Fever in the Aviva II – this time, it’s provincial

First topic message reminder :

Leinster v Munster on Friday night. Should be a cracker, all internationals will be back with both teams and we’ll both be going hammer and tongs at it to get up to speed for the HC the following week.

Let the banter begin.

Turnips….

Thread update. Teams announced:

Leinster also name team

15: Rob Kearney
14: Isa Nacewa
13: Fergus McFadden
12: Gordon D'Arcy
11: Luke Fitzgerald
10: Jonathan Sexton
9: Isaac Boss

1: Cian Healy
2: Richardt Strauss
3: Mike Ross
4: Leo Cullen CAPTAIN
5: Devin Toner
6: Sean O'Brien
7: Shane Jennings
8: Jamie Heaslip

REPLACEMENTS:

16: Sean Cronin
17: Heinke van der Merwe
18: Jamie Hagan
19: Kevin McLaughlin
20: Rhys Ruddock
21: Eoin Reddan
22: Ian Madigan
23: Eoin O'Malley


Munster:

Wian du Preez, Damien Varley, BJ Botha

Donnacha O'Callaghan, Paul O'Connell

Donnacha Ryan, Denis Leamy, Niall Ronan

Conor Murray, Ronan O'Gara

Lifeimi Mafi, Will Chambers

Keith Earls, Johne Murphy, Doug Howlett

Bench: Denis Fogarty, Marcus Horan, John Hayes, Peter O'Mahony, James Coughlan, Tomas O'Leary, Ian Keatley, Danny Barnes

Sin é wrote:I think the ref was responsible, not Munster.

I think they were both at fault. Munster, and to a lesser extent Leinster conceded a lot of infringements at the breakdown, a lot of them cynical.

However the referee spoiled the game by not showing yellow cards earlier in the game and also by not allowing the attacking team longer to play the advantage.

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:I think the ref was responsible, not Munster.

I think they were both at fault. Munster, and to a lesser extent Leinster conceded a lot of infringements at the breakdown, a lot of them cynical.

However the referee spoiled the game by not showing yellow cards earlier in the game and also by not allowing the attacking team longer to play the advantage.

+1. Am getting a bit fed up with Magners/Rabo Pro12 being used as a training ground for refs.
Have been to too many games with refs being overly fussy, showing no feel/empathy for the game and being slightly 'home-town' to boot.
Pay too much money for my season-ticket to tolerate this. Highly frustrating.

As an aside, is Sexton still a 'bottler', or will that tag only reappear next time he misses a couple of kicks??

Sin é wrote:

I think the ref was responsible, not Munster. He blew Munster for stuff that he was letting Leinster get away with. Thats why I think Joe was wrong to claim that it was Munster who ruined the game as a spectacle.

I thought Munster did well, considering we were down 3 of our best attacking players (Earls, Wally & Jones). Our scrum was good. Leinster should consider themselves to be lucky to get the penalties. Bear in mind its a while since Leinster have scored a try against Munster.

Now now no need to be a bad loser the ref should have given Munster a yellow much earlier thats why the game wasn't great to watch

It's sad that your clinging to the fact that we haven't scored a try against you in 2 and a half games? At least when Leinster were holding Munster tryless we were winning too.

ah you cannot completely resolve munster from blame. some of the offences were daft. the one that got me was leamy on the charge off a decent scrum. makes a good 5/10 yards. then ronan absolutely mills into the ruck from the side. penalty in front of the posts 3 points. would have been tearing my hair out.

the ref should simply have gone to his pocket earlier and we may have seen some rugby. Leinster certainly were cynical with 14 men. We are handy enough at the dark arts too.

I do think we deserved to win the game and were never in danger of losing. You kept us try less due to offending any time we got in the danger zone hence 8 very kickable penalties all being slotted

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:I think the ref was responsible, not Munster.

I think they were both at fault. Munster, and to a lesser extent Leinster conceded a lot of infringements at the breakdown, a lot of them cynical.

