Leinster Rugby 2022/23 Season

First topic message reminder :

Interesting season coming up for the boys in blue - reached deep into the knockout rounds in both domestic and European cups and came up short. Some might argue that the depth wasn't there in key positions - notably lock and front row to make it through. With the cutbacks, the squad has been reduced again with a number of Leinster players heading west to Connacht, and promotions from the academy being capped at 4. The good news is that with Toner retiring, Cullen was finally able to get another foreign lock in, with Jason Jenkins moving from Munster. The 26-year old got one cap for the Springboks back in 2018, but hasn't been selected since, so hopefully, Leinster can rely on him being available for in-window games during the season.

The other foreign recruit is the 31-year old, Charlie Ngatai, another 1-cap test player from New Zealand, who will fill in regularly in the absence of Henshaw and Ringrose, and replace the departed Rory O'Loughlin.

All of the coaches' contracts are up at the end of this season, so with the new CEO installed, he'll have a lot on his plate, along with getting the RDS stand redevelopment programme underway.

With RWC coming up next season and test players on restricted programmes, could be another underwhelming season ahead.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Some rumours flying about that Sexton might be in hot water following an altercation with La Rochelle representatives at half time and then saying more than he should have done to Peyper at full time. Investigation into the half time shenanigans has already been confirmed.

Sexton has never been a particularly good loser.

As a neutral, I thought Leinster got more than their fair share of 50/50 decisions too, especially at the breakdown. I'm not sure what Mr Sexton has to complain about tbh......

To be fair you dont know what happened and whether he was complaining at all or maybe you do? Anything Ive seen seems to suggest the main confrontation was between Sean OBrien and OGara. Sexton had also not lost at that point in the game so a bit left-field and unnecessary to call him a sore loser. Everyone is free to write their own narrative however, I find it a bit hard to understand how the primary narrative after that match isnt how well two global heavy weights put on a great final.

The reports from Irish journalists was that it was Sexton the person confronting Peyper at the end of the game.

Leo Cullen made an interesting observation about Leinster winning important turnovers in the second half. He noted that they were won so cleanly, there was no penalty for holding on, sealing off etc. This meant Leinster regained possession deep in their own half and had little option but to kick it back to la Rochelle.

It's a reminder of how much the tactics of the modern game rely on the opposition getting penalized for offences at the scrum, breakdown and driving maul.

I actually did notice that too. Still Leinster are usually quite good at exiting on those moments. La Rochelle did well to put pressure on and make sure the exits did not go well.

Maybe I do

Leinster haven't done themselves any favours over the last few weeks to be fair. I don't think many of the neutrals were too upset to see them get beat (from my perspective anyway).

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Some rumours flying about that Sexton might be in hot water following an altercation with La Rochelle representatives at half time and then saying more than he should have done to Peyper at full time. Investigation into the half time shenanigans has already been confirmed.

Sexton has never been a particularly good loser.

As a neutral, I thought Leinster got more than their fair share of 50/50 decisions too, especially at the breakdown. I'm not sure what Mr Sexton has to complain about tbh......

To be fair you dont know what happened and whether he was complaining at all or maybe you do? Anything Ive seen seems to suggest the main confrontation was between Sean OBrien and OGara. Sexton had also not lost at that point in the game so a bit left-field and unnecessary to call him a sore loser. Everyone is free to write their own narrative however, I find it a bit hard to understand how the primary narrative after that match isnt how well two global heavy weights put on a great final.

The reports from Irish journalists was that it was Sexton the person confronting Peyper at the end of the game.

A whinge-bag on the field and off by all accounts, sad way to end a career.

You sound oddly bitter, plus his career isn’t over yet. He will be remembered as one of the all time greats.

Leinster are basically the Ireland team right? Peaked too soon…

mikey_dragon wrote:Leinster are basically the Ireland team right? Peaked too soon…

There's some key additions when it becomes the Irish team. One is the depth at tighthead, losing Furlong really hit them hard in the second half. The other is the depth at lock where Beirne and Henderson add some real quality to go alongside James Ryan. The Leinster lineout had issues when Ryan left the field.

I don't think you can say they peaked to soon more that just lacked a bit of leadership at halfback in the second half when their pack started to stutter. They didn't manage the game well and that will be a concern to the Ireland coaches.

One real problem area for Leinster is loose head. Porter was struggling against Wardi but got away with it on a couple of scrums. JP was reluctant to give La Rochelle the rewards for their scrum dominance until later in the second half.
Once Healy came on their scrum was under even more pressure. He looks almost in pain when he jogs onto the field. His legs appear to be more bowed than in his prime and he doesn't seem to have the leg power of seasons past.

