Ulster vs. Leinster, Saturday 6th March, 19.35 (Eir Sport 1)

bayern

awec wrote: »

I think there is an endemic lack of competence in referees produced by the IRFU and that, more frequently than not, we feel the brunt of it in fixtures against Leinster. All too often this fixture ends with the biggest talking point being some decision by the ref and it's almost always to the detriment of Ulster.

Maybe Leinster are just more efficient at manipulating appalling referees than other teams. It wouldn't be surprising, this sort of thing is what good teams are good at!

I would gladly never see Frank Murphy near an Ulster game again.

As a Leinster fan I would also gladly never see Frank Murphy ref us again. He is a poor ref.

awec

thomond2006 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/thesimonokeeffe/status/1368302127592902661

:pac:

I'm pretty sure that's a penalty.

Not for Frank. Play on.

TomsOnTheRoof

thomond2006 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/thesimonokeeffe/status/1368302127592902661

:pac:

I'm pretty sure that's a penalty.

Murphy, Touch Judges and TMO all missed that. Terrible stuff.

Clegg

thomond2006 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/thesimonokeeffe/status/1368302127592902661

:pac:

I'm pretty sure that's a penalty.

This is the best clear out since Furlong sent Murray flying in a Pro 14 semi a few years ago.

Larbre34

Show me a good ref these days and I'll show you a liar.

Akrasia

thomond2006 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/thesimonokeeffe/status/1368302127592902661

:pac:

I'm pretty sure that's a penalty.

It’s Elizabeth Barrett Browningian how much of a penalty that was

Let me count the ways...

Akrasia

sebdavis wrote: »

Normally I find the better team wins. The losing team will look for excuses and the automatic choice is the ref.

Very rarely will you find a winning team complain about the ref or the losing team saying the ref had a great game.

Lol, the logic is gas, the team that wins rarely or never looks for excuses for why they won, therefore any team that has an excuse for losing must have been the worse team

Akrasia

Larbre34 wrote: »

Show me a good ref these days and I'll show you a liar.

Is this a forum game?

I show you a picture of Wayne Barnes and you show me a picture of Comical Ali?

Former Former Former

Larbre34 wrote: »

Show me a good ref these days and I'll show you a liar.

Murphy is a good ref. He did his best tonight trying to control two teams who seemed not to know the rules of the game.

Ulster's discipline was absolutely atrocious. Leinster weren't too far behind if slightly less self destructive.

People then blame the ref for enforcing the rules rather than the idiot players who can't follow them.

Ardillaun

Warwick seemed in full Hartley mode from the get go. Too hyped up.

Baloucoune missed a high ball and was a bit narrow on one Leinster attack but used his pace to cover the gap. I just hope for the sake of Ulster and Ireland that his hamstring holds up now. A great prospect. Izuchukwu looked handy too.

molloyjh

The cards killed the game but hard to really argue with any of them even if a few felt harsh while also correct. The only real poor call today was the McCloskey blocking call. Rhys only had eyes for McCloskey and was never even looking at Baloucoune. Should have stood as a try for me.

I was really impressed with Leinsters performance up until the red though. To take the lead despite 2 yellows was impressive. The forwards were really good as a unit, Ross Byrne had some nice involvements and JOB, while he made some errors, was pretty good overall. Kelleher was lively but I was a but disappointed with Dave K, particularly in defence where I thought he made some bad reads/decisions.

Ulster had their moments. Looked very good defensively even with 14 men. Payne is doing a bloody fine job there. Baloucoune looks class and I liked what I saw from Izuchukwu. Stockdale doesn't look quite at the races yet and I'd be bringing Baloucoune into Ireland camp ahead of him as it stands. What's the consensus on McCloskey? Mixed the good with the bad for me. Some lovely work going forward but some pretty poor penalties too.

thegreycity

Can someone clarify the rule around the disallowed Balacoune try. A few people saying Ruddock “bit in”, but my understanding always was that if the defending player was in a realistic position to reach the player with ball and another attacking player gets in his way, it’s obstruction. Does what the defending player does actually come into it?

arsebiscuits1

I cannot wait to watch this game back and have a proper look at it. No useful stats available yet that I've found.

I wont comment much on the referee performance as it's been heartily discussed already. I will say Leinster got the rub of the green but a big part of this was Ulster totally crumbling under pressure.

At first glance:

Baloucoune is box office. Few if any noticeable weaknesses to his game. Very few Irish wingers who'd have taken both those tries that well tonight. I look forward to seeing him get a proper crack at fitness.

Cooney unfortunately showed why he doesn't get more international involvement. Luke McGrath (who I've been vocally critical of in the past) had a much more influential game at 9. Even Ulster at full compliment needed more assurance from their half backs tonight and they just didn't get enough of it. If Cooneys biggest fans want him capped at the highest level, they need to ask why these games pass him by.

