Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Munster v Ulster - Dec 29th 17.30 Team named #132

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Miguel Sanchez
    replied
    Originally posted by The Outlaw View Post
    Murray is infuriatingly inconsistent in my view. On his good days he looks near enough top class bordering world class.

    However his bad days literally fall off the map. If his passing the other night had got any slower you'd have sworn he was in traction.

    He was a big problem the other night for me. Doesn't really churn out 60-70% performances. Its either brilliant or ****e. Need to develop consistency around what I call good solid performances. Nothing flashy just the basics done really well.

    I don't think he's even tapped 60% of his talent yet.

    In another 12 months he might find the likes of Kieran Marmion giving him a real run for his money for the Green Jersey. Might be no harm. Competition might help him.
    He can be a little tardy in his delivery sometimes, but the real issue, and I keep coming back to this, seems to be the lack of real quality "go forward" ball.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Outlaw
    replied
    Originally posted by John Cooper Clarke View Post
    True but even more humdrum sides - Ospreys for example - are well able play the ball both wide and narrow, and their midfield look useful as a result, even though individually the are not superstars.

    Is it just a coincidence that they have a powerful pack and a good 9?
    Murray is infuriatingly inconsistent in my view. On his good days he looks near enough top class bordering world class.

    However his bad days literally fall off the map. If his passing the other night had got any slower you'd have sworn he was in traction.

    He was a big problem the other night for me. Doesn't really churn out 60-70% performances. Its either brilliant or ****e. Need to develop consistency around what I call good solid performances. Nothing flashy just the basics done really well.

    I don't think he's even tapped 60% of his talent yet.

    In another 12 months he might find the likes of Kieran Marmion giving him a real run for his money for the Green Jersey. Might be no harm. Competition might help him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Miguel Sanchez
    replied
    Originally posted by The Outlaw View Post
    doesn't get more dominant then clermont in the Aviva recently.

    Toulon are also doing it.

    Both sides by far the best two teams to watch in European Rugby. But they are near international teams so maybe those standards are to be expected.
    True but even more humdrum sides - Ospreys for example - are well able play the ball both wide and narrow, and their midfield look useful as a result, even though individually the are not superstars.

    Is it just a coincidence that they have a powerful pack and a good 9?

    Leave a comment:


  • The Outlaw
    replied
    Originally posted by lactose intolerant View Post
    Are there all that many well-functioning currently in European rugby?

    And do all of those who spring to mind, play behind a dominant pack capable of regularly supplying quick ball?
    doesn't get more dominant then clermont in the Aviva recently.

    Toulon are also doing it.

    Both sides by far the best two teams to watch in European Rugby. But they are near international teams so maybe those standards are to be expected.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Spoofer
    replied
    Originally posted by HenryFitz View Post
    Alain Rolland to Robbie Diack: "You okay? You got a little bump to the head?"

    I thought that was the incident you referred to. Robbie Diack lying on the floor on the wrong side of the ruck gets a shin or an arm to the forehead.

    Do you find that you're hallucinating more as you get older?
    Yeah, it was all the acid in the 60's man.

    Unfortunately I dont have the GIF gift but if you thought it was a shin or an arm then I assume biology was not a stong subject of yours.

    If that had happened to a Munster player this place would be in meltdown mode.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thomond78
    replied
    Originally posted by lactose intolerant View Post
    Are there all that many well-functioning currently in European rugby?

    And do all of those who spring to mind, play behind a dominant pack capable of regularly supplying quick ball?
    That's at least partially cart before horse. A good pair of centres get you across the gainline from first phase, which gives the pack a chance to give you fast ruck ball for the second and subsequent phases.

    Leave a comment:


  • Balla Boy
    replied
    Munster v Ulster - Dec 29th 17.30 Team named #132

    Originally posted by lactose intolerant View Post
    Are there all that many well-functioning currently in European rugby?

    And do all of those who spring to mind, play behind a dominant pack capable of regularly supplying quick ball?
    Not really, but I thought the Sarries centres showed more bang at Vicarage Road than we've managed all season.

    Quins, Tolouse, Toulon, Ulster, Clermont, Ospreys are all showing more in the backs than us for my money - though I'd agree it's not a vintage year.

    Leave a comment:


  • lactose intolerant
    replied
    Are there all that many well-functioning currently in European rugby?

    And do all of those who spring to mind, play behind a dominant pack capable of regularly supplying quick ball?

    Leave a comment:


  • Balla Boy
    replied
    Munster v Ulster - Dec 29th 17.30 Team named #132

    But that's my point LI - Keatley's running threat isn't having that effect. We've been told for years by ROG's critics that our issues stemmed from his lack of a break allowing the defence to come up on the 12 faster, and that a breaker would make us more unpredictable.