However the referee spoiled the game by not showing yellow cards earlier in the game and also by not allowing the attacking team longer to play the advantage.

For the record, Leinster conceeded 17 penalties. Munster conceeded 13.

Leinster players penalised :
Jennings 3. O'Brien, Toner, Cullen - all 2.
Nacewa, McFadden, D'Arcy, Strauss, Heaslip, McLaughlin = all 1 penalty.

Munster:
Botha 2, POC 2, Ryan 2.
Howlett, Chambers, O'Gara, Ronan, Leamy, varley, Barnes = 1 penalty.

HURLEY_BURLEY wrote:Am getting a bit fed up with Magners/Rabo Pro12 being used as a training ground for refs.

Its a training ground for players and teams. Why shouldnt it be one for refs.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Now now no need to be a bad loser the ref should have given Munster a yellow much earlier thats why the game wasn't great to watch

It's sad that your clinging to the fact that we haven't scored a try against you in 2 and a half games? At least when Leinster were holding Munster tryless we were winning too.

Apologies for being pleased that Munster is probably the only team in Europe to keep Leinster tryless in a while. And I seem to recall, Munster won their last two encounters with Leinster (scoring 3 tries the last time).

No need to apologise whatever helps you sleep better.

Yes Munster won the 2 games before this one and Leinster won the 5 before that,whats your point?

It is true that the Ref should have gone for the yellow earlier. But on the other hand he should have yellow carded another Leinster player in the last 10 mins for persistent fouling after Heaslip had gone.

ASLS - have you ever noticed when you go abroad you're that bit more "Irish". I certainly do. The accent gets ramped up and I'll wax lyrical about Taytos to anyone who'll listen.

Its somewhat the same for Sin É. Living in Dublin he no doubt feels the need to prove himself as a Munster fan with this constant Leinster bashing. No doubt being from Tipperary as oppsed to either Cork or Limerick has increased this and the end product is evident on this thread

Yeah I'll agree with that,it probably should have been a penalty try and a yellow but refs are reluctant to give 2 yellows in such a short space of time.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:No need to apologise whatever helps you sleep better.

Yes Munster won the 2 games before this one and Leinster won the 5 before that,whats your point?

My point is that losing at home to Leinster in the Magners isn't a big deal. It would be a different story though if it was in Thomond Park. Losing to Leinster in Musgrave didn't even bother me which Munster did, just before Munster won the Heineken Cup in '08.

I can understand though why Leinster would be relieved not to lose to Munster at home in front of 45K of their own fans.

What a silly comment RS. Can we say the same about the fact that you are a ref make most of your opinions bland and pointless because you are "trying" to act like a good ref should.

Sin É backs up a lot of what he says with good arguement. The fact that he has a bias to Munster is irrelevent he is a fan FFS. Maybe you are getting the Stockholm syndrome in terms of starting to agree with the enemy.

As you commented once recently..grow a pair and support your team.

Im only taking part in the banter DOD as you always advise me to

I'd hoped the smiley face would show that.

red_stag wrote:ASLS - have you ever noticed when you go abroad you're that bit more "Irish". I certainly do. The accent gets ramped up and I'll wax lyrical about Taytos to anyone who'll listen.

Its somewhat the same for Sin É. Living in Dublin he no doubt feels the need to prove himself as a Munster fan with this constant Leinster bashing. No doubt being from Tipperary as oppsed to either Cork or Limerick has increased this and the end product is evident on this thread

Lol yeah,my cousin who's from London has a video of her 21st.I was pished and was chatting to the camera man at the end of the night not realising he was recording.My accent went from standard Meath man to complete bogger it was weird.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:My accent went from standard Meath man to complete bogger it was weird.

I didn't know there was a differnce.

DOD regarding the ref, theres no ref union where we stick up for him. I thought this fella was rubbish.

