Leicester (and English Rugby?) just not good enough.

Last night was my work Christmas Party (yes I know 3 weeks late) which meant I was saved the pain of watching that thrashing. However huge congratulations to Ulster - such a dominant scoreline can only ever be attributed to one team being much better than the other.

Tigers European campaign this season has been indicative of the abilities of the team. We have had tight wins at home against the two decent teams in teh pool, and suffered heavy defeats in the reverse fixtures. Tigers were comprehensively outplayed by Clermont in the away leg and I can only assume the same was true last night. We are obviously only the third best team in the group - so right now we are a long way away from being a team that can challenge in Europe.

Is it fair to suggest that the ability of the English teams is and English players is at a low ebb right now? After all Tigers are only 4th in the table and the teams are so close that effectively that counts as mid table. However, as Portnoy keeps pointing out, a table based on the 7 league matches since the World Cup would see Leicester at the top. This suggests that tigers are still one of the best teams in the AP - yet are a long way from being truly competitive in Europe. So yes I think it is fair to say that the standard of teh AP is not great right now.

How about English players - after all Quins are still doing well in Europe with a largely (excl Nick Evans) english team. that is true - yet tigers still have 11 players in the EPS/Saxons squads. Yet those players - among the elite of English players - are not good enough to compete with the good teams in Europe.

Perhaps I am being overly pessimistic - but right now things look very bleak for club and country.

I could be wrong here, but it must be noted that Leicester Tigers had 9 non English players in the starting team, granted that if Deacon, Flood and Tuilagi had started that would only be 8. But the concern must be that instead of playing academy players or hopefuls as back ups Leicester seem to play foreign journeymen.

Talking the likes of Mafi, Salvi and Agulla. Why Tigers have these guys I dont know, it would suggest that the academy isn't producing enough local talent, either that or the local talent just isn't good enough. This is also evidenced by only having a total of 6 Leicester lads in the whole 23.

Leicester need guys who will play with pride for the shirt, not these very mediocre foreigners.

It all goes back to the old argument of Leicester having way too many foreign players keeping local players out of the team.

Tiger, I watched it last night.

There was only one team in it. Although Twelvetrees had a very poor game at 10 (out of position), that was not enough to explain the gulf between the two teams. The Ulster forwards were magnificent. Ferris is a beast of a man. What worried me was how feted Tom Croft is, and although he was playing in a losing pack, there was no comparison, and at one stage he was picked up and carried out of play. Leicester were bettered in every single aspect. The Ulster backs were precise and incisive. The game was one way traffic. Nobody from Leicester outplayed their opposite number.

I think that you are right to have concerns about England as a whole. I think that other teams appear to have players far more physical than ours. Not only that but I was worried by the performances of some of our picks, in particular Youngs and Croft.

As a neutral I thought the Ulster performance was magnificent. I will be intrigued to see if they can replicate it in Clermont.

From my perspective, I watched your team recently dismantle mine (Worcester), and then yours get an even bigger lesson in rugby.................. oh dear, oh dear?!?

That's what I was saying. I just feel we've fallen into a bad mess here and need to sort it. I hope a focus on youth can begin to turn it around. Ten years of Irish dominance because they got it right. Can it change?

Tigers were always likely to get mugged in that game,away from home, with key players missing and others out of position, against a rested team and with a ref who allows a free for all at the breakdown. If Ulster were a consistent side why are they mid table in the Rabo Pro 12 ? Teams that target particular games should do well and small factors generally make big differences on the scoreboard. Clermont have now been given a straightforward opportunity.
When Bath played Ulster we were down to our 4th choice flyhalf because of injury, with the same result on the scoreboard against a fully fit opposition.

The England squad is very big gamble with the level of untried combinations and could well lead to some uncomfortable viewing.

Recwatcher,

Which of the 4 competitive meetings between Bath and Ulster in the last 3 seasons are you talking about?

Rec,

With regards to the England watching welcome to our world . But Gatlands youth policy, despite forced through injury has generally paid dividends.

