Ulster vs. Munster, Ravenhill, 30th Dec 7:05pm

First topic message reminder :

Now that Leinster vs. Ulster (and all the attendant hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth) is over, we can focus on Ulster's second derby this week - Munster at Ravenhill.

Most of the team is fairly guessable - McAllister, Kyriacou, Afoa, Muller, Tuohy, Henry, Wannenburg, Pienaar, Humphreys, Gilroy, Cave, D'Arcy, Terblanche.

Without any updates on injuries, I'm in the dark beyond that. I don't know how exactly the back-line will shape up, although I hope Whitten's in at twelve and D'Arcy's on the wing. I have no idea how the back-row will work, with Ferris at Ireland camp, Faloon and McComish injured, and Diack and the two youngsters having played already this week. If Barker's okay, maybe he'll start at five and Touhy move to six?

If Faloon, Marshall and Danielli were fit and healthy, that would get us out of a hole.

What will Munster's line-up be on Friday? Anyone want to hazard a guess? POM, Murphy, Hurley, Botha, du Preez all likely to be in the first VX? Who will be in second row? Who will play at outhalf?

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:

BlueMuff wrote:Ah Artful cop on with the childish silliness. No need for it

1. First try Hurley spills ball in contact in open mid field with the whole Munster team running foward - easy try.
2 Cant remember second try maybe you might give me your interpretation
3. Munster get free kick. Simple percentage play is to take tap and go. Instead go for a scrum deep in our half and made a mess of it/
4. Munster scrum got mullered

If you think that was a great Ulster performance then fair play. No doubt Ulster were absolute convincing deserving winners.

The ulster try's weren't walk ins. They won turnovers due to hard tackling and work at the breakdown as well as munster mistakes. The ulster hands and vision were excellent I thought and to say they weren't would be completely unfair.

As I said Ulster were clinical in scoring the tries and is was mainly the scrum pressure that caused them. I still stand over the fact that Munster were absolutely brutal and if thats sour grapes than then I best get some cream to go with the grapes.

DOD wrote:Artful..ulster were well worth the win. We are purely looking at this from a Munster perspective. If you think Ulster are world beaters fair play that's up to yourself.

Deasy should be Munster second oh keatley is clueless. I used be a big fan of Williams but stringer would be a better sh when he is 50. Gleeson kept the defensive line when he was on and Tommy O'Donnell looked useful. MOD looked tired, time to go. Denis Hurley just ruined a great start to the season. O'Dea is looking like another Dowling bit better. Varley was crap as well, we need mike sherry back.

Any idea when Sherry is back. I thought he was back training 4 weeks ago??

MrsP wrote:I'd have given MOTM to Willie Faloon.

Spot on, IMHO he made the 3rd try by disrupting at the base and being quick to snag the 9 making a loose ball available. Farrell was looking good. Good win.

red_stag wrote:Blue your coming across very sour IMO especially for someone who had predicted a scoreline as such. Ulster will need to take this victory within context - this was a simply apalling Munster selection and never likely to win - however you can only beat whats in front of you and they did well.

I've seen Munster force teams into mistakes Bluemuff. Sadly Ulster did it to us tonight.

Ffs rs will you ever get over yourself and stop being mr in the middle "I'm a referee" and try to be a supporter for once. BM is only stating the obvious from a Munster perspective and the poor decision making that lead to most of Ulsters try's.

I have no news on sherry only that he has resumed light training

DOD I don't see his problem though. Munster picked a team that was 3rd/4th choice in some places. We knew we would be beaten and we were. Blue wasn't talking about Munster he was trotting out the line of how Ulster could only do well when we gifted easy tries. How hard is it to just admit to being second best especially when we all knew in advance that was going to be the case.

Keatley was shocking today. However I actually think that we'd arguably do better with him at 1st choice 10 and O'Gara at second choice 10.

In a strong team and with consistent gametime Keatley looks the part. O'Gara is able to turn it on without the need for a run of games. He can also steady a ship from the bench if needed.

red_stag wrote:DOD I don't see his problem though. Munster picked a team that was 3rd/4th choice in some places. We knew we would be beaten and we were. Blue wasn't talking about Munster he was trotting out the line of how Ulster could only do well when we gifted easy tries. How hard is it to just admit to being second best especially when we all knew in advance that was going to be the case.

Keatley was shocking today. However I actually think that we'd arguably do better with him at 1st choice 10 and O'Gara at second choice 10.