The problem for Ireland is that Healy is still the back up for Porter. In a game against South Africa or France, if Cian Healy plays more than 15 minutes it could mean the difference between winning and losing a close match.

I don't think either Furlong or Porter are particularly strong scrummagers. I thought they both (especially Porter) got away with a lot against La Rochelle.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I don't think either Furlong or Porter are particularly strong scrummagers. I thought they both (especially Porter) got away with a lot against La Rochelle.

I think Furlong is an outstanding all round prop. Porter is decent but does seem prone to twisting in and gambling as opposed to going back or down. They were up against a bigger La Rochelle pack that wasn't exactly short on power either. I think Leinster's problem was more that the bench wasn't great. Cian Healey is past his best and A'alatoa is good in the loose but lacks bulk at scrum time and probably should concede more penalties there than he does. He's got a good frame, just needs to pack on some kilos of muscle around the upper body and quads.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I don't think either Furlong or Porter are particularly strong scrummagers. I thought they both (especially Porter) got away with a lot against La Rochelle.

I think Furlong is an outstanding all round prop. Porter is decent but does seem prone to twisting in and gambling as opposed to going back or down. They were up against a bigger La Rochelle pack that wasn't exactly short on power either. I think Leinster's problem was more that the bench wasn't great. Cian Healey is past his best and A'alatoa is good in the loose but lacks bulk at scrum time and probably should concede more penalties there than he does. He's got a good frame, just needs to pack on some kilos of muscle around the upper body and quads.

La Rochelle have some big guys (Skelton and Atonio obviously), but I don't think they have that big a pack really.

Checking the averages.....they're only 1.5kg a man heavier and just over 12kg in total.....that's not a huge difference. In fact, it you discount the big two, the rest of the pack average around 107kg.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I don't think either Furlong or Porter are particularly strong scrummagers. I thought they both (especially Porter) got away with a lot against La Rochelle.

I think Furlong is an outstanding all round prop. Porter is decent but does seem prone to twisting in and gambling as opposed to going back or down. They were up against a bigger La Rochelle pack that wasn't exactly short on power either. I think Leinster's problem was more that the bench wasn't great. Cian Healey is past his best and A'alatoa is good in the loose but lacks bulk at scrum time and probably should concede more penalties there than he does. He's got a good frame, just needs to pack on some kilos of muscle around the upper body and quads.

La Rochelle have some big guys (Skelton and Atonio obviously), but I don't think they have that big a pack really.

Checking the averages.....they're only 1.5kg a man heavier and just over 12kg in total.....that's not a huge difference. In fact, it you discount the big two, the rest of the pack average around 107kg.

Yeah but the big two are the tighthead and the lock that's scrumming down behind the tighthead. That's going to have an effect at scrum time. Colombe and Scalvi the replacement props are both absolute units as well whilst the Leinster replacement props were not.

Well, that was some game. La Rochelle, what can you say other than the resolve shown was immense. Many a team would have simply collapsed after that rapid start by Leinster but they never gave up.

I feel sorry for Sexton, missing that game must have hurt big time. Up there with the GOAT's and a legend of Leinster and Irish Rugby.

I'm not sure Sexton had any right in speaking to the officials or opposition coaching staff seeing as he had nothing to do with the match day set up, i.e. he was suited & booted so not even a water carrier.

Game changed when La Rochelle started to slow Leinsters ruck average speed down, changed from 2.4 seconds in the first half to in excess of 8 seconds in the second period.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Leinster haven't done themselves any favours over the last few weeks to be fair. I don't think many of the neutrals were too upset to see them get beat (from my perspective anyway).

Yup.

It was beautiful to see. Hilarious that Leinster rested their players out in South Africa in the URC, had the audacity to send their coaches home, who didn't even attend their match versus the Bulls. Played a few second strings against Munster too didn't they? Arrogant, disdainful rugby club got what they deserved......sweet FA.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Some rumours flying about that Sexton might be in hot water following an altercation with La Rochelle representatives.

I'm staggerred at this. He seems such a likelable guy.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Some rumours flying about that Sexton might be in hot water following an altercation with La Rochelle representatives.

I'm staggerred at this. He seems such a likelable guy.

So do you.

The trolls/haters are really out in numbers today I see.

Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

RugbyFan100 wrote:
Yup.

It was beautiful to see. Hilarious that Leinster rested their players out in South Africa in the URC, had the audacity to send their coaches home, who didn't even attend their match versus the Bulls. Played a few second strings against Munster too didn't they? Arrogant, disdainful rugby club got what they deserved......sweet FA.

The Leinster selection approach leading up to the HC Final is perfectly understandable, they simply prioritised the HC final. Many teams have done this before them and many teams will do it after them, are all these teams 'Arrogant and Disdainful'?
Leinster have the strength in depth to do this as well without incredibly hampering their performances which, to be honest, is quite enviable.

