Ulster 2015/2016 Part 2

First topic message reminder :

Continue your discussion of all things Ulster here.

What happened to Marshall?

He came down on his elbow onto he fake turf and jarred his shoulder.

Its like watching League sometimes, no men committed to the ruck and swinging the ball side to side. They need to work on their phase play

Pete Browne up to to 3 turnovers already with his go go gadget arms

Isn't it strange how a game with obviously poorer quality skill on display can still be more entertaining than well organised national side match ups.

I can't say that too much is good, but I'm enjoying myself more this afternoon compared to yesterday afternoon.

What a tackle. Class act.

As terrible as this game has been, Peter Browne has been fantastic. Several turn overs at the breakdown and choke tackles winning us scrums. Really impressed given that he was brought in as cover.

Browne is having a cracker game. If we look at him as replacing Stevenson, I call that great business.

Jeez Paddy need to be nailing those

That tackling is just awful beat 3 or 4 guys with ease

You just knew we would be punished for our stupidity sooner or later.

Scholes gave a pass that was forward and to a player who was pretty much already wrapped up by the tackler

This tackling is almost embarrassing

Pathetic tackling

Pity we don't have a coach who specialises in tackling

That is a fine try by Cardiff in fairness

Ulster are bloody green

I'm about at the end of my tether. Furious at that performance. Every new game you assume they will tighten up. Instead they seem determined to screw it all up. I want to hear Kiss' reaction.

Well played, Cardiff. Fully deserved the win.

Ulster

Ok the one good thing is week by week Browne seems to be getting better and better.
Bad.... Christ I didn't realise tackling is now optional for half the team

It's our tackle technique as much as anything. You see this against Dragons especially, and partially today, we engage in the tackle very early and all the opposition have to do is step inside against the flow of play and we have nothing to counter it.

Both Welsh teams have worked this out. It's clearly a systemic failure, there's no way we just have that many players of the quality we have, missing as many tackles as they currently are.

I suggest you guys go back and watch the Dragons game, it's all they did against us and it worked a treat.

Just seems like Ulster are getting worse and worse every week. It's no excuse looking at the players. Even less talented players can be coached to do simple things well.

ThisUlster is just very soft these days. Give away cheap penalties, give away cheap yards and line breaks, miss chances. Paddy missing from in front of the posts will have done no harm to Madigans chances of making the bench again... all in all, just a poor, listless, soft performance.

carpet baboon wrote:Ok the one good thing is week by week Browne seems to be getting better and better.
Bad.... Christ I didn't realise tackling is now optional for half the team

4 Turnovers! Browne came out with the most credit. Andrew looks ok and Arnold looked good.

Stockdale missed more tackles than he made, he's yet to convince me he's ready at this level... maybe 1 year in the English championship would do him good and Cave should see if he can get a French payday because hes going the wrong way.

Munster and Leinster can still grind out results in games like these... we need to start

Yeah Notch. And lets be honest better he's missing those penalties for us than doing it for Ireland. He would get destroyed by the southern media if he'd missed a kick like that yesterday.

I know he's supposedly been a bit sick.... But last few games have made me quite annoyed at the thought of letting Arnold going and keeping Cave.

toml wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:Ok the one good thing is week by week Browne seems to be getting better and better.
Bad.... Christ I didn't realise tackling is now optional for half the team

4 Turnovers! Browne came out with the most credit. Andrew looks ok and Arnold looked good.

Stockdale missed more tackles than he made, he's yet to convince me he's ready at this level... maybe 1 year in the English championship would do him good and Cave should see if he can get a French payday because hes going the wrong way.

Munster and Leinster can still grind out results in games like these... we need to start

I thought Stockdale was very poor. He just looks like the equivalent of Robbie Diack of the backline. Physically looks the part, but seems hesitant and doesn't appear to make the most of his greater bulk. Almost like he's a bit scared of contact now he's playing with the big boys. Also didn't take, or look like taking any of the high balls he was competing.

He might have potential but he's very, very raw. As you say, a few seasons elsewhere might be no bad thing.

clivemcl wrote:I know he's supposedly been a bit sick.... But last few games have made me quite annoyed at the thought of letting Arnold going and keeping Cave.