In a strong team and with consistent gametime Keatley looks the part. O'Gara is able to turn it on without the need for a run of games. He can also steady a ship from the bench if needed.

He'd throw his toys out of the pram though, like he did at the WC.

The mistakes made were schoolboy mistakes. Ulster executed them perfectly as you would expect. Ulsters try's were gimmes as they rarely had to build up any pressure to score..

I see nothing in keatley that makes me think he is a better player than ROG or Deasy for that matter. The only players that impressed me were Gleeson, O'Donnell and to a lesser extent Archer and Murphy

I thought in the first half Dave O'Callaghan looked to be carrying well.

I would like to see

06 O'Callaghan
07 O'Mahony
08 Butler

get a run out sometimes. Keatley is comfortably better than Deasy IMO. Not better than ROG at all but could be better for Musnter to play him.

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Ulster scrum-very destructive
Recognising space-very effective
Running lines and decoy runners-excellent
Counterattacking-excellent
Recognising space-excellent
Taking their chances-excellent

Just because this Isnt a good munster performance/team doesnt mean it's a poor ulster team/performance. They can only play what is infront of them.

O'Leary is sooo bad.
Passing and speed of service is awful.

They are decent when the game breaks up like this and we can just run the ball back from anywhere and play unstructured rugby. Ihump thrives in a game like this but when its a bit more structured it can go to pieces.

The Munster team isn't that bad they just have a load of players who haven't played together too often or have played much for Munster. There are some players on the Munster team who are appalling and the fact that back coaching/ back play seems to be non existent isn't helping them.

With tol the speed of his service would be alright if it wasn't for the fact that the accuracy is so bad. Everything that can be wrong about a scrumhalf is wrong with him.

BlueMuff wrote:As I said Ulster were clinical in scoring the tries and is was mainly the scrum pressure that caused them. I still stand over the fact that Munster were absolutely brutal and if thats sour grapes than then I best get some cream to go with the grapes.

...Yep, pretty much nailed it there buddy! I can't read that first sentence as anything other than a compliment. You seem to think it's a bad thing. I don't get that- Munster certainly didn't play that well tonight to be fair but I think we all know that they are a dangerous beast whatever team they name so I'm pleased enough.

Very far from a perfect display from Ulster, still a lot of work to do as well, but I'm very encouraged with a lot of our play- especially our set scrum. Dominating them twice on their own put-in to the extent they couldn't control their own ball at the base was really excellent from us. Was Afoa man of the match? He had as much to do with those two as his own. Good for Paddy Mac who struggled a bit to get to grips with Archer in the first half.

Think Munster showed they know how to slow down ball, they know how to ruck quickly and efficiently and they know how to do all the basics well (unfortunately their tight five really let them down in the scrums). We pressurised them into making a lot of mistakes but for the first twenty minutes they looked good. Thought we played really well in the twenty minutes leading up to half time. Superb flowing move to set up the second try for instance.

You can see that this is a work in progress, but we showed a lot of confidence tonight and I think that's the key for us moving forward. Earlier in the season I thought we were entirely devoid of confidence and making elementary mistakes. Now we look like a team that believes in themselves.

DOD wrote:Val tol is far better than Williams. Don't be so obvious and Dave O'Callaghan has been very poor, out of position, poor tackling and generally behind play. Holland should have started.

I'm not sure what you mean in relation to the bolded.

And with regards to tol being better than williams, who cares? That is really not much of a compliment. Tol came on and did little to improve Munster's cause.

red_stag wrote:I thought in the first half Dave O'Callaghan looked to be carrying well.

I would like to see

06 O'Callaghan
07 O'Mahony
08 Butler

get a run out sometimes. Keatley is comfortably better than Deasy IMO. Not better than ROG at all but could be better for Musnter to play him.

He might have carried well but his tackling was poor and he was all over the place at times and his positioning as a blindside was way off. Still has potential but O'Donnell was by far the better backrow.

As for keatley, where to begin. He plays like a player who still thinks giving it a lash for 15 mins is enough and is only along for the ride. He is in Munster to advance his career..nothing necessarily wrong with that but when compared with the reasons why Felix Jones came to Munster and why keatley is here...also I think Deasy is more consistent and a better footballer.

DOD wrote:

red_stag wrote:I thought in the first half Dave O'Callaghan looked to be carrying well.

