Ulster 2014/2015, Part 3

First topic message reminder :

Continue to discuss Ulsters lack of back row options and season in general

Munchkin wrote:

Higher_Ground wrote:I'm not the citing officer. But he's not running backwards, he's running forwards, and at the moment he passes the player, he makes a very unnatural movement of turning sideways and leaving a trailing leg which catches the players head. Anyone's guess as to why. Not the worst thing I've seen on a field, but if they've gone to the trouble of citing him, he'll probably get a short ban.  I'm not agreeing with it, just saying what I think will happen.

It seems that you are implying Marshall intended to connect boot to head, because you apparently can't fathom why else he would make such 'a very unnatural movement'. Look at it again. There is nothing unnatural about his movement. Marshall was obviously positioning himself to face the advancing Scarlets by turning around, and in doing so he clipped the player by accident.

It is ludicrous that Marshall has been cited for this. Pathetic.

Given it was a head injury it may be a case its better to cite and look at it in more depth and be sure rather than not. I seen it as it happened and there was nothing in it other than not watching where he was going

Chunky Norwich wrote:Not much in the Marshall one. But the Wilson one is a ban. Terrible use of the forearm on a players nose. No excuse.

Really disappointed that we didn't get to see the replay on the TMO feed (twice it was cut short).

But then the TMO was from County Antrim, so it figures.

I'm not sure about that, Chunky. You would really need to see it from a clear angle, before drawing any sort of conclusion. From what I can see, it looks as if wilson is trying to dislodge the ball, and must have smacked the player on the nose while doing so. It probably will get a ban though.

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:Not much in the Marshall one. But the Wilson one is a ban. Terrible use of the forearm on a players nose. No excuse.

Really disappointed that we didn't get to see the replay on the TMO feed (twice it was cut short).

But then the TMO was from County Antrim, so it figures.

I'm not sure about that, Chunky. You would really need to see it from a clear angle, before drawing any sort of conclusion. From what I can see, it looks as if wilson is trying to dislodge the ball, and must have smacked the player on the nose while doing so. It probably will get a ban though.

If your technique to dislodge the ball is to swing a haymaker towards a player carrying the ball in his upper chest, you are being utterly reckless.

marty2086 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Higher_Ground wrote:I'm not the citing officer. But he's not running backwards, he's running forwards, and at the moment he passes the player, he makes a very unnatural movement of turning sideways and leaving a trailing leg which catches the players head. Anyone's guess as to why. Not the worst thing I've seen on a field, but if they've gone to the trouble of citing him, he'll probably get a short ban.  I'm not agreeing with it, just saying what I think will happen.

It seems that you are implying Marshall intended to connect boot to head, because you apparently can't fathom why else he would make such 'a very unnatural movement'. Look at it again. There is nothing unnatural about his movement. Marshall was obviously positioning himself to face the advancing Scarlets by turning around, and in doing so he clipped the player by accident.

It is ludicrous that Marshall has been cited for this. Pathetic.

Given it was a head injury it may be a case its better to cite and look at it in more depth and be sure rather than not. I seen it as it happened and there was nothing in it other than not watching where he was going

I had seen at the time also, Marty, and thought, although unfortunate, there was nothing in it. With head injuries being such a hot topic at the moment, and rightly so, you might be right. Still doesn't deserve a ban though.

Can't help thinking back to the fly hack boot to the head on Olding this season, and the general acceptance that it was just one of those unfortunate accidents, even though that incident looked worse...

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:Not much in the Marshall one. But the Wilson one is a ban. Terrible use of the forearm on a players nose. No excuse.

Really disappointed that we didn't get to see the replay on the TMO feed (twice it was cut short).

But then the TMO was from County Antrim, so it figures.

I'm not sure about that, Chunky. You would really need to see it from a clear angle, before drawing any sort of conclusion. From what I can see, it looks as if wilson is trying to dislodge the ball, and must have smacked the player on the nose while doing so. It probably will get a ban though.

