ireland 6N warmdown and look ahead to RWC

First topic message reminder :



Two years in a row!! Both tournaments have been close run, but this team has come on leaps and bounds in the time Schmidt has been in charge. The team is playing with a confidence that has rarely been seen as consistently as this from past Irish teams, we can vary the gameplan to meet the needs of the contest, the new combinations are starting to gell, and we have genuine competition in most positions around the pitch.

So rather than scurrying around the rest of the forum attempting to put out fires that try to feebly illegitimise the championship win, I think we can look back on another positive campaign showing real growth but with plenty of areas for improvement.

Six Nations
Comfortable if not spectacular for the most part. The team looked in control in games versus Italy and France without impressing two much, both results felt like a job done. Against England and Scotland were the real high points. Ireland's plan of attack put England on the back foot for most of the game with Sexton and Murray managing the game brilliantly. Against Scotland it was great to see us play positive and expansive stuff, it is good to know we can play that ball in hand game and have the players to do so. The low point was the Wales game, but even then I feel the territory and possession Ireland had was encouraging, but there are lessons to be learned about finishing chances and adapting to the ref (although credit also to the Welsh defense who were immense).

The Squad
Front Row: McGrath has shown more evidence he is an able replacement to Healy, for me he is not that far off now and was unlucky to lose his place. Rory Best is fantastic in the loose and at the breakdown, but at times his throws can be suspect and Cronin is a great option to bring on and run the ball. Total turnaround for Mike Ross, had a very strong campaign I thought, and great there is finally an able body to come on in Marty Moore
Lock: POC is absolutely vital to the cause and I worry about the impact of his loss more so than BOD. Toner has become a beast in the last two years, but I would love to see what Henderson is capable of starting for Ireland. Getting the best locks in Ireland fit at the right times (Touhy and Ryan are both useful options) has been a problem but these three currently are head and shoulders above the challengers.
Back Row: One of our strongest positions in quality and depth. SOB grew into the tournament, Heaslip and POM work incredibly hard. Honorable mention to Murphy for his early performances which were very positive.
Half Backs: Sexton and Murray have to be the form pair in the world right now, blip against Wales aside. The drop off in quality from those two is a concern, although Reddan had a very strong cameo against Wales. The position of understudy for 10 is still very much up for grabs between Madigan, Jackson and Keatley. I feel the team need to bring on Marmion more as well.
Centres: Starting to get to know each other's games. Henshaw has been absolute quality in all performances, reliably outstanding. Payne has grown into the role and really shone against Scotland. I think there  may be options in coming through in Olding, McCloskey, Marshall and eventually Ringrose, and I'd say Henshaw may eventually move to 13 in green, but I'd wager the incumbents go into the world cup as 12 and 13.
Wings: Another area of strength, with some great variety in the options. Zebo was unlucky to miss out against Scotland but Fitzgerald made a real difference. Bowe for me has been solid but I think Trimble has been missed. Earls for me should be competing for this spot rather than at centre and I would like to see Gilroy push on from his early promise. I have slight concerns about how the wingers are slowly losing their creativity as they come into the set up a la Zebo, and would like to see them try something other than take the soonest contact and recycle
Full Back: Not sure about Rob. Not pulling up and trees but hasn't let anyone down either. I don't know if Jones offers much else that Kearney doesn't. I'd say there are more creative options in the wings that can play fullback in the Pro 12 but against the other 6Ns fullbacks I don't know when they could be blooded. Payne at 15 maybe?

World Cup
Anything other than a semi-final appearance would be a huge disappointment following the last two years of progress. A semi-final win at Twickers against England is certainly doable but it would be a big ask. Despite the last showing at a World Cup I am confident Ireland can go further this time.

Whilst on the subject yet again of Schmidt and Leinster, I wonder will....................... well its Heresy but I'm always guilty of that to some degree............ I wonder will Schmidt have had any chats with any players in a Private capacity?
Maybe just having taken a look at Toulon and offering some casual hint-hint tips?? I know he said he'd be away from rugby for the foreseeable future with his personal life, but the man can't keep away from it. He often pretended not to be interested in the International side of things when at Leinster and yet whenever he was asked about Ireland and their frustrations, he'd say plenty to let you know he was looking intently at all 6N games. If he saw something in Toulon that might be exposed, would he drop an opinion in there behind MOC's back?