I would like to see

06 O'Callaghan
07 O'Mahony
08 Butler

get a run out sometimes. Keatley is comfortably better than Deasy IMO. Not better than ROG at all but could be better for Musnter to play him.

He might have carried well but his tackling was poor and he was all over the place at times and his positioning as a blindside was way off. Still has potential but O'Donnell was by far the better backrow.

As for keatley, where to begin. He plays like a player who still thinks giving it a lash for 15 mins is enough and is only along for the ride. He is in Munster to advance his career..nothing necessarily wrong with that but when compared with the reasons why Felix Jones came to Munster and why keatley is here...also I think Deasy is more consistent and a better footballer.

Jones went to Munster for the same reason as Keatley, they both want to advance their careers. Deasy is never going to make it. If you're annoyed at Keatley starting instead of another Munster player it should be hanrahan you should be pushing at 10.

BlueMuff wrote:

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:

BlueMuff wrote:Ah Artful cop on with the childish silliness. No need for it

1. First try Hurley spills ball in contact in open mid field with the whole Munster team running foward - easy try.
2 Cant remember second try maybe you might give me your interpretation
3. Munster get free kick. Simple percentage play is to take tap and go. Instead go for a scrum deep in our half and made a mess of it/
4. Munster scrum got mullered

If you think that was a great Ulster performance then fair play. No doubt Ulster were absolute convincing deserving winners.

The ulster try's weren't walk ins. They won turnovers due to hard tackling and work at the breakdown as well as munster mistakes. The ulster hands and vision were excellent I thought and to say they weren't would be completely unfair.

As I said Ulster were clinical in scoring the tries and is was mainly the scrum pressure that caused them. I still stand over the fact that Munster were absolutely brutal and if thats sour grapes than then I best get some cream to go with the grapes.

Not once have I said you have sour grapes, have I?
I am not discussing how you viewed Munster, I am discussing it with regards to Ulster.
Not all teams could play flowing rugby the way Ulster did today and attack with precision albeit off Munster mistakes (which they themselves forced Munster into some of the time.)

Munster desperately need a backs/attacking/skills coach.

Perhaps they could make Dougie a backs/skills/attacking/sprint coach while he gets over his injury,the only risk is that he might put some present "staff members" out of a job.

Val..just in case you hadn't noticed Jones is very good. Keatley isn't. But I'm sure you have noticed. Also Jones came straightfrom leinster with a clear goal, keatley plays like chambers, decent but that's about it. Hanrahan should be brought through but in the meantime having keatley is a waste of time and money and deasy is a better option.

DOD wrote:Val..just in case you hadn't noticed Jones is very good. Keatley isn't. But I'm sure you have noticed. Also Jones came straightfrom leinster with a clear goal, keatley plays like chambers, decent but that's about it. Hanrahan should be brought through but in the meantime having keatley is a waste of time and money and deasy is a better option.

Jones good/ keatley bad does not mean they came for different reasons. Deasy has been shown up multiple times as not good enough for RaboDirect. Keatley had a very good start to the season and has struggled since then due to a lack of gametime and playing in weak teams. He has still shown a lot of potential and it should be remember it took Warwick a while to settle for Munster.

I'm going to watch it back. I'm drunk and I'm glad we won.

But from the stand, the question was - "how much money did Rollain have on Munster"?

valjester wrote:

DOD wrote:Val..just in case you hadn't noticed Jones is very good. Keatley isn't. But I'm sure you have noticed. Also Jones came straightfrom leinster with a clear goal, keatley plays like chambers, decent but that's about it. Hanrahan should be brought through but in the meantime having keatley is a waste of time and money and deasy is a better option.

Jones good/ keatley bad does not mean they came for different reasons. Deasy has been shown up multiple times as not good enough for RaboDirect. Keatley had a very good start to the season and has struggled since then due to a lack of gametime and playing in weak teams. He has still shown a lot of potential and it should be remember it took Warwick a while to settle for Munster.

I agree, and playing in the first team would make such a difference to him, just getting quicker ball, and more running options.
He may help in terms of creativity also.

Howlett as an attack coach? I like that idea when he retires.

Keatley as an experiment should have stayed at connacht. He isn't good enough. Better off spending time bringing hanrahan through and using deasy who is underrated and a better player.

I agree with everyone to a degree (perfectly in the middle). I thought Munster were very unfortunate to be down 10 points in the first half as apart from 1 or 2 plays, Ulster were shocking.

