Tigers V Ulster

First topic message reminder :

Is it too early in the week to start this thread?

Don't care.

My local rugby calendar is clear for the day and I have two tickets for this beauty! The wife and I will be at Welford Road (she likes a bit of Toby) to cheer on the boys and looking forward to a great day.

Bring on the Irish Invasion!

TIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRSSSSSS!

I would add Diack to the list of potential movers at the end of the season. It just hasn't happened for him since Wannenberg arrived. The season before that he was looking like a potential International. Now he looks unhappy all the time and he probably thinks it doesn't matter how well he plays he isn't going to be first choice. Pity cause I like him as a player.

He's probably unhappy because Wannenburg gets selected no matter how he plays. I'd imagine Faloon is in danger of falling into the same category.

I can't understand how Diack can just go from 1st choice no 8 to 5th or 6th choice backrower?

This is what I mean about squad management, good players just seem to get frozen out and disappear off the radar.

Whitten played really well for a few games but is now back in the Wilderness whereas Danielli has been really poor.

Pienaar is out and Porter still can't get 5 minutes of gametime.

I'd say there'll be a few more guys eyeing up a move to Connacht.

Rodders, I take you point about squad management but you don't change things around for the sake of it. Remember most of these guys have had a fair bit of game time and squad time during the World Cup.
Wannenberg is a big presence but he certainly isn't a flair player. If his off-loading game was better I think we might gain from his style of play but at the minute he stifles things.

Two or three weeks ago I was saying how Porter should be starting ahead of Marshall and look what happened. Marshall has been very good in the two HC games that we are now discussing keeping him there and playing Piennar at 10.

Think how difficult it is for the management. They are the one's who have to put the best 15/23 out each week. It's easy for us armchair coaches to pick holes in it.

Rava wrote:
Think how difficult it is for the management. They are the one's who have to put the best 15/23 out each week. It's easy for us armchair coaches to pick holes in it.

Absolutely Rava but remember they are getting paid to get it right...trying to solve all Ulsters problems via 606v2 is a purely voluntary endevour for me!

roddersm wrote:

Rava wrote:
Think how difficult it is for the management. They are the one's who have to put the best 15/23 out each week. It's easy for us armchair coaches to pick holes in it.

Absolutely Rava but remember they are getting paid to get it right...trying to solve all Ulsters problems via 606v2 is a purely voluntary endevour for me!

10/10 for effort though

Some good points here about Diack and Faloon.. lets be honest, have they had much of a chance this season? Faloon has started one game possibly? Maybe two? Diack not much more. After a good season last year, you think they would get gametime but somehow even McComish seems to have overtaken the two of them. Terrible management in my view.

My view of the backrow is different from my view of the rest of the team because of 2 very important facts.

We have no one coming through our academy who is even close to making the grade in the backrow and sorry to say Diack and McCormish are just not cutting it. Add that to Ferris and his injury problems and we are very short.

To those who say don't sign backrowers are you seriously suggesting we go into a season with Ferris, Henry, Faloon, Diack and McCormish and that it. Sorry you have to be joking....

Backrow is an area of failure for Ulster in terms of player development and as such we will have no choice but to be heavily reliant on NIQ players in the next few years.

It is ok to say get a southern to join us, or Wilson. We have tried that - they wont come.

However for other positions we do have young talent in the squad or in the academy and we do not appear to be very good at rotating players in Pro 12 matches to give them a chance.
I know that Spence and Gilroy have made a breakthrough - I am not confidence this can be attributed to the coaching staff given them a chance and it is far more to do with injuries last year giving the coaching staff no choice.

I am starting to fear whether McAllister, Marshall, Porter, Jackson, Stephenson are going to be given a fair crack of the whip and behind them Macklin, Annett, Gaston, Nelson etc
What will be key is the Pro 12 games after the HC group stages. Developing these players is more important than chasing a top 4 spot I reckon.

Have we tried for one of the Leinster backrowers Geoff? Leinster have an abundance of flankers right now. We should be trying to sign Ruddock or Ryan. Or maybe even grab one of their academy players like Jordi Murphy.

In years gone by we put up with seeing the same first XV because we didn't have the players to bring in.

But now we do, we're complaining because we aren't using them enough.

I glad of the depth we've got now, but all the players need to get meaningful gametime, players shouldn't just be automatically selected.

I've had a go at Mclaughin but really its all the coaching needs a shakeup this summer. A backs coach needs bought in and squad rotation be used a lot more, giving players gametime and keeping them happy, now the Squad is better than in the past it'll be harder to keep them all happy.