If your technique to dislodge the ball is to swing a haymaker towards a player carrying the ball in his upper chest, you are being utterly reckless.

"Haymaker" Nothing like a bit of hyperbole. Yep, it was probably a bit reckless though, but nothing to indicate it was intentional.

The Wilson one is more understandable in terms of potentially meriting a citing. I think the first view in real time is the best. He's coming 'around the corner' so to speak. He is trying to come around and sack George Earle before the maul is formed, meaning he needs to move fast and decisively. He's already too late as the Scarlets pack engineer a good ball transfer to Barclay. As the ball is transferred and Barclay comes to get the ball his arm has hit him in the face. Personally think if he hits the player in the face, thats not a red card offence unless its intentional. Think it was clumsy but cannot see how you would give more than a yellow card maximum- the TMO and referee were content it wasn't a penalty. It only looks like a 'haymaker' from behind in slow motion, when you look at the side on view you can see he is trying to wrap his arm around to grab George Earle.

I don't know what you're talking about the TMO for, because the referee sees one replay on the big screen and decides he's happy. If he wants to see more replays at different angles he can see them, he decided he didn't need to. It was very much a decision given by the referee who was keen to get on with the game. Rightly or wrongly the decision to not award the penalty and not to look at more angles was taken by the ref.

It is not too easy to see exactly what happened in the Marshall incident, at least on my screen, but it very hard to know how it was worse than what happened to North in the game against England.

I can't quite remember but was there even a penalty after that?

Nope

Which, after mccloskeys citing further shows that we are seeing a growing trend in inconsistencies between citings and citing commissioners. With the RWC only months away it think we are going to see this issue blow up big time.

Reckless doesn't take intent into the equation, so a smack in the chops with a closed hand is not acceptable. That said is rather he isn't banned as its Connacht next and it would be be original to the Scarlets, the team Wilson would have 'offended' to have him play, given the current table position of Connacht and the Scarlets

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Reckless doesn't take intent into the equation, so a smack in the chops with a closed hand is not acceptable.

I'm fairly sure that 'reckless' is only a qualifier for dangerous play such as upending a player or taking him out in the air. I don't think he put any player in danger of injury here.

I agree Stand U the citing process could very easily get out of control. However the Unions need to be a lot more specific about what sort of process they want. If the same people don't sit on all the panels then how is there going to be any consistency?

It is questionable whether consistency could be achieved anyway. Every case is unique and therefore subjective. The process could end up being far more legalised with every aspect of a citing tested against precedent and setting new precedents. The process set up to police foul play could end up taking forever to carry out and cost a fortune. Does rugby really want to go down that road?

I don't see why any offence should carry a minimum and maximum ban. Neither do I see why the CC should explain any of their decisions in public - giving one player a reduction because of no previous record, yet giving another player (with no previous record) an extension to set an example is ridiculous and obvious inconsistency. It would be far better to fully explain the decision to the player in private but offer no explanation for public consumption, thus avoiding the accusations of inconsistency that undermine the whole process.

World Rugby need to take a lead on this and support a structure that will consistently deal with citing and players.

Notch wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Reckless doesn't take intent into the equation, so a smack in the chops with a closed hand is not acceptable.

I'm fairly sure that 'reckless' is only a qualifier for dangerous play such as upending a player or taking him out in the air. I don't think he put any player in danger of injury here.

Depends what's classed as an injury. Barclay was caught in the nose, causing it to bleed, so it could have easily have been broken, which would have been an injury.

The Great Aukster wrote:

I don't see why any offence should carry a minimum and maximum ban. Neither do I see why the CC should explain any of their decisions in public - giving one player a reduction because of no previous record, yet giving another player (with no previous record) an extension to set an example is ridiculous and obvious inconsistency. It would be far better to fully explain the decision to the player in private but offer no explanation for public consumption, thus avoiding the accusations of inconsistency that undermine the whole process.

World Rugby need to take a lead on this and support a structure that will consistently deal with citing and players.

