Ulster Rugby 2017-18

First topic message reminder :

Rory Best (hamstring)
Marcell Coetzee (knee)
Craig Gilroy (back)
Chris Henry (larynx)
Rob Lyttle (shoulder)
Al O'Connor (concussion)
Jared Payne (headaches)
Dave Shanahan (hamstring)
Nick Timoney (ankle)
Schalk van der Merwe (shoulder)

Ha ha - no, I was suggesting they'd just put two and two together and made five. More likely he's following Lam to England?

There's a pretty short list of people I believe on that forum.

Don has more class in his big toe than Dave could even dream of.
Faint praise Don - after all the guy is a tube

Heenan actually wouldn't be a bad call

There's obviously a market for Irish players who go abroad for a few years and then decide to come back to begin or further their international careers. Paddy Butler would be a fine signing if we could persuade him to come back.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:There's obviously a market for Irish players who go abroad for a few years and then decide to come back to begin or further their international careers. Paddy Butler would be a fine signing if we could persuade him to come back.

Pretty sure Butler and Dougall both signed new two year deals earlier this year

marty2086 wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:There's obviously a market for Irish players who go abroad for a few years and then decide to come back to begin or further their international careers. Paddy Butler would be a fine signing if we could persuade him to come back.

Pretty sure Butler and Dougall both signed new two year deals earlier this year

Just read that, but Butler is keen to return after those two years, so he is still an option for the future. Hard to look that far ahead though.

Happy with that team. Obviously there's a high risk of them losing even with the number of player Treviso are missing for the international window but in my mind that seems incidental.

Was it Treviso last year where we didn't managed a try bonus after scoring 3 early tries. Am I remembering that right? Whatever game it was I was hugely deflated after that because it was a strong Ulster team.

Strange to be happy with risking a loss but building for the future, rather than an guaranteed win with nothing but league points to show for it.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:There's obviously a market for Irish players who go abroad for a few years and then decide to come back to begin or further their international careers. Paddy Butler would be a fine signing if we could persuade him to come back.

Pretty sure Butler and Dougall both signed new two year deals earlier this year

Just read that, but Butler is keen to return after those two years, so he is still an option for the future. Hard to look that far ahead though.

Bryn likes to do his business early it seems so hopefully hes on it

There's going to be a real shortage of experience in the back row over the next few years, if the young guys are to fulfil their potential they'll need older heads around them

Suftum

Just saw my car covered in ice. Has pitch been given the all clear?

Pathetic!

Ulster have been truly awful tonight

neilthom7 wrote:Ulster have been truly awful tonight

That's a bit to nice.

First five minutes of the second half, it looked like we had our act together and were working in pods to get over the gain line then it just seemed to go out the window

The backrow was just too lightweight and our backs competed more at the breakdown than our forwards, never going to be easy with so little experience there

Before the flood of criticism comes I'm going to say that's not a bad win for them.

There's a mountain of kids there. The players that were there aren't necessarily fit. Timoney is coming from a 8 week lay off. Kane hasn't played a game in a long time. Black hasn't had a look in and won't be here next season. Herring and Treadwell have been away at the Ireland camp most of the week .......... with a team like that what are expecting against well coaching opposition.

The only thing that annoyed me was how badly we managed the yellow card. Cooney kicks it, and we never see the ball again for 10+ minutes. Play the phases and earn your victory. Poor tactically.

Congrats to Paul Marshall. I'm not his biggest fan but 200 caps is an incredible achievement. Well done sir.

Ulster had a lot of youngster but Trevisio equally had a lot of players missing.
I don't even think it was the youngster tbh, some of the more experienced players were terrible.
It's nice that we came away with a win and that those youngster got a look in but we need to be better.

We shouldn't set the standard low - particularly when it has been claimed that our academy is the best in the country. Leinster/Munster have put out teams of uncapped youngsters a lot, it is only a big deal for us because we don't do it too often. Even Ferris sounded disappointed by the young players. They need to seize these opportunities, but I did think Timoney looked good.

