Leinster Games in South Africa

[Oldschool]

Nobody likes to see their team lose, never mind getting stuffed.
However a huge factor in the result is that playing two matches one week after another at altitude is pretty much a no no for the visiting team.
Circumstances meant that we had very little room to rotate.
For the first time this season Leinster hit a wall. There was nothing left in the tank.
Beating the Lions was probably a better result than we realised but a similar performance wasn't really going to happen a second time given the circumstances.

[riocard911]

Nobody likes to see their team lose, never mind getting stuffed.
However a huge factor in the result is that playing two matches one week after another at altitude is pretty much a no no for the visiting team.
Circumstances meant that we had very little room to rotate.
For the first time this season Leinster hit a wall. There was nothing left in the tank.
Beating the Lions was probably a better result than we realised but a similar performance wasn't really going to happen a second time given the circumstances.

Don't quite understand the above. I would have thought the second match, after having been at altitude longer and acclimatising, was the easier fixture. But then, perhaps I don't know enough about this particular matter. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning, Oldschool.

[naraic]

My understanding that playing at altitude would tire you out more than a normal game. Also recovery at altitude would take longer than normal.

There would have been limited midweek training.

So the team is still tired after the first match. Going into the second match without fully recovering and pulled apart.

[ronk]

Don't quite understand the above. I would have thought the second match, after having been at altitude longer and acclimatising, was the easier fixture. But then, perhaps I don't know enough about this particular matter. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning, Oldschool.

There are 2 schools of thought with altitude: go in and out fast or aclimatise.

Sometimes the 2nd week is harder. Leinster had a considerably less experienced team out for the 2nd fixture, dealing with a considerably better team that were better prepared for what they were going to face.

Also, there are moments in matches where things might go one way or another. We see it all the time with Leinster, some days we grind out wins, some days we blow out teams, some days we struggle for a while and then make it safe. A lot of teams start taking risks when they fall far enough behind, not because it's the only way to win, because they either aren't patient or they don't really care.

But the big comebacks (especially for Leinster) come rarely from Hail Mary risks. If we play the game we're good at we stop making mistakes and have a chance of reeling them in, if we force it we lose effectiveness.

[Oldschool]

My understanding that playing at altitude would tire you out more than a normal game. Also recovery at altitude would take longer than normal.

There would have been limited midweek training.

So the team is still tired after the first match. Going into the second match without fully recovering and pulled apart.

You've pretty much explained it there.
For the second game we started out already tired and it was downhill thereafter.
If you remember back to Ireland's tour to SA when EOS was in charge. We played our first test at altitude and did ok for the first hour.
The boks emptied their bench about 50 minutes in whereas EOS (as was his wont) barely used his bench.
The following weekend, at sea level, we got hosed because we'd emptied the tank the previous weekend.
It was NZ, I think, who came up with the strategy of dropping the acclimatisation approach.
In an ideal world you'd like to play all your games at sea level but if that's not possible then the last game/games should be played at altitude.
Perhaps the NH URC teams should be asking for match scheduling that gives them one game at altitude and one at sea level each season.

[riocard911]

My understanding that playing at altitude would tire you out more than a normal game. Also recovery at altitude would take longer than normal.

There would have been limited midweek training.

So the team is still tired after the first match. Going into the second match without fully recovering and pulled apart.

You've pretty much explained it there.
For the second game we started out already tired and it was downhill thereafter.
If you remember back to Ireland's tour to SA when EOS was in charge. We played our first test at altitude and did ok for the first hour.
The boks emptied their bench about 50 minutes in whereas EOS (as was his wont) barely used his bench.
The following weekend, at sea level, we got hosed because we'd emptied the tank the previous weekend.
It was NZ, I think, who came up with the strategy of dropping the acclimatisation approach.
In an ideal world you'd like to play all your games at sea level but if that's not possible then the last game/games should be played at altitude.
Perhaps the NH URC teams should be asking for match scheduling that gives them one game at altitude and one at sea level each season.

Thanks for the explanation. I obviously had gotten it the wrong way around, thinking the first match would be the tougher of the two. Sounds like one game at altitude and one at sea-level would be the way to go for visiting URC teams in the future, alright.

[Blueberry]

5 match points from those two fixtures was excellent considering what we had on the pitch.

Guys were clearly struggling after about 20 mins v the Bulls and having no Ruddock and Jenkins made a big difference. Physically we were on the backfoot anyway and then clearly tired.

Bulls also nailed it and played a fairly error free and quality game of rugby.

Ignore all the noise and this game will forgotten about very shortly..........