A bit sick is not the half of it - the bloke should be in bed. hew has been all week

From what I have found out Cave should take no blame for the last 2 weeks - what is a bloody disgrace is he was even asked to play

Give a kid a chance

Redman wrote:

toml wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:Ok the one good thing is week by week Browne seems to be getting better and better.
Bad.... Christ I didn't realise tackling is now optional for half the team

4 Turnovers! Browne came out with the most credit. Andrew looks ok and Arnold looked good.

Stockdale missed more tackles than he made, he's yet to convince me he's ready at this level... maybe 1 year in the English championship would do him good and Cave should see if he can get a French payday because hes going the wrong way.

Munster and Leinster can still grind out results in games like these... we need to start

I thought Stockdale was very poor.  He just looks like the equivalent of Robbie Diack of the backline.  Physically looks the part, but seems hesitant and doesn't appear to make the most of his greater bulk.  Almost like he's a bit scared of contact now he's playing with the big boys.  Also didn't take, or look like taking any of the high balls he was competing.  

He might have potential but he's very, very raw.  As you say, a few seasons elsewhere might be no bad thing.  

This time last year Scholes was a sieve in defence - look where he is now

Give the kid a chance

As much as there is the virus issue its so frustrating to see interviews with players where they claim they are 'desperate' to win a trophy and then the performances are just... desperate full stop.

We just seem like a team that does not want to win enough, which is baffling given how close we've come. Some athletes just don't have the drive to be the best and I have to question whether Ulster have a few too many of them, guys who are basically willing to settle for achieving less than their potential.

Positives in the back line were Arnold and Scholes and we are losing both of them. No depth in the pack, no depth at halfback. No leaders, extremely passive and soft defence, basic errors ending attacking moves.

Hopefully we make Top 6. Need a BP on Friday, definitely. From having the potential to consolidate at the top of the table to worrying about making the top 6 in the span of two weeks... christ the night...

The only time I really felt a player was refusing to accept the defeat and really putting their body on the line was when Olding made that try saving tackle. Fair play to him, but the 14 other guys need to know turning up and playing at 60% isn't going to be good enough at this level.

Notch, I was going to say it last week but held back. I feel the team of the last few weeks is full of people who say to themselves "can't believe I'm in pro rugby! I get paid for rugby! This is class!"
What we need is a team full of guys who are in no way surprised to find themselves professional players. But rather, they spend their time thinking to themselves 'how can I succeed and dominate professional rugby?".

Well, this is a surprising read. It seems to completely ignore the possibility of the better team (rather than the team that played better) actually winning.

From the ground, it looked as though Ulster arrived with the idea of doing just enough to win and playing limited rugby in order to do so. They made the naive mistake of not playing the right rugby to ensure their fitness would hold out on 'that plastic pitch'.

Ball in play time is significantly longer at Cardiff and Ulster, despite having Lacey on side, didn't factor that in to their play.

Hence, in the last 10 minutes, they fell away. They aren't the first side to do that.

Plastic pitch and Lacey had nothing to do with it.
We have played on a plastic pitch many times, including this year, and knew what to expect.
Cardiff played better that doesn't make them the better team - look at the league table.

The reason we have lost is since the New Year (inspite of 5 wins out 8) we have been absolutely awful and now results are reflecting that.
In that time we destroyed a pathetic Oyonnax in 1 and a half match and played a respectable half against Treviso.
Against anyone above their low standard we have done nothing of note - that is the brutal truth.

Playing sick and not fully fit people instead of youngsters is a joke.
Also my belief that we have some old stagers past their best grows.

