Waterford GAA thread - mod warning post #1 and #51

3ships wrote: »

..plus
Iggy,midget, MOB,BOH and darragh lyons. Just might have enough for the 26.
U 21lads ye could call on billy nolan, henley,lyons, molumphy, jack prender. After that ye probably ask a couple of footballers to come up

Darragh Lyons is out injured aswell.

Gleeson and Connors trained

thesultan wrote: »

Team O'Keefe
C Gleeson Fives Connors
Brick Austin mahoney
Roche Barron
Foran mahoney Kearney
Bennett Devine Curran

Confirmed?

KevIRL wrote: »

thesultan wrote: »

Team O'Keefe
C Gleeson Fives Connors
Brick Austin mahoney
Roche Barron
Foran mahoney Kearney
Bennett Devine Curran

If that is the team, I approve

Hard to believe we can come out with a team that strong after all our injuries.

PTH2009 wrote: »

Does Brick have the legs for defence ??? Good team but I'll wait til the offical announcement

It's all about how we line up, do we go defensive or attack

We have nothing to lose, Go all out attack

Cant be lumping high ball down onto that forward line like we did in ennis - when foran did come on he was playing corner forward

Would be worried also about brick in defencr and aussies fitness.

Whats the bench looking like? Shanahan make it ?

hurler on de ditch wrote: »

still no Mikey Kearney

?? Kearney is named on the team I saw

Just came upon the new web page.


I have been unable to do my normal kind of analysis on last Sunday’s game due to the lack of a video recording. You might think that, with cameras at the game, RTE would have shown such an important game as a deferred broadcast. BBC have been doing this with Ulster championship games and, of course, TG4 do it routinely with league games.


So these comments are based on first impressions from the terrace. Cusack Park in its present state should never again be used for games of this importance. There are far too few seats, while the slight slope in the main terrace makes the game impossible to see for people of low stature.


For me, apart from Clare’s commitment and good, well-executed, game plan, three key issues undermined Waterford here – the injuries, the failure to provide adequate cover for the injuries, and Waterford’s woeful game plan.


The four injuries, on top of those which ruled Austin Gleeson and Pauric Mahony out, were extremely unusual and a devastating blow, both for this game and the remainder of the series. I usually find it difficult to figure out Derek McGrath’s public utterances, and this again applied to his apparent suggestion that overtraining may have contributed to the injuries. Most of the injuries were the result of belts dished out by opponents while Darragh Fives’s leg injury was just the latest of a long series experienced by this player.



As I remember it, Tadhg de Búrca’s injury arose after he dithered with a clearance and was closed down by two Clare players. In attempting to evade these players, he ran straight into a strong shoulder from a third player which he wasn’t expecting and this is where the damage was done.


While the string of injuries to defenders was unprecedented, the fact is that Waterford were totally unprepared for it, in terms of backup personnel and impact on game plan. In one interview Derek McGrath said how he tries “to cover for every eventuality” while in another he bemoaned having to use untried lads. There is something of a contradiction here.


The fact is that, of ten outfield substitutes, Waterford had only one defender (Ian Kenny) and nine forwards. We have criticised Derek McGrath here before for his failure to use the league constructively to strengthen the squad in terms of depth and experience, particularly in light of the likely demands of the new format. McGrath repeatedly stuck to the same defensive sextet, as if he assumed that they would never get injured. It seems almost providential, therefore, that he should lose four of them in a single game, with Kevin Moran, with lots of defensive experience, then getting himself sent off.


Waterford did start the game with eight defenders on the field, so there were options there, but having to move them around inevitably led to organisational breakdown. De Búrca was replaced by Colm Roche, who played all his underage intercounty hurling as a forward (and a good one at that) and who, even then, has had minimal exposure at senior level. How we could have done with his brother Shane (who left the panel a while back) last Sunday. Conor Prunty probably would have been on the panel if fit, but he also has had very little senior experience.


Where was Seamus Keating, who has been playing some good hurling this year? And other posters have also queried the absence from the panel of William Hahessy and Michael Harney, both excellent at under 21 level but ignored by Derek McGrath.


