European Cup Semi-Final: Away to La Rochelle, Sunday 2nd of May 3pm

[Atlas]

Would we even be allowed sign an NIQ SR given RG and Carter are already on the island? I think SR is a concern going forward as we are too lightweight there.

We really need the South African teams to enter the PRO XX so we can get use to the physicality week in/out and our bacline playing without guaranteed front door ball.

[Avenger]

Absolutely zero chance we sign a NIQ lock.

[Ruckedtobits]

Would we even be allowed sign an NIQ SR given RG and Carter are already on the island? I think SR is a concern going forward as we are too lightweight there.

We really need the South African teams to enter the PRO XX so we can get use to the physicality week in/out and our bacline playing without guaranteed front door ball.

+1
That's certainly one of the solutions. We need to learn through playing more teams with bigger packs. Merely signing one or two giant forwards would not be a development but rather a patch. As we demonstrated against Exeter, we can play against bigger players but it needs greater precision and more innovation.

Leo, Stuart and their fellow Coaches have once against done a decent job this Season but neither they, nor the players, were able to reproduce their optimum display yesterday.

Disappointed as we are, I cannot imagine just how they all feel today when they sit down to visualise just how long is the journey to get back to the opportunity that was lost yesterday.

[curates_egg]

I hoped we would have enough for LAR, but when you looked at that bench, you knew we had to be 10 points up at half time.
I thought it was a mistake not to start Fardy. Having made that mistake, I can understand why they didn't bring him on for Ruddock: he doesn't have the gas to play in the backrow any more.

I'm not sure we would have beaten Toulouse in the final. They have a few injuries but, with a full squad, have definitely kicked on from when we last met. However, we had a chance, and I am not sure when we will get a chance like this again.

The top teams in Europe at the moment all seem to have one or two absolute units (Skelton is 140kg and Atonio 150kg). Pretty much every second row in the Top14 you can think of is just a massive (in the literal sense) object - I'm talking over 120kg.
We don't really have any, and I agree it seems unlikely we will be allowed to sign one.
Sheehan looks like he has potential (as did Salanoa). But, while we have great players 4-8, we don't have a wrecking ball and, unless I have missed someone, nobody with the physical attributes to become one.
Combine that with the gigantic step back losing Sexton means for the halfback axis, and it's really hard to see us winning or even making a final, unless we make a signing...which we won't be allowed.

[Degz]

With the return of crowds and a more favourable draw, we still have potential to go all the way. We just need all the cards to fall in our favour. They absolutely didn't this year.

[blaker]

A pretty sobering loss. While no disgrace losing to a good side away from home, I think the concerning thing is how it has highlighted/re-emphasised issues we have seen before.

We have a lot of guys who are a bit short at the top end. Not knocking them, they put in the effort and show up and do their best but are just a wee bit short. Every squad needs these guys but they need to be the minority.

Our bench yesterday was very shallow. Acknowledging injuries it still would have been a bit “use in case of injury” even with a full deck? The fact that we are still so heavily reliant on Healy, Toner, Sexton further underlines that really. I think our mad depth at back row “hides” shallowness elsewhere sometimes. Fantastic having 9 international backrowers but no use to you at 10!
- water under the bridge but of the guys who have been “encouraged” to leave Leinster, assuming injury free, you’d probably have had all of Carberry McGrath and Murphy on the bench yesterday?

Whatever about size/power, we also miss a b*%&!x. Cullen, Hines, Thorn, Fardy, even Jenno - big guys no question but niggly awkward hard bastrds more so. Sean OBriens comments regarding needing a “cultural” mix in the squad and the problems inherent in sourcing all players from a single place, especially when it is a somewhat cosseted place ring true.

In reality the P14 was a shambles this year. Munster and Ulsters losses in Europe and now ours emphasise that winning it - while demonstrably a good thing - is not a great marker of where you are in life. That may improve with the SA teams coming up but we’ll see. It’s not the P14s fault we lost but how relevant are the vast vast vast majority of Ross’ caps to preparing for a game like yesterday’s?

We’ve a fair transition to deliver next year. Healy, Toner, Cronin, Sexton, Fardy gone or dropping away. The guys coming behind haven’t grabbed their spots off them - excl Cronin/Hooker. It’s cullens last year too and I presume several other guys out of contract.

France are clearly on the up and seem to have gotten their house in order. If SA join the Heino then there’s no doubt it’s gonna be a very hard comp to win.

Somebody said that if you’re losing the physicals you need to be smart and for everything to go your way. We didn’t get the run of the green ref wise yesterday, and the Lowe yellow was weird, but I don’t think we were wildly unlucky. We just didn’t seem that smart.

