Ulster vs Glasgow Warriors - HC Round 5

First topic message reminder :

Preliminary Ulster squad has been announced - unfortunately Luke Marshall and Adam D'Arcy are ruled out. The former being a serious blow for Ulster.

Glasgow have been in excellent form recently, should be a good match.

Provisional Ulster squad to play Glasgow, Heineken Cup Pool 4, Fri 11th January, Ravenhill (kick off 8.00pm):

Ulster team:

(15-9): J Payne; A Trimble, D Cave, P Wallace, C Gilroy; P Jackson, R Pienaar;
(1-8): T Court, R Best, J Afoa, L Stevenson, I Henderson, R Diack, C Henry, N Williams;
Replacements (16-23): R Herring, C Black, D Fitzpatrick, N McComb, R Wilson, P Marshall, M Allen, C Cochrane

Glasgow team:
15 Murchie 14 Maitland 13 Dunbar 12 Horne 11 DTH 10 Weir 9 Pyrgos

1 Grant 2 Hall 3 Low 4 Ryder 5 Kellock (Captain) 6 Eddie 7 Harley 8 Strauss

Subs: 16. MacArthur 17 Reid 18 N/A 19 Campbell 20 Swinson 21 Matawalu 22 Wight 23 Hogg

Happens at amatuer level all the time but never seen it in professional game.

Ulster team:


(15-9): J Payne; A Trimble, D Cave, P Wallace, C Gilroy; P Jackson, R Pienaar;
(1-8): T Court, R Best, J Afoa, L Stevenson, I Henderson, R Diack, C Henry, N Williams;
Replacements (16-23): R Herring, C Black, D Fitzpatrick, N McComb, R Wilson, P Marshall, M Allen, C Cochrane.

Good to see Hendo back. Similarly deccie fitz. Marginally short in the back line with Allen and Cochrane on the bench. We wouldn't need any more injuries in that department.

Stag,

At amateur level one team might lend the other team a player.

I know underage is different because they wouldn't be allowed to play unequal numbers. The wee fella's team lent one of their replacements to the oppositio the other week. He was probably the opposition's best player by some margin.

Strongest ulster team named IMO. Jared and Deccie Fitz back. Need to go for the jugular here and make sure anything we get in France is a bonus

With all the madness going on around Belfast at the moment it is good to see that at least one visitor had a good time:


Ulster Rugby a credit to Belfast
I would like to express my pleasure at a recent visit to Ravenhill to watch Ulster against my hometown team, the Scarlets.

This was my first visit to the ground and only my second-ever to Belfast. I have to say that the Ulster supporters are the very best that I've had the privilege to meet.

The actual game was more than a tad one-sided, but throughout the game, I thought the home supporters were extremely well-behaved and a great example to sporting crowds everywhere. This was a great advert for the sport and for the people of Belfast.

I loved the whole Belfast experience and will return sooner rather than later. In the meantime, I wish Ulster Rugby and all your readers a happy New Year.

BARRIE WILLIAMS

Llanelli, Carmarthenshire



Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/letters/ulster-rugby-a-credit-to-belfast-16259612.html#ixzz2HZi7TAQ6

Any of the Glasgow lads know if the situation would be any different if Glasgow had anything riding on this game?

I mean, I could completly understand them being much less willing to risk fielding a "not quite fit" prop in a game like this when they still are in a good position in the Rabo but they might have risked it if they could still qualify for the knockout stages of the HEC?

That's a theme snowman. Saints fans had a ball as well and thats the weekend everything was kicking off. Guscott even had it on his weekly questions that a saints fan reckoned Belfast was the best place to come to

MrsP wrote:Any of the Glasgow lads know if the situation would be any different if Glasgow had anything riding on this game?

I mean, I could completly understand them being much less willing to risk fielding a "not quite fit" prop in a game like this when they still are in a good position in the Rabo but they might have risked it if they could still qualify for the knockout stages of the HEC?

Glasgow are leaving a fit prop at home because they can't add him to the squad. Should the tournament regs be revised for the future?

It's a tough one Caz.

My concern is that, as things stand, a team with more to lose than Glasgow would be tempted to field a prop who really isn't quite fit.

I totally agree with the principal of avoiding uncontested scrums at all (lose a player) cost.

Think leaving a prop out is unfair,

Imagine if it was a team that had a bad Scrum but great backs, verses a team based on the scrum, they may prefer to leave out a prop on the matchday squad and go 15 V 14 for last 30 mins with uncontested scrums.

Hear Friday is going to be a big day of protests, so get there early, one intresting thing I noticed is St Patricks day is a Flag day and 12th of July isn't?

Not going to this myself, but hope you have a good time Cari and other visitors, protests are confined mostly to just a few small streets/areas and easily avoided, nothing to worry about, live in belfast and have managed not even to see a protest yet.

As far as I know the ormeau road will be clear.

Mrs P,
Your first point is the one that worries me, this has thrown up a potentially serious player welfare issue and it's the regs on replacing squad members that I think should be looked at.

