nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Munster vs Connacht, Fri 14th May 6pm; Eir Sport

thomond2006

Munster:
Matt Gallagher; Andrew Conway, Dan Goggin, Damian de Allende, Shane Daly; Ben Healy, Craig Casey;
James Cronin, Rhys Marshall, John Ryan; Jean Kleyn, Billy Holland; Gavin Coombes, Peter O’Mahony (C), CJ Stander.

Replacements: Niall Scannell, Dave Kilcoyne, Stephen Archer, Tadhg Beirne, Jack O’Donoghue, Conor Murray, Joey Carbery, Keith Earls.

CONNACHT MATCHDAY 23 VS MUNSTER RUGBY

15. John Porch (38)
14. Sammy Arnold (13)
13. Sean O’Brien (Acad) (9)
12. Tom Daly (46) (C)
11. Alex Wootton (19)
10. Conor Fitzgerald (34)
9. Kieran Marmion (184)
1. Paddy McAllister (16)
2. Shane Delahunt (97)
3. Dominic Robertson-McCoy (65)
4. Niall Murray (15)
5. Ultan Dillane (111)
6. Cian Prendergast (7)
7. Conor Oliver (19)
8. Abraham Papali’i (12)

Replacements
16. Dave Heffernan (142)
17. Denis Buckley (198)
18. Finlay Bealham (157)
19. Eoghan Masterson (109)
20. Sean Masterson (11)
21. Caolin Blade (129)
22. Jack Carty (156)
23. Peter Sullivan (14)

There isn't a lot of development selections in that Munster pack. It's not a great sign that Ryan and Archer are both in the 23 when Knox and Salanoa are available and desperate for minutes. A number of players who are leaving / most likely leaving are in the starting lineup.

Dan Goggin gets another start in the centre alongside our top three wingers in Daly, Conway and Earls to come off the bench. Casey starting at 9 with Murray getting a rest.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

thomond2006

Great weather today. Some of ye should go enjoy it.

[Deleted User]

Akrasia wrote: »

Wooten was anting the maggot too, he deliberately relayed touching the ball down until the last second

When JOD went for that ball lit was in play

More great examples in this thread of the fact a Munster player has never, ever committed an act of foul play.

"Acting the maggot" for not touching the ball down, how on earth did you come up with that garbage?

Lost Ormond

Shaka Hislop wrote: »

There has to be a coming together of clubs and referee's to sit down and watch games together...to have clear and open dialogue between both sides and for input from players taken on-board..and for the reasons behind decisions to be acknowledged by players.
It'll benefit both sides immensely imo

Teams work with refs/ref manager all the time where its explained why certain decisions were made. Been happening for quite some time.

Cookiemunster wrote: »

The poor standard of refereeing in the Pro14 is well known about and discussed regularly across many threads. Yet when a Munster fan mentions it they're accused of only bringing up to as an excuse for the loss. Pathetic really from the usuals.

Yet vritually nobody has ever came up with a proposal of how to improve the ref standards...

aloooof

Ah lads.... Does anyone have that Grandpa Simpson meme handy??

Shelflife

Theres nothing to stop any team from asking a referee to meet with them and go through any queries that they have and clarify any issues that they have.

Burkie1203

theVersatile wrote: »

And in what way is that related to Shaka's proposal for an open dialogue between refs and squads for greater understanding of rules? Exactly, none. Stop changing the goalposts. We know you don't like Munster.

That open dialogue goes on all the time.

Stander's comments are accusing the ref on bias. There is none.

Jerry Attrick

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Yes because the narrative is always to micro analyse ref decisions that didn't go Munster's way.

But that's been the norm ever since Neil Back helped the dawdling Peter Stringer to feed a scrum in the Millennium Stadium way back in 2003!

Shaka Hislop

Yerra, it's a lovely day, I'll sun my broken leg and let the interlopers do their normal whataboutery .. peace

theVersatile

Burkie1203 wrote: »

That open dialogue goes on all the time.

Assuming you knew this when the conversation started, and aren't just piggybacking off of Lost Ormond's comment - then please just lead with that next time instead of making a false equivalence in order to push the anti-Munster agenda. You'll save us all a lot of bother.

Lost Ormond wrote: »

Yet virtually nobody has ever came up with a proposal of how to improve the ref standards...

What would you propose? There are obviously some form of directives and guidelines in place to ensure that the refereeing of some aspects of the game is relatively consistent (see Head Contact Process, and other World Rugby guidelines viewable here https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/guidelines/15) - yet there remains many areas of the game where refereeing can be anywhere from "strict" to "lenient".