I'll take Penny over Coombes all day as a back row option. Much more complete player (but they'd compliment each other wonderfully) but it's no accident that he's gotten motm at 8 now 2 weeks in a row. Super player who out performed Marcel Coetzee at 8

Izzy is a breath of fresh air. There is shades of Nakarawa about how he tries to keep it alive (excellent article in the 42 about him). I hope he keeps developing as well and quickly as he has.

Full credit to Marty Moore for having to scrum at loosehead. Had a tough time but took one for the team (if I am not mistaken if they had to go uncontested Ulster would have had to go to 13?)

I think Ross Byrne was excellent tonight, passing, kicking and carrying were all good and controlled things as needed

molloyjh

Paul Smeenus wrote: »

I'll say it again, what about when he didn't give a toss about JOB slamming his head into Madigan's chin?Whhat was the control situation them?

Ah Paul, you're better than this hyperbolic nonsense. JOB didn't slam his head into Madigan. They clashed heads in contact. The way you're describing this here is as if JOB deliberately launched his head straight into Madigans. That isnt what happened. JOB was just too upright in thr tackle. There was nothing really in it but it was deserving of a yellow as tacklers need to get themselves lower and in a position not to make contact with the head.

Murphy did exactly the same thing for all 3 high contact incidents. Looked and them and tried to find mitigating factors to reduce the sanction. He did it for Warwick as much as he did it for Toner or JOB. It isnt his fault that the laws are set up the way that they are. He got all those calls right by the letter of the law.

Now I do think there is a conversation to be had about tweaking the laws because I do feel that there needs to be a fairer way of dealing with these incidents. Warwick should probably have been a yellow, but thats just not what the laws say (or the directions from WR on their interpretation).

In terms of Murphy performance the only real issues were the McCloskey non-block and the Byrne clear out. I was also amused that he missed McCloskey taking a Leinster player past the ruck and straight into Murphy himself and Murphy still didn't do anything, but that was just funny tbh. A couple of calls went against Ulster tonight, but the cards were all 100% understandable, even if we all would rather see some of them treated a bit differently.

Bluwave

Larbre34 wrote: »

Show me a good ref these days and I'll show you a liar.

Jan verhass

thegreycity

thegreycity wrote: »

Can someone clarify the rule around the disallowed Balacoune try. A few people saying Ruddock “bit in”, but my understanding always was that if the defending player was in a realistic position to reach the player with ball and another attacking player gets in his way, it’s blocking. Does what the defending player does actually come into it?

In a situation like that where the decoy runner is part of the last 'play' before the try is scored then there appears to be an increased onus on the decoy runners not to plot a line between a potential tackler and the carrier.

Decoy runners generally run either well beyond the play or short of it - not creating any kind of obvious block.

The difference today is that Ruddock tackled the blocking player. It appears that because the blocking player was in the way regardless, the the try was disallowed. It could be a semantic interpretation, but at the same time - there was a player ahead of the ball between the actual ball carrier and a defender.

It's a marginal call - I personally would have let the try stand, but there are direct interpretations of the laws that could well say I'd be wrong.

molloyjh

thegreycity wrote: »

Can someone clarify the rule around the disallowed Balacoune try. A few people saying Ruddock “bit in”, but my understanding always was that if the defending player was in a realistic position to reach the player with ball and another attacking player gets in his way, it’s obstruction. Does what the defending player does actually come into it?

I'm not sure of WR have issued any instructions on this, which they sometimes do outside of the official laws of the game, but the actual law itself is just that a player must not intentionally prevent an opponent from tackling or attempting to tackle the ball carrier.

So this is where we can get into semantics. Does that mean that it matters what the defender does or does it just matter what the decoy runner does. If the decoy runner runs directly at the defender with the intention of preventing the tackle, is this enough to breach the law? Or if he intends to but is only penalised because the defender actually attempts the tackle, is this the right interpretation? In all honesty I haven't a clue. I'd like to think the defenders action is relevant, but it isn't mentioned in the law and unless there is guidance from WR (which there may be) then its simply not that clear cut.

thegreycity

Thanks guys, just don’t see that try ever being allowed at international level, blocking runner was far too close to the defender who could reach man with ball, regardless of defender’s actions.

molloyjh

thegreycity wrote: »

Thanks guys, just don’t see that try ever being allowed at international level, blocking runner was far too close to the defender who could reach man with ball, regardless of defender’s actions.

Yeah, that's a perfectly valid interpretation of what's in the laws. And given that both TMO and referee used the very same logic then it's probably a very fair reflection on how they are expected to interpret it too.

Former Former Former

thegreycity wrote: »

Thanks guys, just don’t see that try ever being allowed at international level, blocking runner was far too close to the defender who could reach man with ball, regardless of defender’s actions.