The Irish RFU seem to have got their system right and can tell the Provinces when to rest players etc which obviously benefits the National side.

The Provinces themselves then rest a lot of their top names for the HC, teams like Munster and Leinster have the squads to compete on both fronts

Recwatcher wrote:Tigers were always likely to get mugged in that game,away from home, with key players missing and others out of position, against a rested team and with a ref who allows a free for all at the breakdown. If Ulster were a consistent side why are they mid table in the Rabo Pro 12 ? Teams that target particular games should do well and small factors generally make big differences on the scoreboard. Clermont have now been given a straightforward opportunity.
When Bath played Ulster we were down to our 4th choice flyhalf because of injury, with the same result on the scoreboard against a fully fit opposition.

The England squad is very big gamble with the level of untried combinations and could well lead to some uncomfortable viewing.

4th choice fly half???

Somehow I don't think Butch James was Bath's 4th choice fly half mate. Don't know what your comment about Ulster not being consistent relates to, but as it happens we have 3 bonus point wins in our last 3 matches, also have 4 wins against Bath on the trot and havent lost at home to an English team in 10 years.

Also its upto Ulster which games they target, if English clubs can't do that maybe you need to change.

Butcher James never played against Ulster - Ryan Davis was our flyhalf at Ravenhill.

The Irish sides have got their focus for the HC - and it is currently working for them which is fair enough. That is not a criticism just reality and the squads at the English clubs clearly cannot cope with fixture demands under our self imposed salary cap. Rumour has it that is going to change.

Bath 22-26 Ulster

Bath: Cuthbert, Carraro, Barkley, Hape, Banahan, James, Claassens, Flatman, Mears, Wilson, Hooper, Grewcock, Beattie, Moody, Taylor

Sam Vesty was the flyhalf at Ravenhill by the way.

Leicester lose 1 game badly and now England are doomed to fail!

Do any of you work for the papers?

Butch James has played at Ravenhill but it was this season for ASM.

Not sure he enjoyed it.

You are correct about your OH in 2009/2010 but we played you again in 2010/2011 with Vesty at 10.

Same result.

James was at 10 for the second meeting at the Rec. Can't remember who it was the previous season but the result was the same each time.

I'm not sure what you were trying to get at about the OHs?

Some folk are very touchy - simply pointing out playing away games without fully fit squads and flyhalves in particular makes games very difficult.

Ah right!

With you now. Although the point is somewhat diluted when you don't win the return fixtures at home no matter who is at OH.

I actually agree with the original poster. The Premiership is now desperately poor and i truly believe something needs to change. We've got some very decent players but they're generally spread too thinly.

The plus side is there are more EQPs playing first team rugby at that level. The down side is the level isn't that great. It's clearly woeful preparation for the HC.

Sorry to be a downer, i'm not sure what the solution is but i feel our Prem is now the worst top flight rugby league around.

A bit of pessimism here. I think it was more to do with a good year for the Irish Province's. The Welsh teams haven't been great either. Apart from Clermont and Toulouse perhaps most would have expected more from the French.

Quins and Sarries will probably make the last 8 btw.

LondonTiger wrote:.............Is it fair to suggest that the ability of the English teams is and English players is at a low ebb right now?..............After all Tigers are only 4th in the table.....This suggests that tigers are still one of the best teams in the AP - yet are a long way from being truly competitive in Europe. So yes I think it is fair to say that the standard of teh AP is not great right now.

Perhaps I am being overly pessimistic - but right now things look very bleak for club and country.

I understand your arguement, but I think you have dipped into the post-Christmas drinks a bit too much and might be suffering from clinical depression. Probably exacerbated by Tigers being off.

I think its a bit over the top to equate Leicester's performace in Europe to England's place in the world. Leicester has not been good in Europe for a while, and this season due to injuries and general less talent. Some of the other Premeirship clubs are still in the final stages recovery mode after the RWC. Saints, for example, are finally rounding into form. So England will be fine. Yes, this Six Nations squad seems a bit experimental, but I see a touch of grit combined with some significant upside if it all comes together. I am actually optimistic.