I wasn’t a bit relieved after the match, I was a bit disappointed. But I never thought we’d lose.

DOD wrote:
Sin É backs up a lot of what he says with good arguement.

Lol no he doesn't,he hand picks stats that back him up while dismissing those that don't.He never changes his mind he only changes the argument.
There used to be a Leinster fan who was just as bad as him except he stooped to abuse when an argument got heated.For all the things I dislike about his posting style Sin é rarely if ever gets personal.

red_stag wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:My accent went from standard Meath man to complete bogger it was weird.

I didn't know there was a differnce.

It's like the going form Meath to Cavan,you're only on the edge of the bog in Meath.When your in Cavan you're in the heart of it.

Sine buddy Im only taking the pish!!

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

red_stag wrote:ASLS - have you ever noticed when you go abroad you're that bit more "Irish". I certainly do. The accent gets ramped up and I'll wax lyrical about Taytos to anyone who'll listen.

Its somewhat the same for Sin É. Living in Dublin he no doubt feels the need to prove himself as a Munster fan with this constant Leinster bashing. No doubt being from Tipperary as oppsed to either Cork or Limerick has increased this and the end product is evident on this thread

Lol yeah,my cousin who's from London has a video of her 21st.I was pished and was chatting to the camera man at the end of the night not realising he was recording.My accent went from standard Meath man to complete bogger it was weird.

Having gone to a posh boarding school I never acquired a bogger accent to be able to resort to it when I'm abroad. I like how I can go in under the radar in South Dublin!

And you accuse me of Stockholm Syndrome.

Is Rockwell that posh?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

DOD wrote:
Sin É backs up a lot of what he says with good arguement.

Lol no he doesn't,he hand picks stats that back him up while dismissing those that don't.He never changes his mind he only changes the argument.
There used to be a Leinster fan who was just as bad as him except he stooped to abuse when an argument got heated.For all the things I dislike about his posting style Sin é rarely if ever gets personal.

Why don't you pick a few stats to back up what you're saying, and maybe you might get me to change my mind?

You have lost the arguement if you have to get personal or abusive. The reason why I don't resort to being abusive or get personal is that I can back up my arguments.

People who can't back up their arguement don't like that.

I agree with whatever Sin says.......

red_stag wrote:And you accuse me of Stockholm Syndrome.

Is Rockwell that posh?

I don't know. I remember debating against them once - seems like a nice school. I suppose its as posh as Blackrock since its the same order that run it.


EDIT: And I didn't accuse you of anything.

You were on the debate team Sin?

What sites did you use for your stats?

Mickado wrote:You were on the debate team Sin?

What sites did you use for your stats?

You normally wouldn't get the opposition team making wild claims that you'd have to refute with stats
They'd usually present a decent argument.

Sin é wrote:

Mickado wrote:You were on the debate team Sin?

What sites did you use for your stats?

You normally wouldn't get the opposition team making wild claims that you'd have to refute with stats
They'd usually present a decent argument.

you're on fire today sin!

Mickado wrote:You were on the debate team Sin?

What sites did you use for your stats?

topofhishead.com

talkingouthisjacksie.org

and his personal favourite

totalboll0ck.co.nz

Sin é wrote:

Why don't you pick a few stats to back up what you're saying, and maybe you might get me to change my mind?

You have lost the arguement if you have to get personal or abusive. The reason why I don't resort to being abusive or get personal is that I can back up my arguments.

People who can't back up their arguement don't like that.

I don't use endless stats because too often they misrepresent what actually happened in a game,also they are often different depending on which sites you use.

As an example of this http://www.rbs6nations.com/en/matchcentre/7991.php?section=stats&fixid=140061
compared to this http://www.espnscrum.com/sixnations2011/rugby/match/114130.html

Just glancing at it there are significant differences in the stats for tackles made and passes made,I'm sure if I went through it properly I could find loads more.

