Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Connacht Team Talk Thread V - The Friend Zone

Options
1…310311313315316…332

Comments

  • Options
    #9362
    CowboyTed
    Registered Users Posts: 777 ✭✭✭CowboyTed


    Burkie1203 wrote: »
    The Zebre player is almost bolt upright bar a slight bend at the knee. He is not leading with his head.

    Papaili is not upright. He is leaning forward, bent at the hips, head first. His heels are not touching the ground as his head makes contact because he is driving upwards.


    His arms and shoulders were not illegal, but he was not sent off for doing anything wrong with his arms and shoulders. He wraps both arms.

    AP is not jumping out of the way. He is trying to tackle the zebre player. The change of direction doesnt matter. Papaili instincts are to go high. If he makes 5 tackles in a game, chances are one is going to get him into trouble.

    One of his heels were on the ground at time of impact but he is obviously expecting him to come on his left shoulder. The runner is pushing to his left of his right foot, that is why it is an accident. Hard to see anything wreakless.

    Screenshot-2020-11-23-at-13-14-11.png

    From there he tries to get out of the way...


  • Options
    #9363
    Burkie1203
    Registered Users Posts: 11,239 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    Mul, it's over
    CowboyTed wrote: »
    One of his heels were on the ground at time of impact but he is obviously expecting him to come on his left shoulder. The runner is pushing to his left of his right foot, that is why it is an accident. Hard to see anything wreakless.

    Screenshot-2020-11-23-at-13-14-11.png

    From there he tries to get out of the way...

    Papaili is driving upwards, there is still no contact in that still pic but at that stage Papaili has initiated his tackle and he carries through with it. It is not accidental if thats how he tackles. They clash heads because one player has poor tackle technique and he had very recent previous.

    If AP gets a ban and comes back and he continues to tackle in this manner, how many more reds will he collect?


  • Options
    #9364
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    CowboyTed wrote: »
    One of his heels were on the ground at time of impact but he is obviously expecting him to come on his left shoulder. The runner is pushing to his left of his right foot, that is why it is an accident. Hard to see anything wreakless.

    Screenshot-2020-11-23-at-13-14-11.png

    From there he tries to get out of the way...
    Look at how he is entering the contact. Its upwards. He has initiated the tackle and he's already high. Its reckless and deserves a ban and considering he is just back from a ban for dangerous tackling he will be off for a while


  • Options
    #9365
    CowboyTed
    Registered Users Posts: 777 ✭✭✭CowboyTed


    Burkie1203 wrote: »
    Papaili is driving upwards, there is still no contact in that still pic but at that stage Papaili has initiated his tackle and he carries through with it. It is not accidental if thats how he tackles. They clash heads because one player has poor tackle technique and he had very recent previous.

    If AP gets a ban and comes back and he continues to tackle in this manner, how many more reds will he collect?

    You agreed that his shoulder and arms were never illegal and always stay in a legal position...

    This clearly shows him getting his head out of the way or trying to. He is not leading with the head into the runner. The runner is coming into the side of his head.

    Is the technique bad? Well it doesn't look great and that is why he lets the player go as soon as his arm is pushed up.

    So Shoulders and Arm don't deserve red and he is not putting his head into the runner but to the side and runner runs into it... The ref asked did he lead with his head, that implies that he attempted to go head first into the runner.. The picture clearly shows his head wasn't doing that.

    His head was high. The question is having your head high in the tackle a red card offence. If it is why isn't every player pulled up on it?


  • Options
    #9366
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,202 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    The Friend Zone
    CowboyTed wrote: »
    You agreed that his shoulder and arms were never illegal and always stay in a legal position...

    This clearly shows him getting his head out of the way or trying to. He is not leading with the head into the runner. The runner is coming into the side of his head.

    Is the technique bad? Well it doesn't look great and that is why he lets the player go as soon as his arm is pushed up.

    So Shoulders and Arm don't deserve red and he is not putting his head into the runner but to the side and runner runs into it... The ref asked did he lead with his head, that implies that he attempted to go head first into the runner.. The picture clearly shows his head wasn't doing that.