I do see the need for a minimum ban for incidents. Set a structure in place and adhere to it. Increase in bans should only handed out to repeat offenders, not to make examples, its the only way to bring consistency.

I am not against citing's, I am all for them. Its consistency I want.

Nick Williams' illegal clearout has ended Aaron Shingler's season.

No citing though.

Joke league.

Chunky Norwich wrote:Nick Williams' illegal clearout has ended Aaron Shingler's season.

No citing though.

Joke league.

YAWN!

Considering theres a clearance like that in every league and a tackle like it on Hogg on Saturday with no citing do you want to call the 6N a joke?

marty2086 wrote:
Considering theres a clearance like that in every league and a tackle like it on Hogg on Saturday with no citing do you want to call the 6N a joke?

The citing procedures are yes.

Tables turned and one of your Ulster heroes misses the rest of the season - you'd be screaming like a girl that it should have deserved a citing.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Considering theres a clearance like that in every league and a tackle like it on Hogg on Saturday with no citing do you want to call the 6N a joke?

The citing procedures are yes.

Tables turned and one of your Ulster heroes misses the rest of the season - you'd be screaming like a girl that it should have deserved a citing.

We're used to losing them for long periods of time and learn how to get on with it instead of bitching and moaning, we could easily call it a joke of league making us play the Dragons on a Sunday evening. Don't they know the advantage that gives them?! And making us play away from Belfast? I mean WTF?!!!

Wilson should get a short ban - 2 games

If Marshall is banned it will be a complete and utter farce

Going back to Henderson - saying he is not confident in calling the lineout is a bit different to saying he is not interested in learning the detail of play.

If he wasn't Schmidt wouldn't have him in the squad.

The reality is he will be a main stay of the Irish side in the years to come.
What do we have - if you ignore POC, DOC and McCarthy after the world cup
O'Connor, Foley, Kearney not yet ready to step up to the mark

That leave us with only Toner, Tuohy, Henderson and an injury prone Ryan.
Toner can call the line outs

Of course we will miss POC big time he has been such a big presence in the side and yes Henderson is not yet ready to step into his shoes but he is the best prospect we have and by a country mile

geoff999rugby wrote:Going back to Henderson - saying he is not confident in calling the lineout is a bit different to saying he is not interested in learning the detail of play.

If he wasn't Schmidt wouldn't have him in the squad.

The reality is he will be a main stay of the Irish side in the years to come.
What do we have - if you ignore POC, DOC and McCarthy after the world cup
O'Connor, Foley, Kearney not yet ready to step up to the mark

That leave us with only Toner, Tuohy, Henderson and an injury prone Ryan.
Toner can call the line outs

Of course we will miss POC big time he has been such a big presence in the side and yes Henderson is not yet ready to step into his shoes but he is the best prospect we have and by a country mile

Confidence calling the lineout doesn't come into it  - from what BOD said he is very poor at knowing the calls (which I took to mean he wasn't doing his homework).

He is in the team as a bench lock because there is no one else at the moment to cover it. He would make the 23 as a backrower.

Foley is way ahead of Henderson in his development as a lock (including calling the lineouts). Foley has been the starting lock since D Ryan has got injured for Munster. If he was fit, he would be on the bench now having started with McCarthy against Georgia and 20 mins off the bench for Toner against Australia (in preference to McCarthy).

Ryan is not injury prone. He had a specific problem with his toe. He might be back this weekend for Munster. Hopefully it works out because if it doesn't he will have to retire (which will give Foley even more gametime with Munster).

Henderson needs to get the finger out if he wants to be a lock - otherwise he will be permanent bench material and there will be no central contract. He is 23 now, so not the baby he looks.

Chunky Norwich wrote:Tables turned and one of your Ulster heroes misses the rest of the season - you'd be screaming like a girl that it should have deserved a citing.

That would make two of us then, wouldn't it?