That being said the first was down to a textbook steal from afoa and good hands from Cave. The 2nd was as good as anything you will see in the league. Pienaars hands to take the throw back from Terblanche and pass it in one move was world class (doesnt matter a jot about opposition).

2nd half we destroyed their scrum. On first glance i thought Rolland was giving Munster more than their fair share but there may have been copious amounts of pints involved.

Positive for me were

-the first 20 minutes of the 2nd half
- Afoa and to some degree McAllister (one try came off his pressure)
- Pienaar looking in good nick (my motm before the hospital pass to nelson)
- Chris Henry
- Faloon
- Tuohy and Muller showing up well
- Gilroy and D'arcy under the high ball (otherwise, other than a couple of instances for Cave i thought the Backs were ok'ish)

Enough to be reasonably positive about archer as well i thought although i wasnt convinced (alcohol) by Rollands reffing of the scrum.

red_stag wrote:
Keatley was shocking today. However I actually think that we'd arguably do better with him at 1st choice 10 and O'Gara at second choice 10.

In a strong team and with consistent gametime Keatley looks the part. O'Gara is able to turn it on without the need for a run of games. He can also steady a ship from the bench if needed.

Are you for real. Are you seriously suggesting that Keatley should start HC matches ahead of ROG. I know you like to blow smoke up other supporters asses but now your suggesting that we play Keatley a poor Pro 12 fly half at very best ahead of ROG. In reality Deasy should be given the bench slot ahead of Keatley.

You are doing Keatley a massive disservice there Bluemuff. He had a poor game but you are 3rd in the league largely with him directing you are you not? (correct me if im wrong btw. I dont know how many games he has started)

On a side note i actually thought Terblanche was he pick of our outside backs. Knows his stuff. Dont know where he was for the 1st try mind you.

Standulstermen wrote:You are doing Keatley a massive disservice there Bluemuff. He had a poor game but you are 3rd in the league largely with him directing you are you not? (correct me if im wrong btw. I dont know how many games he has started)

On a side note i actually thought Terblanche was he pick of our outside backs. Knows his stuff. Dont know where he was for the 1st try mind you.

+1

Yeah, he did well Terblanche. I must admit after talking his ability to play wing up I was nervous he wouldn't have the legs to finish off his try but he's got a fair bit of pace for a man of 37! He's obviously in fantastic shape, total pro- has made a good contribution imo. Obviously looking to enjoy his rugby at one last new club before retirement but still has the desire to train hard and play hard so I'm happy enough.

Some of the comments on this thread..

Anyway, for the sensible posters who want to talk about rugby, well done to Ulster first off! That is probably the worst I have seen Munster play however. Ulster capitalised on any mistake they made, and put them under constant pressure, especially at the set piece. Brilliant play by the likes of Faloon, Afoa, Henry etc. Anyone else think that should put Faloon at the starting berth? With Henry to 8 and Ferris at 6.

Also have to say I thought Cave shown his lack of pace.. a few times he really did look very slow. He did play well though, even if his pass for the try was forward.

It's going to be tough and I think it comes down to the gameplan. I also thought Wannenburg and Henry played well and the backrow that has played so far in the HC has been very good. Anyway it's definitely four into three for the HC. Diack has not advanced his claims.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Some of the comments on this thread..

Anyway, for the sensible posters who want to talk about rugby, well done to Ulster first off! That is probably the worst I have seen Munster play however. Ulster capitalised on any mistake they made, and put them under constant pressure, especially at the set piece. Brilliant play by the likes of Faloon, Afoa, Henry etc. Anyone else think that should put Faloon at the starting berth? With Henry to 8 and Ferris at 6.

Give yourselves a clap on the back there

Congratulations Ulster from a Munster supporter.

I dont think so SUM. We are third but I wouldnt put that down to Keatley. I never thought he was good enough to replace ROG and lead us to HC success. He is an average Pro12 10. Last week and this week has proved that when the pressure is on he doesnt have the big match temprement that top class fly halfs have.

Warrick would have been a better fly half that Keatley if still around.

Put it another way would you be happy for Keatly to come on in the 6Ns as back up to Sexton?

I was proud of the Ulster boys sin Had to congratulate them!

Cheers Sin. I'm sure there'll be a backlash waiting for us in Thomond in May!

