Ulster Midfield

[Big-al]

+1 lurgan lad

[Nightsoil]

Its not small team survival to play your best XV when available its what is necessary for success . Players get injured take knocks and at times are not 100% that is when you rest them Then there are players like Ferris who are injury prone who you wrap in cotton wool for important games and give others the opportunity to gain experience.

Both Leinster and Munster have a large number of Irish Internationals who are subject to restricted exposure and must be rested. Ulster has fewer players ( at present ) subject to these restrictions.

The fact that Irish players are rested is one of the major complaints from the English press come ERC games because English clubs don't rest players . The best available XV is on the pitch at all times . French clubs may be different but some came in for criticism because they rest players in ERC games so as to ensure their best XV was available for League games.

Northampton last year found that squad was too weak due Internationals and injuries and lost several games during the 6Ns.

A strong squad is not about rotation a strong squad is necessary to cover injuries ( which frequently occur )

When it comes to English clubs rotating, you're wrong.

Northampton don't rotate and that is widely held as a reason they don't win things. Saracens rotate massively, to the point that they tossed a coin to decide which scrum-half would start the Premiership final. Leicester rotate a bit, particularly Cole and Castrogiovanni.

Rotation, with a strong enough squad and the right players, can give out benefits. Admittedly most rotation in rugby is enforced by injury, you're right on that, but to say that English clubs don't do it and you have to play your best XV available all the time for success simply flies directly in the face of the facts.

[Dave]

Its not small team survival to play your best XV when available its what is necessary for success . Players get injured take knocks and at times are not 100% that is when you rest them Then there are players like Ferris who are injury prone who you wrap in cotton wool for important games and give others the opportunity to gain experience.

Both Leinster and Munster have a large number of Irish Internationals who are subject to restricted exposure and must be rested. Ulster has fewer players ( at present ) subject to these restrictions.

The fact that Irish players are rested is one of the major complaints from the English press come ERC games because English clubs don't rest players . The best available XV is on the pitch at all times . French clubs may be different but some came in for criticism because they rest players in ERC games so as to ensure their best XV was available for League games.

Northampton last year found that squad was too weak due Internationals and injuries and lost several games during the 6Ns.

A strong squad is not about rotation a strong squad is necessary to cover injuries ( which frequently occur )

Yes what I am saying is you have natural rotation due to injuries, ireland call ups etc., but there is also room within certain areas of the squad such as the midfield where selective rotation can occur to enhance player development when playing in less crucial games such as Aironi at home etc. I'm not advocating rotation for the sake of it, only in competitive areas of the squad. For example if, for the sake of argument, we say Cave and Spence are vying for the 13 shirt, the question to be asked is would the selection of either player significantly reduce the chance of winning in the league fixture? I think no as they are both good players yet offering different styles of play. The player not selected could then be utilised from the bench to change dynamic of play if neccessary. I wouldn't like to see the likes of Spence wasted on the bench hoping for an injury to get a game.

I think we differ in terms of rugby philosophy which is fine, we can disagree amicably but just to clarify: I think you are advocating playing best XV whenever possible only rotating due to player unavailability because of injury, int'l call ups etc. I am advocating playing the best XV for crucial ties and employing natural/selective rotation in competitive positions for 'lesser' (for want of a better word) fixtures as a demonstration of ambition and for the neccessity of player development. There are some areas where selective rotation is not prudent such as at 9, where the alternatives to Pienaar aren't great and we paying him too much not to utilise him. At least we have options though.

[Fly Half]

Again Fly Half, if you would actually like to read the posts, its quite clear that the above is my opinion on how Spence will turn out and I have said I will be very happy if im wrong.

So you can take your lottery numbers and shove them up ur ar$e for being an ignorant banker.

Isn't every post the opinion of the poster? Your last sentence however suggests that you would not be very happy if said opinion is wrong, but thanks for confirming my suspicion that there was zero reasoning behind it.

[Rooster]

English sides rotate according to the opposition and their style of play, some of the sides will chuck out a weakened team against opponents they have no chance of beating if some of their frontline players need a week to recharge for a close match following we etc, lot of messing around near the end of the season for the play off spots as well.

Good to see Ulster with options in most places and they should be fit to adjust sides for specific matches and give players who are knackered a week off without really weakening the side, thats what a good squad is all about, not 20 or so players but actually 2 full sides that compete within the squad and we are at that stage now at last providing everyone was available.
You never have a good squad till the coaches and fans don't worry about the inclusion of a specific player weakening their side, yes there will always be a slightly better full side but it is rare that any squad has the entire members fit at any one time and those taking to the field should not have an adverse effect on the team makeup.

