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

[Blueberry]

I do think it's pretty knee jerk to say we need to sign a journeyman ProD2 player or a guy who is playing club rugby in Oz as a solution, just because they're big.

Again, how did Exeter manage to win it last year without that player? We were more than powerful enough to beat them.

How did we beat Sarries three years ago and Toulouse two years ago twice with such an 'underpowered' pack?

As I've said multiple times now, I think 'we need more power' is a very simplistic way to look at that game yesterday.

'We need a proper test level 9'
or
'We need our new leadership group (Ringrose, Ryan) to step up and do it on the big stage'

would be areas i would look to first.

Toulouse now are superior to the team we beat 2-3 years ago. La Rochelle were still on the rise last year too. We beat Saracens in 2018 because Billy Vunipola and others were injured, and they were having a terrible year, along with the England national team. We've been utterly strangled twice by Saracens and now by La Rochelle. Bringing in more power isn't a guaranteed solution but it would definitely help.

By the way, I would much prefer to sign a de Jager than any of the more journeyman types, but in case people came in with the usual nay-saying about money, I was showing that there are cheaper options too, that would be reasonably effective.

The Toulouse pack we took apart two years ago was:
1. Clément Castets
2. Peato Mauvaka
3. Charlie Faumuina
4. Richie Arnold
5. Richie Gray
6. Rynhardt Elstadt
7. Joe Tekori
8. Jerome Kaino (captain)

That's arguably more powerful than what they started at the weekend.

Saracens starting 5 against us in 2019 was Mako, George, Figallo, Itoje, Kruis.

You've ignored Exeter, who muscled their way to the cup last year and who we outmuscled just a few weeks ago.

Like I'd be happy to bring in a big NIQ signing, but it's unlikely, and I think doing so would be knee jerk.

But I'd certainly not be in favour of bringing in guys with little pedigree just because they weigh a lot!

You are missing the point - can we beat a big pack, yes of course we can but we are making it harder for ourselves and give big sides a very easy path to follow to beat us - do you think ROG hadn't had the Sarries games on repeat recently...............and we need to be really accurate and perfect in all other areas. Can we do this yes, it is tougher yes.....

Bringing in one or two lumps ain't going to automatically win us games v the top teams but the type of physical over powering that we had v LAR or Sarries etc is less likely to happen and buys us room.

Don't think we will bring in a lump for several reasons (Mainly because 2nd row is where it makes most sense and the Munster IRFU won't allow it bearing in mind the nonsese down in Shelbyville)...........doesn't mean it isn't a good idea.

[wixfjord]

You are missing the point - can we beat a big pack, yes of course we can but we are making it harder for ourselves and give big sides a very easy path to follow to beat us - do you think ROG hadn't had the Sarries games on repeat recently...............and we need to be really accurate and perfect in all other areas. Can we do this yes, it is tougher yes.....

Bringing in one or two lumps ain't going to automatically win us games v the top teams but the type of physical over powering that we had v LAR or Sarries etc is less likely to happen and buys us room.

Don't think we will bring in a lump for several reasons (Mainly because 2nd row is where it makes most sense and the Munster IRFU won't allow it bearing in mind the nonsese down in Shelbyville)...........doesn't mean it isn't a good idea.

No, I'm well aware of the point.

But to overfocus on 'power' as the reason we lost yesterday is wrong in my view.

And to ignore the fact we've beaten plenty of other 'power' based teams in recent years (and weeks) is a bit convenient.

We weren't anywhere near accurate enough yesterday. That was the main issue. We kicked poorly, were sloppy in our ruck work, made some bad handling errors and looked devoid of ideas from about the 20th minute onwards.

By the way, we've also just signed a 21st Samoan TH prop from the best club side in the world. I think people might be forgetting!

[neiliog93]

You are missing the point - can we beat a big pack, yes of course we can but we are making it harder for ourselves and give big sides a very easy path to follow to beat us - do you think ROG hadn't had the Sarries games on repeat recently...............and we need to be really accurate and perfect in all other areas. Can we do this yes, it is tougher yes.....