I's start against Zebre with (assuming same unavailability and take Cave and Williams out the equation as well):
McCall, Andrew, Lutton, Browne, de Merwe, Diack, Dow, Reidy
Shanahan, Jackson, Stockdale, Olding, Marshall, Gilroy, Lyttle

Lutton has to start Ross cant scrimmage - kind of important in a TH
Browne was our MOTM and gets picked on merit
Dow need another opportunity Wilson is finished
Reidy is better than Henry this year simple as
Shanahan deserves a chance and Pienaer is totally out of sorts
Lyttle is a prospect and means we can play our best midfield combination

Some going over the top re Arnold.
Decent player but no more than that - he is behind Olding, Marshall, McCloskey as a young centre and that is why he is off

This is it, we've been utterly awful. We are a better side than our recent performances would suggest so where is the problem coming from? Is Les still settling into the club rugby post or is this a slightly more telling transitional phase for Ulster? I can't put my finger on it but the players are looking more and more disinterested. There are only a few players who are carrying the side at the moment and we need them all doing that. If last week wasn't warning enough perhaps yesterday's terrible performance will be the kick up the backside everyone needs.
I'm not convinced by PJ in the captain's role. I think the young lad has enough responsibility on his shoulders and the captaincy would be better placed elsewhere.

I remember few weeks back somebody noted Humphries vomiting on the pitch. Cave seemed to be in the changing room at the weekend (until called upon), was he so sick he couldn't sit on the bench? Just how bad is this virus and who all is affected?

Id also add that an out of sorts Pienaar and a high risk Marshal does not alone qualify Shanahan to have a chance. I'm happy to be proved wrong, but I have to this day never seen anything from him that made me think he could be our future starting 9.

Pete, we had hoped the close calls would be a kick up the backside and it didn't come, we hoped last week would be and we got the performance yesterday. We may have to just keep hoping that it comes

geoff999rugby wrote:Plastic pitch and Lacey had nothing to do with it.
We have played on a plastic pitch many times, including this year, and knew what to expect.
Cardiff played better that doesn't make them the better team - look at the league table.

The reason we have lost is since the New Year (inspite of 5 wins out 8) we have been absolutely awful and now results are reflecting that.
In that time we destroyed a pathetic Oyonnax in 1 and a half match and played a respectable half against Treviso.
Against anyone above their low standard we have done nothing of note - that is the brutal truth.

How many games have Ulster played on a plastic pitch this season?

Cardiff were the better team on the day which, of course, makes the league table irrelevant. Both teams were missing plenty of players.

On Sunday it was Browne, previously it has been Reidy, and McCall and Scholes. Plenty of players stepping up at times since Christmas. Our problem seems to be with getting them all to at the same time.

That combined with our key players underperforming. (Jackson and Pienaar)

Losing Luke early in the game was a bad blow.he and Gilroy have been the only players who are consistent.

PhilBB wrote:
How many games have Ulster played on a plastic pitch this season?

3 of the last 4 games away have been on a plastic pitch

PhilBB wrote: Cardiff were the better team on the day which, of course, makes the league table irrelevant. Both teams were missing plenty of players.

On the day Cardiff were the better team, during the course of the season Ulster have been the better team - seems clear cut to me

The Ulster that turned up on sunday were way below the performance level they are capable of, in fact the level expected of them. That was Ulster at their very worst so on the day Cardiff were the better side. I'd rather be an Ulster fan though, we'll get back to our best again and very soon.

geoff999rugby wrote:

PhilBB wrote:  
How many games have Ulster played on a plastic pitch this season?

3 of the last 4 games away have been on a plastic pitch

PhilBB wrote:  Cardiff were the better team on the day which, of course, makes the league table irrelevant. Both teams were missing plenty of players.  

On the day Cardiff were the better team, during the course of the season Ulster have been the better team - seems clear cut to me

Treviso, Saracens, Oyannax, Connacht. They are the last four away games.

So two games all season before arriving at CAP? Is that right?

I agree with your second sentence.

Correct so we were not strangers to plastic pitches - I was including Cardiff in the last 4 games so drop Connacht from the list.

Only Treviso was not a plastic pitch.
It is two games all season but that is two of the three prior to Cardiff so we should have known what to expect.

geoff999rugby wrote:...
Some going over the top re Arnold.
Decent player but no more than that - he is behind Olding, Marshall, McCloskey as a young centre and that is why he is off

Wouldn't say it's over the top. He looks a good prospect that would have been worth keeping. He is still only 19... 3,4,5 years younger than Olding McCloskey and Marshall respectively... All of whom could be away with ireland, if they're all fit. Regardless of his last couple of games Cave doesn't look a threat anymore, he looks like he's lost pace and never really had that much. Arnold is same age as Stockdale but plays with more maturity..
That's how I see it.
However we might see Ludik in at centre more next year with all the back 3 players we have.
Anymore centres coming through the production line?