Yeah, I think that's probably it. Did Ruddock have any realistic chance of resetting to tackle Baloucoune after McCloskey makes contact? I don't think so.

It's a subjective call but I think any ref would have called it the same way.

bilston

The officiating tonight killed a little bit of my love of rugby tonight.

FWIW on both the Toner and O'Brien incidents, I was watching them thinking either could be a red by the letter of the law, especially the O'Brien incident, but I was also thinking, come on ref give a yellow and let it go for the sake of the match. Then the Warwick incident happens. Again, it is by letter of the law a red card, but it was far less dangerous than other incidents.

As for the disallowed try, my view is that Ruddock tackled McCloskey as opposed to McCloskey taking Ruddock out, that's a decoy line, that happens all the time.

Anyway, I'm just feeling a bit pissed off right now. The laws around head contact exist for a very good reason, but they are also destroying the game as a spectacle. Wales could well be the worst team in modern history to win a GS because of this! Rugby titles are literally being decided by this. I would just like to see a bit of common sense introduced. How can anyone say Warwick's offence is more dangerous than O'Brien's? I wouldn't have sent either player off!

All that said, irrespective of tonight, Leinster are a machine, they are an exceptional rugby team/organisation. The quality of coaching appears to be of the highest quality and they have 3 or 4 players in every position of good quality.

As for Ulster...truthfully, I switched off after Baloucoune's disallowed try I was that annoyed...but the lads appear to have shown good spirit in the second half, and the aforementioned Baloucoune is a class act. Once again I'm left to conclude that we are never going to beat Leinster with a team containing 5 or 6 ex Leinster players who were surplus to requirements there.

Roll on the last two games, Challenge Cup and hopefully Rainbow Cup, hopefully there is plenty of rugby left this season.

FrannoFan

bilston wrote: »

The officiating tonight killed a little bit of my love of rugby tonight.

FWIW on both the Toner and O'Brien incidents, I was watching them thinking either could be a red by the letter of the law, especially the O'Brien incident, but I was also thinking, come on ref give a yellow and let it go for the sake of the match. Then the Warwick incident happens. Again, it is by letter of the law a red card, but it was far less dangerous than other incidents.

As for the disallowed try, my view is that Ruddock tackled McCloskey as opposed to McCloskey taking Ruddock out, that's a decoy line, that happens all the time.

Anyway, I'm just feeling a bit pissed off right now. The laws around head contact exist for a very good reason, but they are also destroying the game as a spectacle. Wales could well be the worst team in modern history to win a GS because of this! Rugby titles are literally being decided by this. I would just like to see a bit of common sense introduced. How can anyone say Warwick's offence is more dangerous than O'Brien's? I wouldn't have sent either player off!

All that said, irrespective of tonight, Leinster are a machine, they are an exceptional rugby team/organisation. The quality of coaching appears to be of the highest quality and they have 3 or 4 players in every position of good quality.

As for Ulster...truthfully, I switched off after Baloucoune's disallowed try I was that annoyed...but the lads appear to have shown good spirit in the second half, and the aforementioned Baloucoune is a class act. Once again I'm left to conclude that we are never going to beat Leinster with a team containing 5 or 6 ex Leinster players who were surplus to requirements there.

Roll on the last two games, Challenge Cup and hopefully Rainbow Cup, hopefully there is plenty of rugby left this season.

Murphy set his stall out when he carded toner for a seat belt high tackle "he has to do better" he's 7 foot and it's lowry! Game only began and you knew if that's the bar for yellow we were going to see a red at some point.

For me neither jimmy o'brien or warwick were cards. I hate the "games gone soft" brigade but there is spirit of the law as well as letter of the law that needs to be taken into account.

Commentary missed the point on balacoune disallowed try, the problem is mccloskey is ahead of the pass so he's never a valid option to receive it. If ball released to balacoune while mccloskey behind the passer I think he's ok. He's just ahead. Harsh enough though hell of a finish. How conway and daly in irish squad and he isn't is beyond me

sydthebeat

bilston wrote: »

The officiating tonight killed a little bit of my love of rugby tonight.

FWIW on both the Toner and O'Brien incidents, I was watching them thinking either could be a red by the letter of the law, especially the O'Brien incident, but I was also thinking, come on ref give a yellow and let it go for the sake of the match. Then the Warwick incident happens. Again, it is by letter of the law a red card, but it was far less dangerous than other incidents.

As for the disallowed try, my view is that Ruddock tackled McCloskey as opposed to McCloskey taking Ruddock out, that's a decoy line, that happens all the time.

Anyway, I'm just feeling a bit pissed off right now. The laws around head contact exist for a very good reason, but they are also destroying the game as a spectacle. Wales could well be the worst team in modern history to win a GS because of this! Rugby titles are literally being decided by this. I would just like to see a bit of common sense introduced. How can anyone say Warwick's offence is more dangerous than O'Brien's? I wouldn't have sent either player off!