Can't really understand the inclusion of Fitzpatrick over Macklin - unless the Ulster team had to be named before the Glasgow one was available.

There is a real risk of uncontested scrums so having a scrummager on the bench coming back from injury with no match time, doesn't prepare him at all for Castres.

Macklin OTOH has done well enough in the scrums and offers a lot more in the loose to have impact in the last quarter. Maybe Anscombe intends to sub Afoa at the interval to rest him, and give DF some meaningful matchtime, but this compromises Ulster in this game?

Not really on thread but any news of the Ravens Team?

Scrap that its see its up now

Ulster Ravens XV & replacements v Bristol, British & Irish Cup, Friday 11th January, Deramore Park, Belfast, 7.30pm:

(15-9) Blane McIlroy; Neil Walsh, Stuart McCloskey, Niall O’Connor, Rory Scholes; Stuart Olding, Michael Heaney;
(1-8): Richard Lutton, Niall Annett (capt), Adam Macklin, Alan O’Connor, James Simpson, Conor Joyce, Ali Birch, James McMahon;
(16-22): Nigel Brady, Andy Warwick, John Donnan, Neil Faloon, John Creighton, Stuart Morrow, Chris Colvin.

Standby: Ross Adair

Hmmmmm!

A scrum half at 15 and an OH at 12.

I know they used NOC at 12 before. Anyone know how that went?

McIlroy played 15 at MCB I think

I think you're right shanker.

He played at both.

Updated op with teams - don't know what to make of Glasgow only going one prop on the bench

Read up Dodger.

They have no other prop fit and registered and the ERC wouldn't let them register anyone else. If they have 2 prop injuries we will have uncontested scrums and they will have to finish the game with 14.

The registration rules should be looked at for instances like this if they had of been allowed to bring their other fit prop we would not be talking about this. As for Fitzpatrick I imagine any gametime will potentially help him also everyone seem to think this will go to uncontested scrums but that may not be the case I mean to say how many times did we see uncontested scrums when we had 22 man squads for their to be uncontested scrums both props would have to get injured. Also Macklin I don't think has been playing that well I think Macklin has been fortunate the Court has been monstering other props recently and as for the loose I don't know about that recently having watched him and the only thing i remember about his loose work is he drops the ball.

But Neil,

Equally, how many times do we see any prop play the full 80mins nowadays?

I know it's not impossible but it not too common either especially as Lowe is possibly not fully fit.

well this is true MrsP but a lot of the time they are brought off due to tiredness not injury, Lowe off course will presumably be not fully fit but presuming no injuries off course then a prop should be able to make it to the end of the game when he is getting paid to do so off course I would expect a drop off but barring 2 injuries then I would imagine this will stay 15 v 15, well I hope it will anyways because lets face it who wants to see uncontested scrums.

Glasgow might?

Well that is a good point although if they have to take off a back with the quality of our backs that might not work out for them either, ah well I guess we will just have to see how it goes.

If it happens to go to uncontested scrums and Glasgow go down to 14 players it may not affect the Scots too much but im sure Saints and Castres wont be happy with it.

Is this Neil Faloon anything to Willy?

MrsP wrote:Read up Dodger.

They have no other prop fit and registered and the ERC wouldn't let them register anyone else. If they have 2 prop injuries we will have uncontested scrums and they will have to finish the game with 14.

.......yeh but its still bizarre and worthy of

3 props out is a lot but hardly unheard of, to be honest I would far rather the ERC let them bring someone else in but rules is rules I suppose.

Would be a shame if this killed the game as a spectacle.

Never really understood this rule - you should be able to add a prop as injury cover. If they weren't in the HC squad in the first place, then they likely aren't your best players and so I can't really see that the other side is prejudiced very much.

It's (potentially) essentially penalising the entire team because of injuries to three players.

Why do people think that there will be uncontested scrums and killing game as spectacle?

Nothing major has changed. They have named a backup prop and a backup hooker.

We've always had this at international level. Hence why guys who could cover both sides of scrum were very popular.

Major over reaction to this.

Just had a thought.

If the game did go to uncontested scrums would Glasgow be allowed to have only 7 players bound into the scrum or would they have to have 8?

Normally when a team is a man down they can choose but I would think it would be unfair to take 8 Ulstermen out of a set piece move and only take 7 Glasgow forwards, right? Otherwise there isn't much of a disadvantage at that set piece to being a man down. In fact, if a team is playing against a very dominant scrum it would be an advantage as opposed to playing contested with your full compliment.

MrsP they can do either. How they want to structure things in that situation is up to them.

It happens frequently. Its no more different than if a backrow gets yellow carded in most games.

clivemcl wrote:Is this Neil Faloon anything to Willy?

A cousin Clive. Tough as old boots just like Willy from good farming stock.

But surely the side that is down a man is actually at no disadvantage at all if they are allowed to only have 7 binding at an uncontested scrum while the other team has to have 8 bound?