Thats more important than new players this summer

geoff998rugby wrote:
To those who say don't sign backrowers are you seriously suggesting we go into a season with Ferris, Henry, Faloon, Diack and McCormish and that it. Sorry you have to be joking....

No of course not. If Wanneburg goes then we need at least one more but beyond that I don't think it is an urgent priority and I'd like to see Faloon and Diack rotated in more. Henry and Wannenburg have played nearly every game.

If there is no one coming through then obviously we will need to address that but right now I don't think buying another backrow will make us more successful.

I think you are spot on with your other points. We need to start trusting players in the Rabo.

roddersm wrote:


I think you are spot on with your other points. We need to start trusting players in the Rabo.

I agree but would every fan sacrifice a top four place for this? I suspect some might but the majority want parity with Munster and Leinster for whom a top four is almost a given.

What's the point in signing anyone who isn't better than the current player?
Surely if Ulster don't renew Danielli's contract, they will comply with the IRFU quota, so why would they get rid of Wannenburg? It's hard to see where they could get as good value for money elsewhere.

I don't see the point in signing Leinster fringe players either? Is Ryan or Ruddock any better than Faloon or Diack? At Academy level I'd also prefer to give Sean O'Connell more of a chance before drafting in someone like Jordi Murphy.

If Ulster are seriously questioning the retention of Pienaar then it shows all their talk of becoming a European rugby force is just hot air. Pienaar is the very last person they should let go, and if that reflects the true quality of current management thinking then Ulster fans better get used to a prolonged series of years trying to get out of their Amlin CC pool, because this regime will take them nowhere else.

If your saying its a choice of 2NIQ backrows, or 1NIQ backrow and Pienaar.

I'd have Pienaar and 1NIQ backrow every time.

While it may be a problem area, I don't think its such a big problem that we have to lose Pienaar to fix.

It'd be cutting of our nose to spite our face.

McCormish came up from down south, I'm sure someone else will come, or look over to England Tommy Hayes, or someone with an Irish Gran. Doesn't matter if he wants to play for Ireland as long as England don't cap him.

Yeah but Rava I think you can have your cake and eat it too to some extent.

If players like D'arcy, Diack, Faloon, Spence, Whitten, McCallister aren't deemed good enough for even rabo games then we are in trouble.

In genuinely believe we can bring these guys in and still win games. If not they shouldn't be on contracts.

Some present more of a risk than others, like Porter and Jackson but you can't hope to build depth and improve if you stick to the same 18 or so players all season.

A lot of these guys are already proven at that level but need game time to imrove.

Rory we have tried for both Ruddock and McLaughlin - both said no.

I just can't agree that we can afford to go into a season with less than 7 back row players if 4 of them are Ferris, McCormish, Faloon and Diack - I just don't that is viable.

As I said a injury-to say Henry during the 6N and we are screwed.

What would that give us - Wannenburg, Diack, Faloon sub: McCormish
and absolutely no cover wharsoever. That is a weak backrow and the cover is virtually non existant.

Surprised Ruddock said no. Ryan is another player we should maybe try for then. And to answer a question from above, both Ruddock and Ryan are both touted as young, possible future Irish backrowers. They are probably considered above both Faloon and Diack (though they aren't getting much of a chance).

sorry posted wrong place

So given Ulster's less than impressive record at developing players, why would other provincial players want to come? Why would young Leinster backrowers move anyway when at least two of the regular starters will be often missing through International duty? McLaughlin, Ryan and Ruddock have far more opportunity at Leinster than at any other province.

Ulster have 7 backrowers - Tuohy is a viable option at blindside and should be played there more often. It's the sort of thing that would happen to develop him into a better player and enhance his International prospects in a team where the coaches know how to bring players on. It would also give Stevenson more gametime and McComb more development opportunity.

If Ulster wanted Roger Wilson back then that is an indictment of a seriously blinkered mentality.
Chris Henry is already a better player than him, and both Wannenburg and Diack are at least as good. Wilson was disruptive before he left and no doubt is commanding a sizable wage that would never be centrally contracted at Ulster. Why on earth would Ulster bring in someone who isn't Test class to block a younger player who potentially is?

I don't agree with you that all 3 of McLaughlin, Ruddock and Ryan have more oppurtunity - to me one of them will miss out (atm it is Ryan). I'm sure one of them would rather be getting frequent first team appearances.

Its hard not to agree with a lot of that Aukster.

I too agree with much of that except the last paragraph.