    His head was high. The question is having your head high in the tackle a red card offence. If it is why isn't every player pulled up on it?

    https://laws.worldrugby.org/en/guidelines/13


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9367
    FACECUTTR
    Registered Users Posts: 1,521 ✭✭✭FACECUTTR


    Great to see SOB back and playing well. He has lost a bit of weight by the look of it. Reilly looks a really good prospect. Terrible luck for Farrell.
    I wonder will it be Arnold back to 13. He hasn't impressed me much in the centre but has been good on the wing.
    I'm slightly worried about loosehead and hooker. Buckley is going to need a rest soon and McCallister is prone to picking up regular injuries. I'd like to see more of Duggan and Burke getting game time. As for hooker we have Heff and Delahunt who are nailed on. Murphy is not trusted and DTM is not getting any game time. We need another body there and not one to make up the numbers.


  • Options
    #9368
    Burkie1203
    Registered Users Posts: 11,239 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    Mul, it's over
    CowboyTed wrote: »
    You agreed that his shoulder and arms were never illegal and always stay in a legal position...

    This clearly shows him getting his head out of the way or trying to. He is not leading with the head into the runner. The runner is coming into the side of his head.

    Is the technique bad? Well it doesn't look great and that is why he lets the player go as soon as his arm is pushed up.

    So Shoulders and Arm don't deserve red and he is not putting his head into the runner but to the side and runner runs into it... The ref asked did he lead with his head, that implies that he attempted to go head first into the runner.. The picture clearly shows his head wasn't doing that.

    His head was high. The question is having your head high in the tackle a red card offence. If it is why isn't every player pulled up on it?

    His head went straight into the BCs head because he was always high. He is leaning forward and driving upwards.

    When he begins his forward motion his head is the closest part of him to the BC before he goes to wrap. His head connects with the BC head because his tackle technique means he goes high.

    I don't know why you keep bringing his shoulders and arms into it. He was sent off for a head on head clash which he was at fault for.


  • Options
    #9369
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,202 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    The Friend Zone
    The contact to the ball carriers head, and the force of same, with no mitigation factors, is the reason he got sent off.


  • Options
    #9370
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    CowboyTed wrote: »
    You agreed that his shoulder and arms were never illegal and always stay in a legal position...

    This clearly shows him getting his head out of the way or trying to. He is not leading with the head into the runner. The runner is coming into the side of his head.

    Is the technique bad? Well it doesn't look great and that is why he lets the player go as soon as his arm is pushed up.

    So Shoulders and Arm don't deserve red and he is not putting his head into the runner but to the side and runner runs into it... The ref asked did he lead with his head, that implies that he attempted to go head first into the runner.. The picture clearly shows his head wasn't doing that.

    His head was high. The question is having your head high in the tackle a red card offence. If it is why isn't every player pulled up on it?
    Maybe what the ref said wasnt phrased the best but its very clear from the pic and video that he is high and its dangerous under the framework which differentiates between shoulder charges/dangerous tackle.
    https://laws.worldrugby.org/en/guidelines/13

    There is contact with the head, his left arm is nowhere near making contact in the tackle. The force of the hit. All combined means it has to be a red card.


  • Options
    #9371
    RonnieL
    Registered Users Posts: 770 ✭✭✭RonnieL


    Delighted to see SOB back, and in good form from the start. You could actually hear some of the reaction from the other connacht lads when he scored the try too - "welcome back son"!

    Regarding the red - I felt it was harsh, but it's clear he needs to improve his technique. Having said that, I do feel it's more difficult for the bigger men like him to dip in the first place, not to mention react to a smaller player as they twist and turn.

    As an aside, I do think there is a middle ground wrt punishing dangerous play, without ruining games. If the red carded player could be replaced after something like 20 minutes, with the individual still getting the ban, it would allow the behavior to be discouraged without sacrificing the individual games.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9372
    Zeugnis
    Registered Users Posts: 752 ✭✭✭Zeugnis


    Any news on Farrell's knee?


  • Options
    #9373
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    RonnieL wrote: »
    Delighted to see SOB back, and in good form from the start. You could actually hear some of the reaction from the other connacht lads when he scored the try too - "welcome back son"!

    Regarding the red - I felt it was harsh, but it's clear he needs to improve his technique. Having said that, I do feel it's more difficult for the bigger men like him to dip in the first place, not to mention react to a smaller player as they twist and turn.

    As an aside, I do think there is a middle ground wrt punishing dangerous play, without ruining games. If the red carded player could be replaced after something like 20 minutes, with the individual still getting the ban, it would allow the behavior to be discouraged without sacrificing the individual games.
    No a red card doesnt ruin a game. I dont see how its harsh. It may be difficult for bigger men to dip but thats irrelevant.
    A red card is given for the most serious offences or multiple yellows. A 20 minute suspension isnt sufficient for a red card.