Schadenfreude is very strong today...

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Good to see someone is being positive on a Monday morning Billy. I was at the Leinster v Munster match and it was a really enjoyable match and it was still a very strong Leinster side that wanted to win and put in a huge shift. Munster managed the game better, played very nice rugby and came out with the win. It happens, was delighted for Munster as it sets up a mouthwatering final that we can all look forward to. Both the URC semi and the champions cup final were such entertaining games and cant understand all the negativity at all. Great time for Irish rugby.

eirebilly_01 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:
Yup.

It was beautiful to see. Hilarious that Leinster rested their players out in South Africa in the URC, had the audacity to send their coaches home, who didn't even attend their match versus the Bulls. Played a few second strings against Munster too didn't they? Arrogant, disdainful rugby club got what they deserved......sweet FA.

The Leinster selection approach leading up to the HC Final is perfectly understandable, they simply prioritised the HC final. Many teams have done this before them and many teams will do it after them, are all these teams 'Arrogant and Disdainful'?
Leinster have the strength in depth to do this as well without incredibly hampering their performances which, to be honest, is quite enviable.

Schadenfreude is very strong today...

It's extremely arrogant for the main coaches and management of a team to not bother to attend a league game.

If you don't agree with that, then it says more about you. FYI - It's this sort of behaviour that breeds the arrogance that makes Gregory Aldritt claim Leinster disrespected La Rochelle

https://rugby365.com/tournaments/european-cup/news-european-cup/a-bizarre-action-la-rochelle-felt-disrespected-by-leinster-captain/

And it's this sort of behavioir that leads to people enjoying seeing Leinster losing. But by all means defend it, as the true 'rugby values' always show in the end.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Its hardly disrespectful. La Rochelle did the same in their league the week before the champions cup final. Not many teams like Leinster have to play 4 knock out matches in a row over consecutive weekends. Squad rotation is inevitable if you want to win two trophies. They lost both matches in the dying minutes by a point and that's considered disrespectful?

RugbyFan100, what I agree with or don't agree with has no bearing, the fact is, I perfectly understand the decision making behind the decisions.

As a Munsterman, I am probably more likely to enjoy a Leinster defeat than most of you but I will not let that bias get in the way of perfectly understandable decision making. Decisions that nearly every club in every sport has also made in the past and will in the future when approaching their biggest game of the season.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

eirebilly_01 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:
Yup.

It was beautiful to see. Hilarious that Leinster rested their players out in South Africa in the URC, had the audacity to send their coaches home, who didn't even attend their match versus the Bulls. Played a few second strings against Munster too didn't they? Arrogant, disdainful rugby club got what they deserved......sweet FA.

The Leinster selection approach leading up to the HC Final is perfectly understandable, they simply prioritised the HC final. Many teams have done this before them and many teams will do it after them, are all these teams 'Arrogant and Disdainful'?
Leinster have the strength in depth to do this as well without incredibly hampering their performances which, to be honest, is quite enviable.

Schadenfreude is very strong today...

It's extremely arrogant for the main coaches and management of a team to not bother to attend a league game.

If you don't agree with that, then it says more about you. FYI - It's this sort of behaviour that breeds the arrogance that makes Gregory Aldritt claim Leinster disrespected La Rochelle

https://rugby365.com/tournaments/european-cup/news-european-cup/a-bizarre-action-la-rochelle-felt-disrespected-by-leinster-captain/

And it's this sort of behavioir that leads to people enjoying seeing Leinster losing. But by all means defend it, as the true 'rugby values' always show in the end.

I bet Aldrit will regret bringing this up in his post match speech. Makes him seem a bit of a sore winner and a diva.

He felt disrespected because someone didnt look him in the eyes? Really unnecessary especially when he put in such a good performance. Post match emotion, very little else. I prefer to remember him for his big shift rather than that silly stuff.

Collapse2005 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Its hardly disrespectful. La Rochelle did the same in their league the week before the champions cup final. Not many teams like Leinster have to play 4 knock out matches in a row over consecutive weekends. Squad rotation is inevitable if you want to win two trophies. They lost both matches in the dying minutes by a point and that's considered disrespectful?

La Rochelle weren't playing a semi final the week before against their local rivals. They are miles ahead of third with another league game before the playoffs. Leinster not sending their squad over to SA, as I've already said, that made lots of sense. Semi final for domestic title honours and big names are rested will always look bad if it doesn't come off. If you have Leinster's budget and talent then there's going to be a level of expectation, get it wrong and you take the flack, get it right you take the plaudits.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Its hardly disrespectful. La Rochelle did the same in their league the week before the champions cup final. Not many teams like Leinster have to play 4 knock out matches in a row over consecutive weekends. Squad rotation is inevitable if you want to win two trophies. They lost both matches in the dying minutes by a point and that's considered disrespectful?