A rambling post. Sorry. Ultimately, if you’re being brutal, 1 Heineken for the last 5 years is under achievement. We’ve been in the top 2-4 of Europe every year for that period and not got it done. As others have said, we won’t - and shouldn’t - sign 7 SA monsters but we do need to have a hard look at things.
- do we have smart leaders on the pitch? Pattern of the game yesterday was only going one way for 65 minutes - lots of caps but who is the Nacewa / Sexton brain?
- who is the long term 10?
- is Ed Byrne up to replacing Healy. Are we really moving Porter?
- is furlong leaving?
- do we need a signing at second row? Is Baird the solution there now or does he need a year or two?
- can we “source” a b$&%@#d for the back row? Leavy the key man in 2018.
- is McGrath good enough at the top level? How did we allow ourselves get so weak at 9 depth more generally
- has Larmour progressed? Is his fielding good enough?

[Blueberry]

Look we have lots to be proud of, we are the only team in the competition with a nearly entirely home grown team and yes it as clear as day that if you added 2 huge overseas lumps into our side (Skelton esq) we become close to unstoppable.

And we are the dominant supplier to the national team and because of that and the obsession with propping up Munster with NIQ's we arguably are in a bind as with only 4 provincial teams supplying Ireland we get hung out to dry as our player development is too important to compromise. Our success and Munster's and Ulster's utter failure is actually the cause of the bind we are in.

Beating these huge physical teams needs close to a perfect game, we had our chances v Saracens in the Newcastle final and yesterday we did too, the Larmour to McGrath chance the killer for me.

Problem is in the Pro14 we win by either physically dominating which we can't do v the likes of LAR, Sarries etc etc or we create so many chances because we have front foot ball that the missed ones don't matter. What is uncanny is the LAR and Sarries games were very similar. Bullied in the second half.

The step from Pro 14 to the peak in Europe is too big and we are left coming up just short.

So being honest we either join em and sign a couple of Skeltons (which I think we can't do due to the mess the IRFU has created) or we plug away take pride in being a home grown team and just hope we can play the perfect game next year when we run into a similar situation.

Bottom line is the unwillingness of the IRFU to let Munster and to a lesser extent Ulster flounder without NIQ's and force them to bring more local players through is coming back to bite Leinster.

[ronk]

We’ve developed 1 scrum half to sometimes international level in over 20 years.

Next years panel is probably the highest standard we’ve had in terms of development. We got weak because Munster were allowed sign McCarthy when they didn’t need him.

[ronk]

Next season we will have 0 NIQ players in the first choice 23 and 2 project players. We have a lot of talent and we’ll have to turn what we have into the team that wins.

The problem with a big signing or two is that there’s talent across the squad and it would involve pushing out decent talent.

When you have players like Ryan and Baird you figure out how to use them rather than pine for Skelton.

At the time extending Fardy looked like the right move but he faded enough (& had some knocks) so he wasn’t trusted for these games when needed.

[Twist]

No flu except for the fact that me and my whole family had the flu in November... again I work on the biggest FDI sites in Ireland.

FDI, I'm still waiting.
This is starting to feel like Peter and his three denials of any association with JON.

I've a cousin prof of medicine, taught herself Japanese as a teenager, has lectured in Tokyo. She's beyond smart. A while ago she was headhunted by the CDC ( can you guess what her speciality is ) Early doors she told me to wear a mask, so I'll take her advice over Larry, Curly and Moe, you know yourself

That’s gas, I’ve a cousin who did the same thing! He lectures over in Kyoto now

[Twist]

In 2021 we're won 9 lost 4, and we lost our share by not playing smart enough. We put out a strong team but there really wasn't a body of form for a lot of guys and the Munster match wasn't good preparation.

It looked like the squad was getting over the injury hump after Exeter but it wasn't really to be. It's been a long hard year and it has the feel of one of those days where you get a player sent off after 5 minutes but really only fade in the last 5.

I thought it was set to be a great year for the provinces but Ulster yesterday really got me worried. We spent a lot of time playing interpros and maybe it wasn't the standard as much as it was getting stale against the same well known opposition.

There's a changing of the guard post Saracens and we're up there but we're underdogs. We also have to earn it rather than expect to get it. I still think the best path is to build with what we have rather than try to be someone else.

We'll see what damage the Lions does. But I think we should develop hard outside of there and give guys a shot (while still using Fardy etc.)