I'll be going to Ulster Ravens vs Munster A before that. Probably be a good few of the same players on show for Munster.

Blue

He was a poor Pro12 fly half a few posts previous so average is a step up already. He is as good as Humphreys imo but his bests arent as good and his worsts arent as bad.

I do think Ulster only played top rugby for about 20 mins of that game but the 2nd try was a beauty. Faloon did great and for me has cemented his spot in the Heineken 23 but beyond that who knows.

The young Ulster lads need to look at the likes of Terblanche and ask themselves why he is in such good shape. They need to make the most of training and playing with guys of that calibre.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I was proud of the Ulster boys sin Had to congratulate them!

Your right to be proud. Poor show from everyone else that they didn't congratulate Ulster on their very good win. :

Munster were poor. Because they fielded a poor Munster team. The Munster jersey does not imbue poor players with any more ability than they actually possess. Munster's backrow were poor. Nagle and MOD were alright, but nothing special. Keatley was not great. Nor Archer. Etc etc.
Ryan Constable just said on the commentary "it doesn't matter what Munster player is playing" - you know what, Ryan? It does. They're not a super-team of world-beaters. Lose the nonsensical starry eyes.

red_stag wrote: Keatley was shocking today.

Shyt, send him up to us! I'd have him at Ravenhill!!

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Also have to say I thought Cave shown his lack of pace.. a few times he really did look very slow. He did play well though, even if his pass for the try was forward.

I didn't see the line of the pass from where I was sitting but his break into space to draw the last defender was sheer pace. Don't agree with you on that one.

I wouldn't be getting carried away with that performance. I'll take and move on but we need to be better if we are to beat Leicester. I agree with Notch there was a bit more confidence in our play but there were a lot of times tonight if we had been a bit more clinical then a few more scores could have come our way.
I too thought Faloon had a stormer and it doesn't matter what number you put on Chris Henry's back you get the same top class consistent performance. D'Arcy ran some great lines again tonight and was a bit unfortunate not to get away on a couple of occasions. Very impressed with Terblanche in everything he did. Looked a class act and seemed to have loads of time when he got the ball. He put himself about for an old guy.
Full credit to Munster though, even with a largely inexperienced team they never stopped trying and probably had more possession than Ulster during the game. Munster supporters, you shouldn't be too down on you boys, there were still a few reasonably good performances. That you got the last score (albeit a gift) just goes to show they never gave up.

Don Alfonso wrote:Munster were poor. Because they fielded a poor Munster team. The Munster jersey does not imbue poor players with any more ability than they actually possess. Munster's backrow were poor. Nagle and MOD were alright, but nothing special. Keatley was not great. Nor Archer. Etc etc.
Ryan Constable just said on the commentary "it doesn't matter what Munster player is playing" - you know what, Ryan? It does. They're not a super-team of world-beaters. Lose the nonsensical starry eyes.

I don't know, thats true to an extent. There's a Munster way that runs right through the entire squad. They are very well drilled at the breakdown and they do not respect reputations.

That doesn't make a Nagle into an O'Connell, an Archer into a Botha or a Keatley into an O'Gara. But a weakened Munster team is never as weakened as they should be on paper. Just like for years Munster always were better than they should have been on paper. I think more accurate than Constables misty-eyed romancing is saying a weakened Munster is a weakened Munster, but they have an ethos that makes them dangerous opponents even then if you underestimate them.

How far away are we from a Marshall/Pienaar half back combo.

Humph didnt convince me tonight, yet again

Stand I agree but Pienaar is still a better 9 and controls things better in that position.
What really peed me off about Humph was the two missed kicks when there was little or no pressure. Those are the kicks that will make a big difference in the HC games. I just don't think he can be trusted when the chips are down. That said some of his attacking play tonight was reminiscent of last year when we were going really well so maybe he is getting his mojo back.

One of the journos said a mediocre Ulster team.were much better than a terrible Munster team. Just like McLaughlin gambled by playing the beat team today and throwing the Leinater game anyone else think McGahan played the strongest team v Connavht to be aure of win and was happy to let Ulster win today.

I think thats a fair comment about McGahan Stag although I would question the journalist who reckoned Ulster were mediocre

It was.Jim.Glennon was.saidbit about mediocre.ulster.v.terrible munster

Notch - what happens if you don't underestimate them?

I think that attitude is why they beat us last year, for example. They do underperform. They are sometimes less than the sum of their parts.