Redman wrote:

toml wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:Ok the one good thing is week by week Browne seems to be getting better and better.
Bad.... Christ I didn't realise tackling is now optional for half the team

4 Turnovers! Browne came out with the most credit. Andrew looks ok and Arnold looked good.

Stockdale missed more tackles than he made, he's yet to convince me he's ready at this level... maybe 1 year in the English championship would do him good and Cave should see if he can get a French payday because hes going the wrong way.

Munster and Leinster can still grind out results in games like these... we need to start

I thought Stockdale was very poor.  He just looks like the equivalent of Robbie Diack of the backline.  Physically looks the part, but seems hesitant and doesn't appear to make the most of his greater bulk.  Almost like he's a bit scared of contact now he's playing with the big boys.  Also didn't take, or look like taking any of the high balls he was competing.  

He might have potential but he's very, very raw.  As you say, a few seasons elsewhere might be no bad thing.  

Stockdale is only 19 but something I've noticed with a lot of these backs coming through, including Arnold, is how poor their basic skills are - catching, passing in particular. They look like they are spending more time doing S&C than playing rugby - there was a massive contrast between our players and the guys coming through the Welsh regions for ball skills.

The exceptions like Olding, Marshall and McCloskey really standout but at this level being able to pass shouldn't be an exception, for a back or forward. Guys are not playing enough high quality games to build skill and awareness.

I think this is an issue across the country but Ulster and Munster seem particularly bad at producing players with decent skills.

On another note Whitten and Steenson playing very well at Exeter.

Yea Rodders, just watched the highlights.

Stevenson also came off the bench for them.

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/VIDEO-highlights-Bath-Rugby-v-Exeter-Chiefs-Sandy/story-28830247-detail/story.html

Ititially I feel proud when I see the likes of Farrell, Seymour, Whitten do well... but it's always followed by the thought "I hope they don't do too well!"

Why? Because what would it say about the Ulster setup, if we keep the players we believe to be the more talented, only to find out that the other players were developed/coached to a higher playing standard elsewhere than we did in the same time with the players we opted to keep.

For example... Gilroy and Seymour. We believed that Gilroy was worth keeping at Seymour's expense. It has now got to the point that Gilroy vs Seymour is a close enough comparison to debate. The worry might be that some other young players might look objectively and judge that Gilroy's career was stifled at Ulster behind Bowe and Trimble, whereas Seymour/Farrell/Whitten are thriving as a result of taking a move.

Food for thought.

clivemcl wrote: Seymour/Farrell/Whitten are thriving as a result of taking a move.

Well maybe they are. But here's the thing - rugby is a team game but you want player with individual aspirations to win trophies and.achieve international honors - to be the best player they can.

Therefore you want players to stay because they have the belief that they can achieve that at Ulster, more than Exeter, Glasgow or Grenoble. Otherwise you are left with players who are staying because they are comfortable, not because they believe in the coaches and teammates to win things.  

So if players believe they can be better players elsewhere then the club need to look at the set up but I think mostly we are retaining the players we want and I'd rather see someone go an make career elsewhere than be happy with a few pro12 appearances and an Ulster tracksuit.

clivemcl wrote:Yea Rodders, just watched the highlights.

Stevenson also came off the bench for them.

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/VIDEO-highlights-Bath-Rugby-v-Exeter-Chiefs-Sandy/story-28830247-detail/story.html

Ititially I feel proud when I see the likes of Farrell, Seymour, Whitten do well... but it's always followed by the thought "I hope they don't do too well!"

Why? Because what would it say about the Ulster setup, if we keep the players we believe to be the more talented, only to find out that the other players were developed/coached to a higher playing standard elsewhere than we did in the same time with the players we opted to keep.

For example... Gilroy and Seymour. We believed that Gilroy was worth keeping at Seymour's expense. It has now got to the point that Gilroy vs Seymour is a close enough comparison to debate. The worry might be that some other young players might look objectively and judge that Gilroy's career was stifled at Ulster behind Bowe and Trimble, whereas Seymour/Farrell/Whitten are thriving as a result of taking a move.