Leicester Tigers looked well and truly knackerd to be honest, Ulster on the other hand looked very fresh indeed.

With regards to English rugby, well Leicester do not supply (most) of the English players any more. Not like when Martin Johnson used to play for England, so i think England will be alright come the 6ns.

Recwatcher wrote:Tigers were always likely to get mugged in that game,away from home, with key players missing and others out of position, against a rested team and with a ref who allows a free for all at the breakdown. If Ulster were a consistent side why are they mid table in the Rabo Pro 12 ? Teams that target particular games should do well and small factors generally make big differences on the scoreboard. Clermont have now been given a straightforward opportunity.
When Bath played Ulster we were down to our 4th choice flyhalf because of injury, with the same result on the scoreboard against a fully fit opposition.

The England squad is very big gamble with the level of untried combinations and could well lead to some uncomfortable viewing.

I am sorry but really? Surely Ulster would have been a team that Leicester would have targeted as they would have hoped to be the better team and taken points. Leicester were not mugged, they were soundly beaten by a better team on the day. Just my thoughts though.

Eirebilly, I think Recwatcher's point was that Ulster could focus exclusively on this match, because they're not really in the hunt for the Rabo, whereas Leicester have had to put together a long run of form to get back in contention in the AP.

It is a significant factor that AP teams can never afford to take the foot off the gas in the AP to focus on the HEC, whereas Rabo teams can. Clubs get a significant drop in revenue in the following season if they are not in the HEC (essentially top 6), so they have to focus on those matches and then field the best they can in the HEC. You saw that in Leicester's squad yesterday, though admittedly they are more vulnerable to injury than they once were.

Poorfour. Sorry but i dont buy that. Leicester would have had an eye on Ulster as the two teams are at about a similar standard, just as Ulster would have targetted Leicester.

I get very tired of this view that when a team like Leicester loses to another team then its only down to the other team focusiing purely on that match. Leicester are just not the power they once were.

Ok they had injuries but that happens to every side at some stage, one could say that it goes to show that Leicester are not progressing in the development of replacements. If Leicester were just beaten then you could have a point that their injuries had a major impact but Leicester were soundly beaten so some credit should be given.

If the Irish teams are just focussed on Europe how come Munster and Leinster are in the play off positions in the Rabbo - with Ulster rapidly rising. How come Leinster fielded 15 Irish players at Cardiff last week and won and will field 14 against Glasgow in the HC today if there is not one eye on National Imperatives.

English rugby has everything it needs to succeed - numbers and money but there is one particular fix needed that if resolved could see them at All Black levels of consistancy.

When I watch underage representative International games- and I've seen a lot over the years- English rugby sides regularly swat away European opposition I can't remember how many times I've turned up to think gee these guys are so much bigger than the Welsh side their facing.

This superiority very rarely seems to translate into the full English sides - if the RFU could find a way of harnassing the vast amount of young talent that exists in England there would be teams for the rest of us to fear for generations to come - it never happens though - why is this?

Leicester are a very good side and they will be back, of that i am certain. Its just nice to see that Ulster could not only beat them but really run them off the park.

Leicester competed for about 60mins but when the game looked lost, they switched off. That was the saddest thing for me about the match.

eirebilly wrote:Poorfour. Sorry but i dont buy that. Leicester would have had an eye on Ulster as the two teams are at about a similar standard, just as Ulster would have targetted Leicester.

I get very tired of this view that when a team like Leicester loses to another team then its only down to the other team focusiing purely on that match. Leicester are just not the power they once were.

Ok they had injuries but that happens to every side at some stage, one could say that it goes to show that Leicester are not progressing in the development of replacements. If Leicester were just beaten then you could have a point that their injuries had a major impact but Leicester were soundly beaten so some credit should be given.

nobody has said Leicester has lost because they have to focus more on the Aviva than Ulster do on the Rabo, they said it was a factor. Which is correct.

Not sure how you come to the point that if a team has injuries then they should only just lose. Surely if you lose your best players through injury you'll lose greatly. (i'm speaking generally here, not about leicester).