You seem fairly well placed to discuss refereeing standards, so would you say there's a lot done to align the thought process of refs with decisions regarding say the breakdown? Or the scrum? It seems like, from an outsider perspective, the only time there's any consistency in this regard is just after new interpretations/laws are introduced (the "pulling action" required for jackalling, for example). There needs to be some form of "one size fits all" approach which will make refereeing certain parts of the game a lot easier (obviously one size fits all isn't applicable everywhere, there is a certain level of subjectivity always).

Take scrummaging for example - it's an area some refs simply do not understand. I saw a comment online about Nick Berry in the SH saying how scrums are basically a free for all when he's refereeing. Surely there can be some video education to show refs what good and bad pictures are? TH boring in, LH swinging out, short binds, etc are all usually straight forward enough to spot and could, IMO anyways, be refereed to near perfect consistency if the education is done.

Same with the breakdown, it should be easy enough to show referees pictures which are good compared to pictures which are bad (hands/elbows beyond ball and onto the grass/shoulders below hips/taking off v landing).

Once this education is conducted, there needs to be accountability as well. Reflection, analysis, external review. I'm sure this does occur on a fairly regular basis, and it should lead to referees learning from their mistakes and becoming more consistent. However, it doesn't seem to happen - to the point where teams can analyse areas where referees are deficient and take more risks in those areas. That shouldn't in a perfect world, be able to happen.

Maybe re-affirmation and re-education on a consistent basis is required - none of this "forgetting to apply new interpretations after four weeks because eh" that tends to happen (crooked feeds a prime example, jackalling slowly returning to old norm of "surviving the clearout"). There needs to be constant communication of "this is a bad picture, penalise it"; ongoing all the time. Obviously, again, this is a perfect world situation, there's always going to be some element of subjectivity - and that's okay; but the inconsistency shouldn't be to the point where in an important 6N game, a referee doesn't know what a knock on is.

I realise that none of this is exactly revolutionary, and is probably already implemented. Which poses the question - why doesn't it work? Maybe it's implemented poorly, or maybe the buy in isn't there from the refs to improve their game. As the All Blacks say, "if you can't change the man, change the man". I wouldn't consider myself familiar enough with the systems in place to
definitively comment - maybe you would.

There are 21 Law headings in the rule book, of which about 15 aren't formalities such as equipment, the field of play, regulatory stuff. It shouldn't be hugely difficult to produce some form of alignment document and/or video(s) which shows the aforementioned "good and bad pictures" for these 15 areas of the game, and produce a decent level of consistency for the majority of decisions.

Would love your thoughts.

Shelflife

All of that happens already even at amateur level !

Professional refs are reviewed and assessed after each game, they will be given work ons and add ons to their games and performances.

This is ongoing throughout the season.

The main problems are.

Its a game of moving parts, each ruck is different, each scrum is different what each team want in a scrum will be different depending on where they are on the pitch what their proposed tactic is and that could all change even after a reset.

What you see in the "classroom" will rarely be the same thing you see on the pitch, you wont get a chance to see it a second time on the pitch and you wont have players in your ear in the classroom.

Materiality

A prop who finds himself 40m away from play and is a foot offside is technically offside, should we penalise him ? if he hasn't affected play then no !

If a player in a ruck doesn't support his body weight but doesn't stop anyone playing the ball, your not going to penalise that either.

It depends on whether or not an illegal action has affected a teams ability to play or defend the ball as they would wish.

Laws

Most people don't know the laws, they shout for what they want, not for what is the correct option, supporters do it, coaches do it and players do it, they express dissatisfaction with the ref even when they know that they are in the wrong. Ive had players swear on their mothers grave that they got the ball down when Ive been right beside them to see that it clearly wasnt.

This leads to the rest of the players believing that the ref made a huge mistake and this feeds back to the coaches and the fans who know all believe that the ref is against them and then obviously the ref is incompetent when in fact its the player thats in the wrong.

The international players comments that they were playing against more than 15 is just plain wrong and out of order, it calls the refs integrity into question and that is unacceptable.

AbusesToilets

Awful lot of fuss for a fairly meaningless game lads.

Ben Bailey

Very enjoyable game (for the neutral). Thought Dan Jones did well and didn't merit the criticism . Really hope CJ apologises both publically and personally.

Would any captain or senior player make such disparaging remarks about a team mate whose actions had directly caused their team to lose ?.

Teferi

I read this article from David Corkery giving Munster both barrels about the backchat this morning (and more positive about the rest of their game). It seems relevant to the conversation over the past few pages.