We will obviously never know how the game would have gone without the injuries, but my opinion is that Waterford would still have lost, given the woeful game plan put into practice on the day. Many of the points I have made about this have also been made by other posters.


It is a poor reflection on McGrath that, in his fifth year in charge, the best he could come up with was place three forwards in the D outside the Clare large parallelogram and pump long ball down on top of them. Some posters here have suggested that Waterford only started doing this after de Búrca got injured, but in fact this was the “game plan” right from the beginning.



The fact that Clare took complete command of the game after de Búrca’s injury may have had something to do with that injury, as many have suggested. My own view is that, while the unexpected Waterford tactical approach did cause some initial problems for the Clare defence, they quickly got to grips with it. In particular, instead of competing for incoming ball, the Clare defenders resorted instead to batting the ball out, confident that it would be picked up by waiting team mates, as there were no other Waterford players in the vicinity.


Defenders like nothing more than predictable incoming ball (especially coming straight down the field rather than coming in at an angle) and bunching in front of goal. Waterford delivered these in spades last Sunday.
One poster here has described this as “1950s junior hurling tactics”, but even a junior hurling manager would have placed no more than two forwards under the incoming high ball, with a couple of nippy hurlers (of whom Waterford have many) around the fringes to pick up breaking ball. Placing three forwards under the incoming ball made no sense at all. Including Brick Walsh in this trio was even more nonsensical. Brick thrives picking up breaking ball out the field and competing one-on-one on the wing. He was completely wasted trying to compete in the crowded conditions which obtained in front of the Clare goal.


Watching Clare’s alternative game plan last Sunday, and the well-thought-out and skillful way Wexford, Cork and Galway worked the ball out of defence into good attacking positions, as shown on the Sunday Game on Sunday night, showed that they are all light years ahead of Waterford’s “caveman hurling”, as one poster has described it.


From a combination of short puckouts and picking up breaking ball around the bunched group in front of their goal, Clare methodically worked the ball to spare men on the wings in the midfield area. In last year’s Munster final, they persisted in ignoring the potential in their full forward line, instead shooting a series of bad wides from out the field. Last Sunday they mixed it up, combining much more accurate outfield shooting with good ball into the Waterford goal area where John Conlon went to town. They might have scored several more goals except for repeated fouling by the Waterford defenders which presented Peter Duggan with a series of easy tap-over frees.


When Derek McGrath first took over, Waterford did play some nice hurling in defence, using stick passes to move the ball up to midfield. However, from there on there seemed to be no clear idea how to proceed. Over time, Waterford regressed to playing blind long ball to mainly non-existent forwards. The difference last Sunday was that Waterford did plant three forwards in front of the Clare goal as targets for the continued flow of long balls from back the field. The problem was that they were basically depending on lucky breaks to achieve anything from this situation, and these were, predictably, few and far between.



The couple of posters here who commented on the minor match were, I thought, a bit harsh on Waterford. There was nothing in it at half time while in the third quarter in particular, Waterford got a lot of good possession around midfield and the half forward line but wasted it through poor decision-making and poorly-executed attempted passes. It was by no means the case that they were being played off the field, and with better use of the ball they could well have been in contention going into the closing straight.


Clare did pull away eventually, with wind assistance and showing the benefit of having played a tough game the week before. As in the senior game, the minors dealt very poorly with high ball delivered into their goal area. Kilkenny, Tipperary and Galway put a lot of emphasis on ability to win high ball in their under-age coaching, and Waterford badly need to step up in this area.


It was also noticeable that Clare were better coached than Waterford in key facets of the game. In particular, they were very good at getting out of trouble and moving the ball forward by looking for team-mates to pass to (and these were always available). Again, like the seniors, Waterford were far too inclined to hit blind balls under pressure in these situations.

KevIRL wrote: »

Is three lads making a first championship start tomorrow? Roche, Curran and Foran?

Kearney hasn’t either I think? Not certain on Curran.