La Rochelle weren't playing a semi final the week before against their local rivals. They are miles ahead of third with another league game before the playoffs. Leinster not sending their squad over to SA, as I've already said, that made lots of sense. Semi final for domestic title honours and big names are rested will always look bad if it doesn't come off. If you have Leinster's budget and talent then there's going to be a level of expectation, get it wrong and you take the flack, get it right you take the plaudits.

Leinster's squad v Munster was still very strong and they went out to win that match. Do you realise that only one of Leinster's players (Tommy OBrien) in that match had not yet been capped at international level and he was Ireland's 2018 under 20 captain? Munster had at least four uncapped players.

Leinster had a disallowed try and missed a second one by finger tips and lost by one point via a last minute drop goal. Leinster played very well in that game which was a high quality match. The narrative around disrespect is fantasy stuff. They clearly did what they thought they needed to do to win two trophies but it didnt work, nothing to do with disrespect.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Not naughty at all. I think a season stretches from minute 1 to that final final whistle. It's up to the head coach to guide them through to try and optimise performance and outcomes for the club/etc. I think it's a bit like a refs performance in a game, a mistake in minute 1 vs the 79th minute. More people will say a a ref mistake has cost their team in the latter category and this feels similar. When are teams allowed to rest players without it being naughty? Are they allowed to only do it against certain teams?  How many can they rest at 1 point. When there is enforced resting due to international agreements does that mean you can't rest others?

I also think it's tempting to gauge these things based on outcomes. Saracens would have won that game for me bar the red card, would that have meant it was ok? (lots of ifs and buts!).

eirebilly_01 wrote:RugbyFan100, what I agree with or don't agree with has no bearing, the fact is, I perfectly understand the decision making behind the decisions.

As a Munsterman, I am probably more likely to enjoy a Leinster defeat than most of you but I will not let that bias get in the way of perfectly understandable decision making. Decisions that nearly every club in every sport has also made in the past and will in the future when approaching their biggest game of the season.

Not sending your coaches to a league game gets people's backs up.
Putting Leinster flags in all the seats in what is supposed to be a neutral venue gets people's backs up.
Getting involved in a tunnel fracas when you're not even a coach or in the matchday 23 gets people's backs up.
Booing the refereeing decisions when it doesn't go your way gets people's backs up.

No it gets your back up because you have a preconceived agenda it seems. The things you are getting bent out of shape over are so minor that I sense jealousy is driving it. Flags under seats, Ryan not looking Aldritt in the eyes, brilliant! Its your loss that you seem to have missed out on enjoying one of the great euro cup finals.

Collapse2005 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

eirebilly_01 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:
Yup.

It was beautiful to see. Hilarious that Leinster rested their players out in South Africa in the URC, had the audacity to send their coaches home, who didn't even attend their match versus the Bulls. Played a few second strings against Munster too didn't they? Arrogant, disdainful rugby club got what they deserved......sweet FA.

The Leinster selection approach leading up to the HC Final is perfectly understandable, they simply prioritised the HC final. Many teams have done this before them and many teams will do it after them, are all these teams 'Arrogant and Disdainful'?
Leinster have the strength in depth to do this as well without incredibly hampering their performances which, to be honest, is quite enviable.

Schadenfreude is very strong today...

It's extremely arrogant for the main coaches and management of a team to not bother to attend a league game.

If you don't agree with that, then it says more about you. FYI - It's this sort of behaviour that breeds the arrogance that makes Gregory Aldritt claim Leinster disrespected La Rochelle

https://rugby365.com/tournaments/european-cup/news-european-cup/a-bizarre-action-la-rochelle-felt-disrespected-by-leinster-captain/

And it's this sort of behavioir that leads to people enjoying seeing Leinster losing. But by all means defend it, as the true 'rugby values' always show in the end.

I bet Aldrit will regret bringing this up in his post match speech. Makes him seem a bit of a sore winner and a diva.

He felt disrespected because someone didnt look him in the eyes? Really unnecessary especially when he put in such a good performance. Post match emotion, very little else. I prefer to remember him for his big shift rather than that silly stuff.

Theres a great photo of them durning the coin toss, shaking hands and Ryan looking him straight in the eye. Was a petty remark to make in the first place, even worse that he made it up.

Yeah its really quite a sore winner thing to do in your post match speech, always thought Aldritt was classier than that. Ill chalk it down to post match emotion. I bet he regrets it though!

Collapse2005 wrote: Its your loss that you seem to have missed out on enjoying one of the great euro cup finals.