Let me be blunt - if you want spirit, if you want players playing to a level that was more than the sum of their parts, look at Ulster 3rds vs Leinster. I didn't see the same willpower this evening (from either team).

The sooner we lose this propensity to tug our forelock to Munster, the better. Ulster fans are hypercritical, and maybe sometime we should just take a chill pill and say we were the better team. And for supporters who said, after the Leinster game, "well, we'd better win against Munster" - we have. With a TBP. So what now?

Stag - I think there's a degree of that, except I'd imagine with Mafi and Hurley playing, the lines are slightly more blurred for Munster. What did you think of Rollain's performance, particularly as regards the amount of advantage played and off-side?

Don Alfonso wrote:Notch - what happens if you don't underestimate them?

I think that attitude is why they beat us last year, for example. They do underperform. They are sometimes less than the sum of their parts.

Let me be blunt - if you want spirit, if you want players playing to a level that was more than the sum of their parts, look at Ulster 3rds vs Leinster. I didn't see the same willpower this evening (from either team).

The sooner we lose this propensity to tug our forelock to Munster, the better. Ulster fans are hypercritical, and maybe sometime we should just take a chill pill and say we were the better team. And for supporters who said, after the Leinster game, "well, we'd better win against Munster" - we have. With a TBP. So what now?

Stag - I think there's a degree of that, except I'd imagine with Mafi and Hurley playing, the lines are slightly more blurred for Munster. What did you think of Rollain's performance, particularly as regards the amount of advantage played and off-side?

What now? A win on the road in Edinburgh, that's what. If we have any aspirations of getting into the top four and/or the HC Quarters then we need to start showing some consistency.

Agreed. But i'd also like to hear retrospective analyses of McL's line-ups from those that were aghast by the team we sent to Dublin. I assume they'd rather we spilt our best players amongst the two fixtures, and got 0 points from it, than the atrocious devaluing of the Leinster game we were guilty of, and the resultant 5 pts from the same fixtures?

No this is professional sport. You do what you have to to maximise the return. Five points is an excellent return from these two games. How many times has Alex Ferguson done exactly the same thing for Manchester United and been called shrewd? I'm not saying McLaughlin is shrewd but he played the hand he was dealt fairly well. Add to that the performance of the Ravens players and it has been a reasonably good week.

Don you are being a touch aggressive. All that was said was that if we lost this game after the team we sent to Leinster the coaches would have taken massive abuse. Hardly a shocking statement.

watched it again there. first half we werent scrummaging as an 8. our backrow were offering nothing and Munster got a couple of good hits. 2nd half was much better. I may be being slightly harsh on D'arcy but he could have been a bit stronger for the first try. cave to terblanche was marginally forward but not to the extent of being overly critical on the ref.

There was a tad more purpose in our back play but I was surprised by how placid the munster wide defence was. One thing that I came away thinking was that the 2nd best scrum half for munster is currently playing for Saracens.

Notch wrote:

Don Alfonso wrote:Munster were poor. Because they fielded a poor Munster team. The Munster jersey does not imbue poor players with any more ability than they actually possess. Munster's backrow were poor. Nagle and MOD were alright, but nothing special. Keatley was not great. Nor Archer. Etc etc.
Ryan Constable just said on the commentary "it doesn't matter what Munster player is playing" - you know what, Ryan? It does. They're not a super-team of world-beaters. Lose the nonsensical starry eyes.

I don't know, thats true to an extent. There's a Munster way that runs right through the entire squad. They are very well drilled at the breakdown and they do not respect reputations.

That doesn't make a Nagle into an O'Connell, an Archer into a Botha or a Keatley into an O'Gara. But a weakened Munster team is never as weakened as they should be on paper. Just like for years Munster always were better than they should have been on paper. I think more accurate than Constables misty-eyed romancing is saying a weakened Munster is a weakened Munster, but they have an ethos that makes them dangerous opponents even then if you underestimate them.

Thats very well put. Whats very dissappointing from a Munster perspective though is that ethos appears to be slowly dissappearing. There was no grit or determination last night. No sum of the parts greater than the individual. Yes it was a weakened team and yes I expected to be beat but the manner of defeat is worrying. The sense of pride for pulling on a Munster jersey was not evident last night.

And just for a couple of poster here thats not to take from Ulster who did exactly what they had to do and comfortably beat the team put in front of them.