I am very upset that, given our stranglehold on this league and that IT IS OUR LEAGUE AND EVERYONE MUST DO WHAT WE SAY, they have had the temerity to cite two fine upstanding Ulstermen. Especially given that Wilson's actions were reviewed by the TMO and the ref at the time.

Maybe you should write to the League, Norwich, suggesting that every time a player is injured in a collision, the other player should be banned? If you put your return address as one in Ireland, they will probably make that a rule, such is our power.

Shame for Shingler. A good player, and a loss to the Scarlets. No-one wants any player's season to end early. Doesn't mean that there's a Machiavellian, moustache-twirling dastardly Ulster genius behind his injury.

Still. Your stoicism is an inspiration to us all.

Sin - if Tuohy was fit, Foley would be at home watching 24 box-sets.

Unless you can point to an Ireland game for which Foley was preferred to an available Tuohy or Henderson?

Henderson has just turned 23, a week or so ago. He has fifteen caps for Ireland. Starting in 2012.

Foley will be 27 in May. He has two Ireland caps, going back to last year.

Foley is ahead. YAAAAY MUNSTERRRRR!

The Wilson incident was accidental - he's trying to thump the ball and clocks Barclay which he appologises for straight away. A short ban at worst.

Ryan is some player, it would be a shame if he had to retire but comparing Foley to Hendo is laughable.... Hendo could be the greatest Irish forward ever produced.... like Neil Best and Willie John combined... Foley is a poor mans Mick O'Driscoll, a journeyman in waiting. Crazy talk.

Foley's a good player. And I doubt Hendo will be quite that good...

It's funny that everyone is obsessing over BOD's comments. Did anyone hear him talking about Madigan during the Wasps-Leinster game? Capoable of moments of magic, but not enough of a "general" to be first choice outhalf was hsi take.

Folley is nowhere near Henderson or Tuohy.
The only reason he started against Georgia was because Henderson and Tuohy were injured

Reminds me all the hype about Nagle after a couple of games - whatever happened to him.
Foley is short of international class

Hence my observation next year Ireland will down to Toner, Henderson, Tuohy and, hopefully, Ryan
Ryan hasn't played for a year there has to be a question mark - hope he makes it

Don Alfonso wrote:Foley's a good player. And I doubt Hendo will be quite that good...

It's funny that everyone is obsessing over BOD's comments. Did anyone hear him talking about Madigan during the Wasps-Leinster game? Capoable of moments of magic, but not enough of a "general" to be first choice outhalf was hsi take.

BOD is spot on about Madigan hence no one is discussing it. Even Madsers own mother doesn't think he's a flrst choice 10....

That's a serious talent pool, Although I'd say the dynamic of the whole team will have to shift when POC's no longer about.

Any idea when Marshall and Wilson's KANGAROO COURT - sorry hearings - are?

geoff999rugby wrote:Folley is nowhere near Henderson or Tuohy.
The only reason he started against Georgia was because Henderson and Tuohy were injured

Reminds me all the hype about Nagle after a couple of games - whatever happened to him.
Foley is short of international class

Hence my observation next year Ireland will down to Toner, Henderson, Tuohy and, hopefully, Ryan
Ryan hasn't played for a year there has to be a question mark - hope he makes it

Totally agree - Nagle is a very good comparison, both guys too small to make it as to class locks.

Ryan was very lightweight too but had such a massive presence in the loose, he gets away with it. I'd have McCarthy before Foley too, maybe even Robbie Diack.

Chunky Norwich wrote:
But then the TMO was from County Antrim, so it figures.

"Referee: Ben Whitehouse (WRU)"

Incidents like these happen often in rugby, I'm sure Marshall and Wilson didn't purposely do it, I don't think any player purposely does it. It's a tough game to play and these things happen. But still, I don't see you condemning these players in the manner you would condemn Liam Williams. Need perspective from the Belfast crew please.

rodders wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Folley is nowhere near Henderson or Tuohy.
The only reason he started against Georgia was because Henderson and Tuohy were injured

Reminds me all the hype about Nagle after a couple of games - whatever happened to him.
Foley is short of international class

Hence my observation next year Ireland will down to Toner, Henderson, Tuohy and, hopefully, Ryan
Ryan hasn't played for a year there has to be a question mark - hope he makes it

Totally agree - Nagle is a very good comparison, both guys too small to make it as to class locks.