GunsGerms wrote:

rodders wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:I dont think they are scapegoats at all. Gopperth came from Newcastle. He was average then he is still really average now. Why is he being picked?

MOC came from Leicester and hadnt exactly done much at Leicester and the manner of which Leinster and more importantly some Leinster players have regressed under him suggests is isnt up to the task at all.

Well because Gopperth is the best fly-half Leinster have - irrespective of the fact that he's not an adequate replacement for Sexton. The reality is that Madigan has not developed and has had a poor season compared to last year.

It was Schmidt who signed Gopperth so you can't blame O'Connor for Leinster's poor options at 10.

No Madigan is easily a better OH. A better coach and he would flourish again. So what if Schmidt signed Gopperth. If Schmidt was still coach Madigan would be number 1 and would have continued his upward trajectory. MOC hasnt a bog when it comes to backs which is why we play 10 man Jimmy Gopperth rugby.

What's that based on? Schmidt has never rated Madigan as a fly-half. That's why he signed Gopperth - bar place kicking and long range passing Gopperth is better in every department than Madigan. Madigan had a chance for the wolfhounds at 10 and was pretty shocking - I don't think he can have many complaints. As with a lot of Leinster players they haven't performed this year and that's not the fault of MOC imo.

If anything MOC has made himself look worse by trying to cover up for his players in public and make excuses. That's why they like him I'd imagine...

rodders wrote: As with a lot of Leinster players they haven't performed this year and that's not the fault of MOC imo.

..

Is there a degree of holding back involved or are they plain shyte? Are they pacing themselves through what will be a tough year and in a sense sacrificing a club year because of it or are they just plain shyte?

Not being smart - just interested in your honest opinion. Because if these guys are plain shyte and yet many of them have just won us a second 6N, then we're in real trouble not just as a side going into the WC but also in real trouble with our National coach who might not be able to see the shyte from the trees.

rodders wrote:


What's that based on? Schmidt has never rated Madigan as a fly-half. That's why he signed Gopperth - bar place kicking and long range passing Gopperth is better in every department than Madigan. Madigan had a chance for the wolfhounds at 10 and was pretty shocking - I don't think he can have many complaints. As with a lot of Leinster players they haven't performed this year and that's not the fault of MOC imo.

If anything MOC has made himself look worse by trying to cover up for his players in public and make excuses. That's why they like him I'd imagine...

I'd say most people would be of the opinion that he signed Gopperth because Leinster needed backup for when Madigan was away on Ireland duty,rested or injured.

You say the players haven't performed and that's not the fault of MoC but he's the one who trains them.Their is a finite amount of training they can do each week and if the head coach has the player training in the wrong areas or training poorly in the right areas then the players skills will stagnate and regress.Schmidt showed in his first season just how quickly a good coach could turn Leinster into the best passing and rucking team in Europe.Why have those skills deserted the players,imo it's because a poor coach hasn't managed to keep them at the necessary level.

SecretFly wrote:

rodders wrote: As with a lot of Leinster players they haven't performed this year and that's not the fault of MOC imo.

..

Is there a degree of holding back involved or are they plain shyte?  Are they pacing themselves through what will be a tough year and in a sense sacrificing a club year because of it or are they just plain shyte?  

Not being smart - just interested in your honest opinion.  Because if these guys are plain shyte and yet many of them have just won us a second 6N, then we're in real trouble not just as a side going into the WC but also in real trouble with our National coach who might not be able to see the shyte from the trees.

Well that's a good question - is there an element that Schmidt made players look better than they are - Kearney in attack for example. Certainly the likes of O'Brien, Healy, Toner, Heaslip etc. are far from shyte....

The set piece is certainly going well so you can't be too critical of the front 5. The issues seem to be in the back row, where there isn't the ball carrying threat of a few years ago and then the backline is markedly weaker than in years gone by.

I think you can't ignore that Leinster have lost their 3 best footballing backs - Sexton, BOD and Nacewa and D'arcy has declined further. On paper Leinster definitely aren't as strong as a few years ago.

