Ulster squad additions

First topic message reminder :

All things relating to Ulster squad changes

NOC - no just no ok! (don't even think about mentioning Steenson either!)

iHumph played well at times last year but I'm struggling to remember when he has been good this season aside from a good last quarter off the bench against Edinburgh. McL has been able to limit his gametime by shifting Pienaar and luckily Ruan has remained fit.

Ulster are progressing by heaping all the key playmaking onto RP, but they could be so much better with someone to share that load outside him. (Jackson would benefit too!)

The Great Aukster wrote:NOC - no just no ok!

Aukster I have to ask whats wrong with NOC? From what Ive seen hes done the business for Connacht, he seems to have developed his game in Galway and against Quins in awful conditions he looked better than Evans

As a 2nd or 3rd choice surely hes not a bad option considering he knows the setup and wouldnt use up a NIQ spot and shouldnt cost too much since he'll fall down the pecking order at Connacht next eason if he stays

Does the fact that he's not cutting it at Connacht and already (one season) is off the radar not say something about him Marty.
Ulster are in the business of improving the team. In the case of O'Connor that wouldn't happen.

Rava is it not more a case of Connacht bringing in a more experienced higher profile player?
Ive watched Connacht a few times this season and NOC has looked assured and been key to big performances from the team hes kicked well and helped them with his tactical kicking which is something he was lacking at Ulster

I agree Marty, NOC has looked good when I've seen him. He maybe just lacks consistancy but certainly has ability.

The woes of being an Ulster no 10! Justice for O'Connor! .....

I'm not to sure what's wrong with Hump? Why is everyone so keen to single him out?

I rate him and think he is very hard done by. Didn't kick great on Sunday but played well in the open. But that was Sunday. He generally plays and kicks extremely well. Can really get a back line moving and though he is not renowned for his ability to tackle neither is that useless waste of space ROG.

Where would we be if big Ian wasn't around?

NOC left Ulster with his head scrambled. Elwood and the west winds are starting to realign his thoughts but he would need to be far stronger mentally before he should consider a return to his home province.

Ulster have a perfectly good understudy in Jackson, and what they need is a top quality starter until Paddy can get a couple more years under his belt.

Thomond wrote:SOB has been poor this year and I don't think he offers much when he isn't making big runs, people know how to stop him making big runs now, except Dan Parks. In my view O'Mahony offers more around the park, and is a very good lineout operator too.

If he is starved of possession, I fail to see what he does that well. Was ridiculous watching the Wales game how much of a difference a proper 7 (Warburton) made. Ireland should get the nugget in to coach their back row.

He makes the same amount of tackles as the player of the series, that is one thing he does well. Plus played a big part in the turnover stats where Ireland came top. In the welsh game the opposition 7s caused us problems, but how was SOB to blame?

Interesting article on the coaching set up:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/0414/1224314728058.html

I'm utterly bored of these hacks who write for rag newspapers ignoring the reasonable explanations and facts of the BM situation, and attempt to drag the name of David Humphreys - a man of utmost integrity and sincerity in his love of Ulster Rugby - through the dirt, all in an attempt to whip up outrage that most (perhaps not all) Ulster fans don't actually feel having heard the explanations and acknowledged the potential long terms benefits to Ulster that this move may bring... *Pause for breath*

It's boring, it's been going on for months and none of them have any record of showing that they actually care for Ulster Rugby... Unfortunately it's typical of the standard of journalism in Ireland (North and South) today.

Despite his apparent protestations, I understood the reason for McLaughlin moving into the academy position was more about his own personal reasons for doing so. The job of head coach soaks up a lot of personal and family time, and it can become all-consuming.

The appointment of Anscombe is a curious one at first glance. One senses from David Humphrey's vision and the other leading figures that Ulster are not about a quick fix, and have put some long-term planning and thinking into their development. Anscombe has a mixed pedigree for taking on the role. His history of coaching in the game seems largely to have been on the junior side of the game, ITM Sides and then the NZ u20s, with whom he won the Junior World Cup last year.

Johann Muller is a strong personality, and South African players are known for their predilection of getting involved in running teams more than most. Together with Doak and Bell, and the newbie, Anscombe, they may look to fashion a team that is much more reliant on players' leadership to play and be successful.

Meanwhile, Anscombe can work well with McLaughlin to bring through the new players from the Ulster Academy, and give youth its chance. The involvement of quiet benefactors in funding and keeping the talents of the like of Muller and Piennar may also have a part to play in the future.