Ryan was very lightweight too but had such a massive presence in the loose, he gets away with it. I'd have McCarthy before Foley too, maybe even Robbie Diack.

I think you're going overboard a tad there. I'd certainly have Foley before Diack at second row, and wouldn't be averse to giving Foley the opportunity to prove he can edge out McCarthy.

The Saint wrote:Incidents like these happen often in rugby, I'm sure Marshall and Wilson didn't purposely do it, I don't think any player purposely does it. It's a tough game to play and these things happen. But still, I don't see you condemning these players in the manner you would condemn Liam Williams. Need perspective from the Belfast crew please.

Your first few lines I completely agree with. And if Liam WIlliams was involved in these incidents, he'd get the same shrug from me. Nothing incidents.

But please don't criticise us for condemnations you imagine we would make in a different set of hypothetical circumstances.

If - when - we make unfair condemnations, of other team's players, call us on it. When we're being one-eyed, say so. But you seem to agree with most Uslter fans' takes on the incidents in question, yet tell us to have persepctive. How does that work? How can we demonstrate more perspective in this example? Should we write, "if it was Liam Williams involved, I wouldn't want him banned either?" Why mention Williams at all? He wasn't on the pitch.

Apologies if that feels overly defensive, but I feel like the Ulster thread si getting trolled here. Not by yourself, I hasten to add.

Don Alfonso wrote:Henderson has just turned 23, a week or so ago. He has fifteen caps for Ireland. Starting in 2012.

Foley will be 27 in May. He has two Ireland caps, going back to last year.

Foley is ahead. YAAAAY MUNSTERRRRR!

Henderson has 1 start as a lock with Ireland (v Argentina). 8 of his 12 bench appearances are as a flanker (out of a total of 15 caps - 3 starts, 12 sub appearances).

To summarise so far - Henderson is a very good impact sub who can cover lock & backrow.

You have to admit that the competition for starting lock in Munster would be a bit competitive.

He did get Man of the Match for his first start for Ireland versus Georgia as a lock. The following week he was on the bench against Australia (ahead of McCarthy).

He did well against Georgia but got a reality check against Saracens and Clermont.

geoff999rugby wrote:Folley is nowhere near Henderson or Tuohy.
The only reason he started against Georgia was because Henderson and Tuohy were injured

Reminds me all the hype about Nagle after a couple of games - whatever happened to him.
Foley is short of international class

Hence my observation next year Ireland will down to Toner, Henderson, Tuohy and, hopefully, Ryan
Ryan hasn't played for a year there has to be a question mark - hope he makes it

Henderson has started one international game as a lock v. Argentina. He isn't in the reckoning as a starter lock for Ireland until he takes it seriously. He is a very talented player. Hope he doesn't waste it.

Nagle injuries held him back. He wasn't aggressive enough either - very talented player though. He was offered a contract with Munster, but he got an opportunity to work in Washington DC as an intern in some sort of management company and do an MBA there I think. He could be back.

I'd happily have him ahead of McCarthy. I've been crystal clear on that.

A start against Georgia when we are missing basically everyone else does not impress me. Especially if you are arguing that means he's preferred to a player that started at lock against Argentina. I think Foley's a fine player, and will get a few more caps. But the idea that if POC was out and Foley was fit, he'd start ahead of Henderson I don't buy for a second.

I don't think he has had masses of competition at lock at Munster. Who has be been preferred to? POC? No. Ryan? No. DOC and Billy Holland? Fine. I'd take Alan O'Connor over both of them as well. And he's nowhere near international level.

rodders wrote:He did well against Georgia but got a reality check against Saracens and Clermont.