Ulster biggest problem right now in terms of the team is that we don't have a good spine. To really be successful you need to start with the basics and one of those is the spine of team. Key position like back row and flyhalf are lacking for Ulster. Without those we will struggle to put together good performance as they are vital to give us a basic foothold in the games. We saw tonight there was no direction because of a poor outhalf and the back row wasn't winning us ball so we got turned over and gave pens away for holding on

I'm not usually here to make excuses but it's a win. Our most experienced international forward was Treadwell with 2 caps. Their's was Barbieri with 41 Italy caps.

Personally I'm happy for the win and the experience of the lads getting much needed gametime.

No.

I watched a Treviso team, stripped of its best players, organise to get outside us in attack twice, when they were down to fourteen players. That's not inexperienced back rows. That's a big defensive systems failure.

I haven't been to a live game in a while. I watched Treviso make plenty of hard yards by going wide twice and then inside once. Time after time.

No exit strategies - Cooney was kicking "contestable" box kicks within our own 22, when we turned Treviso over, which happened a few times. Just kick it the frig out!!!

I am now, on the evidence of what I have seen, firmly in the Les Kiss Out stand. We didn't deserve to win that. Because every single team in this league finds us predictable, and is happy to be patient, waiting for us to give away a penalty, knowing we won't do anything extraordinary in defence.

About seven players came out to do a lap of "honour" after. There were only about a couple of hundred of us that stayed to cheer. And we didn't feel like there was much to cheer. Both the players and the fans felt awkward. Herring furious genuinely seemed embarrassed, clapping the fans but also literally looking away so he wouldn't catch our eye.

A couple of years ago, we were a pretty good team, over-achieving because we were well coached. This is the opposite. A decently-talented team, poorly coached.

Utterly dispiriting. For the first time in forever, we had a sporadically dominant scrum. And a lineout that functioned. And we were still gash.

We need a new coach.

Don - since you were at the game, you should watch what Les Kiss had to say in his post-match interview on the BBC. Embarrassing.

Another important point I just have to note - of the new players this season, two impressed me last night - Timoney and Jones. Both Leinstermen. Hall made a lot of tackles but didn't do much else. Like I said, if our academy truly is the best, we need to start seeing the fruits of it pretty soon.

On the plus side, I thought Hall tackled well, got low put his man down, timmoney played well, and Jones didn't look out of place.
Hall and Jones need to bulk up a bit , but look decent pro14 players and hopefully push on.
I'm determined to see some pisotives

Yet again Ulster struggle when officiated by a whistle happy ref. This proclivity has been there for a few seasons but is exacerbated in a game where Ulster are stripped of the few players that have any real rugby nous.

The defensive lapses were damaging enough but it was the proliferation of penalties that stopped moves, conceded territory and often with easy points. Looking through the team there is a distinct lack of cute hoorishness in being able to adapt to the style of refereeing, and the area where this is most manifest is at the breakdown. It was great to see Hall, Dalton and Jones but that lack of experience concentrated on the pitch at the same time was probably ill-advised from the coaches. Surely they should be blooding these players in teams where there is experience around them to learn from?

I feel my excitement ebb away with every passing game. It's just gutting to watch the same dross week in, week out. I'll never stop supporting Ulster but there are many, many more who've already gone AWOL. Sad, sorry times but what can we expect missing so many pivotal players. The only way is up????

No excuses that was dross

I also don't except the -'we were missing 22 players excuse'.
Treviso were missing a similar amount - 16 players with Italy + a few injuries.

Some praise playing the youngest - we were forced into it because of unavailability.
That is the only way young players 1 to 13 get a chance at Ulster - same with Kane last year, and Stewart this.

The reality is these lads should be getting 10 mins here, 14 mins there in games against the likes of Dragons etc.
so that they are better equipped to play In these games.
Would it really have hurt to give, say, Hall 20 mins against Dragons earlier in the season and Jones 8 mins away to Treviso this.
That's the way to develop youngsters not throw them all in the deep end all at once.

I see our new prop gifted them 7 mins.
Had a few chat afterwards - interesting.
Firstly on said new prop. It appears the ref was within a whisker of pinging him for a penalty at the late scrum.
If he had we would have lost.

Also some rumours our glorious leader wants out and that his priority has always been money over rugby.
Sees Ulster as a stepping to something bigger - don't know whether we are talking business or politics.
When we were looking for a big name a couple of years back - The rumour is he put pressure on to get Piatau over a backrower
because he wanted a big name who would sell tickets.