Interesting times at Ulster Rugby, and there's likely to be a couple more surprise signings before long, I'd wager.

BelfastNI - I didn't read that article as being anti-Humphreys at all. Ulster are in a situation of bringing in a new coach while the incumbent one is seeing success on the pitch. That is a newsworthy story by anyone's standard and the average associate fan should expect those questions to be asked in print.

Since the announcement McLaughlin has got a lot less conservative in his decisions and that has helped the team in the last few weeks. It's almost as though he is only now starting to follow his instinct rather than the Collins guide to rugby coaching. However it is too little too late for him and Ulster are 100% doing the right thing by bringing in Anscombe.

My post was perhaps more based on an overview of much of what has been written. You're right that journalists need to ask these questions, but they were asked and answered clearly when the announcement was made. However, many commentators are ignoring those explanations again and again and again to write the same old stuff - and it's boring!

There are no quiet benefactors other than the IRFU and sponsors, I'm not sure what you mean.

What really annoyed me last week was Quinlan saying it wasn't like they were going for an established coach, and cited John Kirwan as an example. Ulster Rugby conducted interviews, extensive research on all candidates, and deemed Kirwan was no better than what we already had. Anscombe was the man who out-performed him and other established candidates like Michael Cheika in that interview process.

I think it's important to hold teams to account but we would be absolutely nowhere without Humphreys input so far and that is a cast iron fact. In terms of recruiting the right personnel for Ulster Rugby, his record is utterly outstanding. He's proved himself as an incredibly astute judge of character and talent.

I would think more would be said about this but the standard line towards the people he's recruited in the media is resentment over the fact they aren't Irish, not a clear-eyed view over what they've brought to Ulster Rugby.

And I don't think they appreciate the level of ambition in Ulster. They think this is an amazing season for us and can't understand why we're not genuflecting in gratitude. They simply don't comprehend that Ulster want to be a powerhouse of European Rugby in the way Toulouse, Leinster, Munster, Leicester etc. have been in the past and that the management are willing to make whatever decisions they feel they need to make to get us there.

It feels like the media and some fans have become over-focused on the success we've achieved in the Heineken Cup. It's wonderful for everyone. But we're in a position were we need other results to go our way to get into the Pro12 playoffs, we have much less players in the Ireland set-up than Munster or Leinster, we still rely on a clutch of non-Irish qualified players and our strength in depth is poor. We have a LONG way to go to get where we want to be even if we win the Heineken Cup this season.

We can be happy because we've achieved one of our goals; to become competitive at the top level of European Rugby, at least this season. To put the structures in place for us to do that every season there are two things we need to do.

1) we need to do is improve our Academy structures and start generating players who are ready to compete at Pro 12 level right away. You can see this in Leinster and Toulouse.
2) we need to do is improve the competitiveness of the fringe players in the squad so that a) we can start competing on two fronts and b) we're not reliant on having an injury-free XV to beat the big teams in Europe.

Bringing in a new Head Coach to work with the seniors whilst diverting our current Head Coach (who I think is an outstanding coach) to strengthen our Academy moves us closer to those two stepping stones. Humphreys may be getting some incredible flak but this could be a true master stroke.

Anyone else hear the rumours about Andi Kyriacou off to Cardiff Blues? That would mean Niall Annett will be staying here next season, which is great. He's a talent. Kyriacou being moved on... he was a silly boy in Treviso, but I've always liked him on the pitch.

Slightly disappointed but I don't think we are weakened in having Best, Brady and Annett as our hookers if this is true. The guy I'm most disappointed to see move on this year is Ian Whitten.

Notch wrote:There are no quiet benefactors other than the IRFU and sponsors, I'm not sure what you mean.

What really annoyed me last week was Quinlan saying it wasn't like they were going for an established coach, and cited John Kirwan as an example. Ulster Rugby conducted interviews, extensive research on all candidates, and deemed Kirwan was no better than what we already had. Anscombe was the man who out-performed him and other established candidates like Michael Cheika in that interview process.

I think it's important to hold teams to account but we would be absolutely nowhere without Humphreys input so far and that is a cast iron fact. In terms of recruiting the right personnel for Ulster Rugby, his record is utterly outstanding. He's proved himself as an incredibly astute judge of character and talent.

I would think more would be said about this but the standard line towards the people he's recruited in the media is resentment over the fact they aren't Irish, not a clear-eyed view over what they've brought to Ulster Rugby.