As for the saffers on Twitface, eh whatever..........lets see who has names on cups at season end. You can sing on about your demolition of the Leinster Acedemy and Leo the Lion in a dead rubber all yah want

[Blue Man]

We were bullied by a side that was physically vastly superior. No shame there given the fact that we sent a bunch of kids. If you look at who wasn’t available yesterday, we sent out a third string side.
In the Lions match, the guys who could mix it in the physical stakes were Milne, Vakh, JJ and Rhys, all missing from yesterday. The second row pairing we put out yesterday was simply too lightweight- probably giving around 30KG to the opposition engine room.
Clarkson has looked uncomfortable at scrum time in every match he has played this year, although it’s hard to gauge set piece performance from yesterday as it appeared to be multiple systems failure.
Nick McCarthy had a rough ride behind a retreating pack but isn’t up to it at the top level.
Players will learn from yesterday. The backrow was committed to the end (Culhane looks a real prospect), I really like the look of Brownlee, T O’Brien looked primed for the business end of the season and there’s lots of football in Prendergast and Cosgrave.
If congrats are due to the debutants, playing for Leinster is a significant career achievement.
Hopefully we’ll learn from yesterday, get back to training and grow as players (metaphorically and literally!). There are lots for players from yesterday with big careers ahead

[ronk]

Watching it back I feel more positive about how we played. They were better than us obviously but a huge amount of scoreboard damage happened in a short space of time. We held them scoreless for the last 20.

Defensive maul repelled some tough positions. I think they kept going till the end and I think yesterday I was off. Even their last try wasn't off a huge risk by us, it was just a handling error that we got punished for.

We were absolutely cobbled together, especially the pack at the end. We had 2 players who haven't even come into the academy. Clarkson (having come back on) and Deegan were the senior players in the pack.

Maybe we could have been smarter about it but we were pinged off the park with borderline at best calls. And we didn't get stroppy with the ref, which is impressive discipline.

[Dexter]

My understanding that playing at altitude would tire you out more than a normal game. Also recovery at altitude would take longer than normal.

There would have been limited midweek training.

So the team is still tired after the first match. Going into the second match without fully recovering and pulled apart.

That's interesting, I wondered about that. Explains a lot.

[Dexter]

Watching it back I feel more positive about how we played. They were better than us obviously but a huge amount of scoreboard damage happened in a short space of time. We held them scoreless for the last 20.

Defensive maul repelled some tough positions. I think they kept going till the end and I think yesterday I was off. Even their last try wasn't off a huge risk by us, it was just a handling error that we got punished for.

We were absolutely cobbled together, especially the pack at the end. We had 2 players who haven't even come into the academy. Clarkson (having come back on) and Deegan were the senior players in the pack.

Maybe we could have been smarter about it but we were pinged off the park with borderline at best calls. And we didn't get stroppy with the ref, which is impressive discipline.

I'd say the home town reffing probably added about 20 points to the winning margin, but yes it was impressive that the lads didn't get stroppy because it must have been really frustrating. I think they're generally pretty good in that regard.

[riocard911]

Plus Ed Byrne and Tom Clarkson had to come back and play to the end, after Michael Milne and Temi Lasisi both picked up injuries and had to be subbed off within minutes of coming on.

[ronk]

Plus Ed Byrne and Tom Clarkson had to come back and play to the end, after Michael Milne and Temi Lasisi both picked up injuries and had to be subbed off within minutes of coming on.

Lasisi stayed on with Clarkson, it was Byrne who went off (twice).

There were no scrums but I had presumed that Lasisi switched to loosehead.

But yeah, at that stage it was duck tape holding the duck tape together.

[the-goon2]

I'm not looking forward to the injury report after this game...

[backrower8]

Congratulations to Nick McCarthy. Your entry for the worst performance by a 9 in the history of Rugby has won the prize.

Nick McCarthy making a bigger mess than a Jack Russell with IBS who just ate f**k tonnes of chocolate

This sort of commentary about one of our own players on a Leinster forum is not right. In any circumstances.

[riocard911]

Congratulations to Nick McCarthy. Your entry for the worst performance by a 9 in the history of Rugby has won the prize.

Nick McCarthy making a bigger mess than a Jack Russell with IBS who just ate f**k tonnes of chocolate

This sort of commentary about one of our own players on a Leinster forum is not right. In any circumstances.

I agree!

[RoboProp]

Nick McCarthy making a bigger mess than a Jack Russell with IBS who just ate f**k tonnes of chocolate

This sort of commentary about one of our own players on a Leinster forum is not right. In any circumstances.

I agree!

Mea Maxima Culpa, in the heat of the moment I oft neglect my filter.

[ronk]

The full squad is as follows:

Forwards:

Jack Boyle
Ed Byrne
Michael Milne
Lee Barron
Tadgh McElroy
Vakhtang Abdaladze
Thomas Clarkson
Temi Lasisi
Brian Deeny
Alex Soroka
Jason Jenkins
Conor O’Tighearnaigh*
Liam Molony*
Rhys Ruddock
Will Connors
James Culhane
Max Deegan


Backs:

Fintan Gunne*
Nick McCarthy
Ben Murphy
Sam Prendergast*
Charlie Tector
Dave Kearney
Aitzol King
Ben Brownlee
Liam Turner
Tommy O’Brien
Rob Russell
Chris Cosgrave
Max O’Reilly
* Denotes uncapped player

4 players not used. All academy players. 2 players in specialist positions where gametime was always going to be hard to come by and 2 back 3 players, which I think reflects more than we had players we wanted to give gametime to for the run in, lack of injuries in that area and maybe they they're that bit further from ready.