There is a bit of a rift between the Christians and the others.
The religious ones are a bit self righteous and it is annoying others.
On a lighter note - apparently Stephen Ferris really dislikes Ian Humphreys and off camera has given him a piece of his mind on more than one occasion.
He was particularly peeved when Humphreys mentioned Ulster lacked physicality at a recent game.
A withering look ensued which oozed contempt.

geoff999rugby wrote:No excuses that was dross

I also don't except the -'we were missing 22 players excuse'.
Treviso were missing a similar amount - 16 players with Italy + a few injuries.

Some praise playing the youngest - we were forced into it because of unavailability.
That is the only way young players 1 to 13 get a chance at Ulster - same with Kane last year, and Stewart this.

The reality is these lads should be getting 10 mins here, 14 mins there in games against the likes of Dragons etc.
so that they are better equipped to play In these games.
Would it really have hurt to give, say, Hall 20 mins against Dragons earlier in the season and Jones 8 mins away to Treviso this.
That's the way to develop youngsters not throw them all in the deep end all at once.

I see our new prop gifted them 7 mins.
Had a few chat afterwards - interesting.
Firstly on said new prop. It appears the ref was within a whisker of pinging him for a penalty at the late scrum.
If he had we would have lost.

Also some rumours our glorious leader wants out and that his priority has always been money over rugby.
Sees Ulster as a stepping to something bigger - don't know whether we are talking business or politics.
When we were looking for a big name a couple of years back - The rumour is he put pressure on to get Piatau over a backrower
because he wanted a big name who would sell tickets.

There is a bit of a rift between the Christians and the others.
The religious ones are a bit self righteous and it is annoying others.
On a lighter note - apparently Stephen Ferris really dislikes Ian Humphreys and off camera has given him a piece of his mind on more than one occasion.
He was particularly peeved when Humphreys mentioned Ulster lacked physicality at a recent game.
A withering look ensued which oozed contempt.

Glorious leader, Geoff - Logan or Kiss? Either (or preferably both) would be welcome at this stage.

Honestly, lads - if I had it within me to disengage for the rest of the season, I would. But I can't stay away. Like a dog returning to eat its own vomit.

Heard the name "Giteau" being bandied about this morning at the club. Dunno how likely or accurate, but Bryn may have been in touch. Also heard some stuff about why Anscombe was shown the door. Best rid of him.

Ah - Logan I presume. The stuff about business and politics just hit home.

I've heard Giteau mentioned as well. He'd be ample
Logan going? Could he take Kiss with him?

I also have heard whispers of Giteau.

I would not get too excited yet - I suspect he is one of many we have approach.
No clue yet as to responses

Logan is indeed our glorious leader.
Looking around for a new position is the rumour, outside of rugby.

"There is a bit of a rift between the Christians and the others.
The religious ones are a bit self righteous and it is annoying others."

The religious culture should never have been allowed to grow within Ulster rugby IMO. It's all well and fine having your beliefs but when it spills over into your professional life it can become poisonous. Unfortunately such culture would have been empowered by the likes of Muller and Pienaar. The legacy obviously isn't healthy.

Pete330v2 wrote:"There is a bit of a rift between the Christians and the others.
The religious ones are a bit self righteous and it is annoying others."

The religious culture should never have been allowed to grow within Ulster rugby IMO. It's all well and fine having your beliefs but when it spills over into your professional life it can become poisonous. Unfortunately such culture would have been empowered by the likes of Muller and Pienaar. The legacy obviously isn't healthy.

Complete and utter nonsense. Everyone brings their beliefs and principles wherever they go, regardless what those beliefs are, including you. What you seem to be advocating is censorship of beliefs you don't agree with. Which is the most self-righteous position of all.

Anyway, not sure which players are being referred to, but the self-righteousness of some players at Ulster doesn't seem to stop with the religious bunch.

Self righteousness is something you'd be an expert on. You are by far the most pompous, obnoxious poster on here.
Any religious belief and the enforcing of it onto others has no place in any professional workplace. It brings only division something that is very obvious.
Pompous twit.