Bringing in one or two lumps ain't going to automatically win us games v the top teams but the type of physical over powering that we had v LAR or Sarries etc is less likely to happen and buys us room.

Don't think we will bring in a lump for several reasons (Mainly because 2nd row is where it makes most sense and the Munster IRFU won't allow it bearing in mind the nonsese down in Shelbyville)...........doesn't mean it isn't a good idea.

No, I'm well aware of the point.

But to overfocus on 'power' as the reason we lost yesterday is wrong in my view.

And to ignore the fact we've beaten plenty of other 'power' based teams in recent years (and weeks) is a bit convenient.

We weren't anywhere near accurate enough yesterday. That was the main issue. We kicked poorly, were sloppy in our ruck work, made some bad handling errors and looked devoid of ideas from about the 20th minute onwards.

By the way, we've also just signed a 21st Samoan TH prop from the best club side in the world. I think people might be forgetting!

It's completely correct to focus (not overfocus) on power as the main reason we lost. BOD and Jackman have said it as well. It's been exactly the same twice against Saracens. We haven't beaten power-based teams as effective as La Rochelle or Sarries (the 2018 victory was an exception in a terrible year for England, and without Billy).

Why were we sloppy in our ruck work yesterday? Because they were so big and powerful at the breakdown that we struggled. Why did we make handling errors, struggle to gain forward momentum, and generally look bereft of ideas? Because their power allowed them to dominate the collisions. As Graham Henry said, lose most o the collisions and 90% of the time you'll lose the match.

[wixfjord]

You are missing the point - can we beat a big pack, yes of course we can but we are making it harder for ourselves and give big sides a very easy path to follow to beat us - do you think ROG hadn't had the Sarries games on repeat recently...............and we need to be really accurate and perfect in all other areas. Can we do this yes, it is tougher yes.....

Bringing in one or two lumps ain't going to automatically win us games v the top teams but the type of physical over powering that we had v LAR or Sarries etc is less likely to happen and buys us room.

Don't think we will bring in a lump for several reasons (Mainly because 2nd row is where it makes most sense and the Munster IRFU won't allow it bearing in mind the nonsese down in Shelbyville)...........doesn't mean it isn't a good idea.

No, I'm well aware of the point.

But to overfocus on 'power' as the reason we lost yesterday is wrong in my view.

And to ignore the fact we've beaten plenty of other 'power' based teams in recent years (and weeks) is a bit convenient.

We weren't anywhere near accurate enough yesterday. That was the main issue. We kicked poorly, were sloppy in our ruck work, made some bad handling errors and looked devoid of ideas from about the 20th minute onwards.

By the way, we've also just signed a 21st Samoan TH prop from the best club side in the world. I think people might be forgetting!

It's completely correct to focus (not overfocus) on power as the main reason we lost. BOD and Jackman have said it as well. It's been exactly the same twice against Saracens. We haven't beaten power-based teams as effective as La Rochelle or Sarries (the 2018 victory was an exception in a terrible year for England, and without Billy).

Why were we sloppy in our ruck work yesterday? Because they were so big and powerful at the breakdown that we struggled. Why did we make handling errors, struggle to gain forward momentum, and generally look bereft of ideas? Because their power allowed them to dominate the collisions. As Graham Henry said, lose most o the collisions and 90% of the time you'll lose the match.

Again, you're just conveniently bracketing LAR and Saracens together and ignoring the fact we have beaten Exeter, Toulouse x3, Racing, Sarries in recent years.

We made handling errors and had poor ruck work because they were big? Nah, don't agree with that.

I think I'll leave it there as this isn't going anywhere!

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Why were we sloppy in our ruck work yesterday? Because they were so big and powerful at the breakdown that we struggled. Why did we make handling errors, struggle to gain forward momentum, and generally look bereft of ideas? Because their power allowed them to dominate the collisions. As Graham Henry said, lose most o the collisions and 90% of the time you'll lose the match.

Totally agree. We didn’t help ourselves but it all stemmed from that.

[Blueberry]

Why were we sloppy in our ruck work yesterday? Because they were so big and powerful at the breakdown that we struggled. Why did we make handling errors, struggle to gain forward momentum, and generally look bereft of ideas? Because their power allowed them to dominate the collisions. As Graham Henry said, lose most o the collisions and 90% of the time you'll lose the match.