And I don't think they appreciate the level of ambition in Ulster. They think this is an amazing season for us and can't understand why we're not genuflecting in gratitude. They simply don't comprehend that Ulster want to be a powerhouse of European Rugby in the way Toulouse, Leinster, Munster, Leicester etc. have been in the past and that the management are willing to make whatever decisions they feel they need to make to get us there.

It feels like the media and some fans have become over-focused on the success we've achieved in the Heineken Cup. It's wonderful for everyone. But we're in a position were we need other results to go our way to get into the Pro12 playoffs, we have much less players in the Ireland set-up than Munster or Leinster, we still rely on a clutch of non-Irish qualified players and our strength in depth is poor. We have a LONG way to go to get where we want to be even if we win the Heineken Cup this season.

We can be happy because we've achieved one of our goals; to become competitive at the top level of European Rugby, at least this season. To put the structures in place for us to do that every season there are two things we need to do.

1) we need to do is improve our Academy structures and start generating players who are ready to compete at Pro 12 level right away. You can see this in Leinster and Toulouse.
2) we need to do is improve the competitiveness of the fringe players in the squad so that a) we can start competing on two fronts and b) we're not reliant on having an injury-free XV to beat the big teams in Europe.

Bringing in a new Head Coach to work with the seniors whilst diverting our current Head Coach (who I think is an outstanding coach) to strengthen our Academy moves us closer to those two stepping stones. Humphreys may be getting some incredible flak but this could be a true master stroke.

Same thing, different words.

There is a quiet benefactor helping out, I understand, besides the IRFU and commercial sponsors.

Can you say anything to back up that claim though Pot? We have heard all sorts about this and to be honest i dont give two hoots but all this is complete speculation and i will believe it when UR (or Geoff) confirm it

Standulstermen wrote:Can you say anything to back up that claim though Pot? We have heard all sorts about this and to be honest i dont give two hoots but all this is complete speculation and i will believe it when UR (or Geoff) confirm it

Quiet benefactors by their nature like to remain quiet, so I would doubt UR would confirm or say anything about it.

yet you have heard this?

Cant be that quiet

Standulstermen wrote:yet you have heard this?

Cant be that quiet

Outer Mongolia has many ears.

Notch wrote:Anyone else hear the rumours about Andi Kyriacou off to Cardiff Blues? That would mean Niall Annett will be staying here next season, which is great. He's a talent. Kyriacou being moved on... he was a silly boy in Treviso, but I've always liked him on the pitch.

Slightly disappointed but I don't think we are weakened in having Best, Brady and Annett as our hookers if this is true. The guy I'm most disappointed to see move on this year is Ian Whitten.

Notch good post on Humph et al. Logan is also being really influential from what I've heard and they are both in for the long run.

Regarding Annett that's great news. He is exactly type of Academy player who should be getting plenty of PRO12 time with Ulster and has the potential to compete with Sherry as Ireland's best young hooker.

Does anyone have any ides when we start to increase the size of our squad?

I know we need quality as well as quantity but we have a very small squad no matter how you look at it. Surely there must be more money floating about with our league and cup showings in the past 2 seasons?

And, did anyone hear what Craig Gilroy had to say about BM after the Munster game? From his comments it sounds to me like we have issues with the academy and there could be no-one better suited to that role than BM. I know BM is/was gutted to not be continuing with the senior team but he will be such a boost for our academy that Anscombe doesn't need to be better than BM for us to be in a better position for this move.

Well Gilroy graduated from our Academy it was still incumbent on Brian McLaughlin to teach him ball transfer and fend when he reached senior level. He's talented but entirely raw as he hadn't been exposed to quality coaching before the senior set-up. It's a very basic skill he's learning a year into his senior career as a professional player!

Thats something that could undermine our whole operation regardless of who is coaching the senior team.

In the defence of the current Academy coaches, Gilroy started playing rugby late and at backrow. He was fast-tracked through the Academy. So it's understandable he still has some things to learn about the game. Like Nevin Spence, he's come to the senior set-up under coached and raw. They both need less in the way of tunnel vision.

Improving the quality of our coaching set-up outside our senior team is a long process but moving a talented coach like McLaughlin across is a very positive move

Gilroy definately played on the wing at school and I think he played minis too.

Annett played in the back row at MCB. Could you be getting the 2 mixed up?

Pot Hale wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:Can you say anything to back up that claim though Pot? We have heard all sorts about this and to be honest i dont give two hoots but all this is complete speculation and i will believe it when UR (or Geoff) confirm it

Quiet benefactors by their nature like to remain quiet, so I would doubt UR would confirm or say anything about it.

