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

Leinster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread VII: The Fan-base Awakens

.ak

There has been an awakening ... Have you felt it?

Cont. from here.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

The Rape of Lucretia

Neil3030 wrote: »

I'm starting to think there's pressure on the national selectors to play centrally contracted players. When you look at the disproportionate amount of gametime given to players not in great form (Kearney, Trimble, C Healy) during the 6N etc - not a huge surprise that they were all centrally contracted. So I'm not sure I like the idea of central contracts being used because a certain province needs help to keep important players. This could (if I'm right about the pressure on selectors) wind up being to the detriment of the national team, no matter who the coach may be.

Cant see any evidence for such pressure.

Players have central contract because they are more highly rated by the coaching ticket - so are more likely to be selected. Whether you agree with the higher rating or not. Zebo and TOH only have provincial contracts - without doubt, Rob is rated higher than both by Joe and co.

Form, as we the fans see it, has far less impact on the coaches than we might perceive: past form, experience, overall ability ceiling, how training is going, how consistently they have been in-squad, and how well they know the (derided by some) systems seem to count for a lot. Like it or loath it.

Kearney and Trimble had no competition in Joe's eyes (and the eyes of many of us). Healy seems was an attempt to get a former world class player, who is still a medium player, back up to world class level by playing him in tough games. It seems to have failed, so in hindsight not a good choice. But hindsight being 20 20 and all that. I would say he is out of rope now though.

Bazzo

Deleted User wrote: »

Exactly my point. Central contracts should be used to promote the national team, and retaining Zebo and Earls at the expense of Moore would appear to be a very poor piece of business.

I dunno if you're going for a hypothetical here, but if it's genuine speculation then there's absolutely no reason to believe at all that Zebo & Earls were retained at the expense of Moore.

[Deleted User]

Bazzo wrote: »

I dunno if you're going for a hypothetical here, but if it's genuine speculation then there's absolutely no reason to believe at all that Zebo & Earls were retained at the expense of Moore.

It is hypothetical, but Earls was out the door "apparently" and a last minute 3 year deal kept him in Ireland according to Quinlan. All evidence appears to point to Moore not being offered a similar deal and rather than play around with false promises of heading abroad he was actually prepared to just go, and signed a contract to this effect. An article by ROG would suggest that Earls was just holding out for the best deal and wasn't planning on leaving, seems the entire Munster setup was vocally involved in ensuring Earls was retained with the best possible deal whilst creating an impression that his (non) intention to move was real. Fair play to them, best deal for Earls for his last central contract. Good job Quinny, good job ROG.

Unfortunately for the IRFU, Moore wasn't interested in publicly messing around and getting former players to chime in courtesy of the media and his directness ended up in us losing he best TH prospect in Ireland.

.ak

Tight heads are more important than utility backs. I'm not going to open up the can of worms that is a Zebo debate but I really don't think there's much between our back three players at the moment.

Having said that before Moore got injured he looked on a downwards curve. He struggled with fitness and I'm not sure he would've held his place in the pecking order.

salmocab

This is an odd one I think keeping Earls was probably more important to Munster than Moore to Leinster but in the grand scheme Moore will be more important to Ireland over the next couple of years especially once Ross retires.

[Deleted User]

.ak wrote: »

Having said that before Moore got injured he looked on a downwards curve. He struggled with fitness and I'm not sure he would've held his place in the pecking order.

Ross was like that for years though, he absolutely required time on the pitch before he was up to his normal level after a break. We've seen where Moore can get to and I suspect he has plenty of development left, but like any props he needs match time to improve his form.

salmocab wrote: »

This is an odd one I think keeping Earls was probably more important to Munster than Moore to Leinster but in the grand scheme Moore will be more important to Ireland over the next couple of years especially once Ross retires.

My argument is that we are more in need of centrally contracted international Tight Heads then centrally contracted international back 3 players. If Moore was low-balled to the point he left whereas Earls was given a superior contract, that imo is a poor call.

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

Wasn't it you who was pointing out Gilroy's try scoring record and and attacking threat whilst lamenting his exclusion on several if not multiple occasions?