Other thing is the defense is not as solid and they've dropped a lot of winnable games in the Pro12. On against the head last night the panel were saying how much worse the ball presentation has been since Gibbs left - so some of that has to fall on the coaching.

I think there are a combination of factors. I think the expectations of some of the fans aren't realistic given the current squad and MOC is getting a bit too much stick - conversely, with the squad they still have the performances aren't acceptable, especially in the pro 12.

rodders wrote:

What's that based on? Schmidt has never rated Madigan as a fly-half. That's why he signed Gopperth - bar place kicking and long range passing Gopperth is better in every department than Madigan. Madigan had a chance for the wolfhounds at 10 and was pretty shocking - I don't think he can have many complaints. As with a lot of Leinster players they haven't performed this year and that's not the fault of MOC imo.

If anything MOC has made himself look worse by trying to cover up for his players in public and make excuses. That's why they like him I'd imagine...

No Gopperth was signed because Sexton was leaving obvoiusly. You cant rely on one out half. Schmidt regularly gave Madigan game time in big games and also gave him creative licence.

Gopperth is a bargain basement rugby player. We should have been offered two Gopperths for the price of one he is so bad. Better in no sense than Madigan. Id prefer Niall O'Connor, Ian Humphries or Paddy Wallace at 10.

Madigan was bad with the wolfhounds because MOC insists in butchering his career by not playing him at 10. Before O'Connor arrived Madigan was regularly playing out of his skin at 10.

Well, I think MOC is the victim of some ruthless 'pragmatic' form developing that has to a degree scuppered Leinster's season big time.  I don't think that's all Schmidt doing the commanding behind the scenes either, but I do think Nucifora and Schmidt and performance guys are trying to keep players out of trouble and in a constant form building phase rather than a form-depleting phase.

So that's MOC's cop-out.  I think he can't be blamed for everything.  I saw the same thing happening with Warburton who absolutely cruised through his last Regional game.  I simply didn't see him for entire swathes of the game.  Let nobody tell me he was playing his best.  He was simply making up numbers and floating through, trying to stay trouble free.

Call me cynical and I'll call National coaching methods cynical leading into WCs.

BUT...MOC doesn't get off the hook on his attitude.  I think he came to Leinster expecting an easy ride, expecting an armchair ride through Pro12 'dross' sides and then the enjoyment of some big games in Europe.

What hit him was something he doesn't have the resources to correct.  He simply didn't or couldn't sustain Schmidt's attention to detail - he's a different coach.  I saw him coach a camp in his first pre-season and he certainly wasn't Schmidt-active.  Just standing around watching and holding the bibs.  Just very laid back.  Cullen was injured at the time and lying against a goal post for the duration like one of those clichéd Mexicans in the Warner Brother cartoons "Hey, me not like to do too much effort een the sun".  The only guy scowling and shouting was O'Brien as he forced a knackered Fanning around and around the outside of the pitch.  He was in no mood to let poor Fanning off the hook as he ran alongside him.

But I've kinda remembered that session as I've watched Leinster gradually and gradually go off the boil and become 'normal' again.  They really do need greedier, more animated and ruthless coaches to keep them up (all teams are the same actually).  MOC might remain a good assistant coach but I think he's found out that Head Coach is a much bigger proposition, and I think he knows he's having difficulty finding that level.

Here's a question - does Schmidt's micro management and systematic approach have negative implications for players in the longer term?

As in once he moves on do players struggle to adapt to a less hands on approach and get exposed in the absence of such water-tight patterns and systems?

GunsGerms wrote:

rodders wrote:

What's that based on? Schmidt has never rated Madigan as a fly-half. That's why he signed Gopperth - bar place kicking and long range passing Gopperth is better in every department than Madigan. Madigan had a chance for the wolfhounds at 10 and was pretty shocking - I don't think he can have many complaints. As with a lot of Leinster players they haven't performed this year and that's not the fault of MOC imo.

If anything MOC has made himself look worse by trying to cover up for his players in public and make excuses. That's why they like him I'd imagine...

No Gopperth was signed because Sexton was leaving obvoiusly. You cant rely on one out half. Schmidt regularly gave Madigan game time in big games and also gave him creative licence.

Gopperth is a bargain basement rugby player. We should have been offered two Gopperths for the price of one he is so bad. Better in no sense than Madigan. Id prefer Niall O'Connor, Ian Humphries or Paddy Wallace at 10.