Finally, Your saying Ulster haven't been given any credit, i mean come on!!!!!!!

eirebilly wrote:Leicester are a very good side and they will be back, of that i am certain. Its just nice to see that Ulster could not only beat them but really run them off the park.

Leicester competed for about 60mins but when the game looked lost, they switched off. That was the saddest thing for me about the match.

i think they put that much effort in the first 60 to just be in the game that they were knackered for the last 20 mins.

stevetynant wrote:If the Irish teams are just focussed on Europe how come Munster and Leinster are in the play off positions in the Rabbo - with Ulster rapidly rising. How come Leinster fielded 15 Irish players at Cardiff last week and won and will field 14 against Glasgow in the HC today if there is not one eye on National Imperatives.

English rugby has everything it needs to succeed - numbers and money but there is one particular fix needed that if resolved could see them at All Black levels of consistancy.

When I watch underage representative International games- and I've seen a lot over the years- English rugby sides regularly swat away European opposition I can't remember how many times I've turned up to think gee these guys are so much bigger than the Welsh side their facing.

This superiority very rarely seems to translate into the full English sides - if the RFU could find a way of harnassing the vast amount of young talent that exists in England there would be teams for the rest of us to fear for generations to come - it never happens though - why is this?

These things go in cycles and hopefully this new EPS selection policy is the start of a new era for England in the future - it has just happened a bit later than most English fans would have expected.

But Pourfour is right about the number of games, at a higher intensity that AP clubs have to play compared to the Rabo teams. Look at the Saints in the HC final last year they were dead on their feet in the second half.
Which league is better is a personal opinion but they are different and geared for different reasons.
All this doesn't excuse the Tigers being totally outclassed by a superb Ulster outfit on Friday. These games happen from time to time and are great for fans when they do - Good luck to them!

I am not an apologist for Leicester, and they have been poor at bringing through squad talent. But rugby is a game of small margins and it does make a difference when every game is effectively a must win.

All I am saying is that Ulster would have had more opportunity to plan ahead and manage their squad for this match, even if it's only a matter of resting a couple of players at some point to keep them fresh for the game. Leicester have had to focus on winning every game and looked totally drained in comparison.

I am not taking away anyhting from Ulster's performance, just pointing out that one of the factors in that performance is that they had more options in preparing for it than Leicester. The two teams were not able to target the match with equal focus, and at this level that makes a difference.

For what it's worth, I agree with Stevetynant that English clubs need to do more to bring English talent through. But then, I'm a Quins fan, and last night watched them field 14 EQPs out of the 18 who played (including replacements), of whom 8 were Academy products, 2 were in England's RWC squad, 4 are in the current squad and 3 are in the Saxons squad.

However, it's taken about 6 years of hard work to get to that point, and some very understanding backers. Unfortunately, not all teams are run with such an eye to the future.

Is the AP really a higher intensity than the Rabo? Not sure that i agree to that to be honest.

The HC is the premier club tournement for European rugby. I just cant believe that Leicester did not prepare for this and target Ulster as a team to beat as much as Ulster would have.

To be honest, i feel that Ulster were bang on form and just outplayed Leicester, regardless of injuries.

eire,

I think it is on a more regular basis but not completley if that makes sense lol.

Going off on tangent a bit and over old ground but the HC qualification system in the Rabo is flawed but can't see way around it.

There's the little battles in it to finish 3rd places Welsh Region etc but still lacks that bit on regular occasions.

nathan wrote:

eirebilly wrote:Poorfour. Sorry but i dont buy that. Leicester would have had an eye on Ulster as the two teams are at about a similar standard, just as Ulster would have targetted Leicester.

I get very tired of this view that when a team like Leicester loses to another team then its only down to the other team focusiing purely on that match. Leicester are just not the power they once were.

Ok they had injuries but that happens to every side at some stage, one could say that it goes to show that Leicester are not progressing in the development of replacements. If Leicester were just beaten then you could have a point that their injuries had a major impact but Leicester were soundly beaten so some credit should be given.

nobody has said Leicester has lost because they have to focus more on the Aviva than Ulster do on the Rabo, they said it was a factor. Which is correct.