Absolutely, I think he deserves his chance certainly ahead of the likes of McFadden. He's not as good as Earls and he's not as good as Zebo though.

Trimble has been much more commended than Earls for his contributions this 6N unfortunately for your arguments sake.

Commended by whom?

I thought I read a post by former Ireland coaching staff member Les Kiss that Olding is the real deal and he won't be leaving Ulster. Sure sounds ready to step up?

Olding is the real deal but it takes more than a handful of decent performances at fullback after returning from injury to be ready to play test rugby. He's certainly still well behind Kearney Snr and Zebo.

Are Earls and Zebo on anyone's horizons for Lions 2017 right now? Anyone? At all?

The point is they are the only two back three players we have who will even be in with a sniff of touring. Not that they are being scouted right now. In a years time this situation won't change.

I think a lot of people are wondering about that, myself included. But at the same time, unlike anyone who has been mentioned in this post - at least he was at one time World Class.

I would definitely say the three year deal given to Healy (now comfortably second choice) was a poorer decision.

I would rather lose Healy to England than Moore, Zebo or Earls given that he struggles with injury and struggles with form. He may have been world class at one stage but he certainly hsan't been for a while

awec

Neil3030 wrote: »

I'm starting to think there's pressure on the national selectors to play centrally contracted players. When you look at the disproportionate amount of gametime given to players not in great form (Kearney, Trimble, C Healy) during the 6N etc - not a huge surprise that they were all centrally contracted. So I'm not sure I like the idea of central contracts being used because a certain province needs help to keep important players. This could (if I'm right about the pressure on selectors) wind up being to the detriment of the national team, no matter who the coach may be.

This is nothing new.

When was the last time a fully fit, not in need of a rest centrally contracted player was dropped out of the 23 for form?

A central deal practically guarantees you selection for the big games, especially now when the number of central deals has been reduced.

[Deleted User]

This is the Leinster thread lads.

Tarf1234

I know we have none of Zebo, Earls and Moore for next year. If I was given the choice of one from all 3 I would very quickly make a very easy decision to take Moore. In all honesty I reckon all 4 provinces would pick him based on ability/need for a TH alone.

CMOTDibbler

awec wrote: »

I would definitely say the three year deal given to Healy (now comfortably second choice) was a poorer decision.

I would rather lose Healy to England than Moore, Zebo or Earls given that he struggles with injury and struggles with form. He may have been world class at one stage but he certainly hsan't been for a while

I would rather neither tbh.

Healy had major neck surgery last May and up to then was in fine form. Since he came back, he's had a number of false starts and further surgery on his knee in January. To expect him to be at his best after such a stop start season is pushing it tbh. It's been almost twelve months of injury breaks interspersed with short bursts of matches which no player can be expected to coast through, especially a prop. If he can get a run of matches together and a normal pre-season, he should be fine.

The writing off of a world class player in those circumstances smacks of hysteria tbh.

brokenhooker

Healy needs to rest until preseason begins. He is clearly not 100%.

CMOTDibbler

brokenhooker wrote: »

Healy needs to rest until preseason begins. He is clearly not 100%.

I'm not sure he needs rest, he's had plenty of that so far. He probably came back to early after the neck surgery and without the benefit of a pre-season when he was by necessity unfit. He couldn't do weights or even running until given the all clear by the surgeons. Straight into a RWC training camp and matches when he hadn't built himself back up properly was the mistake really.

It's just time to build himself up, keep training and playing matches and he'll come good. A normal routine in other words.

[Deleted User]

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I'm not sure he needs rest, he's had plenty of that so far. He probably came back to early after the neck surgery and without the benefit of a pre-season when he was by necessity unfit. He couldn't do weights or even running until given the all clear by the surgeons. Straight into a RWC training camp and matches when he hadn't built himself back up properly was the mistake really.

It's just time to build himself up, keep training and playing matches and he'll come good. A normal routine in other words.

Does that explain constant brain farts?

CMOTDibbler

Deleted User wrote: »

Does that explain constant brain farts?

Yes it does. Frustration at being below your best can push you into making mistakes. Healy knows he's not up to par and he's not in a very good place as a result. Trying too hard to show he's still the player he was before the surgery is symptomatic.