Yeah I agree you are very good at not allowing your emotions get the better of you,it's one reason why people continue debating with you instead of dismissing you as a WUM the way a lot of other posters are. eg. GreyGhost when he was still here.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Why don't you pick a few stats to back up what you're saying, and maybe you might get me to change my mind?

You have lost the arguement if you have to get personal or abusive. The reason why I don't resort to being abusive or get personal is that I can back up my arguments.

People who can't back up their arguement don't like that.

I don't use endless stats because too often they misrepresent what actually happened in a game,also they are often different depending on which sites you use.

As an example of this http://www.rbs6nations.com/en/matchcentre/7991.php?section=stats&fixid=140061
compared to this http://www.espnscrum.com/sixnations2011/rugby/match/114130.html

Just glancing at it there are significant differences in the stats for tackles made and passes made,I'm sure if I went through it properly I could find loads more.

Yeah I agree you are very good at not allowing your emotions get the better of you,it's one reason why people continue debating with you instead of dismissing you as a WUM the way a lot of other posters are. eg. GreyGhost when he was still here.

I produced one stat in this thread to refute the comment that Munster spent their whole time infringing. Counting the number of penalties is factual, and not subject to interpretation as for instance, who was responsible for conceeding the penalty, or who made the tackle if two players are tackling together.

Are you suggesting that I am a WUM?

D24tress wrote:

Mickado wrote:You were on the debate team Sin?

What sites did you use for your stats?

topofhishead.com

talkingouthisjacksie.org

and his personal favourite

totalboll0ck.co.nz

As opposed to the Leinster favourite....
heinogoggles.ie - see Johnny Sexton turn from a good flyhalf to a great one. 1000 Ross O Carrol Kelleys cant be wrong...

I'm talking in general about your use of stats.

No,I'm not saying your a WUM.Apologies if it came across that way,I think some posters who sink to insults can be labelled WUMs when they are really trying to debate but then get sucked into arguments and lose the head.

You have to admit you are a poster who inspires vigorous debate but the fact you keep your head means you aren't as easily dismissed and people have to try to address your points.It's a compliment I promise.

Sin é wrote:
I produced one stat in this thread to refute the comment that Munster spent their whole time infringing. Counting the number of penalties is factual, and not subject to interpretation as for instance, who was responsible for conceeding the penalty, or who made the tackle if two players are tackling together.

If it was my comment I was suggesting that there were alot of cynical penalties, not exclusively by Munster. The number of penalties by each side is factual but whether they were cynical or not is subjective to an extent. The penalty count that you produced also doesn't indicate where on the field and what facet of the game the penalties occured.

Although the stats you produced were relevant and interesting they don't on their own conclusively refute the suggestion that Munster committed a lot of cynical penalties in their own half which contributed to a poor spectical.

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:
I produced one stat in this thread to refute the comment that Munster spent their whole time infringing. Counting the number of penalties is factual, and not subject to interpretation as for instance, who was responsible for conceeding the penalty, or who made the tackle if two players are tackling together.

If it was my comment I was suggesting that there were alot of cynical penalties, not exclusively by Munster. The number of penalties by each side is factual but whether they were cynical or not is subjective to an extent. The penalty count that you produced also doesn't indicate where on the field and what facet of the game the penalties occured.

Although the stats you produced were relevant and interesting they don't on their own conclusively refute the suggestion that Munster committed a lot of cynical penalties in their own half which contributed to a poor spectical.

All that is being refuted are allegations Rodders. So for example while the stats done conclusively refute the suggestion that Munster commited a lot of cynical penalties there is nothing to suggest that Munster did. The comments are being made by Leinster supporters but the stats appear to prove otherwise. It could be argued that because of the cynical fouling by Leinster in the last 10 mins Munster would have scored two tries and won the game.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:I'm talking in general about your use of stats.