Madigan was bad with the wolfhounds because MOC insists in butchering his career by not playing him at 10. Before O'Connor arrived Madigan was regularly playing out of his skin at 10.

I wish you were Leinsters Director of Rugby when NOC was first choice for Ulster- if only we could have traded him for an out half as good as Gopperth back then!

 - with due respect to young Niall...I'd take Jimmy too...

rodders wrote:Here's a question  - does Schmidt's micro management and systematic approach have negative implications for players in the longer term?

As in once he moves on do players struggle to adapt to a less hands on approach and get exposed in the absence of such water-tight patterns and systems?  

I'll bet they miss being told about the opposition in detail yes. And I'll bet they miss being told distinctly where their personal failings were in a game, yes. I don't think that would be happening anymore so they'd probably miss it. It doesn't change the fact that when they've been coached well in the past, under different coaches, they've showed up. It's no secret that the hunger was always for coaches that forced more from them - the players themselves loved the challenge of getting a coach that wouldn't sit back and think enough was enough.

Cheika certainly wasn't that kind of coach and Schmidt, in his own way though less aggressively, wasn't that kind of coach. I think Leinster are lacking a loud, petulant or angry perfectionist coach. I think they've got a bunch of 'sleepers' - so they've mostly gone to sleep.

But it wasn't the same players - Cheika had a lot of experienced players like Jennings, Shaggy, Contepomi, BOD, Darcy, Dempsey, Hines....Sexton had barely broken through.

There's very little evidence of how a lot of these players have fared without Schmidt.

Leinster kept performing because there is a culture in Leinster that comes from the colleges through to the academy and into the team.  Of course the team changes.  It's no coincidence though that Leinster got three HECs under two coaches and different sets of players.

Leinster has always had a cutting edge way with them that always lacked a solid spine to make it work in tougher climates.  When they got the tougher spine, they began to function at those high levels.  
MOC is not a tough minded coach.  He seems to be what he is, an assistant coach out of his depth.  He hasn't enough to keep the foot on the gas.  The shape of the team is all over the place.  And even if they win against Toulon! (big big challenge) and even if they then win another Euro title by getting past Clermont or Saracens, I'd still say MOC was the wrong man to lead this Leinster side on.  Wrong coach - but not all to blame for all of this year's absolute shocking form.

On Gopperth, I actually feel that he is a very competent 10. His game certainly improved when he arrived at Leinster. That said, I would much prefer that Madigan was used at 10 far more than he is as its obviously affecting his game.

The only reason I want Madigan to oust Gopperth is for Ireland. I don't think Madigan is much better than Gopperth at the key parts of being a 10.

Just from watching Paddy Jackson since he came back, if we could have his general play and Madigans kicking at goal we'd be sorted. Madigan is not a 10 like he is.

Notch wrote:The only reason I want Madigan to oust Gopperth is for Ireland. I don't think Madigan is much better than Gopperth at the key parts of being a 10.

Just from watching Paddy Jackson since he came back, if we could have his general play and Madigans kicking at goal we'd be sorted. Madigan is not a 10 like he is.

If we had Sexton's general play and Madigan's kicking at goal we'd be even more sorted!

Sexton himself still has a big issue with kicking pressure points in big games.....  I'd love a kicking alternative out there that takes over at the first sign that Sexton has the 'shakes' again mentally.  Our WC could depend on the certainty of kicks going over and we shouldn't have to simply replace him completely if his kicking game broke down completely in an important game.  The 10 doesn't always have to be the kicker.  That sticking to convention might cost us dearly.

I would be totally comfortable bringing Jackson off the bench to play 10 instead of Sexton in even the biggest of games if someone else could take the kicks at goal.

Notch wrote:I would be totally comfortable bringing Jackson off the bench to play 10 instead of Sexton in even the biggest of games if someone else could take the kicks at goal.

Ah for F**k's sake, Notch...a merry-go-round???  A non-kicking 10 goes off even though he's playing his best stuff otherwise, to be replaced by another 10 who can't kick, to be replaced finally by a kicking 10 who can't control a good game?