A least he was playing as a lock.

Don Alfonso wrote:I'd happily have him ahead of McCarthy. I've been crystal clear on that.

A start against Georgia when we are missing basically everyone else does not impress me. Especially if you are arguing that means he's preferred to a player that started at lock against Argentina. I think Foley's a fine player, and will get a few more caps. But the idea that if POC was out and Foley was fit, he'd start ahead of Henderson I don't buy for a second.

I don't think he has had masses of competition at lock at Munster. Who has be been preferred to? POC? No. Ryan? No. DOC and Billy Holland? Fine. I'd take Alan O'Connor over both of them as well. And he's nowhere near international level.

Foley was a starting lock with the Wolfhounds that played in the Tiblisi Cup while Henderson got one start as a lock in his 15 caps against Argentina.

If Henderson isn't learning the lineout calls, he most certainly will not be starting as a lock in a Schmidt coached Ireland.

No need to be insulting about DOC & Billy Holland (who has been playing really well for Munster).

Don Alfonso wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:
But then the TMO was from County Antrim, so it figures.

"Referee: Ben Whitehouse (WRU)"

TMO: Simon McDowell, richest man in Larne

So what's your point?

You see, Sin, what you're doing is focussing on lock rather than being good enough for international rugby.

I don't think I did insult the other Munster secodn rows.  I certainly didn't mean to. It's an honest opinion. I would genuinely take O'Connor over either of them, and I don't think starting over either of them is any indication at all that you're good enough to start for Ireland.

You said I "have admit that the competition for starting lock in Munster would be a bit competitive." I don't feel I do, with Ryan having been out thsi season. I think the idea that Munster have great talent at lock is an out-of-date truism, skewed by having POC, who si exemplary, and memories of Donncha Ryan when he was playing last season.

I'm not taking a cut out of Munster. I would kill for your depth at backrow. Letting playres like Dougall and Butler go, when they'd have seen oodles of game time at Ulster this season. (Less so next seaosn with Faloon coming back.) If POC retires completely after the RWC, I think Munster's second row stocks will actually be fairly mediocre, as a whole.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Don Alfonso wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:
But then the TMO was from County Antrim, so it figures.

"Referee: Ben Whitehouse (WRU)"

TMO: Simon McDowell, richest man in Larne

So what's your point?

So who made the decision? The Irish official or the Welsh official?

My point is that you're happy to sit and imply bias when an official is Irish, but not concerned at all when he's Welsh.

An Irish touch-judge reccomended a yellow card for Williams. The Welsh ref overturned that, thought a penalty was fair, when he saw it on the big screen. The Welsh ref saw Wilson's play on the big screen. Thought it was fair. But that doesn't matter, becasue the Irish officials (who, at least in the case of Williams, was MORE critical than the ref) are biased.

You;'re the one who started pointing out where officials where from. What was your point?

Don't answer that, by thw way. I know exactly what your point was.

Don Alfonso wrote:


So who made the decision? The Irish official or the Welsh official?

The Irish official. Because he wouldn't let the referee see this:

https://vine.co/v/O0DLTTErVrK

Ironically, I can't see that.

I can only presume it is Ulster players bathing in the blood of children.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Don Alfonso wrote:


So who made the decision? The Irish official or the Welsh official?

The Irish official. Because he wouldn't let the referee see this:

https://vine.co/v/O0DLTTErVrK

Funny how that played in the ground but hey don't let the facts get in the way of trolling

And just think, if you guys put a clearly obvious troll,like chunky on ignore instead of constantly quoting him the rest of us wouldn't have to read his drivel

Don Alfonso wrote:You see, Sin, what you're doing is focussing on lock rather than being good enough for international rugby.

I don't think I did insult the other Munster secodn rows.  I certainly didn't mean to. It's an honest opinion. I would genuinely take O'Connor over either of them, and I don't think starting over either of them is any indication at all that you're good enough to start for Ireland.