Totally agree. We didn’t help ourselves but it all stemmed from that.

Agree with both of these posts.

To be honest I am actual surprised there is any debate over this, clear as day to me we got over powered....everything else comes from this.

[blaker]

The Sarries 18 game was a good win but they were deffo not at full whack. Still had to be beat - no asterisk.
The Sarries final loss is the one where I think we were outdone by power and the critical “everything needs to go right” moments around half time went against us. Power loss to a team at the top of their game.
Sarries quarter post Covid was a sickener. Power ultimately given the scrum but we killed ourselves in that game too.
LR yesterday aren’t in the same arena as Sarries at their peak but are a good side who took their points, rode their luck and had a few beasts to rely on while we under performed. Combo of the 2 Sarries losses almost.

I don’t think it’s mutually exclusive to say we’d have won if Skelton played for us or that we should have won despite him being on their team?

We would be demonstrably better with a giant De Jäger in the row. Any team would be made better with a world class giant. Without exception, Zero question. But we ain’t getting one.

Size means opponents are rushed, on the back foot, need to put more into basic keep ball etc. It’s clearly a huge benefit. But it’s not insurmountable (except at the very peak combo of skill coaching and size which Sarries had).

We SHOULD have been able to win despite LR size yesterday. No Sexton and losing Ruddock made that harder. But look at the facts of it; if I’d offered you constant possession for the first 10, multiple penalties, a try and a man in the bin you’d have been putting the mortgage on us winning. Almost scripted perfect start. I think game management and leadership was a big factor from there but if you combine a pack not getting major go fwd with halfbacks having bad games (chicken / egg) it’s hard to do anything.

[hugonaut]

We made handling errors and had poor ruck work because they were big? Nah, don't agree with that.

I think I'll leave it there as this isn't going anywhere!

We also relied too much on getting to deck, which exposed us to poaching turnovers. They had 16 offloads to our 3, including 9 from their backs [source: https://www.epcrugby.com/report/la-roch ... statistics ]. The likes of Kerr-Barlow, West, Dulin and Leyds aren't massive men winning collisions and offloading on the front foot, they're just more comfortable with it.

It's been evident since the return to rugby that it is way more difficult to retain possession through multi-phase rucks under the current interpretations, so it's something that we really should work on being better at and more comfortable with.

We've got to be able to maul better, we need to vary our offensive kicking and not be too worried about 'kicking the ball away', and we need to offload more in attacking situations. They'd be three improvements I'd like to see for next season.

[OTT]

Ryan Baird destroyed that maul. Thought furlong took a high shot in there too.

Certainly looked like it.

https://twitter.com/Keithob84/status/13 ... 83745?s=20

There’s the one. Strange that they never even mentioned it in commentary, less strange they didn’t bother with a replay as that was their mo.

[Morf]

Third choice scrum-half was always the most likely position that would come and bite us in the ass – I have to say that I think it was a very difficult issue to remedy in practical terms for Guy/Leo/Stuart once McCarthy announced he was going to Munster. Thankfully we have addressed that for next season.

The reality is that Ireland doesn't produce more than one top class scrum half every 20 years. So instead of reactive calls to sign every fat arsed afrikaaner jacamo customer, if we have the money and the permission to do so, we should bite the bullet, admit the truth and target a world class scrum half.

Get TJ Perenara before he goes to the NRL? [link: https://www.planetrugby.com/all-blacks- ... argreaves/ ]

He's a fine player but I find his manner onfield really unpleasant.
I've seen him a few times using pretty foul language at or near refs that wouldn't get ignored like it does in NZ.

[Ruckedtobits]

Perenara would be attractive player based on his skill-set. There's not many at this level and he has top class winning experience. Whether his personality is suitable could be a problem. Ideally, we could do with top class who will 'nurture' two Byrnes and Frawley

[tingman]

Ryan Baird destroyed that maul. Thought furlong took a high shot in there too.

Certainly looked like it.

https://twitter.com/Keithob84/status/13 ... 83745?s=20

There’s the one. Strange that they never even mentioned it in commentary, less strange they didn’t bother with a replay as that was their mo.