We might get a result out of all that bench hopping but it might also become another Micky Rourke classic movie

Notch wrote:I don't think Madigan is much better than Gopperth at the key parts of being a 10.

Just from watching Paddy Jackson since he came back, if we could have his general play and Madigans kicking at goal we'd be sorted. Madigan is not a 10 like he is.

Totally agree. Jackson is a much more complete 10 but needs a second goal kicker like Madigan on the field - that said Madigan missed a total sitter against Scotland which could have cost us the 6N. The drop of from Sexton is massive but a fully fit Jackson is next best imo.

SecretFly wrote:Leinster kept performing because there is a culture in Leinster that comes from the colleges through to the academy and into the team.  Of course the team changes.  It's no coincidence though that Leinster got three HECs under two coaches and different sets of players.
.

I think you will find that the group that won the three Heineken cups did not differ that greatly in terms of the starting 15.

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Leinster kept performing because there is a culture in Leinster that comes from the colleges through to the academy and into the team.  Of course the team changes.  It's no coincidence though that Leinster got three HECs under two coaches and different sets of players.
.

I think you will find that the group that won the three Heineken cups did not differ that greatly in terms of the starting 15.

I think you'll find I already suggested that but got told it was all different players. So I decided I'd put in a "Yeah so they gave us roads and canals and science and maths but what did the Romans ever do for us"

Or in other words, so the players changed (and some of them did) but the result of my point remains the same... success under two coaches with different philosophies but with the determined energy to push their personalities into the team.

Well here is the major difference (as posted earlier) between those three finals and now...

Nacewa, Sexton, BOD, Darcy, Cullen...you could add players like Elsom, Thorn. Hines and Shane Horgan...Can you say the current players are better? Or that that group of players would have been seen as the core group of players give or take one or two?

To my mind Cheika pushed the team over the line, Schmidt added to it but the core of that team are now gone or waning in the case of Darcy. MOC just doesnt have the same players. Not saying he couldnt be doing better but its not a level playing field. It could even be suggested Joe saw the writing on the wall and moved on to pastures new..

Bearing in mind that the year Schmidt left was the first year he failed to get out of the group stages in the Heineken Cup

Notch wrote:Bearing in mind that the year Schmidt left was the first year he failed to get out of the group stages in the Heineken Cup

controversial...

He was too successful?


Maybe. He started realising "I'm in Ireland here, I better not overdo this. These guy hate a smarmy shchidt. I'll let us lose this season and come back goo............................... oh I got the Ireland job??? Bye suckers!"

Well he did well with Cheikas team. Once the core of the team left the only way was down...no? Which is precisely what happened.

ME-109 wrote:Well here is the major difference (as posted earlier) between those three finals and now...

Nacewa, Sexton, BOD, Darcy, Cullen...you could add players like Elsom, Thorn. Hines and Shane Horgan...Can you say the current players are better? Or that that group of players would have been seen as the core group of players give or take one or two?

To my mind Cheika pushed the team over the line, Schmidt added to it but the core of that team are now gone or waning in the case of Darcy. MOC just doesnt have the same players.  Not saying he couldnt be doing better but its not a level playing field. It could even be suggested Joe saw the writing on the wall and moved on to pastures new..

If Schmidt was still there with this current outfit - they'd still be 2nd or 3rd in League and would have gotten through to where they are now in Europe easier than the route MOC took.  I have little doubt of that.  That's what I believe. I believe too that Gopperth would have been much more effective under him.
MOC just isn't the same kind of coach.  Maybe he'll develop more into his own coach and be successful later down the line but for now he's out of his depth as number 1.  And he's unfortunate in that I don't think he has all that much leadership in Cullen either who needed to come in at a lower level without such pressure....but was dropped into a team with tons of pressure.

ME-109 wrote:Well here is the major difference (as posted earlier) between those three finals and now...

Nacewa, Sexton, BOD, Darcy, Cullen...you could add players like Elsom, Thorn. Hines and Shane Horgan...Can you say the current players are better? Or that that group of players would have been seen as the core group of players give or take one or two?

To my mind Cheika pushed the team over the line, Schmidt added to it but the core of that team are now gone or waning in the case of Darcy. MOC just doesnt have the same players.  Not saying he couldnt be doing better but its not a level playing field. It could even be suggested Joe saw the writing on the wall and moved on to pastures new..