    But it hasn't. We are just as lacking in creativity with Keatley at 10.

    I don't think it's another ROG vs Keatley discussion, though. It's a "why are our backs ****e" discussion, and my increasing view is that ROG vs Keatley isn't the central issue.

    With or without a breaking threat at 10, with or without ROG's control of field position, we're fundamentally blunt.

    Leave a comment:


  • lactose intolerant
    replied
    Originally posted by Balla Boy View Post
    I think we're talking across each other.

    His running threat doesn't make any difference off first phase ball, contrary to what people have been saying for years in criticising ROG. With or without a running threat at 10, our first phase back play is woeful. Either through their own threat or some other mechanism, Carter, Priestland (on form), Sexton, Cipriani and a rake of other tens can manufacture line breaks from first phase ball.

    That's not a criticism of Keatley, necessarily. It's an observation that the notion we've been sold that a breaking ten would fix a rake of our woes is a crock. The solution to our inability to get the backs moving is not a breaking threat at 10, because we have one and it's doing nothing, for the most part.

    I'll need to re-watch the break before the penalty try, as my impression was that the Ulster defence was a lot more open than that.
    It's not necessarily about the breaks Keatley does make though, it's about the threat of a break at 10 which has to be defended against, or at least thought about, which isn't really there with ROG at 10!!

    Backlines ran well with ROG at 10 for years, so I'm sure he hasn't just forgotten how to do it!!

    The thing about the ROG bashing here is people are forgetting the other little elephant in the room, which was bringing on a non-threat 9 along with a non-threat 10 (both in terms of running threat) meant the defence could basically start at 12, or keep an eye on any loose flankers etc. Coughlan was noticeably double teamed once or twice for example

    What we did get with Stringer-ROG were some lovely kicks in behind the winger, as of old, but they were worth feckall really considering Ulster secured lineout and cleared with ease!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Balla Boy
    replied
    Originally posted by CorcĂ­och View Post
    Just how many 10's in the world are line breakers against set defence's ( seeing as broken play is conceeded ) on the 1st phase of play?? . . . .It is also fair to say that even if Keatley does take the ball into contact against a set defence he will get the ball back to you, ROG cannot offer the same.

    Because my memory is not a catalogue of rugby clips I dont have specific examples to illustrate . . . I will refer to two breaks . ..the break leading to our penalty try on Sat . . . .which was our first decent foray into the Ulster 22 I might add. . . . . .and the movement of play that led to Earls try against Ulster this season.

    Last Sat . . . . ..Varley threw into line out . . .taken into a maul . . .Murray took the ball from the maul and fed Keatley a poor pass he had to work to catch . .he took the gap very well and fed LLL etc etc . . .

    I cannot recall the last time I saw ROG do that . .he either cannot or simply doesn't. It was a fine run by Keatley who strightened for the gap very well . . .He put the Muster attack in behind the Ulster line with ball in hand on the front foot . . .When have we ever seen that from ROG this season . . . .getting our backs in behind a defence with ball in hand on the front foot???? He might do it with a nice chip kick etc . .but not running ball in hand

    Even the greatest 10's are not set defence line breakers themselves on 1st phase play ( bar rehearsed moves off a set piece ) . . . . Keatley is not by the way imo one of the worlds greatest 10's . . . .however, on evidence of this years play he is far more suited IMO to the style and system Munster are using. Both for his attack AND defence.

    ROG's insistance on playing deep does not in any way work with the system of play Penny has brought . . . . .it has to be played much flatter to work. . .to play that kind of width . . .from such depth means by the time your ball gets to 13 or 14 and contact you are actually further back than where you were when 9 began the movement. . . .The PACK system as it was explained to . .where you don't "earn the right to go wide" . .but work back in off width for mismatches etc . . .is not working because the 1st movement is too slow coming from depth


    The second example I illustrated is not a moment of anything really by Keatley . .it was a combination of great play by Coughlan and Holland out wide, quick ball, a nice offload from LLL etc . .there was a nice skip pass from Keatley . . .the real break came on the 2nd movement . .. as we worked back inside at speed FROM width . . .and we had space and mismatches . . .that is the essence of the system as I understand it.

    The reason I have referred to it is because those phases . .the positioning of players, the support play, the whole movement of the line sums up 100% what Penny is try to do, the purpose of the system . . .its like a little summary all in one there . . . and I have never seen that kind of play from Munster with ROG at 10 this year.
    The guy is a LEGEND but his time is past imo . . . .he has been a pale shadow of his former self at times this year
    I think we're talking across each other.

    His running threat doesn't make any difference off first phase ball, contrary to what people have been saying for years in criticising ROG. With or without a running threat at 10, our first phase back play is woeful. Either through their own threat or some other mechanism, Carter, Priestland (on form), Sexton, Cipriani and a rake of other tens can manufacture line breaks from first phase ball.