It has been a very disjointed season with COVID playing a huge part in that disruption. Games called off, schedules shifted, players in bubbles along with the normal everyday disruptions of injuries - really mitigated against building a consistant selection (in either Europe or the Pro14) and a run of form. Same for all the provinces of course, and France and Britain had their own set of disruptions too.

Another thing with Covid is that we ended up with a tougher route than usual. Ordinarily our consistency is a big strength for us and gets us a home QF/SF/both.

Last season we should’ve played Saracens at a packed LR in Spring. Instead we came in cold at an empty stadium and couldn’t recover from a bad start. This year we were on the road against serious heavyweights twice while carrying a lot of injuries.

I still think we need to recruit an enforcer-type ideally at lock. Otherwise we’ll be asking Ryan or Toner or Baird to perform that role and it doesnt suit any of them. Ruddock is a the closest we have to that kind of guy now.

[Oldschool]

Now that the dust has settled and hindsight is at 20/20.
1. They wanted it more than we did. At the end of the day ya can't beat a bit of good old fashioned pashun.
2. They were better prepared than we were. Against Munster we looked leaden footed, it was the same against LAR
3. We made selection errors. Kearney should have started, beginning to think Lowe's level is Pro14/HCC pool level only.
4. We didn't react on the day especially at HT. Our best spell in the first half was tight in carrying by the forwards, that should have been the HT message.
5. We didn't use our substitutions well. With McGrath having a mare we had to either bring on No 21 or move Larmour to 9 and bring on no. 23.
6. We lacked on field leadership. With Sexton gone or going we have a problem in that we've nobody to drive the team when things aren't going well.
7. We were hurt by injuries. Enough said JGP was probably the most significant loss here and Ryan just wasn't ready.
In summary when the post mortum takes place the coaches as much as the 23 need to learn from this one.
The above are just brief one liners.
A certain DC mentioned the substitution of Ruddock with Baird as a significant moment in the game.
The substitution was preprogrammed thinking Baird for BR, Fardy for SR and that was the real problem and may even have been guided by concerns over Ryan's fitness
After 25 mins the coaches should have being revising their substitution plan. They were still inside the box.
Shitty weather isn't it.

[Dave Cahill]

A lot has been said of the huge lumps that others have that we don't, but we didn't lose because of the power of Skelton et al, we lost because we allowed them apply it. They were able to spend the entire game in their comfort zone, trundling up and down their lanes without ever being stressed. Skelton, for example, isn't particularly explosive, but we did nothing either with the ball or without it to stop or slow his momentuum. We didn't do anything that would waste their energy doing something other than what they wanted to do. That was a tactical failure on our part.

[Blueberry]

A lot has been said of the huge lumps that others have that we don't, but we didn't lose because of the power of Skelton et al, we lost because we allowed them apply it. They were able to spend the entire game in their comfort zone, trundling up and down their lanes without ever being stressed. Skelton, for example, isn't particularly explosive, but we did nothing either with the ball or without it to stop or slow his momentuum. We didn't do anything that would waste their energy doing something other than what they wanted to do. That was a tactical failure on our part.

Not saying we can't be better or much of what you are saying hasn't merit but it is very hard to compete when you have these huge lumps coming at you...had to say we ain't seeing a consistent problem here....Sarries, LAR etc etc...same problems.

My view is we accept it and do our best but accept that winning 2 or 3 games in a HEC knock out on the trot against huge sides is unlikely or we look to sign a couple of lumps and take on the problem directly.

See merit on both approaches (accept and do our best but be realistic or sign and confront the problem) but I think that is the decision. Expecting to be able to find some magic ingredients to beat bulk I just don't think is realistic.

[Oldschool]

A lot has been said of the huge lumps that others have that we don't, but we didn't lose because of the power of Skelton et al, we lost because we allowed them apply it. They were able to spend the entire game in their comfort zone, trundling up and down their lanes without ever being stressed. Skelton, for example, isn't particularly explosive, but we did nothing either with the ball or without it to stop or slow his momentuum. We didn't do anything that would waste their energy doing something other than what they wanted to do. That was a tactical failure on our part.

Not saying we can't be better or much of what you are saying hasn't merit but it is very hard to compete when you have these huge lumps coming at you...had to say we ain't seeing a consistent problem here....Sarries, LAR etc etc...same problems.

My view is we accept it and do our best but accept that winning 2 or 3 games in a HEC knock out on the trot against huge sides is unlikely or we look to sign a couple of lumps and take on the problem directly.

See merit on both approaches (accept and do our best but be realistic or sign and confront the problem) but I think that is the decision. Expecting to be able to find some magic ingredients to beat bulk I just don't think is realistic.