All that said, irrespective of tonight, Leinster are a machine, they are an exceptional rugby team/organisation. The quality of coaching appears to be of the highest quality and they have 3 or 4 players in every position of good quality.

As for Ulster...truthfully, I switched off after Baloucoune's disallowed try I was that annoyed...but the lads appear to have shown good spirit in the second half, and the aforementioned Baloucoune is a class act. Once again I'm left to conclude that we are never going to beat Leinster with a team containing 5 or 6 ex Leinster players who were surplus to requirements there.

Roll on the last two games, Challenge Cup and hopefully Rainbow Cup, hopefully there is plenty of rugby left this season.

Its so unconvincing that we can see different competitions from across the world, but being reffed as of they are different sports.
As said already, moody hits Regan 2 or 3 decent head slaps and nothing happens.
That offload in jap rugby which leads to the player hitting the deck head first... We have the Glasgow 6 and zebre 9 clashing head on head... And we have that flambé gimp in top 14 jumping into a double tackle..

All these have consequences which have absolutely no effect on the game.

Yet we have what 6 cards in the pro 14 game this evening for incidents which I personally think are lesser than any of those, and are singularly instrumental in the result.

Theres a huge disconnect between got the game is played and how the game is reffed.

Interested Observer

I'd love to know Murphy's cards per game compared to other refs.

I think all the high tackles etc could be considered "rugby incidents" nobody was trying to hit anyone high and I don't see how the red cards make anything safer. I don't think the Ulster player should have been sent off.

I also think disallowing Balacoune's try was just wrong, at full speed it looked a bit like crossing but Ruddock got drawn in by a dummy line, he was free to try fill the gap.

Having said that, Leinster won by 20pts and had 3 yellows. Frank wasn't decisive

pickarooney

thomond2006 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/thesimonokeeffe/status/1368302127592902661

:pac:

I'm pretty sure that's a penalty.

If Cooney is any taller it's a red card. Ridiculous to let this 'launching yourself at a ruck' nonsense go. Yellow card minimum for dangerous play, regardless of the outcome.

razorblunt

arsebiscuits1 wrote: »

I'll take Penny over Coombes all day as a back row option. Much more complete player (but they'd compliment each other wonderfully) but it's no accident that he's gotten motm at 8 now 2 weeks in a row. Super player who out performed Marcel Coetzee at 8

Doesn’t matter Jack Conan walks in to the team for some reason ahead of both. Interesting to see what happens at Leinster post 6 Nations if Penney can keep Conan out.

Buer

razorblunt wrote: »

Doesn’t matter Jack Conan walks in to the team for some reason ahead of both. Interesting to see what happens at Leinster post 6 Nations if Penney can keep Conan out.

There's not a hope in hell of Penny staying at 8 and keeping Conan out. I don't think it's even a consideration. Penny is an emergency 8 who has done excellently.

I've been fairly critical of Conan earlier in his career but he's incredibly underrated now. He wins MOTM in back to back weeks and has a significant impact in a 6N game after coming on and nobody bats an eyelid. That's why he's ahead of those guys.

It's not exactly a head scratcher to see a guy who is a proven performer in green and in good form selected ahead of uncapped players.

Former Former Former

sydthebeat wrote: »

All these have consequences which have absolutely no effect on the game.

Yet we have what 6 cards in the pro 14 game this evening for incidents which I personally think are lesser than any of those, and are singularly instrumental in the result.

Theres a huge disconnect between got the game is played and how the game is reffed.

Effect on the game is utterly irrelevant though. That's what people are missing here.

The rugby authorities have to reduce contact with the head. They have to, have to, have to. The game will be bankrupted within 10 years by lawsuits if the unions can't say they made legitimate efforts to protect players.

We have to change the way the game is played. Warwick leading with an elbow to the throat, Toner just flailing out an arm as he's being beaten, we have to train players not to do these things.

Buer

Akrasia wrote: »

The Ulster red was fair, it’s the JOB yellow that was unfair. If JOB was yellow, then The Ulster should have been yellow too given that Jimmy’s collision was more dangerous than the offense that caused the red card

Just coming back to this (I know, I know)...the list of mitigations provided by WR for contact with the head or neck includes a ball carrier dropping in height. This is what gave Murphy an out on the red.

I agree JOB's contact was significant however and he's a lucky man to avoid the red card regardless.

Former Former Former

And it's incredibly unfair and bitter for people to accuse Murphy not only of being a bad ref, but of deliberately screwing Ulster, simply for enforcing the rules of the game.

I think we'll find that when Ulster get better players, they'll miraculously get a better deal from refs.