That's the old Rory McIlroy thing that did the rounds a while back. Nice if it were true but I have doubts that it is.

No, Gilroy started in the backrow and moved to wing in his later years in Methody. By the time he reached Schools Cup level he was playing wing.

Adam Macklin was an 8 at school too.

Seems like the MCB back row is the place to be!

At least Gilroy had moved by 16 or 17. The others played there till 18!

Macklin played in the centre up to medallion level and was playing prop for the Ireland underage sides while still playing 8 for Methody.

I wouldn't get too worried about the Dublin Press - Farrelly et al - they are all lining up to criticise Ulster Rugby for the McLaughlin move - and obviously are going on about more the further Ulster get in the HC.

JayMaster3000 wrote:I'm not to sure what's wrong with Hump? Why is everyone so keen to single him out?

Because he is not good enough.

Sorry to be harsh but we won in Limerick inspite of our 10 not because of him. Humphreys is currently a passanger.
The Connacht game convinced me we start next season with a line up of Pienaer, Jackson, Wallace.
I also have to say I was not impressed by Faloon, fortuntely Birch did well and in patches so did Diack.
D'aRcy on the wing looked like a fish out of water, McComb was poor, Macklin looked solid. Court isn'ty a TH but we already knew that - give Macklin and Fitzpatrcik a half each next week and then decide for Edinburgh.

Kyriacou is indeed away and maybe Barker too.

Looks like Marshall is out for the season.

Humph searching hard for a backrower. We are behind the curve ball on this though as we thought we would be allowed to keep Wannenberg.

We are going to see a lot more of the kids next year that is for sure.

Lot of speculation of silent benefactors -but no evidence.

geoff998rugby wrote:

JayMaster3000 wrote:I'm not to sure what's wrong with Hump? Why is everyone so keen to single him out?

Because he is not good enough.

Sorry to be harsh but we won in Limerick inspite of our 10 not because of him. Humphreys is currently a passanger.
The Connacht game convinced me we start next season with a line up of Pienaer, Jackson, Wallace.
I also have to say I was not impressed by Faloon, fortuntely Birch did well and in patches so did Diack.
D'aRcy on the wing looked like a fish out of water, McComb was poor, Macklin looked solid. Court isn'ty a TH but we already knew that - give Macklin and Fitzpatrcik a half each next week and then decide for Edinburgh.

Kyriacou is indeed away and maybe Barker too.

Looks like Marshall is out for the season.

Humph searching hard for a backrower. We are behind the curve ball on this though as we thought we would be allowed to keep Wannenberg.

We are going to see a lot more of the kids next year that is for sure.

Lot of speculation of silent benefactors -but no evidence.

I also thought Darcy was poor, and was puzzled he was on wing. To my knowledge, every other time Darcy and Terblanche have played together, Darcy was 15 and Terblanche on wing. Perhaps they didnt want to shift Terblanche about in the run up to semi.

I suppose there are questions that need to be asked about why Mclaughlin chose to play several players out of position in such an important game.

To my knowledge that was the first time Jackson and Spence played together in the centre. Whitten has played well on the wing, but ultimately he's an inside centre and D'arcy is a fullback.

When Diack came off we had 3 flankers, including 2 opensides, on in the backrow.

Its not surprising that our defence was so poor when we has so many unfamiliar combinations out there.

geoff998rugby wrote:

JayMaster3000 wrote:I'm not to sure what's wrong with Hump? Why is everyone so keen to single him out?

Because he is not good enough.

Sorry to be harsh but we won in Limerick inspite of our 10 not because of him. Humphreys is currently a passanger.
The Connacht game convinced me we start next season with a line up of Pienaer, Jackson, Wallace.
I also have to say I was not impressed by Faloon, fortuntely Birch did well and in patches so did Diack.
D'aRcy on the wing looked like a fish out of water, McComb was poor, Macklin looked solid. Court isn'ty a TH but we already knew that - give Macklin and Fitzpatrcik a half each next week and then decide for Edinburgh.

Kyriacou is indeed away and maybe Barker too.

Looks like Marshall is out for the season.

Humph searching hard for a backrower. We are behind the curve ball on this though as we thought we would be allowed to keep Wannenberg.

We are going to see a lot more of the kids next year that is for sure.