Not sure how you come to the point that if a team has injuries then they should only just lose. Surely if you lose your best players through injury you'll lose greatly. (i'm speaking generally here, not about leicester).

Finally, Your saying Ulster haven't been given any credit, i mean come on!!!!!!!

Actually they did nathan if you read above.
As for the injuries thing, i mean that it would have been a more telling point to use had Leicester just lost and not been soundly beaten. There is a difference to being soundly beaten and just losing if that makes any sense.

I simply reacted to the fact that it was cleary said by REC that Ulster only won this match because they were up for it. Simply not true.

bedfordwelsh wrote:eire,

I think it is on a more regular basis but not completley if that makes sense lol.

Going off on tangent a bit and over old ground but the HC qualification system in the Rabo is flawed but can't see way around it.

There's the little battles in it to finish 3rd places Welsh Region etc but still lacks that bit on regular occasions.

That does make sense bedford.

nathan wrote:

eirebilly wrote:Leicester are a very good side and they will be back, of that i am certain. Its just nice to see that Ulster could not only beat them but really run them off the park.

Leicester competed for about 60mins but when the game looked lost, they switched off. That was the saddest thing for me about the match.

i think they put that much effort in the first 60 to just be in the game that they were knackered for the last 20 mins.

Having watched the game, to me it looked as if they had realised the game was over and just looked shellshocked. Their heads went down and they basically gave up. They are a much better team than that result shows.

eirebilly wrote:Is the AP really a higher intensity than the Rabo? Not sure that i agree to that to be honest.

It depends what you mean by intensity. Individual matches, probably not. But because AP teams' main route to secure their HEC places is through finishing in the top 6 of the AP, over the course of a season there are fewer matches that don't have a bearing on a club's finances. It makes it much harder for a DoR to choose to rest players or protect someone with a niggle.

So, more intense, probably not. More attritional, and with more fronts to fight, yes.

It must be getting close to the time where the Celtic league no longer needs to be developed and the top 5 qualify from each league must qualify plus the winners to make four pools of four in the HC. We would then see a level playing field with pools all played in one block in the season. This would not surprise me at all when the format next gets reviewed - the French and English clubs are already talking.

Recwatcher wrote:It must be getting close to the time where the Celtic league no longer needs to be developed and the top 5 qualify from each league must qualify plus the winners to make four pools of four in the HC. We would then see a level playing field with pools all played in one block in the season. This would not surprise me at all when the format next gets reviewed - the French and English clubs are already talking.

I can't see the clubs accepting a reduction in the number of teams in the competition, that would hit revenues too much. But I'd like to see the Rabo teams having to qualify the same way that French and English teams do. It would change the game in Europe.

It is not about developing the Celtic league!!

How condescending is that!

The HEC is a competition for the best sides from EACH of the European nations.

How each Union decide which teams to send is ENTIRELY up to themselves!!!

It is the RFU who decides that the top 6 teams from the Jeff are the ones to send.

Ireland and Wales get to send 3 each (occasionally 4 if we get an extra spot) and they have elected to use the Pro12 placings to decide who to send!

Don't blame us because we have a better system, blame the RFU!

Usual argument coming from English fans - 'our system isnt good enough so rather than change it lets try and make the Irish change theirs'

Pathetic.

Poorfour wrote:

Recwatcher wrote:It must be getting close to the time where the Celtic league no longer needs to be developed and the top 5 qualify from each league must qualify plus the winners to make four pools of four in the HC. We would then see a level playing field with pools all played in one block in the season. This would not surprise me at all when the format next gets reviewed - the French and English clubs are already talking.

I can't see the clubs accepting a reduction in the number of teams in the competition, that would hit revenues too much. But I'd like to see the Rabo teams having to qualify the same way that French and English teams do. It would change the game in Europe.

Can't ever seeing that happening due the chance of one Nation not being represented one year.