? It was one of the best days of my life.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote: Its your loss that you seem to have missed out on enjoying one of the great euro cup finals.

? It was one of the best days of my life.

Good to hear.

Collapse2005 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Its hardly disrespectful. La Rochelle did the same in their league the week before the champions cup final. Not many teams like Leinster have to play 4 knock out matches in a row over consecutive weekends. Squad rotation is inevitable if you want to win two trophies. They lost both matches in the dying minutes by a point and that's considered disrespectful?

La Rochelle weren't playing a semi final the week before against their local rivals. They are miles ahead of third with another league game before the playoffs. Leinster not sending their squad over to SA, as I've already said, that made lots of sense. Semi final for domestic title honours and big names are rested will always look bad if it doesn't come off. If you have Leinster's budget and talent then there's going to be a level of expectation, get it wrong and you take the flack, get it right you take the plaudits.

Leinster's squad v Munster was still very strong and they went out to win that match. Do you realise that only one of Leinster's players (Tommy OBrien) in that match had not yet been capped at international level and he was Ireland's 2018 under 20 captain? Munster had at least four uncapped players.

Leinster had a disallowed try and missed a second one by finger tips and lost by one point via a last minute drop goal. Leinster played very well in that game which was a high quality match. The narrative around disrespect is fantasy stuff. They clearly did what they thought they needed to do to win two trophies but it didnt work, nothing to do with disrespect.

Leinster had more than enough out there to beat Munster at home. I don't see that as an excuse why we lost that game.

We simply choked in both comps and that's it. There's something seriously wrong with the mentality of this squad.

Yes, something probably in that.

A team as good as Leinster should not be losing games from 17-0 up.

Glasgow were down by a similar score against Toulon the night before and I never felt we were coming back and we did not.

Kingshu wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

eirebilly_01 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:
Yup.

It was beautiful to see. Hilarious that Leinster rested their players out in South Africa in the URC, had the audacity to send their coaches home, who didn't even attend their match versus the Bulls. Played a few second strings against Munster too didn't they? Arrogant, disdainful rugby club got what they deserved......sweet FA.

The Leinster selection approach leading up to the HC Final is perfectly understandable, they simply prioritised the HC final. Many teams have done this before them and many teams will do it after them, are all these teams 'Arrogant and Disdainful'?
Leinster have the strength in depth to do this as well without incredibly hampering their performances which, to be honest, is quite enviable.

Schadenfreude is very strong today...

It's extremely arrogant for the main coaches and management of a team to not bother to attend a league game.

If you don't agree with that, then it says more about you. FYI - It's this sort of behaviour that breeds the arrogance that makes Gregory Aldritt claim Leinster disrespected La Rochelle

https://rugby365.com/tournaments/european-cup/news-european-cup/a-bizarre-action-la-rochelle-felt-disrespected-by-leinster-captain/

And it's this sort of behavioir that leads to people enjoying seeing Leinster losing. But by all means defend it, as the true 'rugby values' always show in the end.

I bet Aldrit will regret bringing this up in his post match speech. Makes him seem a bit of a sore winner and a diva.

He felt disrespected because someone didnt look him in the eyes? Really unnecessary especially when he put in such a good performance. Post match emotion, very little else. I prefer to remember him for his big shift rather than that silly stuff.

Theres a great photo of them durning the coin toss, shaking hands and Ryan looking him straight in the eye. Was a petty remark to make in the first place, even worse that he made it up.

Ryan does look like he's looking at him and that he's turning away as he shakes his hand. Might have been half imagined or that Aldritt was looking for something. Maybe Ryan was in the zone and not really communicative, who knows. It fired up Aldritt either way.

Collapse2005 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Its hardly disrespectful. La Rochelle did the same in their league the week before the champions cup final. Not many teams like Leinster have to play 4 knock out matches in a row over consecutive weekends. Squad rotation is inevitable if you want to win two trophies. They lost both matches in the dying minutes by a point and that's considered disrespectful?

La Rochelle weren't playing a semi final the week before against their local rivals. They are miles ahead of third with another league game before the playoffs. Leinster not sending their squad over to SA, as I've already said, that made lots of sense. Semi final for domestic title honours and big names are rested will always look bad if it doesn't come off. If you have Leinster's budget and talent then there's going to be a level of expectation, get it wrong and you take the flack, get it right you take the plaudits.

Leinster's squad v Munster was still very strong and they went out to win that match. Do you realise that only one of Leinster's players (Tommy OBrien) in that match had not yet been capped at international level and he was Ireland's 2018 under 20 captain? Munster had at least four uncapped players.

