defined a knock-on. What bit isn't clear?

irishbucsfan

Tessa Attractive Plantation wrote: »

Zzippy has correctly defined a knock-on. What bit isn't clear?

You can't knock the ball forward and regather it and be guaranteed of it not being called a knock-on, for fairly obvious reasons

Whatever these obvious reasons are they don't apply here. Zzippy correctly defined a knock-on, troyzer was not correct.

irishbucsfan

Tessa Attractive Plantation wrote: »

Whatever these obvious reasons are they don't apply here. Zzippy correctly defined a knock-on, troyzer was not correct.

That's why I said it's not always true and didn't say Zzippy was incorrect in this scenario.

troyzer

Happy to stand corrected if that's the case.

stephen_n

jacothelad wrote: »

Whoosh.................................................

Irony is a difficult concept to get your head around it would seem.

jacothelad

stephen_n wrote: »

Irony is a difficult concept to get your head around it would seem.

Whoosh... Someone whining about people whining.....

connemara man

If only there were other Interpros this weekend...

Oh wait there is