No,I'm not saying your a WUM.Apologies if it came across that way,I think some posters who sink to insults can be labelled WUMs when they are really trying to debate but then get sucked into arguments and lose the head.

You have to admit you are a poster who inspires vigorous debate but the fact you keep your head means you aren't as easily dismissed and people have to try to address your points.It's a compliment I promise.

Good. Delighted to hear that you regard my contributions as positive.

i think we should bring harvard referencing into this forum, for every stat shown can we get a link.

DOD wrote:

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:
I produced one stat in this thread to refute the comment that Munster spent their whole time infringing. Counting the number of penalties is factual, and not subject to interpretation as for instance, who was responsible for conceeding the penalty, or who made the tackle if two players are tackling together.

If it was my comment I was suggesting that there were alot of cynical penalties, not exclusively by Munster. The number of penalties by each side is factual but whether they were cynical or not is subjective to an extent. The penalty count that you produced also doesn't indicate where on the field and what facet of the game the penalties occured.

Although the stats you produced were relevant and interesting they don't on their own conclusively refute the suggestion that Munster committed a lot of cynical penalties in their own half which contributed to a poor spectical.

All that is being refuted are allegations Rodders. So for example while the stats done conclusively refute the suggestion that Munster commited a lot of cynical penalties there is nothing to suggest that Munster did. The comments are being made by Leinster supporters but the stats appear to prove otherwise. It could be argued that because of the cynical fouling by Leinster in the last 10 mins Munster would have scored two tries and won the game.

Argue that if you want,we'll argue that if Munster hadn't given away cynical penalties in the 1st 60 minutes we'd have scored a couple of tries and won the game even more comfortably than we did.

Sin é wrote:
Good. Delighted to hear that you regard my contributions as positive.

I do enjoy the debates although they can be a big commitment as you don't really give up,I know that text can be hard to get proper tone across so I hope most of my comments are taken in the spirit they're intended.

Yes it could DOD. My recollection was that there was a fair bit of cynical play and indiscipline by both sides and that combined with a whistle happy referee led t a poor specticle.

Leinster did look more threatening with the ball so it did appear that Munster were doing more infringing at the breakdown and straying offside in their own half. The fact that Leinster had more kicks on goal would suggest that.

It is a fact though that Leinster conceded more overall but they must have been out of kicking range or Munster would have won. Munster did appear to have the upper hand in the set peice so I'd imagine a few penalties were conceded there.

Stats appear to show otherwise. The only clear cut chance was butchered by Ross and good Munster defence. If you hadnt got the penalties you might not have got the tries...etc etc.

DOD wrote:Stats appear to show otherwise. The only clear cut chance was butchered by Ross and good Munster defence. If you hadnt got the penalties you might not have got the tries...etc etc.

In fairness the game was pretty much decided after 60 minutes,Leinster conceded 6 of our penalties after that so we were only cynical in trying to deny Munster the bonus point.

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:
I produced one stat in this thread to refute the comment that Munster spent their whole time infringing. Counting the number of penalties is factual, and not subject to interpretation as for instance, who was responsible for conceeding the penalty, or who made the tackle if two players are tackling together.

If it was my comment I was suggesting that there were alot of cynical penalties, not exclusively by Munster. The number of penalties by each side is factual but whether they were cynical or not is subjective to an extent. The penalty count that you produced also doesn't indicate where on the field and what facet of the game the penalties occured.

Although the stats you produced were relevant and interesting they don't on their own conclusively refute the suggestion that Munster committed a lot of cynical penalties in their own half which contributed to a poor spectical.

I didn't really mean to pick on your point - the thread had got to the stage where it was claimed that Munster was solely responsible for the game being stop and start. Of course, these posters were only repeating what Joe Schmidt & Sexton claimed in their post-match interviews.

I think the Munster players were genuinely puzzled as to what was allowed and what wasn't on. The reffing was very inconsistent. Its interesting to see that generally most of them only gave away one penalty each, so when they were penalised, they stopped doing what they were doing.