Leinster had a disallowed try and missed a second one by finger tips and lost by one point via a last minute drop goal. Leinster played very well in that game which was a high quality match. The narrative around disrespect is fantasy stuff. They clearly did what they thought they needed to do to win two trophies but it didnt work, nothing to do with disrespect.

There might have been plenty of internationals in there but there was no Keenan, no Ringrose, no Doris, no Furlong, no Porter, no Ryan, no Gibson-Park, no Lowe, no Sheehan and no doubt I've missed one or more. With VDF on the bench that's a full two thirds of the starting line up not running out to start the game. You're basically telling Munster they aren't worth the effort of the first team, I'm sure the Munster coaching staff will have used that to fire their players up. Starting more first teamers putting the game to bed and then subbing the key players might have gone down better and go the job done.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Not naughty at all. I think a season stretches from minute 1 to that final final whistle. It's up to the head coach to guide them through to try and optimise performance and outcomes for the club/etc. I think it's a bit like a refs performance in a game, a mistake in minute 1 vs the 79th minute. More people will say a a ref mistake has cost their team in the latter category and this feels similar. When are teams allowed to rest players without it being naughty? Are they allowed to only do it against certain teams?  How many can they rest at 1 point. When there is enforced resting due to international agreements does that mean you can't rest others?

I also think it's tempting to gauge these things based on outcomes. Saracens would have won that game for me bar the red card, would that have meant it was ok? (lots of ifs and buts!).

They could have rested players for both the Saints and the LI games and not effected the fourth place battle and still had a game Vs Bath to put a strong team out for minutes before the play off. As it was they rested players against Saints to provide a bonus point victory and then went with the first team against LI. Swung it in Saints favour.

Resting players is fine, they'd earned the right it was just a little bit naughty to do it for one playoff chasing team and not the other to effectively select their opponent.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Not naughty at all. I think a season stretches from minute 1 to that final final whistle. It's up to the head coach to guide them through to try and optimise performance and outcomes for the club/etc. I think it's a bit like a refs performance in a game, a mistake in minute 1 vs the 79th minute. More people will say a a ref mistake has cost their team in the latter category and this feels similar. When are teams allowed to rest players without it being naughty? Are they allowed to only do it against certain teams?  How many can they rest at 1 point. When there is enforced resting due to international agreements does that mean you can't rest others?

I also think it's tempting to gauge these things based on outcomes. Saracens would have won that game for me bar the red card, would that have meant it was ok? (lots of ifs and buts!).

They could have rested players for both the Saints and the LI games and not effected the fourth place battle and still had a game Vs Bath to put a strong team out for minutes before the play off. As it was they rested players against Saints to provide a bonus point victory and then went with the first team against LI. Swung it in Saints favour.

Resting players is fine, they'd earned the right it was just a little bit naughty to do it for one playoff chasing team and not the other to effectively select their opponent.

I think if a team puts themselves in position to rest players toward the end of the season, more power to them.  I wouldn't think twice who the opposition might be - if I am a coach I am going to worry about my team first. If I am a coach and one of my players gets injured in a game with no meaning for me with the playoffs looming, I could, and depending on the situation, should be fired. This season my Saints benefited from this, and frankly I knew the beat-down that was coming in the semi-final, though there is - almost - always hope.  

This past NFL season, the NY Giants rested almost the whole squad in their last game of the season because they had just locked up their playoff slot the week before.  I don't think they cared who their opposition was.  As a Giants fan, I was happy to see them rest so many players - they won their first round playoff game before losing to the eventual Super Bowl champs in the next round.

Ultimately, Rugby, like the NFL, is far too rough to allow even a notion of not resting or benching key players in a game which is meaningless for the team doing the resting, especially with the playoffs just around the corner.  

doctor_grey wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Not naughty at all. I think a season stretches from minute 1 to that final final whistle. It's up to the head coach to guide them through to try and optimise performance and outcomes for the club/etc. I think it's a bit like a refs performance in a game, a mistake in minute 1 vs the 79th minute. More people will say a a ref mistake has cost their team in the latter category and this feels similar. When are teams allowed to rest players without it being naughty? Are they allowed to only do it against certain teams?  How many can they rest at 1 point. When there is enforced resting due to international agreements does that mean you can't rest others?

I also think it's tempting to gauge these things based on outcomes. Saracens would have won that game for me bar the red card, would that have meant it was ok? (lots of ifs and buts!).

They could have rested players for both the Saints and the LI games and not effected the fourth place battle and still had a game Vs Bath to put a strong team out for minutes before the play off. As it was they rested players against Saints to provide a bonus point victory and then went with the first team against LI. Swung it in Saints favour.

Resting players is fine, they'd earned the right it was just a little bit naughty to do it for one playoff chasing team and not the other to effectively select their opponent.