Lot of speculation of silent benefactors -but no evidence.

geoff surely Jackson has played his way into the last 2 Rabo games at 10 at least, was maybe a game well look back at in a few years and say that was the game that was the beginning off him

Theres no doubting Humphries techical ability and Saturday showed his heart but hes too easy to knock aside and mentally hes weak and ultimately that is what makes good and great players

I would hope so.

Jackson should start against Leinster - if Humphreys starts and is poor - again what do we do against Edinburgh ?

Marshall's injury means that Pienaer at 10 is no longer an option .

That is a real shame about Marshall. With regards to the Connacht game I have to agree that Faloon did not have a great game. Birch looked pretty good when he came on, even if he was playing at 8. Will he be challenging Henry for the 7 shirt next season?

We have to start Humphreys against Leinster and Edinburgh. We've made our bed and have to stick with him now.

Jackson hasn't played enough to be thrown in at this stage of the season.

Losing Marshall is a huge blow as it removes that option of moving Pienaar to 10 if Humph is struggling.

Is Paddy Wallace an option at 10?

So who gets the SF bench spot? Paddy J or Porter?

Porter has to be on the bench clive, you can't not have scrum-half cover.

roddersm wrote:We have to start Humphreys against Leinster and Edinburgh. We've made our bed and have to stick with him now.

Jackson hasn't played enough to be thrown in at this stage of the season.

Losing Marshall is a huge blow as it removes that option of moving Pienaar to 10 if Humph is struggling.

Is Paddy Wallace an option at 10?

We have probably left it too late to move Wallace to 10, but you know that is a good idea I think. Because then we could draft Whitten into 12, and Cave has said before that they have grown up together and are very comfortable together in the centres.

Have to say i'm tempted by Paddy Wallace at 10. Take the Leinster game to get used to it. But I'd have Spence at 12. He looked VERY hungry v Connacht.

Imv Humphreys is so poor at the moment the SF could blow up in our face because of his form and no Afoa.

Court is not a TH and Humph is pants at the moment.
Have faith in your kids rather keep banging your head against a brick wall.

Court at TH isn't working
Humphreys at 10 isn't working.

To try the alternatives against Leinster is not a gamble as we have nothing to loose. Jackson outplayed Humphreys against Connacht, Macklin outplayed Court at TH. Give them their chance.

Also Fitzpatrcik is fit, albeit not match fit, so give him a run out as well.

I wouldn't start anyone other than Humph at 10. The question for me is what the best back up option is if he is struggling or we get an injury.

a) Wallace to 10, Whitten/Spence to 12.

b) Jackson to 10

c) Pienaar to 10, Porter to 9

In my opinion a and c present the least risk at this stage. Probably c is the best bet.

To me Jackson seemed to relish the reponsibility on Saturday and with the Rabo as good as gone for us is it not a chance to look to the future rather than going back to Wallace?

What does it say if after his performance hes told well done but it means nothing were going to try someone else there that everyone knows isnt his best position

If Jackson starts it wouldn't be at 12 and most definitely wouldn't be at the expense of Paddy Wallace.

Its not about the future Marty its about winning a HEC SF.

The time for showing faith in the kids was before xmas, not now.

Jackson is not ready to play 10 in a HEC SF imo. He's hardly played this season at all, this is not the time to throw him in.

Do you genuinely believe they will start anyone other than humph at 10 Geoff. I agree with much of what you write but it would be a gargantuan call to throw Jackson in against Edinburgh. I would applaud it to be honest but I think we need to start Jackson next season between our two experienced guys.

It would almost to good if we were able to reach a heineken final with Macklin at 3 and Jackson at 10. No doubt Farrelly would still complain but still.

rodders Im not saying satart him against Edinburgh Im saying start him against what'll be a strong Leinster side and ask questions of him but we cant keep throwing Humpries in and keeping our fingers crossed he plays well this season has been a big step backwards for him after some strong showings last season

I think we need to start most of the side against Leinster that we do against Edinburgh.

The only person I'd be tempted to leave out is Ferris. Hes capable of hitting the ground running in the SF and I don't want another injury scare like we had in the QF.

I think we've left ourselves in a position where we now have no choice but to keep starting humph and hope he can get the job done. Apart from Marshall/Pienaar we haven't looked at the alternatives and now is not the time to start.

Jackson will have to wait until next season imo.

roddersm wrote:Its not about the future Marty its about winning a HEC SF.

The time for showing faith in the kids was before xmas, not now.

Jackson is not ready to play 10 in a HEC SF imo. He's hardly played this season at all, this is not the time to throw him in.

Wasn't this situation the making of Jonny Sexton?