  • Options
    #9374
    Bazzo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    Mul, it's over
    A red card is ruining this thread


  • Options
    #9375
    SqueakyKneecap
    Registered Users Posts: 1,165 ✭✭✭SqueakyKneecap


    Bazzo wrote: »
    A red card is ruining this thread

    In the complimentary way possible: if I was being sentenced to me death I'd want Burkie1203 as my legal team because the case would be still going long after I die of natural causes :pac:


  • Options
    #9376
    ClanofLams
    Registered Users Posts: 4,212 ✭✭✭ClanofLams


    Mul, it's over
    Bazzo wrote: »
    A red card is ruining this thread

    Make Connacht Rugby Thread Great readable Again!


  • Options
    #9377
    CowboyTed
    Registered Users Posts: 777 ✭✭✭CowboyTed


    Bazzo wrote: »
    A red card is ruining this thread

    Fair enough... Won't be sorted out here...


  • Options
    #9378
    Wegians89
    Registered Users Posts: 3,447 ✭✭✭Wegians89


    The Friend Zone
    Connacht are sitting third in the conference, a point off scarlets but have two games in hand. Had felt like it was a pretty bad start to the season but looking at that top two is very much on.

    Gotta love seeing SOB back, what a cracking 6. After Boyles performance the week before, there’s the makings of a very competitive back row with butler too. Sean masterson looked solid and I’ve been impressed with Oliver so far this year. Aungier looks like a steal too.

    In the backs, Reilly looks like another solid 9 coming through. Hopefully Tom Farrell isn’t out for long, he makes such a difference to the attack. Really looking forward to seeing a back three of wootton, porch and BOD


  • Options
    #9379
    freyners
    Registered Users Posts: 4,300 ✭✭✭freyners


    The Friend Zone
    Wegians89 wrote: »
    Connacht are sitting third in the conference, a point off scarlets but have two games in hand. Had felt like it was a pretty bad start to the season but looking at that top two is very much on.

    Gotta love seeing SOB back, what a cracking 6. After Boyles performance the week before, there’s the makings of a very competitive back row with butler too. Sean masterson looked solid and I’ve been impressed with Oliver so far this year. Aungier looks like a steal too.

    In the backs, Reilly looks like another solid 9 coming through. Hopefully Tom Farrell isn’t out for long, he makes such a difference to the attack. Really looking forward to seeing a back three of wootton, porch and BOD

    SOB could be huge if he gets back to his level of 2016/17 where he was rampant imo, still quite young so if he can keep fit has the talent to go past that and start being look at for Ireland squads.

    I'm fairly confident that the coaches can fix APs tackling, for me its part fitness, part getting used to this level of rugby union as while the first one was reckless, there is a significant element of bad luck in the second and you have two excellent options in every position in SOB/Masterson, Butler/Oliver and AP/Boyle with Masterson eile, Dowling and Gallagher all knocking around also.

    Agreed on Aungier, looks very good. Very competitive position with the 4 options in Bealham/DRM/Aungier/Kenny

    Anyone have a read on Tierney Martin at hooker, has he not developed as hoped or has injuries stalled his progress?


  • Options
    #9380
    Wegians89
    Registered Users Posts: 3,447 ✭✭✭Wegians89


    The Friend Zone
    freyners wrote: »
    SOB could be huge if he gets back to his level of 2016/17 where he was rampant imo, still quite young so if he can keep fit has the talent to go past that and start being look at for Ireland squads.

    I'm fairly confident that the coaches can fix APs tackling, for me its part fitness, part getting used to this level of rugby union as while the first one was reckless, there is a significant element of bad luck in the second and you have two excellent options in every position in SOB/Masterson, Butler/Oliver and AP/Boyle with Masterson eile, Dowling and Gallagher all knocking around also.

    Agreed on Aungier, looks very good. Very competitive position with the 4 options in Bealham/DRM/Aungier/Kenny

    Anyone have a read on Tierney Martin at hooker, has he not developed as hoped or has injuries stalled his progress?