That's not the problem,we don't expect to dominate Europe indefinitely.It's the substandard performances and results against teams like the Dragons and Treviso that are the problem.The players are good enough to beat those teams but incompetent management is holding them back.

It should be obvious to anyone who has watched Ireland over the last few years ,the difference good coaches can make.

Notch wrote:Bearing in mind that the year Schmidt left was the first year he failed to get out of the group stages in the Heineken Cup

Also the first year he won the Pro12 with Leinster.

ME-109 wrote:Well he did well with Cheikas team. Once the core of the team left the only way was down...no? Which is precisely what happened.

No that's still a different narrative, ME that you try to sell from time to time.

You could throw the idea at Cheika too - he left when he might have been losing faith in the future. Maybe he though the players had only one all out season in them? Maybe he got out when he thought the going was good? But Schmidt saw more potential to keep momentum going.

Fly...given the benign nature of the group Neil Francis could have coached Leinster through. However they did get to the Semis beating a decent Bath team along the way...

It should be obvious to anyone who has watched Ireland over the last few years would see the difference good/world class players can make

Fixed that for you there...

SecretFly wrote:

ME-109 wrote:Well he did well with Cheikas team. Once the core of the team left the only way was down...no? Which is precisely what happened.

No that's still a different narrative, ME that you try to sell from time to time.

You could throw the idea at Cheika too - he left when he might have been losing faith in the future.  Maybe he though the players had only one all out season in them?  Maybe he got out when he thought the going was good? But Schmidt saw more potential to keep momentum going.

I believe Schmidt did an excellent job with that team however what cant be ignored is the quality of players in that time period spanning both coaches. However it is also true to say that Cheika built a lot of the foundations of the period....

Cheika played his part. Of course he did. But the players were tiring of his ways and wanted a more cutting backs edge. Schmidt gave them what they wanted. And they excelled at it for the period he was there. The fall off in his last year was too brief a period to work out would it have been terminal or merely a blip in even more success the following year. We'll never know.

So you dont think this is cutting backs edge..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVpt3sOJdxQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzW5KlXF5d8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JONbPmyklN0

Not sure when recently i.e post Cheika I saw Leinster play like that.

?

There you go. How many times have I said that Leinster always had a cutting edge but no backbone to back it up in hard European contests. Cheika came in and gradually gave the backbone.

But then the players felt the cutting edge was slipping as a result. They wanted it back. It's the players who say it in interviews over the years.... not me.

Ah well fair enough. I just think that in terms of backplay Schmidt went a different direction to Cheika but I dont think it brought a cutting edge to the backplay. What he did do was turned the forwards into an extremely effective and at times unbeatable unit. I certainly dont remember the Schmidt era for the backplay more for the forwards. I think you will find that the % of tries scored by Leinster forwards increased significantly under Schmidt.

.....well forwards in open back play

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-5z4Nu5r7E

Jesus, when you look back.............................. if Schmidt even unlocked some of it at the World Cup.....

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

ME-109 wrote:Well he did well with Cheikas team. Once the core of the team left the only way was down...no? Which is precisely what happened.

No that's still a different narrative, ME that you try to sell from time to time.

You could throw the idea at Cheika too - he left when he might have been losing faith in the future.  Maybe he though the players had only one all out season in them?  Maybe he got out when he thought the going was good? But Schmidt saw more potential to keep momentum going.

I believe Schmidt did an excellent job with that team however what cant be ignored is the quality of players in that time period spanning both coaches. However it is also true to say that Cheika built a lot of the foundations of the period....

Well i would be crediting Matt Williams or Deccie Kidney myself...

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

ME-109 wrote:Well he did well with Cheikas team. Once the core of the team left the only way was down...no? Which is precisely what happened.

No that's still a different narrative, ME that you try to sell from time to time.

You could throw the idea at Cheika too - he left when he might have been losing faith in the future.  Maybe he though the players had only one all out season in them?  Maybe he got out when he thought the going was good? But Schmidt saw more potential to keep momentum going.

I believe Schmidt did an excellent job with that team however what cant be ignored is the quality of players in that time period spanning both coaches. However it is also true to say that Cheika built a lot of the foundations of the period....