[Big-al]

I do think coming into winter the pace and raw power of Spence will have him selected over someone like Cave who.

Marshall and Spence for me are the perfect combination of a centre partnership. Young Luke Marshall brings flair, bulk, a good kicking game and creatvity where as Spence brings hardlines and top end speed.

In 10 years time if they're developed properly (which is my biggest worry) then I reckon we'll be talking about them as the greatest centre partnership Ulster has ever produced

That's without factoring the huge Chris Farrell (12-13) and the very, very skillfull Peter Nelson (10, 12, wing, 15)

Could this be the golden age of Ulster rugby?

[BR]

Out of all the crp on this thread and there's a fair amount on both sides of each argument. I find myself agreeing with Dave the most. We haven't had anything approaching proper rotation since Solly left. We have different plyers with different styles, strengths and weaknesses - but we also play 11 different teams each with their own styles, strengths and weaknesses. Our best team against Aironi may not be our best team against Cardiff. Who is best choice for a particular position can also depend on who is playng inside/outside/elsewhere. Horses for courses and lets not flog any individual player needlessly. The only thing we need to worry about is retaining the services of those players who only may not get a starting spot in the majority of matches.

[TinPig]

Simple answer would be to vary the starting line up depending on the opposition (within reason, I don't think we should go mad) resting a few choice players on the bench in case they are needed but giving challengers a go.
I think it was against Edinburgh at home last season we had an awesome bench which came on..
It is always hard for management to have the balls to rotate as this equates to risk and if it goes badly the wrath that follows.
Professional coaches are only 2 loses on the trot away from fans baying for blood and heads to roll.
If it works the players get the plaudits if it doesn't then the coach is a prat..so most take the safe route.
I think the good Doctor has played his part in pushing McGlock into taking a few risks last season with the like of Jackson and giving youngsters a start so I would hope that this trust would continue in rotation of players in whatever format.
Willie Falloon became a shadow of himself a couple of seasons ago (Pollock being injured) because he played game after game hit after hit until exhausted & that also ups the chances of serious injury.

[rumncoke]

There are a number here who really really dislike Bish-Bash 12s . To appreciate them one must understand the many purposes of Bish-Bash .
Firstly it is to retain possession , secondly to engage the backrow and remove the cover defence and thirdly it is too fatigue the back row thereby hopefully provide space for the players outside the 12 later in the game. It not just about banging your head at a brick wall. To be effective it requires the close support of the backrow and quick recycle.

Having a Bish - Basher can be a positive for any team especially if like Ulster at the 55 min mark you can bring on a player like Wallace or Marshall to exploit a tireing backrow. For those with a long memory Paddy Wallace was at his most effective when he first played as a late sub and able to exploit the gaps.

[Cornerfleg]

Balanced reasoning there Mr Coke. Who do you reckon is the best or are the best 12s in world rugby at the minute?

It's hard to see past Sonny Boy or Nonu - both big, both can punch a whole - both can now off load and put people into space. Having a big 12 is a positive - but to just say for 60 minutes you tuck the ball under one arm and run at people is a bit .... well .... English.

Whitten is a serious unit whose other skills I feel are going to waste by just trying to play like Kevin Maggs. Also nothing tires backrows out like running like mad things to the other side of the pitch after a 2nd 5/8 has just put someone else into a hole.

Yes there are merits in taking the direct route but why not develop players who can do both rather than one dimensional bash merchants. Whitten and Marshall are chunky enough to exploit a bad tackle or a turnstyle out half, they should also be able to put a winger or fullback the wrong way through a drift defence.

[jackthelad]

Balanced reasoning there Mr Coke. Who do you reckon is the best or are the best 12s in world rugby at the minute?

It's hard to see past Sonny Boy or Nonu - both big, both can punch a whole - both can now off load and put people into space. Having a big 12 is a positive - but to just say for 60 minutes you tuck the ball under one arm and run at people is a bit .... well .... English.

Whitten is a serious unit whose other skills I feel are going to waste by just trying to play like Kevin Maggs. Also nothing tires backrows out like running like mad things to the other side of the pitch after a 2nd 5/8 has just put someone else into a hole.

Yes there are merits in taking the direct route but why not develop players who can do both rather than one dimensional bash merchants. Whitten and Marshall are chunky enough to exploit a bad tackle or a turnstyle out half, they should also be able to put a winger or fullback the wrong way through a drift defence.

"Thus spake Zarathustra..."

[Cornerfleg]

Nietzsche is dead!

[jackthelad]

Nietzsche is dead!

Gazuntite.

[Cornerfleg]

He's dead too but his books were crap!

[jackthelad]

He's dead too but his books were crap!

I dunno. I thought they weren't to be sneezed at.