Munster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread.

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 04:57PM

Deleted User wrote: »

any decent player should realise that the team comes before the player 100% of the time. That's why you see players giving unselfish passes, why players with perfect disciplinary records take a team yellow to prevent certain tries etc.

Em, like any great player, he knows the team is better with him playing in it.

Absolutely every great player believes he improves the team and should always be starting. You think O'driscoll or O'connell don't think they improve the team every time they start?

Whether team is actually better is up for debate but each player must 100% believe it is better with them starting, they have to know it.

wixfjord · 22-11-2011 05:01PM

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Em, like any great player, he knows the team is better with him playing in it.

Absolutely every great player believes he improves the team and should always be starting. You think O'driscoll or O'connell don't think they improve the team every time they start?

Whether team is actually better is up for debate but each player must 100% believe it is better with them starting, they have to know it.

Uh oh, let's not start this again.
There's two very differing views toward that interview on the board, so it won't go anywhere.

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 05:06PM

wixfjord wrote: »

Uh oh, let's not start this again.
There's two very differing views toward that interview on the board, so it won't go anywhere.

I'm not saying he's right or wrong. Himself and Sexton both think they should be starting, they both think the Irish team is better with them in it, Keatley and Humphreys hopefully think they should be starting etc.

show me a player who thinks he isn't good enough to start and I'll show you a player who definitely isn't good enough to start.

ed7890 · 22-11-2011 05:08PM

wixfjord wrote: »

Uh oh, let's not start this again.
There's two very differing views toward that interview on the board, so it won't go anywhere.

You know you were the one who brought it up right?

wixfjord · 22-11-2011 05:10PM

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

I'm not saying he's right or wrong. Himself and Sexton both think they should be starting, they both think the Irish team is better with them in it, Keatley and Humphreys hopefully think they should be starting etc.

show me a player who thinks he isn't good enough to start and I'll show you a player who definitely isn't good enough to start.

Oh I agree, that's never been my point, I think a player as good as ROG needs to be supremely self confident, quiet arrogance is almost pre required in a great 10. My qualms have always been as to how he went about letting it be known, when he came out, and how a supposed leader could come out with a statement like he did, not with the actual content of what he's saying.

wixfjord · 22-11-2011 05:12PM

ed7890 wrote: »

You know you were the one who brought it up right?

Not in that sense, a subtle difference, but fairly important. It's a fact that ROG maintains he should be starting each game and needs to be number 1, and so my point is that it will be hard for McGahan to phase in Keatley.
Am I right or am I right?

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 05:14PM

wixfjord wrote: »

Oh I agree, that's never been my point, I think a player as good as ROG needs to be supremely self confident, quiet arrogance is almost pre required in a great 10. My qualms have always been as to how he went about letting it be known, when he came out, and how a supposed leader could come out with a statement like he did, not with the actual content of what he's saying.

O'Gara is a very human person, he's never shied away from it. How do you think he felt being away from his wife and three kids for a sport, a sport, which at the end of the day, is only a sport? He's at a point where rugby is no longer the biggest thing in his life.

On the point of confidence, hopefully Earls can keep his confidence high, he was really hitting form prior to this injury and seemed to have found a good mental edge to his game.

wixfjord · 22-11-2011 05:17PM

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

O'Gara is a very human person, he's never shied away from it. How do you think he felt being away from his wife and three kids for a sport, a sport, which at the end of the day, is only a sport? He's at a point where rugby is no longer the biggest thing in his life.

Again, I have a vastly different opinion to this, and I don't want to drag the thread off.

Good to know that ROG is a human person though, as opposed to BOD who's a Russian cyborg war machine, stolen from Russia and unleashed in Paris in the millenium year.

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 05:21PM

wixfjord wrote: »

Again, I have a vastly different opinion to this, and I don't want to drag the thread off.

Good to know that ROG is a human person though, as opposed to BOD who's a Russian cyborg war machine, stolen from Russia and unleashed in Paris in the millenium year.

Not really, some people are different emotionally. Hines, for example, walked out on his team in france to play in the Lions, despite it being their chance at winning the Brennus. To me, that was despicable, he put the personal glory of the Lions ahead of the good of his team.