Pete330v2 wrote:Self righteousness is something you'd be an expert on. You are by far the most pompous, obnoxious poster on here.
Any religious belief and the enforcing of it onto others has no place in any professional workplace. It brings only division something that is very obvious.
Pompous twit.

So the religious Ulster players are enforcing their beliefs onto others in the workplace? Interesting, could you tell me where you got this information from? However, it sounds like you are happy enough to enforce your beliefs and principles onto others, by not allowing others (your words) whom you disagree with to have beliefs or principles of their own. In fact, what even is this "religious culture" in Ulster Rugby that you are talking about? Be specific.

Your posting on these forums suggests that you can't handle any kind of adult debate. You resort to childish insults when it doesn't go your way. I hope you don't bring that into the workplace.

In fact, I don't trust you to answer that honestly, and you'll probably just respond with more childish insults, so I'll answer it for you. By "religious culture" you mean that there are a rather large number of Christians at Ulster Rugby. You have zero evidence that they are proselytising their beliefs in the workplace, but you dislike that there is a growing number of people at the club with beliefs and principles that you personally disagree with. That's your real gripe here.

The reality is, none of us know what the case is regarding this "rift". It could be that they are religious zealots. It could also be, as you yourself give evidence towards, that the fact they even have principles or beliefs that others dislike is enough to have them labeled as "self-righteous".

Either way, this is a pointless debate unless someone actually has legitimate information. It's just rich to hear someone peddling a bunch of silly myths that they would attack a religious person for making themselves.

Legitimate information -seriously? Forget logic Rory you shouldn't try to interrupt a good witch hunt. Muller, Pienaar, Logan, wee P, both Humphs, Trimby, Piutau, Coetzee and various other saffers should all have been burnt at the stake before ever passing the memorial clock. Ulster are obviously missing a trick by not having a cucking stool as part of the medical as they have too many players with too much morality.

I don't know about our players having too much morality or how that affects the camp but I do know that there's 2 players who we could really use right now who didn't have enough off it

neilthom7 wrote:I don't know about our players having too much morality or how that affects the camp but I do know that there's 2 players who we could really use right now who didn't have enough off it

Allegedly neil..... allegedly.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

Pete330v2 wrote:"There is a bit of a rift between the Christians and the others.
The religious ones are a bit self righteous and it is annoying others."

The religious culture should never have been allowed to grow within Ulster rugby IMO. It's all well and fine having your beliefs but when it spills over into your professional life it can become poisonous. Unfortunately such culture would have been empowered by the likes of Muller and Pienaar. The legacy obviously isn't healthy.

Complete and utter nonsense. Everyone brings their beliefs and principles wherever they go, regardless what those beliefs are, including you. What you seem to be advocating is censorship of beliefs you don't agree with. Which is the most self-righteous position of all.

Anyway, not sure which players are being referred to, but the self-righteousness of some players at Ulster doesn't seem to stop with the religious bunch.

What is nonsense ?

That we have players with deeply held religious beliefs
That we have players who don't
That  the ones who aren't resent the prominence given to those with strongly held religious beliefs

The fact is prayer meeting take place regularly on Ulster rugby premises - this still happens
Prior to Anscombe, players were not, official, allowed to drink at any time to promote the family and Christian image the club wished to portray.
This came from the very top.
Some players resented this, I'll name one - Tommy Bowe.
Now Tommy has never been a big drinker he just likes 2 or 3 pints after a match to unwind.
Other like a beer - Henderson, Best for example.
Now it is of course ironic given the way Anscombe behaved but the heavy influence of the Christian group remains.

I have no issue with individual beliefs but it is inappropriate for them to pervade the workplace.
I have strong political and environmental beliefs but I never took them into the workplace it would have been unprofessional.

The question of the two players going to trial has of itself caused some rifts in the camp.

Pete....
‘Should’ve never have been allowed to grow’

WTF are you on about??

Banning religious beliefs??

I’d also like t know what it is that makes it a ‘Christian culture’ as opposed to a few of the guys being up front about their faith.

Pete330v2 wrote:Self righteousness is something you'd be an expert on. You are by far the most pompous, obnoxious poster on here.
Any religious belief and the enforcing of it onto others has no place in any professional workplace. It brings only division something that is very obvious.
Pompous twit.