Qualification is based on a quota system for each country England and France already have a advantage by being able to enter twice as many teams than Ireland Wales and Scotland with Italy being allowed to enter two teams.
How each country decides what team goes through should be their choice and changing the system just because one country is more successful than another is not the way forward.

Recwatcher. I am sorry but that is just so ill informed from you.

Cymroglan wrote:Qualification is based on a quota system for each country England and France already have a advantage by being able to enter twice as many teams than Ireland Wales and Scotland with Italy being allowed to enter two teams.
How each country decides what team goes through should be their choice and changing the system just because one country is more successful than another is not the way forward.

Would it be very unkind to point out that, if the above system was adopted, the Italian teams and at least one of the Scottish teams would rarely be included (going on the placings in the past few seasons. Who would Bath beat then?

MrsP, you seem to have a real problem with Bath.

The Celtic league will never be one where the top 5 or 6 qualify for the H cup because the unions and clubs would not agree to it. How would it help Scottish rugby if they go four years with no team at all in the h cup? Or Wales or Ireland or Italy? Why would clubs agree to this or the unions? If this meant also that the style of rugby becomes negative and dull and all about defense (out of fear) then I seriously hope that the current system always remains.

Having Irish or Welsh sides compete to be in the top 3 out of 4 from their country in order to qualify for the h cup could in the long run be done in Scotland and Italy once they have more teams involved. That's the only way that I see this league qualification changing.

If the relegation fear is what is limiting English rugby in style and in developing English players then maybe it's worth getting rid of it.

I would have thought playing in a more competitive intense league would be an advantage, not a disadvantage. It's just a pathetic excuse. England have produced multiple HEC winning clubs (More HEC wins than any other nation) and 6 Nations and RWC winning teams under the current system. They're not now. The English need to look at themselves and figure out why not. Not point fingers at Ireland and whinge about how unfair it all is because your league is harder. Excuses won't make England a dominant force again. Producing better teams will.

I think the salary cap needs to be looked at. The top teams need bigger squads to fight on two fronts. Like the best Irish and French teams have.

Feckless Rogue wrote:I would have thought playing in a more competitive intense league would be an advantage, not a disadvantage. It's just a pathetic excuse. England have produced multiple HEC winning clubs (More HEC wins than any other nation) and 6 Nations and RWC winning teams under the current system. They're not now. The English need to look at themselves and figure out why not. Not point fingers at Ireland and whinge about how unfair it all is because your league is harder. Excuses won't make England a dominant force again. Producing better teams will.

+1

MrsP wrote:It is not about developing the Celtic league!!
How condescending is that!
Don't blame us because we have a better system, blame the RFU!

My dear Mrs. P. You sound as if you are about to explode again. You should still be giddy with happiness or recovering from a celebratory night. Not engaging in a dialogue about the relative merits of the Celtic and English leagues which no one can win.

At the bottom line they are completely different business propositions and I don't think one is better than the other. They serve different purposes and are, therefore, different.

Of all people, I should thik you would be most careful with your actions:
Wasn't it YOU who tried to cancel Christmas (Mrs. Scrooge)?
YOU, whose poor children had to appeal to guardian angels to have a holiday which all children deserve?
YOU, who almost brought the space-time continuim to a grinding halt?
And now you enter this no-win scenario?

My God, woman. Is there nothing you won't dare?

Myme.

MrsP wrote:It is not about developing the Celtic league!!
How condescending is that!
Don't blame us because we have a better system, blame the RFU!

My dear Mrs. P. You sound as if you are about to explode again. You should still be giddy with happiness or recovering from a celebratory night. Not engaging in a dialogue about the relative merits of the Celtic and English leagues which no one can win.

At the bottom line they are completely different business propositions and I don't think one is better than the other. They serve different purposes and are, therefore, different.

Of all people, I should thik you would be most careful with your actions:
Wasn't it YOU who tried to cancel Christmas (Mrs. Scrooge)?
YOU, whose poor children had to appeal to guardian angels to have a holiday which all children deserve?
YOU, who almost brought the space-time continuim to a grinding halt?
And now you enter this no-win scenario?

My God, woman. Is there nothing you won't dare?

Myme.