You said I "have admit that the competition for starting lock in Munster would be a bit competitive." I don't feel I do, with Ryan having been out thsi season. I think the idea that Munster have great talent at lock is an out-of-date truism, skewed by having POC, who si exemplary, and memories of Donncha Ryan when he was playing last season.

I'm not taking a cut out of Munster. I would kill for your depth at backrow. Letting playres like Dougall and Butler go, when they'd have seen oodles of game time at Ulster this season. (Less so next seaosn with Faloon coming back.) If POC retires completely after the RWC, I think Munster's second row stocks will actually be fairly mediocre, as a whole.

The initial point was that (according to Geoff) Henderson would be taking over as a lock from POC next season. He won't - because as a lock he is not ahead of Toner, Foley, Tuohy, McCarthy and hopefully Ryan (who will be ahead of them all if his injury works out) etc. because all of them do the required homework. Schmidt doesn't go for stars, he goes for players who know their 'detail' well and are able to implement the gameplan.

POC will have to finish the season with Munster anyway as they would want to know now if he was going to do that. We are all well aware of what a massive loss POC will be when he retires, but we will still be the best fixed Province for locks even after POC retires (if D Ryan gets back to full fitness). There are a couple of locks in the Academy as well and I think Brian Hayes' contract is up this year so he might want to return home now after his French adventure and who knows, Nagle may decide to come back after his sabbatical in the US.

Sin é wrote:The initial point was that (according to Geoff) Henderson would be taking over as a lock from POC next season. He won't - because as a lock he is not ahead of Toner, Foley, Tuohy, McCarthy and hopefully Ryan (who will be ahead of them all if his injury works out) etc. because all of them do the required homework. Schmidt doesn't go for stars, he goes for players who know their 'detail' well and are able to implement the gameplan.

POC will have to finish the season with Munster anyway as they would want to know now if he was going to do that. We are all well aware of what a massive loss POC will be when he retires, but we will still be the best fixed Province for locks even after POC retires (if D Ryan gets back to full fitness). There are a couple of locks in the Academy as well and I think Brian Hayes' contract is up this year so he might want to return home now after his French adventure and who knows, Nagle may decide to come back after his sabbatical in the US.

Ah Sin. C'mon.

Well, I don't know that Hendo will take over from POC next season. But he is definitely preferred to Foley and McCarthy at lock, at least.

Toner and POC are first choice, absolutely. You can talk about Hendo's starts all you want, Hendo has been chosen at lock ahead of Foley and McCarthy, when all are available. The other two have never been chosen over him at lock. That's fact. Can we agree on that? That's factually accurate.

The massive flaw in your argument is that Schmidt is choosing Henderson. He is playing. He's not starting is all. He's not starting ahead of Toner or POC because he's not as good as them. If he is such a shambles, why isn’t he out in the cold? The argument you're making is basically Schmidt needs attention to detail and hard work from hid starters, but obviously not his bench, because Hendo is on the bench. Unless the stuff about Hendo not knowing the calls is being somewhat over-egged...?

I’m happy for you that you’re confident about Munster’s second rows after POC retires. I know there’s some well-regarded academy guys. I absolutely disagree though.

Geoff's comment was that Henderson was getting POC's international contract when he retires. He is not - Toner got it a few weeks ago and Ryan has one as well.

In Henderson's 15 caps, he has had 1 start as a lock, with 5 sub appearances, 2 of those recently when no one else was available. By bringing him to Argentina, maybe they hoped POC might inspire him to get the finger out. There was no point sending him to play with the Wolfhounds because he would have needed someone to call the lineout for him.

He has had 10 sub appearances as a flanker. POM, SOB & Heislip have all recently signed central contracts, so he isn't going to get one there.

The argument I'm making is that he may make it as an international back row, but he isn't going to make it as an international lock on a central contract if he doesn't start putting a serious amount of work into studying opposition lineouts, knowing his calls, learning to run the lineout as well.

The belief we have in Munster is that someone always steps up to the plate when they are needed.