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 05:22PM

wixfjord wrote: »

Not in that sense, a subtle difference, but fairly important. It's a fact that ROG maintains he should be starting each game and needs to be number 1, and so my point is that it will be hard for McGahan to phase in Keatley.
Am I right or am I right?

Every player in the squad should want to start, O'Gara v. Keatley is no different to Stringer v. O'Leary v. Williams v. Murray.

ed7890 · 22-11-2011 05:23PM

wixfjord wrote: »

Not in that sense, a subtle difference, but fairly important. It's a fact that ROG maintains he should be starting each game and needs to be number 1, and so my point is that it will be hard for McGahan to phase in Keatley.
Am I right or am I right?

What subtle difference? You brought it up, that is a fact. There was no need to start all that again.

wixfjord · 22-11-2011 05:24PM

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Every player in the squad should want to start, O'Gara v. Keatley is no different to Stringer v. O'Leary v. Williams v. Murray.

Yes I've said I agree with that, as above.

wixfjord · 22-11-2011 05:26PM

ed7890 wrote: »

What subtle difference? You brought it up, that is a fact. There was no need to start all that again.

The subtle difference is that everyone agrees that ROG, and all pro players should believe that they should be starting. That's not up for discussion. This is what I said, and this is why it will be difficult for McGahan.

Not everyone agrees with how ROG brought it up though, which I never mentioned, because I knew it'd cause peeps like yourself to cotton on to it and make it an issue in a discussion where it's not relevant.

irishbucsfan · 22-11-2011 05:28PM

The point is that O'Gara's nature (which has served him, Munster and Ireland brilliantly in the past) will make it very hard to find a replacement for him before he leaves.

He won't want to be phased out, it's his hugely competitive nature. He'll more likely go from starting to retired than starter, to back up, to retired. (IE opposite of Hayes)

I THINK that is what wixfjord is trying to say.

wixfjord · 22-11-2011 05:30PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The point is that O'Gara's nature (which has served him, Munster and Ireland brilliantly in the past) will make it very hard to find a replacement for him before he leaves.

He won't want to be phased out, it's his hugely competitive nature. He'll more likely go from starting to retired than starter, to back up, to retired. (IE opposite of Hayes)

I THINK that is what wixfjord is trying to say.

Absolutely, I never mentioned my own opinions on the way ROG brought up his feelings, merely the fact that because of these feelings, it will be hard for him to be impeached, which we've already seen with Ireland.
I don't think anyone can disagree with that.

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 05:31PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The point is that O'Gara's nature (which has served him, Munster and Ireland brilliantly in the past) will make it very hard to find a replacement for him before he leaves.

He won't want to be phased out, it's his hugely competitive nature. He'll more likely go from starting to retired than starter, to back up, to retired. (IE opposite of Hayes)

I THINK that is what wixfjord is trying to say.

Anthony Foley did the same, he only really lost his place in the 2008 season. Looking back, we could have done with him around the younger players in a playing capacity for a bit longer. However, these guys are too competitive for that I guess.

twinytwo · 22-11-2011 05:31PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The point is that O'Gara's nature (which has served him, Munster and Ireland brilliantly in the past) will make it very hard to find a replacement for him before he leaves.

He won't want to be phased out, it's his hugely competitive nature. He'll more likely go from starting to retired than starter, to back up, to retired. (IE opposite of Hayes)

I THINK that is what wixfjord is trying to say.

Is he not the top points scorer in the history of club rugby?.. As long as he can continue to play I think it will be very hard to bench him.

AtItAllDayRef · 22-11-2011 05:34PM

wixfjord wrote: »

The subtle difference is that everyone agrees that ROG, and all pro players should believe that they should be starting. That's not up for discussion. This is what I said, and this is why it will be difficult for McGahan.

Not everyone agrees with how ROG brought it up though, which I never mentioned, because I knew it'd cause peeps like yourself to cotton on to it and make it an issue in a discussion where it's not relevant.