Luke Fitz went through a similar period of adjustment after a prolonged injury absence. Many were writing him off but he persevered and got back to his best.

AbusesToilets

.ak wrote: »

Tight heads are more important than utility backs. I'm not going to open up the can of worms that is a Zebo debate but I really don't think there's much between our back three players at the moment.

Having said that before Moore got injured he looked on a downwards curve. He struggled with fitness and I'm not sure he would've held his place in the pecking order.

I thought Moore looked solid enough this season. He destroyed the Toulon scrum in the match in the Aviva for example. What areas do you feel he regressed in? Genuine question

redmca2

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Healy knows he's not up to par and he's not in a very good place as a result. Trying too hard to show he's still the player he was before the surgery is symptomatic.

I am reminded of a Welsh player of old talking about some player making a comeback after injury or premature retirement: "To be as good as you used to be, you have to be twice as good as you used to be!!"

brokenhooker

The last try Leinster scored against a team in the top half of the table was on New Years day.

neelia11

brokenhooker wrote: »

The last try Leinster scored against a team in the top half of the table was on New Years day.

Ospreys, dragons, cardiff, zebre (x2), connacht have been the opponents since then.

dub_skav

brokenhooker wrote: »

The last try Leinster scored against a team in the top half of the table was on New Years day.

Is that a problem?
In their 10 matches since New Year's Day, Leinster have played twice against teams in the top half of the table and scored no tries in those 2 games.

In their other 8 matches since New Year's Day, they scored tries.

I'm not exactly sure what point you're trying to make, with such a limited sample size there's not much to take from it.

brokenhooker

dub_skav wrote: »

Is that a problem?
In their 10 matches since New Year's Day, Leinster have played twice against teams in the top half of the table and scored no tries in those 2 games.

In their other 8 matches since New Year's Day, they scored tries.

I'm not exactly sure what point you're trying to make, with such a limited sample size there's not much to take from it.

Glasgow were effectively an A side, yet leinster were still incapable of scoring a try.

Connacht do not have a good defense and Leinster were still incapable of scoring a try, in fact they looked bereft of ideas apart from one out runners.

Where are the skills and backplay gone to in Leinster? Without Sexton leinster are a blunt object in attack against teams with a pulse.

irishbucsfan

brokenhooker wrote: »

Glasgow were effectively an A side, yet leinster were still incapable of scoring a try.

Connacht do not have a good defense and Leinster were still incapable of scoring a try, in fact they looked bereft of ideas apart from one out runners.

Where are the skills and backplay gone to in Leinster? Without Sexton leinster are a blunt object in attack against teams with a pulse.

It was a pretty poor attempt at obfuscation really, wan't it?

Leinster have scored tries in 8/10 games since New Year's day. Not an awful rate of return.

brokenhooker

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It was a pretty poor attempt at obfuscation really, wan't it?

Leinster have scored tries in 8/10 games since New Year's day. Not an awful rate of return.

and against good teams they havent scored.

[Deleted User]

Leinster also did not score tries in any match where they did not touch the ball down beyond their opponents try line

brokenhooker

Deleted User wrote: »

Leinster also did not score tries in any match where they did not touch the ball down beyond their opponents try line

because they aren't good enough in attack minus Sexton against a team who is half decent.

only part of the team that is adequately coached is the defense.

stephen_n

brokenhooker wrote: »

and against good teams they havent scored.

In two games, hardly a crisis of epic proportions :rolleyes:

Podge_irl

stephen_n wrote: »

In two games, hardly a crisis of epic proportions :rolleyes:

Neither in particularly good conditions.

[Deleted User]

Leinster have not scored a single try from a top 12 opponent's conversion attempt since before the 25th June 2015.

stephen_n

Deleted User wrote: »

Leinster have not scored a single try from a top 12 opponent's conversion attempt since before the 25th June 2015.

Sack Leo

irishbucsfan

Podge_irl wrote: »

Neither in particularly good conditions.

Away from home, in not particularly good conditions, missing players due to the 6 Nations.

Wow Leinster have really fallen away from the lofty heights of the Schmidt era.