Food for thought.

Disagree Clive. What it says about the Ulster setup is that they can produce the quality and number of backs that even those at the bottom of the pecking order at Ulster can be successful elsewhere.

Seymour was let go long before Gilroy came on the scene - he is nearly three years older. He was competing with the likes of D'Arcy and McIlwaine, both of whom showed more promise in those days than Seymour did. TS had the reputation of being difficult so maybe a move was the best thing to help him mature as a player at a different club. He is a solid Test player now but I don't think he would be first choice at Ulster still so it was a good decision for both player and Ulster. Gilroy stayed to compete with the best and put pressure on them to perform, so how has he been stifled?

Farrell is a big unit and was competing directly with McCloskey when he was at Ulster. He had ankle ligament damage that hampered him and wanted to experience France so he was never going to stay to be 4/5th choice. He is getting first team starts at Grenoble where he wouldn't be at Ulster so again good decision for him and Ulster.

Whitten wanted first team rugby and is definitely getting it more at Exeter than he would have at Ulster so again good for both parties (Michael Allen the same).

The Great Aukster wrote: Seymour was let go long before Gilroy came on the scene - he is nearly three years older. He was competing with the likes of D'Arcy and McIlwaine, both of whom showed more promise in those days than Seymour did.).

Not true Seymour and Gilroy made the first team in the same season 20101-11
Gilroy started 12 games and was a sub once.
Seymour played in 7 games total - don't know the breakdown.

D'Arcy was never in competiton with Seymour - one was a winger the other a 15.
Seymour was never ever behind McIlwaine (no full professional was). McLaughlin had a bizarre belief in him which no one shared

Seymour left because he was 4th choice winger and knew he was nowhere near the Irish team and wanted to play for Scotland.
Ulster were never going to use one of their NIQ places on him so he had to go.

Arnold was going to be 5th/6th choice centre next year and decided to leave - same for Whitten when he left (remember he played most of his rugby on the wing for us)
Farrell was offered a contract and turned it down - to be blunt he didn't fancy the competition.
Opened the door for McCloskey who is a better player

geoff999rugby wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote: Seymour was let go long before Gilroy came on the scene - he is nearly three years older. He was competing with the likes of D'Arcy and McIlwaine, both of whom showed more promise in those days than Seymour did.).

Not true Seymour and Gilroy made the first team in the same season 20101-11
Gilroy started 12 games and was a sub once.
Seymour played in  7 games total - don't know the breakdown.

Yes you're right of course Geoff, I thought he had already gone but it was the same season - apologies

geoff999rugby wrote:D'Arcy was never in competiton with Seymour - one was a winger the other a 15.

Not strictly correct Geoff - Seymour played a couple of times at 15 in that season albeit from the bench. Most of his Schools rugby was at 15.

geoff999rugby wrote:Seymour was never ever behind McIlwaine (no full professional was). McLaughlin had a bizarre belief in him which no one shared

I agree Seymour was behind McIlwaine in McLaughlins eyes, but Seymour was arguably behind Jamie Smith, Conor Gaston, Jonny Shiels, Ian Whitten and Paul Emerick as well as Gilroy in McLaughlin's eyes as they were all tried at his expense.

Seymour did play schools rugby at 15 but Ulster never viewed him as a 15 shown by the fact he never started a game at Full back.

Ian Whitten was a centre played on the wing who was an established squad player by 2010
As to the other players you mentioned they had less games on the wing between them than Seymour alone did that year - it is not credible to say any of them were ahead of Seymour in the pecking order, as a winger.
Playing a player instead of another in a match does not mean that player is ahead in the pecking order.
Black played instead of McCall this weekend, Stockdale played instead of Scholes. The player on the bench is currently considered the better player in the club.

In that year (10-11) the pecking order, as wingers was Trimble, Gilroy/Whitten with Seymour/Cochrane/Emerick seen as the best of the rest in equal measure

We never rated Seymour highly enough imo. Nothing about his rise to international level was surprising to me. I remember watching him play for the Ravens and thinking he was definitely going to be first choice for us.