Burkie1203

theVersatile wrote: »

Assuming you knew this when the conversation started, and aren't just piggybacking off of Lost Ormond's comment - then please just lead with that next time instead of making a false equivalence in order to push the anti-Munster agenda. You'll save us all a lot of bother.

False equivalence?

The poster said stander highlighted an officiating standard's issue. He didn't. Stander was accusing the ref on Friday and in previous Munster defeats of bias against them. That is utter BS.

It's widely known that refs get reviewed and coaches are able to deal with competition organisers regarding refs decisions.

‐‐

‐--‐

‐‐

‐--‐

‐‐

‐--‐

‐‐

‐--‐

2019 RWC - October 01 2019 08:49 AM
Ireland have received confirmation from World Rugby that referee Angus Gardner got three key penalty decisions wrong in their shock defeat to Japan last Saturday according to Joe Schmidt.
The head coach, who was keen to reiterate his praise for the hosts after naming his team for Thursday's clash with Russia, voiced his concern about the Australian official in the build-up to last weekend's game and, as is the norm, submitted a detailed dossier on the refereeing in the aftermath.

‐‐

‐--‐

‐‐

‐--‐

‐‐

‐--‐

‐‐

‐--‐

More recently

A clearly annoyed Dan McFarland could scarcely conceal his disappointment with some of the decisions made by referee Frank Murphy and his officials in the loss to Leinster, particularly the red card given to Andrew Warwick.

While the Ulster head coach was “really proud of the effort”, he added: “I thought in the context of the way the game unfolded, the things that we could control, we did a pretty good job. There was a little bit of indiscipline in the first-half that allowed them back into the game and then after that things were out of our control, either through the intensity that Leinster played with when we were down numbers or us falling foul of the referee.

“Stuff around the key decision-making in the game is something I’m going to have to discuss with Greg Garner the referees’ manager,” said McFarland whose team lost the penalty count 17-10..

‐--‐

‐‐

‐--‐

‐‐

‐--‐

‐‐

‐--‐----

So its widely known there is some form of communication.

TomsOnTheRoof

Cookiemunster wrote: »

The poor standard of refereeing in the Pro14 is well known about and discussed regularly across many threads. Yet when a Munster fan mentions it they're accused of only bringing up to as an excuse for the loss. Pathetic really from the usuals.

The best part is that the same lads were whinging when anyone so much as commented on the Lá Rochelle game.

phog

Very disappointing game from a Munster pov, we opted to kick long range kicks and refused ones under the posts then we had a few decisions from the officials that were head scratchers and we gift Connacht 2 trys from very silly errors. Hard to win games when you add all that together in one game.

VayNiice

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

The best part is that the same lads were whinging when anyone so much as commented on the Lá Rochelle game.

I don't think many had a problem with the la rochelle loss. It's was a tough loss but I didn't hear any whinging. Most leinster fans accepted the better team won.

TomsOnTheRoof

VayNiice wrote: »

I don't think many had a problem with the la rochelle loss. It's was a tough loss but I didn't hear any whinging. Most leinster fans accepted the better team won.

The whinging was directed at anyone who said they were happy for ROG.

VayNiice

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

The whinging was directed at anyone who said they were happy for ROG.

Being happy seeing an Irish province lose to a French team full of imports will always stir some mixed emotions.

It's very different to moaning about referees having a bias against munster if you don't like the result of a match.

Shaka Hislop

VayNiice wrote: »

I don't think many had a problem with the la rochelle loss. It's was a tough loss but I didn't hear any whinging. Most leinster fans accepted the better team won.

I believe there wasn't a single post on the match thread saying Connacht didn't deserve the win

aloooof

VayNiice wrote: »

Being happy seeing an Irish province lose to a French team full of imports will always stir some mixed emotions.

It's very different to moaning about referees having a bias against munster if you don't like the result of a match.

That’s a straw-man tho, and not what Tom suggested. It was possible to be happy for Rog AND sorry an Irish province lost to a French team.

(Edit, just to be clear there was that position as well as some awful takes from a minority in that match thread also, which I’m obviously not defending).

Equally it’s possible to think the ref had a bad game AND Munster deserved to lose.

typhoony

VayNiice wrote: »

Casey is being made out to be the new saviour but I felt he was poor at times. Got bounced like a rag doll a couple of times, particularly with his attempted tackle on Arnold who is no man-mountain.

Also seemed slower getting the ball away, similar to Murray.

co-commentator was really bigging up Casey, meanwhile Marmion was quietly and excellently going about his business. this narrative about him being a fiery committed lad who's always first to training as if it makes hum a better player, personally i think he needs to tone it down a notch or 2.

ClanofLams

Jesus that three red kings Munster fan account on Twitter is real cringe. I get it’s obviously going to be biased in terms of content but having a weekend long meltdown over a game when the ref decisions as highlighted here didn’t especially favour any team is embarrassing.

Dave_The_Sheep

Not for the first time.

Akrasia

ClanofLams wrote: »

Jesus that three red kings Munster fan account on Twitter is real cringe. I get it’s obviously going to be biased in terms of content but having a weekend long meltdown over a game when the ref decisions as highlighted here didn’t especially favour any team is embarrassing.

When you lose by 4 points in a game with 2 disallowed tries and multiple dodgy refereeing decisions, that is always gonna be a talking point.
Btw, in this thread only a small number of the baffling refereeing has been brought up. The problem with inconsistency from a referee is that it punishes teams for trying to be smart and playing the referee

If a team notices a ref is letting the opposition go off their feet, it is clever play to change your own behavior to neutralize that advantage at the breakdown, but if you then get pinged for doing something the other team just got away with, it’s infuriating

It’s also completely natural to only notice poor refereeing decisions when they go against you

ClanofLams

Akrasia wrote: »

When you lose by 4 points in a game with 2 disallowed tries and multiple dodgy refereeing decisions, that is always gonna be a talking point.
Btw, in this thread only a small number of the baffling refereeing has been brought up. The problem with inconsistency from a referee is that it punishes teams for trying to be smart and playing the referee

If a team notices a ref is letting the opposition go off their feet, it is clever play to change your own behavior to neutralize that advantage at the breakdown, but if you then get pinged for doing something the other team just got away with, it’s infuriating

It’s also completely natural to only notice poor refereeing decisions when they go against you

I understand that. The account just seems incredibly petty and sensitive, dragging up a craggy rugby podcast from four years ago in response to criticism, suggesting papalli somehow started the incident with Jack O'Donoghue where O'Donoghue was holding him beyond the ruck. Other examples but I'm not going through all their tweets.

That was a Connacht team missing five or six first teamers or 23 anyway (Thornbury, Roux, Butler, Ak,i Farrell, Healy and a few others would have played considering those injuries such as Robb TOH etc). It's a game Munster should absolutely win and they didn't perform well at all. Focusing on some ref decisions for a weekend and more or less ignoring Munster's failings looks juvenile.

But it's probably what's best for the business or whatever.

Tomtom364

ClanofLams wrote: »

It's a game Munster should absolutely win and they didn't perform well at all. Focusing on some ref decisions for a weekend and more or less ignoring Munster's failings looks juvenile.

But it's probably what's best for the business or whatever.

Whatever about the free to see Twitter account, if you saw any of his content on this game (and previous games) that is behind the paywall you'd see clearly that he far from ignores Munster's own failings and issues.

theVersatile

"Weekend meltdown" lol. That and the fact that he literally says that JOD held AP first - you're making a bit of a big deal over nothing there.

And whatever about his paid content that Tom points out, there's enough of his tweets there to show that he fully understands Munsters work ons and criticisms - yet you chose to focus on the three or four ref related ones - which he openly admits wasn't the reason they lost.

Akrasia

ClanofLams wrote: »

I understand that. The account just seems incredibly petty and sensitive, dragging up a craggy rugby podcast from four years ago in response to criticism, suggesting papalli somehow started the incident with Jack O'Donoghue where O'Donoghue was holding him beyond the ruck. Other examples but I'm not going through all their tweets.

That was a Connacht team missing five or six first teamers or 23 anyway (Thornbury, Roux, Butler, Ak,i Farrell, Healy and a few others would have played considering those injuries such as Robb TOH etc). It's a game Munster should absolutely win and they didn't perform well at all. Focusing on some ref decisions for a weekend and more or less ignoring Munster's failings looks juvenile.

But it's probably what's best for the business or whatever.

Except he didn’t ignore munsters failings,he said multiple times that Munster didn’t deserve to win that because they performed so poorly and made so many individual errors. In his player ratings he gave the Pack 1 star each and praised the Connacht tight 5 for their ohysicality..

irelandrover

Why does everyone ignore the second part of that quote by CJ?

CJ Stander fumed at the performance of the referee Dan Jones afterwards when he told eir Sport that it had felt like “playing against more than 15 men”, adding “I can say it now I’m done but it’s difficult for both sides."

For me he isnt accusing the ref of bias as he says its tough for both sides. He's just saying the ref is bad.

Its still a bad thing to say and unnecessary.