It's highly unlikely we'd be allowed to sign a bulky NIQ SR because Ireland's need is almost as great as our own.
Leinster are better than they showed against LAR, it's about identifying where we went wrong and not repeating the same mistakes.

[wixfjord]

Now that the dust has settled and hindsight is at 20/20.
1. They wanted it more than we did. At the end of the day ya can't beat a bit of good old fashioned pashun.
2. They were better prepared than we were. Against Munster we looked leaden footed, it was the same against LAR
3. We made selection errors. Kearney should have started, beginning to think Lowe's level is Pro14/HCC pool level only.
4. We didn't react on the day especially at HT. Our best spell in the first half was tight in carrying by the forwards, that should have been the HT message.
5. We didn't use our substitutions well. With McGrath having a mare we had to either bring on No 21 or move Larmour to 9 and bring on no. 23.
6. We lacked on field leadership. With Sexton gone or going we have a problem in that we've nobody to drive the team when things aren't going well.
7. We were hurt by injuries. Enough said JGP was probably the most significant loss here and Ryan just wasn't ready.
In summary when the post mortum takes place the coaches as much as the 23 need to learn from this one.
The above are just brief one liners.
A certain DC mentioned the substitution of Ruddock with Baird as a significant moment in the game.
The substitution was preprogrammed thinking Baird for BR, Fardy for SR and that was the real problem and may even have been guided by concerns over Ryan's fitness
After 25 mins the coaches should have being revising their substitution plan. They were still inside the box.
Shitty weather isn't it.

Agree with a lot of that.

But Lowe was excellent against Exeter and certainly wasn't a problem yesterday. If anything DK should've been in ahead of Larmour.

While Luke was poor in a big game (again), putting Larmour to 9 in a feckin away Euro SF would've been madness. He has never played there at any level I believe?

[wixfjord]

I really, really think this focus on 'power' as the only answer is a misnomer. We lost Rhys which was a huge blow.

But the reason we lost that game was down to errors like poor kicking, passing and ruck play, along with a few of our bigger players not having good games.

[Dave Cahill]

Not saying we can't be better or much of what you are saying hasn't merit but it is very hard to compete when you have these huge lumps coming at you...had to say we ain't seeing a consistent problem here....Sarries, LAR etc etc...same problems.

My view is we accept it and do our best but accept that winning 2 or 3 games in a HEC knock out on the trot against huge sides is unlikely or we look to sign a couple of lumps and take on the problem directly.

See merit on both approaches (accept and do our best but be realistic or sign and confront the problem) but I think that is the decision. Expecting to be able to find some magic ingredients to beat bulk I just don't think is realistic.

I agree with most of what you say, but it's based on what I see the problem to be, the "huge lumps coming at you" - stop them coming at you by stressing them, stress their fitness, their mobility, make them take the ball on the back foot, keep the ball off them in the first place. Those are the things we didn't do against Sarries (slightly different because Billy V is both explosive and powerful) or yesterday

[ronk]

Different solutions to the same problem. Both are valid and feasible. One is an option within current constraints.

[Blueberry]

Not saying we can't be better or much of what you are saying hasn't merit but it is very hard to compete when you have these huge lumps coming at you...had to say we ain't seeing a consistent problem here....Sarries, LAR etc etc...same problems.

My view is we accept it and do our best but accept that winning 2 or 3 games in a HEC knock out on the trot against huge sides is unlikely or we look to sign a couple of lumps and take on the problem directly.

See merit on both approaches (accept and do our best but be realistic or sign and confront the problem) but I think that is the decision. Expecting to be able to find some magic ingredients to beat bulk I just don't think is realistic.

I agree with most of what you say, but it's based on what I see the problem to be, the "huge lumps coming at you" - stop them coming at you by stressing them, stress their fitness, their mobility, make them take the ball on the back foot, keep the ball off them in the first place. Those are the things we didn't do against Sarries (slightly different because Billy V is both explosive and powerful) or yesterday

Agree with you, we can do better and do the things you suggest but just feel there is a point where you will not be able to ultimately close those gap or negate it enough to be able to win.

Ultimately power in rugby will always win out, you can work around and negate it to a degree but there is a point where giving the ball to the big guy wins out......

Suppose I am just wondering are we at that point of no return, I.E bar the perfect game where every half chance sticks and we get the rub of the green with the draw are we going to consistently come unstuck in semi / final when we tip into the Sarries or LAR lumps.

My gut says we are at that point now and we need to accept we are that point now or we do add a NIQ or two to paper over the issue. Historically we have always had 2-3 key NIQ'S and it hasn't hurt our identity etc, Elsom, Thorn etc etc.