First phase moves from that scrum would actually be better for a team with a weak scrum than if they actually had to contest it. That doesn't seem right. It is a totally different kettle of fish if the scrum is contested as it woud be if you had a forward in the bin. It that situation having 7 forwards is a disadvantage. But if there is no pushing...

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Not sure, MrsP, not normally - a non-prop would slot into the front row and they'd carry on as 15-vs-15, no?

Wasps and others antics in the Aviva Prem precipitated a rather fair rule change.

Personally, scrums are a big part of why I love this game and teams that can't keep a full front row on the pitch deserve to be disadvantaged. It is the worst thing that you can see in a game outside someone getting hurt.

I have a huge amount of sympathy for the situation Glasgow find themselves in but uncontested scrums are still unlikely unless they actively sought them out or where very unlucky.

MrsP wrote:But surely the side that is down a man is actually at no disadvantage at all if they are allowed to only have 7 binding at an uncontested scrum while the other team has to have 8 bound?

First phase moves from that scrum would actually be better for a team with a weak scrum than if they actually had to contest it. That doesn't seem right. It is a totally different kettle of fish if the scrum is contested as it woud be if you had a forward in the bin. It that situation having 7 forwards is a disadvantage. But if there is no pushing...

Do you then have to have an 8-man scrum yourself if its uncontested?

Personally I'm annoyed at the ERC regulation. There should be an exception for the front row in terms of registering additional players. I appreciate they don't want multiple ringers coming in but they should really make every effort that is humanely possible to ensure teams can name a full front row on their bench.

I always thought so Notch but it would seem not!

I was think the same Mrs P

If your not a great scrumming team, but with strong backs, playing a team like Saints, why not just leave a prop out,

Try to give all in scrums for 60 mins, replaceing say hooker and prop and half time to try and have fresh players, they remove a prop after 60 mins.

Uncontested Scrums would nullify a big part of Saints game, and if you only have 7 players in an uncontested scrum you don't really suffer,

It would appear to me this could be used a a very underhand tatic (Glasgow aren't doing it this way as they have a good scrum, etc, but other teams in future mipe).

(e)

Number of players: eight. A scrum must have eight players from each team. All eight players must stay bound to the scrum until it ends. Each front row must have three players in it, no more and no less. Two locks must form the second row.


Sanction: Penalty kick

Exception: When a team is reduced to fewer than fifteen for any reason, then the number of players of each team in the scrum may be similarly reduced. Where a permitted reduction is made by one team, there is no requirement for the other team to make a similar reduction. However, a team must not have fewer than five players in the scrum.

Sanction: Penalty kick

Yeah, just to be clear here.

I am not suggesting that Glasgow are trying to pull fast one in any way here, the situation just got me thinking about hypotheticals.

Araoz, Welsh and Kalman are not in the Heino squad so cannot be added to the team. Maitland was their addition to the squad after round 3 so can't make any more additions after adding Fainga'anuku to their original squad. Cusack, Hunter and Fainga'anuku are the other props in the squad and are injured.

It's a bit of a farce but Low and Grant can both play on both sides so if Low is injured then Grant goes to TH and Reid comes on at LH

Question is why was Hunter not replaced by one of Kalman/Welsh/Araoz?

Who did Glasgow use as their injury joker?

They brought in Maitland i think.

That's what I was wondering if that was what they had used their joker for but I couldn't find any reference to it on a quick "Juke" on the ERC site.

If Glasgow haven't a suitable prop and the ERC rules don't allow them to name one, why aren't they alllowed to nominate any other player from those qualified to take the bench place?

Fainga'anuku was their prop replacement. You're allowed 1 injury joker and one front row replacement in the Heineken squads. That's why it's a pain. So Hunter couldn't have been replaced by Araoz (only fit one of those three) as the FR replacement had already been made!

You have to have 3 front row on the bench.

(ii) a club may nominate a maximum of 23 players and a minimum of 19 players for each match. Included amongst such players must be a minimum of six players who can play in front row forward positions and who are suitably trained and experienced. The club must be able to replace each front row position on the first occasion of an injury to those positions. If unconstested scrums are ordered as a result of their being no suitably trained and experienced front row replacement available, the player whose departure cused the unconstested scrums may not be replaced, ie: the team will be required to play with 14 players

MrsP wrote:You have to have 3 front row on the bench.

(ii) a club may nominate a maximum of 23 players and a minimum of 19 players for each match. Included amongst such players must be a minimum of six players who can play in front row forward positions and who are suitably trained and experienced. The club must be able to replace each front row position on the first occasion of an injury to those positions. If unconstested scrums are ordered as a result of their being no suitably trained and experienced front row replacement available, the player whose departure cused the unconstested scrums may not be replaced, ie: the team will be required to play with 14 players

Except Glasgow have only five, so are flaunting that rule and therefore should presumably forfeit the game?

Ah sure we don't want that!

Cari has come all this way! It's bad enough that Tommy went and got himself injured!