If you’ve heard stuff, tell us.

This thread has taken a strange turn; very interesting...but strange.

Geoff, was there any mandatory attendance at these meetings? Or is it just that some perceive better treatment for those who belong to the ‘Christian culture’?
I just want to understand what the issue some folks have is.

Besides, we also would update likely be wrong to assume that the players themselves are in any way weirding power. In fact I would suggest that if prayer meetings were outlawed, they would probably say ‘fair enough’ and rearrange off-site.
Also, prayer meetings I assume did not take place during working hours?

Crickey - how is Rory captain as from what was said on the Lions tour, he loved a pint and he was leading the midweek team astray!

I'd imagine the trial coming up is very challenging for everyone in Ulster Rugby (but especially the 2 lads).

Sin é wrote:Crickey - how is Rory captain as from what was said on the Lions tour, he loved a pint and he was leading the midweek team astray!

I'd imagine the trial coming up is very challenging for everyone in Ulster Rugby (but especially the 2 lads).

I imagine Rory is accepted as captain easily as the squad regardless of beliefs are able to judge him purely on his leadership and rugby skills and not his personal beliefs or his lifestyle choices.

I'm not interesting in a religious debate, but I didn't bring it up and I'm going to leave it at this. It's all well and good attaching the word "religious" to suggest what you you want banned from public life, but that's merely a red herring to get rid of beliefs or principles you dislike. Everyone brings their beliefs into the public life, it really is that simple, whether you consider yourself an atheist, humanist, Christian, whatever.

It is just mind boggling that people can't actually grasp this simple point. So those who like to swear will do so regardless of company, those who prefer not to will noticeably not, etc. Calling people "self-righteous" because they adhere to a set of morals, or, much worse, suggesting that they shouldn't be entitled to those morals is the epitome of intolerance and prejudice. Nor do they have to like your way of life, as you aren't forced to like theirs. Is there evidence that the "christian culture" at Ulster is prohibiting other players from drinking alcohol? I'm actually tempted to do some digging here, based on the insinuations on this forum.

As for people wanting to pray - what's the problem? There have been prayer meetings in a few places I have worked, where a handful of people went, and there were always a few militant atheists who disliked it, but could never give a legitimate reason why, other than the fact they just didn't like it. Which is interesting to me.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I'm not interesting in a religious debate, but I didn't bring it up and I'm going to leave it at this. It's all well and good attaching the word "religious" to suggest what you you want banned from public life, but that's merely a red herring to get rid of beliefs or principles you dislike. Everyone brings their beliefs into the public life, it really is that simple, whether you consider yourself an atheist, humanist, Christian, whatever.

The creation of cliques or perceived cliques in any organisation is always difficult to deal with it particularly if it's among powerful or influential people in the organisation. It could be based around gender, religion, politics, or whatever that informs a culture or an influential culture within a group.

The difficultly is that those within may not intend to offend or exclude those without, but if it's allowed to persist, it can become very unhealthy.

geoff999rugby wrote:
The question of the two players going to trial has of itself caused some rifts in the camp.

I have no doubt this is the root of this so-called "rift". On here, when I suggested in general terms that it would be wiser and much better if people retained traditional views on sex and relationships than the amoral mess we are in now, I was called self-righteous and judgemental. Yet it was a fair and legitimate point, to avoid situations like two extremely talented young men potentially destroying their careers. I'm sure they regret it now.

And, for those who haven't been living under a rock and watch the news, plenty of men have been happy enough to bring their beliefs and views about sex into the workplace. I know which side of this issue I prefer.

SecretFly wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I'm not interesting in a religious debate, but I didn't bring it up and I'm going to leave it at this. It's all well and good attaching the word "religious" to suggest what you you want banned from public life, but that's merely a red herring to get rid of beliefs or principles you dislike. Everyone brings their beliefs into the public life, it really is that simple, whether you consider yourself an atheist, humanist, Christian, whatever.

I wasn't including you Mr Fly. You've defended Trump supporters on here in the past, an indefensible position and unfit for public or private life. I would have you on the chopping block (and all of those associated with the deplorables) if it were up to me.