Wilson is a much better play than when he left.
Was stupid enough to follow Neil Best around when he was here but appears to have, unlike Best, matured.
Diack is not even close to being as good as him.
Wannenburg and Henry are of a similar standard and if he replaced Wannenburg it would very importantly free up a NIQ position and allow us to sign a 7 and retain Pienaer - that would be very smart thinking.

Yeah I can see both sides of the Wilson argument, I'll sit on the fence on that one....

Neil Best now he was some player..any chance of getting him back..

Just thinking of Best and Ferris pairing up is mouth watering! Pure power and aggression combined - I would be terrified as the opposition!

Best is finished lads. He's gone. Wouldn't want him back in any event.

Sorry Rory I'm just stirring , I think I know what Geoff will say about that one!

I do rate Best as a player though but it sounds like he burnt some bridges here which is unfortunate.

Hey Notch were have you been hiding?

What happened with Best? He captained the Wolfhounds to the Churchill cup and then seemed to drop of the radar.

Wilson would be a top signing. Best would be bad move he isnt good enough anymore.

Best could have been a great if he didn't kept pushing the self-destruct button. There is no way Ulster would have him back, nor Mark McCall for that matter. Kidney gave him every chance but those bridges have been burnt (as with O'Sullivan) and he will never move back to Saints either while Mallinder is still there... pattern emerging??

Geoff - Apart from being younger, Diack is better in the lineout and faster in the loose than Wilson, but he hasn't shown those qualities for some time so I won't argue that point further.
As 8s I'd rather have Pedrie and Chris, but crucially they also play other positions which Roger does not. Wilson is neither a viable bench option nor flexible position-wise for on-field injuries, he will cost at least as much as Pedrie so the only benefit is that he is IQ and doesn't count towards the quota.

Your argument is presumably based on Ulster's need for an openside, a sentiment I would have agreed with last season as Ulster had lost Pollock. However he has been effectively replaced by Henry who is growing into the position with every game. Given Ulster also have the services of Faloon why would they need another openside? If Ulster recruit a top class 7 they effectively stymie two home grown players from competing for possible Test honours in a backrow position where Ireland are weakest.

Ferris is the one player who will be missing more than any other from the Ulster backrow. So if you get rid of Wannenburg, who plays 6? I don't think Henry is as good at 6 as at 7 simply because he is a better first up tackler than a counter rucker or carrier. Diack is definitely a better 8 than a 6, and Tuohy lacks topline experience in the backrow.

Your argument is also based on the assumption that Ulster 'should' be able to attract a better quality IQ blindside than an IQ openside, yet all those you mentioned refused to come, so is there really any benefit in having an NIQ openside rather than Wannenburg in relation to Pienaar?

BTW if Pocock wanted to come, I'd have to say cheerio to Pedrie and do a swap deal with Connacht - Faloon for Muldoon (sounds as though it could work!).

Another great post Aukster.

I am not certain things are as bad as all that (although others on here probably know more than me). I do agree with geoff though. I would take just finishing above Connacht this season if it meant we had brought through and gave experience to Marshall, Jackson, Annett, McAllister etc.

These guys are the future of Ulster rugby and if they are not developed we do not have a future and 4 top class NIQ signings wont change that. It is imperative that they are able to step up soon.

As i mentioned the backrow thing puzzled me. Faloon starts the first two games but is then dropped for Diack who plays well against Cardiff and gets retained. Then we get duffed by the Ospreys and dragons and we turn to mcComish with Faloon not making 3 consecutive squads. Then after missing out on the scarlets game he is parachuted above Diack and McComish to the HEC.

This time last year Diack was probably our best player but i recall him getting injured against Munster and he just hasnt come back the same player. McComish i was never sold on. Didnt and doesnt seem like a step up from Anderson. Faloon to me can do a job but hasnt seen gametime.

I actually rate Wannenburg. Yes he isnt Parisse or Kieran Read but he is an effective player and does a lot of dirty work for Ulster. If i am right though his contract is up and i would like to see a player of a higher calibre come in but again i wouldnt be too worried if we retained pedrie. Ruddock is also out of contract this year (he only signed a 1 year extension) so might be an option. Does anyone know if Stephen Leckey or Dominic Gallagher could be options?

I cant emphasise enough how important it is to ensure we have the best possible coach for our young backs though. jackson, Marshall, Spence, gaston, nelson, D'arcy etc need to fulfil their potential. Do that and we can challenge. Dont and we will slump again i think

Wilson works harder, is more aggressive and a better ball carrier (he shouldn't be but is because he works at it) than Diack and as a result is a better player.

Neil Best will never be allowed to darken Ulster doors again - I literally don't think he would be allowed through the gates.
As a player he is washed up.