I think if a team puts themselves in position to rest players toward the end of the season, more power to them.  I wouldn't think twice who the opposition might be - if I am a coach I am going to worry about my team first.  If I am a coach and one of my players gets injured in a game with no meaning for me with the playoffs looming, I could, and depending on the situation, should be fired.  This season my Saints benefited from this, and frankly I knew the beat-down that was coming in the semi-final, though there is - almost - always hope.  

This past NFL season, the NY Giants rested almost the whole squad in their last game of the season because they had just locked up their playoff slot the week before.  I don't think they cared who their opposition was.  As a Giants fan, I was happy to see them rest so many players - they won their first round playoff game before losing to the eventual Super Bowl champs in the next round.

Ultimately, Rugby, like the NFL, is far too rough to allow even a notion of not resting or benching key players in a game which is meaningless for the team doing the resting, especially with the playoffs just around the corner.  

Well said DG. Its easy for us to sit behind our pcs and say which team shouldn't be resting players but at the end of the day, the likes of sheehan, keenan and porter had already racked up an extraordinary amount of minutes before the play offs had even started, so to expect them to play every playoff game at the end of the season was just unreasonable. Like I said we sent out a team against munster that was more the capable of winning and we didn't. There's no excuses we just weren't good enough in both comps.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

doctor_grey wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Not naughty at all. I think a season stretches from minute 1 to that final final whistle. It's up to the head coach to guide them through to try and optimise performance and outcomes for the club/etc. I think it's a bit like a refs performance in a game, a mistake in minute 1 vs the 79th minute. More people will say a a ref mistake has cost their team in the latter category and this feels similar. When are teams allowed to rest players without it being naughty? Are they allowed to only do it against certain teams?  How many can they rest at 1 point. When there is enforced resting due to international agreements does that mean you can't rest others?

I also think it's tempting to gauge these things based on outcomes. Saracens would have won that game for me bar the red card, would that have meant it was ok? (lots of ifs and buts!).

They could have rested players for both the Saints and the LI games and not effected the fourth place battle and still had a game Vs Bath to put a strong team out for minutes before the play off. As it was they rested players against Saints to provide a bonus point victory and then went with the first team against LI. Swung it in Saints favour.

Resting players is fine, they'd earned the right it was just a little bit naughty to do it for one playoff chasing team and not the other to effectively select their opponent.

I think if a team puts themselves in position to rest players toward the end of the season, more power to them.  I wouldn't think twice who the opposition might be - if I am a coach I am going to worry about my team first.  If I am a coach and one of my players gets injured in a game with no meaning for me with the playoffs looming, I could, and depending on the situation, should be fired.  This season my Saints benefited from this, and frankly I knew the beat-down that was coming in the semi-final, though there is - almost - always hope.  

This past NFL season, the NY Giants rested almost the whole squad in their last game of the season because they had just locked up their playoff slot the week before.  I don't think they cared who their opposition was.  As a Giants fan, I was happy to see them rest so many players - they won their first round playoff game before losing to the eventual Super Bowl champs in the next round.

Ultimately, Rugby, like the NFL, is far too rough to allow even a notion of not resting or benching key players in a game which is meaningless for the team doing the resting, especially with the playoffs just around the corner.  

Well said DG. Its easy for us to sit behind our pcs and say which team shouldn't be resting players but at the end of the day, the likes of sheehan, keenan and porter had already racked up an extraordinary amount of minutes before the play offs had even started, so to expect them to play every playoff game at the end of the season was just unreasonable. Like I said we sent out a team against munster that was more the capable of winning and we didn't. There's no excuses we just weren't good enough in both comps.

Not to attack you Leinster, but I was intrigued a bit with this......I've compared the 3 mentioned Leinster players to their English/French counterparts.

Dan Sheehan - 1326 (24 total games, 8 URC)
Jamie George - 1246 (21 total, 7 Prem)
Julien Marchand - 1316 (26 total, 12 T14)

Andrew Porter - 1456 (24 total, 8 URC)
Ellis Genge - 1208 (20 total, 8 Prem)
Cyril Baille - 983 (21 total, 7 T14)

Hugo Keenan - 1482 (19 total, 3 URC)
Freddie Steward - 1890 (25 total, 11 Prem)
Thomas Ramos - 1890 (25 total, 12 T14)

I was a little surprised that the Leinster front row options had played as much in the URC as they had tbh.....but still, it compares up quite evenly with the players from different leagues.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Not naughty at all. I think a season stretches from minute 1 to that final final whistle. It's up to the head coach to guide them through to try and optimise performance and outcomes for the club/etc. I think it's a bit like a refs performance in a game, a mistake in minute 1 vs the 79th minute. More people will say a a ref mistake has cost their team in the latter category and this feels similar. When are teams allowed to rest players without it being naughty? Are they allowed to only do it against certain teams?  How many can they rest at 1 point. When there is enforced resting due to international agreements does that mean you can't rest others?