Central contracts play far more of a role in deciding who starts than any thoughts a provincial coach may have on who he wants to play.

ed7890 · 22-11-2011 05:35PM

wixfjord wrote: »

The subtle difference is that everyone agrees that ROG, and all pro players should believe that they should be starting. That's not up for discussion. This is what I said, and this is why it will be difficult for McGahan.

Not everyone agrees with how ROG brought it up though, which I never mentioned, because I knew it'd cause peeps like yourself to cotton on to it and make it an issue in a discussion where it's not relevant.

Hey, i'm not bothered at all about the ROG thing at all, i'm just annoyed at you bringing up the interview and then claiming you didn't when an argument broke out about it. Maybe don't try to incite an argument next time if you just want a reasonable discussion.

wixfjord · 22-11-2011 05:37PM

AtItAllDayRef wrote: »

Central contracts play far more of a role in deciding who starts than any thoughts a provincial coach may have on who he wants to play.

I know that's a bugbear of yours, but I don't agree, and if that was the case, then we'd be properly shagged for the national team.

wixfjord · 22-11-2011 05:39PM

ed7890 wrote: »

Hey, i'm not bothered at all about the ROG thing at all, i'm just annoyed at you bringing up the interview and then claiming you didn't when an argument broke out about it. Maybe don't try to incite an argument next time if you just want a reasonable discussion.

Aha, but if you can't seperate fact with the need to try start an argument based on something I didn't say, then "maybe" don't reply and help out with this resonable argument. I've explained why I brought up the interview, because it's relevant to Blackbeard's comment that because he is enjoying his rugby more than ever, he'll be less likely than ever to accept a place on the bench

22-11-2011 05:46PM

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Em, like any great player, he knows the team is better with him playing in it.

Absolutely every great player believes he improves the team and should always be starting. You think O'driscoll or O'connell don't think they improve the team every time they start?

Whether team is actually better is up for debate but each player must 100% believe it is better with them starting, they have to know it.

that's BS tbh. That's almost 100% the reason why certain teams and coaches get horrible names for being completely blind to the horizon.

What's best for the team isn't always for the best possible players to play every single game. We constantly see the problem with the inclusion of BOD in every Irish game that he didn't need to play (games v Pacific Islands etc) and as a result we've got nobody that's earned more than 10 caps at 13 in a Green Jersey in the past 10 years. We would have had the same problem at Leinster had he not been injured a couple of times in past seasons.

One could argue that players like Hayes and ROG, with their refusal to get injured and take breaks, are absolute behemoths for the team. But being unable to work them alongside a suitable replacement in the final seasons of their careers is almost certainly damaging for a team.

Would you prefer to be competitive for one season at the cost of 3 seasons? I'd rather a coach balance the development of a team properly tbh.

There's more to a team than the coming season, acting blind to that has already been a problem for our national side on more than one occasion.

AtItAllDayRef · 22-11-2011 05:47PM

wixfjord wrote: »

I know that's a bugbear of yours, but I don't agree, and if that was the case, then we'd be properly shagged for the national team.

really? so the internationals won't be limited to 6 games between the start of the HC and the end of December? They will all play 4 HC games if fit. The likes of ROG, BOD, POC, Kearney etc are never drafted straight back into HC games.

For Leinster why is Nacewa not at full back for the HC games? (and I'd be fairly sure its not because Kearney is a better full back)

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 05:52PM

Deleted User wrote: »

that's BS tbh. That's almost 100% the reason why certain teams and coaches get horrible names for being completely blind to the horizon.

What's best for the team isn't always for the best possible players to play every single game. We constantly see the problem with the inclusion of BOD in every Irish game that he didn't need to play (games v Pacific Islands etc) and as a result we've got nobody that's earned more than 10 caps at 13 in a Green Jersey in the past 10 years. We would have had the same problem at Leinster had he not been injured a couple of times in past seasons.

One could argue that players like Hayes and ROG, with their refusal to get injured and take breaks, are absolute behemoths for the team. But being unable to work them alongside a suitable replacement in the final seasons of their careers is almost certainly damaging for a team.

Would you prefer to be competitive for one season at the cost of 3 seasons? I'd rather a coach balance the development of a team properly tbh.