I do think the club would welcome McCall back. I think it is recognized that he was not to blame for the way the team fell apart. Appalling management, player power, drinking culture were all evident then. This has all changed - we now have excellent management, no player power e.g. the way Humphreys sent Botha off with a flea in his ear and we must be the soberest team in top flight rugby. Half of them don't drink and most of the rest are quiet family men.

The make up of our backrow is interesting. If we can't persuade an IQ player to join us I do beleive we are seriously considering getting 2NIQ (1 of course could be Wannenburg and releasing Pienaer). This is the only spin I can put on the fact that both Pienaer and Wannenburg want to sign extensions but he club are keeping their options open.

We have
Ferris - World Class very injury prone. A top 6
Henry - An 8 who is developing as 7 but never will be a natural 7. Very good provincial player but just short of International class
Faloon - an out and out 7 who can be excellent but can also be very poor
Diack - a natural 8 and a gifted player but for whatever reason is not doing the hard yards and is coming up short. Does he want home to SA perhaps ? now that he is married. I would not be shocked if he sees out his contract and leave (2013 I believe)
McCormish - make shift cover for 6 and 7 - short of the required standard

So what 2 players would enhance that best ???
I thought they might have got Neil McMillan back to be honest as 7 cover.

I'll give you a nightmare scenario - Wannenburg is signed for one year before going home, Ferris has to retire and Diack goes home in 2013 - all perfectly feasible.
We are left with Henry, Faloon, McCormish and only 1 NIQ slot to fill, no southerners willing to join and no youngesters coming through. That is why they are thinking very very carefully and why they are seriously considering 2 NIQ players.

Heres one to offer a contract too - Liam Gill of Queensland Reds. 19 years old, an outstanding prospect at 7 (Pocock will have genuine competition in a couple of years). Spent time in America so used to living abroad. Two years at Ulster would set him up financially, he would go home a more rounded players and he would be ready to take the International scene by storm and he is good enough to do so.

Ulster would get a player who has all the signs of being top draw and would not have to pay top dollar due to his age and experience.

Judging from my occassional twitter following, I would say the Diacks seem the most settled here. His wife has set up a business I believe. So has Pedries.

I know performance is most important, but I can't help but have a sopft spot for anyone who seems to actually enjoy our wee country. I'd be inclined to say keep them if they want to. Coaches are the key to improving their performance.

Show some loyalty guys.

Guys, I only saw highlights of the Tigers game but it looks like that you could have won the match if not for the scrum.

Word of caution on Twitter - the players know it is for public consumption and post accordingly. Lets face it they are not going to tweet they are unhappy.

I think body language is a better guide and Diack's body lanaguage is not good.
Having said that if he wants to stay we would keep him as we are so short of IQ backrowers.

Basically Diack frustrates the **** out of me. He so naturally talented but doesn't deliver, it is so so annoying.

geoff998rugby wrote:Word of caution on Twitter - the players know it is for public consumption and post accordingly. Lets face it they are not going to tweet they are unhappy.

I think body language is a better guide

+1

Geoff I understand that nightmare scenario and its good that we are planning ahead.

However we need to start delivering in the here and now too. We have had a lot of personnel changes in recent season and I think we need a bit of stability to gel not constant buying and selling.

If Ulster are on about bringing McMillan and Wilson back and letting Diack, Pienaar and Wannenburg go then that is very strange. That sounds like 1 step forward 2 back to me.

Guys, I only saw highlights of the Tigers game but it looks like that you could have won the match if not for the scrum..

Scrum didn't have that great an influence. Tigers nicked a couple against the head but what really killed Ulster was the inability to create space and utilise their outside backs. Too many forwards getting in the way or running sideways before straightening up. Meant that the Tigers defence was able to drift across fairly easily. When the likes of Cave got to run in the outside channels Ulster looked dangerous, the number of chances were too few though.

Mcmillan was my idea as cover which with the lsoe of Pollock would be a prudent move.

Wilson would be an excellent addition and is IQ. In order to have the required numbers we really need to find an IQ backrower
Diack isn't delivering.
Wannenburg and Pienaer would only go if we get NIQ players the club beleive would be more useful.

Much is being made of old players and NIQ stopping local lads developing.
Elsewhere around the park fair enough but in the backrow who are we talking about ??

Ferris and Henry play.
McCormish is not much more than an AIB player.
The only local lad who is not getting decent game time is Faloon..there is no one else that is the problem.

I wonder if there's a backrow equivalent of D'Arcy anywhere? That would be th ideal - cheap, IQ, talented if raw.