I also think it's tempting to gauge these things based on outcomes. Saracens would have won that game for me bar the red card, would that have meant it was ok? (lots of ifs and buts!).

They could have rested players for both the Saints and the LI games and not effected the fourth place battle and still had a game Vs Bath to put a strong team out for minutes before the play off. As it was they rested players against Saints to provide a bonus point victory and then went with the first team against LI. Swung it in Saints favour.

Resting players is fine, they'd earned the right it was just a little bit naughty to do it for one playoff chasing team and not the other to effectively select their opponent.

But they chose not to. Northampton would have probably lost bit for the red. I remember you applauding Leicster not playing their strongest team too. You don't overly earn the right either. Anyone coach can pick his team as he likes.

When looking at those minutes you have to remember the Top 14 has another round if games before their playoffs as well.

You should also be building the team towards the playoffs not needing to rest them at that point. Particularly when you are as dominant as Leinster have been in the league.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Teams are allowed to play anyone that is suitably registered. The amount of moaning around Saracens doing so etc is pettiness. Ultimately it's down to the head coach to get as much out of his side as he can; and he'll carry the can.

Sarries pretty did it to decide who they'd play in the playoffs though. That was a little bit naughty. Leinster I can fully understand not sending the first team down to SA though, that's just logical. Resting players against Munster in the semi final though, that was a little bit disrespectful. Easy for Munster to write their own team talk.

Not naughty at all. I think a season stretches from minute 1 to that final final whistle. It's up to the head coach to guide them through to try and optimise performance and outcomes for the club/etc. I think it's a bit like a refs performance in a game, a mistake in minute 1 vs the 79th minute. More people will say a a ref mistake has cost their team in the latter category and this feels similar. When are teams allowed to rest players without it being naughty? Are they allowed to only do it against certain teams?  How many can they rest at 1 point. When there is enforced resting due to international agreements does that mean you can't rest others?

I also think it's tempting to gauge these things based on outcomes. Saracens would have won that game for me bar the red card, would that have meant it was ok? (lots of ifs and buts!).

They could have rested players for both the Saints and the LI games and not effected the fourth place battle and still had a game Vs Bath to put a strong team out for minutes before the play off. As it was they rested players against Saints to provide a bonus point victory and then went with the first team against LI. Swung it in Saints favour.

Resting players is fine, they'd earned the right it was just a little bit naughty to do it for one playoff chasing team and not the other to effectively select their opponent.

But they chose not to. Northampton would have probably lost bit for the red. I remember you applauding Leicester not playing their strongest team too. You don't overly earn the right either. Anyone coach can pick his team as he likes.

Don't think the red made much difference really. Just got the game done quicker.

I've already said they'd earned the right to rest players just doing against one playoff contender and not the other in the final weeks and effectively fixing the result of fourth place was a bit naughty. Tigers rested their players in a dead rubber Vs Quins and even then it wasn't that weak a side.

Hmm. I tend to disagree. When you have a red that early it's going to take the legs out of you at some point.

I'll have to go back and check but thought you often praised Borthwick's team rotation away from home.

It's not Saracens, Leinsters or any other teams job to look after anyone else, only themselves.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hmm. I tend to disagree. When you have a red that early it's going to take the legs out of you at some point.

I'll have to go back and check but thought you often praised Borthwick's team tptation away from home.

Last season he rotated for away games all season. Not heavily but one or two regular first teamers each away game would rotate out. Kept the squad fresh as he could whilst remaining competitive. He did that over the long winning run period.

That's shocking behaviour. Bit naughty.

Great game at the weekend - brilliant atmosphere, two superb teams and nail-biting finish - couldn't ask for more.

Leinster just couldn't do it - Cullen will have a lot of soul searching over the summer. Nienaber may just be the right new addition to the coaching mix for next season.

Squad changes have been finalised with Kearney, Sexton departing from senior squad and smith and Sean O'Brien heading from the academy over to Connacht - good additions to what is looking like a very good squad for the Westerners for next season.

Incoming for Leinster are 3 academy promotions in Soroka, McKee and Russell who already have some senior game time under their belts.

So far, it doesn't look like any other business to be done. Minor in comparison to the other clubs - Ulster have 11 players departing, and only 3 senior coming in, plus 5 academy players on development contracts. Connacht have 8 out and in with JJ Hanrahan moving from Dragons to Connacht, plus two young players on loan from Ulster. Munster with 9 leaving along with 3 others from during season, and 5 arriving including 2 academy players.