    DTM was actually the 24th man at the weekend, he was pictured on the bench


  • Options
    #9381
    connachta
    Registered Users Posts: 7,965 ✭✭✭connachta


    Wegians89 wrote: »
    DTM was actually the 24th man at the weekend, he was pictured on the bench




    We have 5 and a half key players able to go forward (and not crashing, gaining meters on their feet)



    Heff
    Dillane
    Papali'i
    Aki
    Daly or Robb



    Partly Boyle




    As long as we have so few, their "competitors" for the spots start with a huge disadvantage in my opinion, because we need at least 3 or 4 carriers within 15


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9382
    SqueakyKneecap
    Registered Users Posts: 1,165 ✭✭✭SqueakyKneecap


    Tom Farrell out for 6 weeks


  • Options
    #9383
    realhorrorshow
    Registered Users Posts: 1,915 ✭✭✭realhorrorshow


    freyners wrote: »
    SOB could be huge if he gets back to his level of 2016/17 where he was rampant imo, still quite young so if he can keep fit has the talent to go past that and start being look at for Ireland squads.

    I'm fairly confident that the coaches can fix APs tackling, for me its part fitness, part getting used to this level of rugby union as while the first one was reckless, there is a significant element of bad luck in the second and you have two excellent options in every position in SOB/Masterson, Butler/Oliver and AP/Boyle with Masterson eile, Dowling and Gallagher all knocking around also.

    Agreed on Aungier, looks very good. Very competitive position with the 4 options in Bealham/DRM/Aungier/Kenny

    Anyone have a read on Tierney Martin at hooker, has he not developed as hoped or has injuries stalled his progress?

    My read on Tierney Martin as an u20 was that he had matured physically quite early and that he would struggle in adult rugby. I’ve seen him play a bit for Eagles/Corinthians and I think that has turned out to be the case. If he were particularly rated I think he would have passed out Johnny Murphy by now. Hopefully he’ll turn out to be a decent squad member as indigenous players are invaluable no matter where they are on the depth chart, but he’s not an O’Brien/Gallagher/Murray tier prospect imo, which was probably a lot of people’s expectation.


  • Options
    #9384
    connachta
    Registered Users Posts: 7,965 ✭✭✭connachta


    SqueakyKneecap wrote: »
    Tom Farrell out for 6 weeks


    Fairly good news when you saw him out of the pitch
    Available for Champions Cup in January
    Robb can't come back soon enough. Daly/Arnold our last option this week


  • Options
    #9385
    Bazzo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    Mul, it's over
    SqueakyKneecap wrote: »
    Tom Farrell out for 6 weeks

    That's a lot better than I thought it would be to be honest


  • Options
    #9386
    Burkie1203
    Registered Users Posts: 11,239 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    Mul, it's over
    SqueakyKneecap wrote: »
    Tom Farrell out for 6 weeks

    That's a seriously good result, was convinced it was ACL when I saw video clip of him leaving the field


  • Options
    #9387
    FACECUTTR
    Registered Users Posts: 1,521 ✭✭✭FACECUTTR


    Bazzo wrote: »
    That's a lot better than I thought it would be to be honest

    I honestly thought it would be 6 months to a year before we saw him again. Great news


  • Options
    #9388
    connachta
    Registered Users Posts: 7,965 ✭✭✭connachta


    “We are going to appeal that and hopefully common sense prevails on Thursday and it’s thrown out.”

    Andy Friend with the exact good words in this article "hope to get a disciplinary panel “who understand collision sports and that things like that do happen, that there was no malice or intent in it.”

    https://www.the42.ie/connacht-appeal-abraham-papalii-5277157-Nov2020/


  • Options
    #9389
    serfboard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭serfboard


    connachta wrote: »
    https://www.the42.ie/connacht-appeal-abraham-papalii-5277157-Nov2020/
    Friend confirmed that Connacht had already been working with Papali’i on his tackling technique since his arrival, with the 27-year-old having played rugby league up until last year.

    “We’re working really hard with him to drop that body height, he’s a big man anyway and those things take a while
    You could imagine Friend saying to him; "Alright, Abraham, your training sessions are going to consist, from now on, exclusively on tackle technique, and we will not play you again until we are satisified that you have got it right".

    At 27, he's not exactly an old dog, but you'd have to wonder how long it will take to teach him the new trick of low(er) tackling.


  • Options
    #9390
    RonnieL
    Registered Users Posts: 770 ✭✭✭RonnieL


    SqueakyKneecap wrote: »
    Tom Farrell out for 6 weeks

    The 6 week figure seems hopeful based on what Friend said:
    “He had a scan yesterday and it’s going to be lengthy that one, let’s say six weeks plus,” said Friend of Farrell. “We won’t see him for six weeks at least.”

    Fingers crossed!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9391
    ElisaAtWar
    Registered Users Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭ElisaAtWar


    What happened with Matt and Tiernan. They seemed to have been there for a few minutes, and minutes later they were not to be found again?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement