Leinster Team Talk Thread (Love you Furlong time)

Then Irish media lunacy over Prendergast continues so. The young player of the year is maybe warranted but that try was far from try of the year. Snyman did most of the work and the 15 for the opposition did his best Prendergast imitation with the attempted tackle.

When will this crap end?

The only lunacy surrounding Prendergast is those people who lose all semblance of critical thinking skills when he's mentioned. That try was a 80m breakout that featured offloading from two tight five forwards. That's why it was given the award.

Was it not the 5 that nearly got to him at the end?

Will go down as an all time stinker of a selection. Rolling out Cian Healys rotting corpse in place of a guy who was MOTM the week before and put his all into it is everything wrong with our selection policy the last couple of years.

Clarkson should have been ahead of Ala'alatoa last year aswell, the latter was scrummaging below an AIL level at the end of last year, every scrum a collapse.

I'd say a good thing he had a 5m start on him.

No it’s not, a league game at the start of the season is very very different. Cup rugby is 3-6-9 all day long, there is a margin for error in your first game of the season, a LBP to be had maybe.

Cup rugby is win or bust, and win by any means necessary - the perfect example Munster taking a DG to put their lead beyond 7 against LaR in the round of 16.

A decision to go for the corner is made IF your sure of winning ball from the lineout and IF your maul is going well. While the lineout was winning the majority of its ball the maul wasn’t in anyway dominating.

In Leinster’s case the call for a lineout wasn’t even right as they would have more advantage taking the scrum. That wasn’t even considered for a second.

Yes, I agree.

Like, people are flipping out about Porter and Barrett being benched. I haven't been able to bring myself to watch the replay yet but from watching it live, was Barrett any better than Henshaw when he came on? I didn't think so. It was 22-27 with 30 minutes to go when Barrett arrived. There was plenty of time for Barrett to make an impact, grab the game by the neck etc but did he? Not really IMO.

Likewise, Porter came on at 20 minutes, shortly thereafter we took the lead and then they had a guy binned. It was set up perfectly for us to turn the screw but we couldn't make it count. Why do we think it would have been better if he had started?

There's always an assumption when a teams does XYZ and loses, that they lost because they did XYZ. I think the issue is a lot more complex than that. I think we lost because lots of guys underperformed and the team activated headless chicken mode with apparently no way to settle themselves, no plan B, and apparently very little communication between the sideline and the pitch.

1000% agree with this. Too easy to scapegoat coaches and selection. Simple fact is some key players didn’t perform. Those with the jersey carry the burden of triumph & disaster. The latter on this occasion sadly. Northampton were way better and had the game of their lives. We were mentally unprepared but that is a players responsibility to get into the zone and give it everything for time on the pitch. Other excuses are too convenient & easy. Leo has a European cup and knows what it takes on the pitch to win one. Same for Jacques in RWC. Some of our guys were poor, defensive was amateur at best

There's always an assumption when a teams does XYZ and loses, that they lost because they did XYZ. I think the issue is a lot more complex than that. I think we lost because lots of guys underperformed and the team activated headless chicken mode with apparently no way to settle themselves, no plan B, and apparently very little communication between the sideline and the pitch.

That can be the case and it can still have been the wrong call not to start Barrett tho; both things can be true.