There's more to a team than the coming season, acting blind to that has already been a problem for our national side on more than one occasion.

em, Sexton has spoken repeatedly about how much O'Gara has helped him.

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 05:53PM

AtItAllDayRef wrote: »

really? so the internationals won't be limited to 6 games between the start of the HC and the end of December? They will all play 4 HC games if fit. The likes of ROG, BOD, POC, Kearney etc are never drafted straight back into HC games.

For Leinster why is Nacewa not at full back for the HC games? (and I'd be fairly sure its not because Kearney is a better full back)

Exactly, the provincial managers have massive restrictions placed on them.

22-11-2011 05:55PM

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

em, Sexton has spoken repeatedly about how much O'Gara has helped him.

Sexton doesn't play for Munster.

Good work completely missing the point, it was like the Hernandez drop goal effort at Edinburgh

irishbucsfan · 22-11-2011 05:56PM

AtItAllDayRef wrote: »

really? so the internationals won't be limited to 6 games between the start of the HC and the end of December? They will all play 4 HC games if fit. The likes of ROG, BOD, POC, Kearney etc are never drafted straight back into HC games.

I really don't see a problem with the player management program. It keeps players from playing too much rugby (something the physios were very concerned about in 08/09) It also gives their backups a chance, which is vital in a provincial system that has the vast majority of Irish rugby players spread between four teams. It's best for everyone.

For Leinster why is Nacewa not at full back for the HC games? (and I'd be fairly sure its not because Kearney is a better full back)

Because Leinster are better off with Nacewa at 14 and Kearney at 15 than with Kearney on a wing and Nacewa at 15. The way both played against Glasgow showed that.

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 05:57PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Sexton doesn't play for Munster.

Good work completely missing the point, it was like the Hernandez drop goal effort at Edinburgh

I'm sure Keatley will find O'Gara helpful too, you don't?

GerM · 22-11-2011 06:00PM

AtItAllDayRef wrote: »

really? so the internationals won't be limited to 6 games between the start of the HC and the end of December? They will all play 4 HC games if fit. The likes of ROG, BOD, POC, Kearney etc are never drafted straight back into HC games.

For Leinster why is Nacewa not at full back for the HC games? (and I'd be fairly sure its not because Kearney is a better full back)

D'Arcy, Stringer, Kearney, Wallace, Leamy, Hayes, DOC all centrally contracted players (at the time) that have benched for big European games. The fact is, more often than not, the centrally contracted players are clearly the best option and that is why they're selected not because the national coach says so. The national coaches involvement is far less influential than people make out. DK might ask a provincial coach to try something such as giving Wallace a couple of games at 10 last season at some point which happened in the Pro12 early on but come match day in the HEC the best side is put on the park.

Is Nacewa a better 15 than Kearney? Yes, I think most people would say so. Is 15. Kearney, 14. Nacewa a better combination overall for the team than 15. Nacewa, 14. Kearney? Again, yes, I think most people would say so. Nacewa won player of the year for Leinster as a winger. He's more than capable of being a great player there. It's just Leinster getting their best players on the park.

Amazotheamazing · 22-11-2011 06:05PM

GerM wrote: »

D'Arcy, Stringer, Kearney, Wallace, Leamy, Hayes, DOC all centrally contracted players (at the time) that have benched for big European games. The fact is, more often than not, the centrally contracted players are clearly the best option and that is why they're selected not because the national coach says so. The national coaches involvement is far less influential than people make out. DK might ask a provincial coach to try something such as giving Wallace a couple of games at 10 last season at some point which happened in the Pro12 early on but come match day in the HEC the best side is put on the park.

Is Nacewa a better 15 than Kearney? Yes, I think most people would say so. Is 15. Kearney, 14. Nacewa a better combination overall for the team than 15. Nacewa, 14. Kearney? Again, yes, I think most people would say so. Nacewa won player of the year for Leinster as a winger. He's more than capable of being a great player there. It's just Leinster getting their best players on the park.

The restriction is still there, they can't start every game should the coach want them to. It's no doubt for their own good but it's still a massive limitation on the coach.

Munster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread.

Comments