Indeed - I caught this in real time - lets face it - French TV has form here. But 'Tempo" should have looked. Interesting to see if a citing ensues.

[joooooe]

Third choice scrum-half was always the most likely position that would come and bite us in the ass – I have to say that I think it was a very difficult issue to remedy in practical terms for Guy/Leo/Stuart once McCarthy announced he was going to Munster. Thankfully we have addressed that for next season.

The reality is that Ireland doesn't produce more than one top class scrum half every 20 years. So instead of reactive calls to sign every fat arsed afrikaaner jacamo customer, if we have the money and the permission to do so, we should bite the bullet, admit the truth and target a world class scrum half.

I think this is where I stand on this too. I love the Irish provincial model that ensures a sense of belonging and connection. At least at Leinster, anyway. However, after 25 years of trying, we may need to accept that we've only ever had a very good 9 when we signed him from outside. I think the "BeastOfASecondRow" debate is (a) moot (as we won't get one anyway with the number of NIQ second rows already in the country; and (b) distracting from the real areas of concern (if Fardy, Toner and Ryan were all out we would still put out a half decent pair of locks. If our top 3 scrum halves were out I might bring my boots.).

[Dexter]

We made handling errors and had poor ruck work because they were big? Nah, don't agree with that.

I think I'll leave it there as this isn't going anywhere!

We also relied too much on getting to deck, which exposed us to poaching turnovers. They had 16 offloads to our 3, including 9 from their backs [source: https://www.epcrugby.com/report/la-roch ... statistics ]. The likes of Kerr-Barlow, West, Dulin and Leyds aren't massive men winning collisions and offloading on the front foot, they're just more comfortable with it.

It's been evident since the return to rugby that it is way more difficult to retain possession through multi-phase rucks under the current interpretations, so it's something that we really should work on being better at and more comfortable with.

We've got to be able to maul better, we need to vary our offensive kicking and not be too worried about 'kicking the ball away', and we need to offload more in attacking situations. They'd be three improvements I'd like to see for next season.

The disappointing thing for me is that I thought Leinster had identified this during the season and worked on it. Multi phase rucks are being reffed out of the game, players can go onto their hands and then poach without being penalised, a lot of the time.
Whatever about our disappointment, I really feel for the players. I read Lukes comments after the game. We can just get on with things this week, but don't they have to quarantine for 5 days??
Hopefully we're all being overly pessimistic about the future. Looking forward to next season, onwards and upwards!

[Flash Gordon]

Third choice scrum-half was always the most likely position that would come and bite us in the ass – I have to say that I think it was a very difficult issue to remedy in practical terms for Guy/Leo/Stuart once McCarthy announced he was going to Munster. Thankfully we have addressed that for next season.

The reality is that Ireland doesn't produce more than one top class scrum half every 20 years. So instead of reactive calls to sign every fat arsed afrikaaner jacamo customer, if we have the money and the permission to do so, we should bite the bullet, admit the truth and target a world class scrum half.

There are 2 pretty good ones at Connacht. There's also a very good 2m+ lock from Dublin.....

[the spoofer]

I'm not really sure why we box kick so much on Larmour's wing. He is quite poor in the air.

[backrower8]

We made handling errors and had poor ruck work because they were big? Nah, don't agree with that.

I think I'll leave it there as this isn't going anywhere!

We also relied too much on getting to deck, which exposed us to poaching turnovers. They had 16 offloads to our 3, including 9 from their backs [source: https://www.epcrugby.com/report/la-roch ... statistics ]. The likes of Kerr-Barlow, West, Dulin and Leyds aren't massive men winning collisions and offloading on the front foot, they're just more comfortable with it.

It's been evident since the return to rugby that it is way more difficult to retain possession through multi-phase rucks under the current interpretations, so it's something that we really should work on being better at and more comfortable with.

We've got to be able to maul better, we need to vary our offensive kicking and not be too worried about 'kicking the ball away', and we need to offload more in attacking situations. They'd be three improvements I'd like to see for next season.