What can't be ignored is how much Schmidt improved the team he inherited.Cheika got us to a point where we were one of the best teams in Europe but there were 3 or 4 teams that could easily match us and we needed a large slice of luck to win the HC.We got out of our group winning only 4 games and squeaked through in the QF against Quins.We then played Leicester a week after they played the AP final while we had a rest week.Having seen us lose 2 Pro 12 finals the week after winning the HC I know just how much that drains a team.

Schmidt turned that very good side into the undeniably the best side in Europe,through the quirks of the seeding system we were unfortunate enough to come up against Clermont in the group stages twice when Schmidt coached us,they were the only team within an asses roar of us and when we suffered an injury crisis in Schmidts 3rd season they managed to beat us twice despite the best coaching performance I have ever seen in the way our team was prepared and performed in the 1st game against them that year.When the injury crisis abated we went back to our best and won the league and coasted through the Amlin.

Schmidt made the players better,that is the mark of a truly great coach.Cheika assembled a side,he got rid of the weak players,that's the sign of a great manager but we stagnated under him as he could only really improve the team by bringing in better players from outside.Schmidt improved what he had and it's no coincidence that Leinster and Ireland both immediately improved while he was head coach and Leinster immediately regressed when he left.Most Leinster fans were commenting on how badly our skills had dropped before Christmas last year,it was noticeable across the entire team,that's a coaching failure and you can say that it's not the coach dropping the ball but it's his failure to keep the skills at their established standard that is the root cause of the players dropping the ball.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:
What can't be ignored is how much Schmidt improved the team he inherited.

I think you have to say that he changed how they played too. Leinster were already renowned for their back play but it was built around the individual magic of contepomi,Darcy and BOD - Hickie and Horgan coming through the middle - Keith Gleeson and his link play. There was a lot of pace and counterattacking play, very off the cuff.

Under Schmidt there were a lot more set plays - the Leinster loop and a lot of short passing - the inside ball back against the ruck. It was very creative but a different sort of game - less around pace and individuals and more around creation of space in tight channels and quick ball. Defensively Leinster were very strong too under schmidt and great at grinding results away from home - breakdown work was the best in the NH too, as was ball presentation. Squad rotation was excellent - I think you can credit Schmidt and his coaches with a lot of the success.

Could he be as successful with the current squad? I doubt it - but then I underestimated what he would be able to do with the current Irish squad too.

rodders wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:
What can't be ignored is how much Schmidt improved the team he inherited.

I think you have to say that he changed how they played too. Leinster were already renowned for their back play but it was built around the individual magic of contepomi,Darcy and BOD - Hickie and Horgan coming through the middle - Keith Gleeson and his link play. There was a lot of pace and counterattacking play, very off the cuff.

Under Schmidt there were a lot more set plays - the Leinster loop and a lot of short passing - the inside ball back against the ruck. It was very creative but a different sort of game - less around pace and individuals and more around creation of space in tight channels and quick ball. Defensively Leinster were very strong too under schmidt and great at grinding results away from home - breakdown work was the best in the NH too, as was ball presentation. Squad rotation was excellent - I think you can credit Schmidt and his coaches with a lot of the success.

Could he be as successful with the current squad? I doubt it - but then I underestimated what he would be able to do with the current Irish squad too.

I agree,but I think he'd be doing an immeasurably better job than MoC has done.The poor losses at home and throwing away leads wouldn't happen under Schmidt,our squad players would be performing far better.That's the measure of a great coach,getting the best out of the weaker players in your squad.The great players will always do their thing,it's getting the rest of the less talented players doing great things that's tough.

SecretFly wrote:.....well forwards in open back play

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-5z4Nu5r7E

Jesus, when you look back..............................  if Schmidt even unlocked some of it at the World Cup.....

God when you look back at that and think about the sh1t we're playing now makes you wanna weep

It does doesn't it.

You kinda forget just what these same players could do a few short years ago when they passed and toyed with the opposition for fun.

Amazing the transition when you actually take the time to look back.

Like I said ASLS I am not saying MOC couldnt be doing better. But there is a big drop in quality when you take into consideration the players at Schmidts disposal. You just cannot compare the current crop of players with those that have left in terms of quality. I think you are rewriting the records (as is your wont) concerning injuries, or with regards Clermont (all over at 25-9 in the Aviva before some consolation scores). Even the 2012 victory had a bit of luck (always needed) when Fofana dropped the ball over the line in the semi.