Leinster were very cynical at the end and if it was earlier in the game, O'Brien could have been carded for repeatedly failing to bind in the scrum, not to mention for his overzealousness (Murray, Ryan). Leo Cullen should have walked as well for taking POC out in the air and persistent offences in the lineout at the end.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

DOD wrote:Stats appear to show otherwise. The only clear cut chance was butchered by Ross and good Munster defence. If you hadnt got the penalties you might not have got the tries...etc etc.

In fairness the game was pretty much decided after 60 minutes,Leinster conceded 6 of our penalties after that so we were only cynical in trying to deny Munster the bonus point.

Really...there were over 10 mins left when Heaslip went. Then as was pointed out there were repeated infringements in the next five mins when a try was imminent. If they had scored then there was only one winner.

However your assertion that "we were only cynical in trying to deny Munster the bonus point" is rather funny...(but you probably wouldnt get it).

the only stat i care about is the final score, not sure what the munster fans are trying to argue, maybe its that they think they are as good as us.

maybe they are starting to feel there decline and want to think they are as good as us, they bring up these bogus stats, which they feel mask there decline.

leinster looked comfortable the whole way, is there a stat for that

D24tress wrote:the only stat i care about is the final score, not sure what the munster fans are trying to argue, maybe its that they think they are as good as us.

maybe they are starting to feel there decline and want to think they are as good as us, they bring up these bogus stats, which they feel mask there decline.

leinster looked comfortable the whole way, is there a stat for that

Oh dear this is even funnier. The original argument made was that Munster were stopping leinster from playing...once thats refuted its down to the "not sure what Munster fans are trying to argue" when they werent saying anything...hilarious..

What repeated infringements when a try was imminent,there was one where a maul was pulled down and Heaslip got a yellow,then one where you got the penalty try.Every other penalty was from well out of try scoring range.

You say if Munster had scored then there was only one winner,I agree but it was still Leinster.

roddersm wrote:Yes it could DOD. My recollection was that there was a fair bit of cynical play and indiscipline by both sides and that combined with a whistle happy referee led t a poor specticle.

Leinster did look more threatening with the ball so it did appear that Munster were doing more infringing at the breakdown and straying offside in their own half. The fact that Leinster had more kicks on goal would suggest that.

It is a fact though that Leinster conceded more overall but they must have been out of kicking range or Munster would have won. Munster did appear to have the upper hand in the set peice so I'd imagine a few penalties were conceded there.

Indeed - three penalties against Jennings!

Leinster players penalised :
Jennings 3. O'Brien, Toner, Cullen - all 2.
Nacewa, McFadden, D'Arcy, Strauss, Heaslip, McLaughlin = all 1 penalty.

None of the Leinster props got penalised, unlike Botha gave away 2 penalties.

In the 2nd half, Munster turned down a few kicking chances and went for the lineout.

Sin é wrote:

roddersm wrote:Yes it could DOD. My recollection was that there was a fair bit of cynical play and indiscipline by both sides and that combined with a whistle happy referee led t a poor specticle.

Leinster did look more threatening with the ball so it did appear that Munster were doing more infringing at the breakdown and straying offside in their own half. The fact that Leinster had more kicks on goal would suggest that.

It is a fact though that Leinster conceded more overall but they must have been out of kicking range or Munster would have won. Munster did appear to have the upper hand in the set peice so I'd imagine a few penalties were conceded there.

Indeed - three penalties against Jennings!

Leinster players penalised :
Jennings 3. O'Brien, Toner, Cullen - all 2.
Nacewa, McFadden, D'Arcy, Strauss, Heaslip, McLaughlin = all 1 penalty.

None of the Leinster props got penalised, unlike Botha gave away 2 penalties.

In the 2nd half, Munster turned down a few kicking chances and went for the lineout.

without a verified source this is the ramblings of a madman.

surely you private school boys know about sources