Bravo Hugonaut. Consistently the best analysis available here over the years. These points are the technical issues allied to the power factor.

Had we one Brian Rigney in the row yesterday it would have been different, but we are 30 years too late for that. He and Damien Browne are the only Irish-born second rows I have seen with the physique to match the Polynesian and Afrikaans ballast. Moss Keane just about too. Back in the 70s/80s, after Willie-John retired we spent most of Moss Keane's career trying to find a second row partner to partner him - Harry Steele, Brendan Foley, Donal Spring, none were big enough until Donal Lenihan arrived and eventually filled-out in time for Moss to retire soon after himself!

Rigney stands alone at international level for sheer bulk and hard carrying and scrummaging.

In addition to the need for more brute power and adaptation of our style, the other factors for me are on-field leadership and team cohesion.

LEADERSHIP: Luke, Garry and JR are all too 'nice'. Too nice to their own team mates and the referee. The ref was not the reason why we lost but we made it too easy for him. We needed to be putting diplomatic pressure on him to try and reduce the flow of penalties. We gave away just 3 in the first 30 and 14 in the next 50...much of that comes from pressure, but the Lowe Yellow Card looked totally OTT. Former international referee Owen Doyle has called out that decision in today's Irish Times.

Rhys is soft spoken but leads from the front by his actions and, at 30 yrs old from his own gene-pool, is both a smart and street-wise leader for these battles.

COHESION: In this gladiatorial, band-of-brothers sport, there is a huge benefit to playing together week-in and week-out with largely the same cohort. As individual players and as a team you build up momentum and intuition and loyalty and, if you are winning more than you lose, confidence together.

The Leinster/Irish model means that our international players get minded across the season but, because we have so many with Ireland (17+), we are running two teams and the reintegration process of parachuting players in and out + breaks in the calendar + unprecedented injury issues (back row, out half, centre) means that we are lacking the cohesion needed to go to the trenches and change tactics mid-stream against top teams when we need to.

These issues of leadership and cohesion are lesser than the power + style of play points made by Hugonaut and others, but the cohesion piece is massive in rugby. Always was and always will be when it comes to the biggest battles. Leinster teams are mainly cut and paste jobs. The only cohesion comes when the internationals are away, and then it is with our seconds team which, of course, is good enough at Pro 14 level.

[Ruckedtobits]

Two intelligent strands of commentary from @hugonaut and @backrower8.

A further outlook might be that Leinster now have a file opened on LAR and over the weeks and months ahead, that will be pored over, analysed and scrutinised to objectively determine what actually happened to us, by clarifying aspects such as:

1. How much below par did we play because of unforced errors?
2. How much below par did we play because they focused on our unrecognised weaknesses?
3. What weaknesses have they got that we didn't recognise?
4. How well did we optimise our perceived advantages and if not, why not?
5. Have we got the players /units capable of taking advantage of their identified weaknesses?
6. Could we beat LAR with our current or anticipated Squad strength 7 of 10 times?
7. Are there any positions in our Squad which are so limited that LAR would beat us 8/10?
8. Where's the list of replacement candidates if Yes is the answer to question 7.

Apart from the Sarries games in recent years, I remember hearing of tough objective reviews of Toulouse s/f in 2010 and others which led to altered focus by rugby management. There was certainly one post 2006 s/f against our southern cousins.

LAR have now been added to a list of teams on which we have an open file, which includes Toulouse, Clermont, Toulon, Sarries & Exeter - all teams that are respected and from whom we can always learn. Part of that learning may be copying particular elements of what they do (the highest tribute). Part of it may be learning to counteract what they do (the most satisfying).

The first part however is being very objective and brutal in the analysis of what happened and why.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Darce was on Second Captains and spoke about how power was the big issue issue on Sunday and the knock on effects from it.

Shaggy also mentioned how some of our forwards will have lost out on a Lions place because Gatland will have watched them get dominated.

[neiliog93]

Darce was on Second Captains and spoke about how power was the big issue issue on Sunday and the knock on effects from it.

Shaggy also mentioned how some of our forwards will have lost out on a Lions place because Gatland will have watched them get dominated.

O'Driscoll and Jackman have said the same.