Schmidt definitely took that team to a higher level but I do think he saw the writing on the wall in 2013 and moved on as I dont think he would have done better with the players he had at his disposal.

SecretFly wrote:It does doesn't it.

You kinda forget just what these same players could do a few short years ago when they passed and toyed with the opposition for fun.

Amazing the transition when you actually take the time to look back.

Did you see how many of the tries involved Bod,Shaggy, Nacewa and Sexton....

ME-109 wrote:Even the 2012 victory had a bit of luck (always needed) when Fofana dropped the ball over the line in the semi.

Hope the bastard drops it again when we meet the f**ers in the Final!

Down with the Huns!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  ...oh and the French as well........................ if any of them get to play in the next few instalments.

ME-109 wrote:Like I said ASLS I am not saying MOC couldnt be doing better. But there is a big drop in quality when you take into consideration the players at Schmidts disposal. You just cannot compare the current crop of players with those that have left in terms of quality. I think you are rewriting the records (as is your wont) concerning injuries, or with regards Clermont (all over at 25-9 in the Aviva before some consolation scores). Even the 2012 victory had a bit of luck (always needed) when Fofana dropped the ball over the line in the semi.

Schmidt definitely took that team to a higher level but I do think he saw the writing on the wall in 2013 and moved on as I dont think he would have done better with the players he had at his disposal.

Nope,I was referring to the game in Clermont where we lost by 3 points,that is the best prepared team I've ever seen.We had Goodman at 12,D'Arcy at 13 and Madigan at fullback,all the injuries were i the same positions so we were down to our 3rd choice centres (D'Arcy was 3rd choice 13) and fullback.Massively weakened backline and we went toe to toe with them but our lack of top quality just meant we didn't get over the line.Strauss having a bad day with at the lineout hurt us badly too.In the return game Clermont had the time to adjust to all the weaknesses Schmidt had exposed in the first game and so were comfortable winners.

Also I'm not trying to compare the current crop with those who have left.My point is that when Schmidt was without his best players we were still a highly functioning team,that was what made him so good.In the international windows when all the teams were without their most naturally gifted players then Schmidts class shone through.He had all the more average players functioning at levels that other coaches just couldn't replicate with their less gifted players.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/32332220?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Fingers crossed

Notch wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/32332220?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Fingers crossed

Do not mention the pre world cup contract extension jinx .......damn!!!!

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

ME-109 wrote:Like I said ASLS I am not saying MOC couldnt be doing better. But there is a big drop in quality when you take into consideration the players at Schmidts disposal. You just cannot compare the current crop of players with those that have left in terms of quality. I think you are rewriting the records (as is your wont) concerning injuries, or with regards Clermont (all over at 25-9 in the Aviva before some consolation scores). Even the 2012 victory had a bit of luck (always needed) when Fofana dropped the ball over the line in the semi.

Schmidt definitely took that team to a higher level but I do think he saw the writing on the wall in 2013 and moved on as I dont think he would have done better with the players he had at his disposal.

Nope,I was referring to the game in Clermont where we lost by 3 points,that is the best prepared team I've ever seen.We had Goodman at 12,D'Arcy at 13 and Madigan at fullback,all the injuries were i the same positions so we were down to our 3rd choice centres (D'Arcy was 3rd choice 13) and fullback.Massively weakened backline and we went toe to toe with them but our lack of top quality just meant we didn't get over the line.Strauss having a bad day with at the lineout hurt us badly too.In the return game Clermont had the time to adjust to all the weaknesses Schmidt had exposed in the first game and so were comfortable winners.

Also I'm not trying to compare the current crop with those who have left.My point is that when Schmidt was without his best players we were still a highly functioning team,that was what made him so good.In the international windows when all the teams were without their most naturally gifted players then Schmidts class shone through.He had all the more average players functioning at levels that other coaches just couldn't replicate with their less gifted players.

It probably helped that Schmidt knew Clermont and their coach very well.

Schmidt was very quick to get the cheque book out to bring Brad Thorn in (dropping Toner) - something MOC hasn't done.