I think quite apart from being a truly great player in his own right, Pienaar brings the best out of iHumph. Ian trusts him, and it's reflected in his performances. It also seemed to help his kicking quite substantially last season.

Pollock's retirement has really had serious ramifications for us.

Did anyone go to that URSC "meet the players" last night?

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Guys, I only saw highlights of the Tigers game but it looks like that you could have won the match if not for the scrum..

Scrum didn't have that great an influence. Tigers nicked a couple against the head but what really killed Ulster was the inability to create space and utilise their outside backs. Too many forwards getting in the way or running sideways before straightening up. Meant that the Tigers defence was able to drift across fairly easily. When the likes of Cave got to run in the outside channels Ulster looked dangerous, the number of chances were too few though.

+ 1 Our general attacking play is a bit of a bollix really. The forwards are laying a good platform and there's been some excellent carrying but from 8 through to 12 the correct descisions and execution are not being taken to get our outside backs into space enough. This seems to be irrespective of personel which makes me feel that the coaches need to be looked at.

Geoff I don't think its overseas players stopping our young players developing, bar Danielli maybe but more our failure to rotate players effectively.

In terms of Stands post yesterday I think we should still be aiming for at least a top 5 league finish plus 19 points minimum in our HEC pool and still get significant gametime to most of our squad throughout the season. That would present progress from last season to me even if we just missed out on the KO stages of both competitions.

Other than Faloon there is no one to rotate in the back row - thats my point.

This season we should go full bore for HC/Amlin qualification .
If we fail use the remaining games to rotate and give the promising youngsters a chance to show us what they can do. We will see the benefit next year. If you qualify for the later stages of a European tournament then this would have to be tempered with having our first XV geared up for the big matches in April.

Qualifying for the last 4 of the Pro 12 is secondary to developing our players imv.

geoff998rugby wrote:
Qualifying for the last 4 of the Pro 12 is secondary to developing our players imv.

I agree but my point is we should be able to play the likes of Faloon, Diack, Jackson, Spence, D'arcy, L Marshall etc. and still have a decent League campaign.

Not qualifying for the play off is not the end of the world but we should not be aiming for below 5th/6th no matter who we send out.

Just finishing above Connacht and the Italian teams simply isn't good enough IMO and would be disasterous given the progress we made last season.

Like wise in the HEC we need 9 points minimum against Aironi and a good win against Leicester at Ravenhill at least to take any positives from the season.

geoff998rugby wrote:Qualifying for the last 4 of the Pro 12 is secondary to developing our players imv.

I think we can say that it's this attatude to the Pro 12 that makes the Jeff a better league. Would an English club rather develop players, or get into the play offs.

For the Pro 12 to improve as a league it needs to be taken more serously. Otherwise fans will see the games as little more than friendlys.

I agree with Geoff. To me the Pro 12 is comfortably less of a priority than the HEC.

I know a lot of Munster fans still see last season as a failure for not qualifying from the pool stages. The fact we won the Magners League is very quickly forgotten.

Stag the HEC is the priority of course. However our pro 12 ambitions need to be higher than just finishing above Connacht regardless of whether we send out our young guns or our 1st XV every week.

I believe we have enough depth that we can rotate players in the Rabo and still get results.

We might not get a top 4 spot but we should be in the top half of the league.

The point I am making is we currently are not strong enough to develop players and maintain a serious challange for a knock out place - Munster and Leinster are. To improve our ability to do so we need more depth.

However just because I do not see the top 4 as a priority does not mean that 9th is ok (above the Italians and Connacht). I would still expect us to be close to 4th than 9th.

I get what you are saying Geoff.

Its like how when Munster started out as a good European Cup side we would usually finish about 5th or 6th in the Celtic League.

Now we can challenge on two fronts. Same as Leinster.

Fair enough Geoff. I think we are all more or less in agreement anyway. We had such a good season last year and its important that expectations don't fall too low.

I think we are a good side with a very strong squad, it's just about building on that and challenging for trophies. I know that will take time but at the minute I don't think we have kicked on enough from last year enough in terms of performance.

Our set piece is looking good but the style of rugby and back play is pretty poor given the quality we have.

red_stag wrote:I get what you are saying Geoff.

Its like how when Munster started out as a good European Cup side we would usually finish about 5th or 6th in the Celtic League.

Thats were I'd like us to be stag, in and around mid table but with a bit more squad utilisation to bring the young guys on and keep people fresh.

4 huge performances in the HEC is a must now and we need to do our best to improve our european seeding.

Its doable. I still think Tigers will claim your pool but make no mistake Ulster are still in the hunt.