    That's not a criticism of Keatley, necessarily. It's an observation that the notion we've been sold that a breaking ten would fix a rake of our woes is a crock. The solution to our inability to get the backs moving is not a breaking threat at 10, because we have one and it's doing nothing, for the most part.

    I'll need to re-watch the break before the penalty try, as my impression was that the Ulster defence was a lot more open than that.

    Leave a comment:


  • isola ciarrai
    replied
    Originally posted by Jackie Brown View Post
    Sadly not, first in 3 years I've missed!
    Lucky man, JB, it was just a crap night weatherwise, even sleet for a while!

    Leave a comment:


  • HenryFitz
    replied
    Originally posted by The Spoofer View Post
    Neither yet but advancing age will probably result in both. I asked a serious question of some of the more intelligent posters on this forum. None have responded to date.

    Just for accuracy sake, the incident in question occured around 47 minutes 30 to 47 minutes 40 on the RTE player and resulted in a injury to Robbie Diack.

    Just to note, I'm not calling for a citing or a ban just pointing out that luck doesnt always go the blue way.
    Alain Rolland to Robbie Diack: "You okay? You got a little bump to the head?"

    I thought that was the incident you referred to. Robbie Diack lying on the floor on the wrong side of the ruck gets a shin or an arm to the forehead.

    Do you find that you're hallucinating more as you get older?

    Leave a comment:


  • hellovating
    replied
    Originally posted by The Spoofer View Post
    Neither yet but advancing age will probably result in both. I asked a serious question of some of the more intelligent posters on this forum. None have responded to date.

    Just for accuracy sake, the incident in question occured around 47 minutes 30 to 47 minutes 40 on the RTE player and resulted in a injury to Robbie Diack.

    Just to note, I'm not calling for a citing or a ban just pointing out that luck doesnt always go the blue way.
    holland stamp on diack. looks dangerous.

    Leave a comment:


  • Clubman
    replied
    Originally posted by The Outlaw View Post
    Its more the abject level of skills displayed by all 4 provinces last weekend in the backs rather then ages of players. I'd never drop a player because of his age personally. I'd drop him if he isn't playing well.

    None of the back-line coaching this year aside from Ulster seems to be moving in the right direction
    .

    If you look at how all 4 teams played last weekend they all played the same way in the backs. 10 yards behind the gain-line. Watched Clermont's 2nd string beating Bordeaux last week in a cracker of a match. The contrast was remarkable. All back-line moves were a yard from the gain-line with runners straightening and hitting the line at pace. In the pissing rain the offloading was remarkable.

    I don't see the point in standing deep in the backs unless the outhalf can clearly see a gap on the far side of the defence by going back and around the centre of the pitch. Yet time and again off static ball all of our provinces are in the habit of doing this.

    Jared Payne is a good example. He rarely takes a ball in the line more then a yard from the gain-line. The back-line play of all of Leinster, Munster and Connacht has been dire for the first half of the season.
    I'd agree totally on the highlighted bit. Rewatched that game again to see if I could detect the things being said about ROG etc. First impressions are totally in line with your opening comment. Skill levels at Munster are abysmal.

    Now in no particular order, here are some other impressions on the rewatch.

    Howlett was a disaster. Poor kicks from him on a number of occasions resulted in loss of momentum, not to mention the ball. He surely cannot hold his place.

    Varley, the real villian of the piece but as our second choice hooker has to be given game time too. Unlike Howlett though, he also did some good things and was centrally involved in both second half tries.

    For anyone to say we'd have got the bonus with Keatley at 10 is nonsense. Back play wasn't massively different with either at 10. The biggest difference I saw was ROG wanting to shunt the ball asap rather than being caught in possession and Marshall running over him a couple of times. He also threw a couple of hospital passes that Keatley didn't, seeming much more confident in his own ability to retain possession if he has to take contact. Our two worked tries came from some decent forward play and the resultant platform to create something. For the rest of the game, we struggled to gain any kind of parity let alone superiority.

    Our awful back play floundered on the rock that was Luke Marshall for the most part and, how anyone objective could award anyone other than he, mom status is beyond me. Picking TOD was a pure cop out. He also had much to do with gaining the position for the closing try while its execution had all to do with Ulster players superior core skills and confidence.

    Conclusion; Penney and the game he wants to play is totally unsuited to our skill levels now and, I don't see too much light on that particular horizon either. Maybe we just should have given it to Foley after all?

    Incidentally, the great plan of only recruiting players in certain positions to the Munster academy on an as needed basis is pure daft and what we saw the other night is partly the result of it. Meanwhile, possibly the best second row prospect of them all goes west.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X