Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Talk about the men in white, and everything Ulster!!

Moderators: The Fonz, Moderators

User avatar
LegsLikeSausages
Warrior Chief
Posts: 1682
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by LegsLikeSausages » Sun Jan 10, 2021 4:27 pm

kingofthehill wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:59 pm
SparkyClarky wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:37 pm
kingofthehill wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 7:51 pm
SparkyClarky wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 3:16 pm
Would have rather seen Alby going down instead of Wee Dave but if he has been producing in training well he deserves the reward!
SUFTUM
Can only have two foreigners in a squad.

Carter and Faddes.
Thanks KOTH I should have known!
PS Go on give us a wee hint of who we’re getting lol
No worries. It’s only really this season with alby,Faddes and carter that it’s been noticeable with Ulster.
When you go in search of honey you must expect to be stung by bees.
Don’t the Brum-bees sometimes play at the Manuka Oval? Is this possibly a reference to Carter or could one of his former team mates be on the way?
Love trying to decipher KOTH’s cryptic clues.

Bart S
Chancellor to the King
Posts: 3567
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:48 am

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by Bart S » Sun Jan 10, 2021 4:36 pm

LegsLikeSausages wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 4:27 pm
kingofthehill wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:59 pm
SparkyClarky wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:37 pm
kingofthehill wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 7:51 pm
SparkyClarky wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 3:16 pm
Would have rather seen Alby going down instead of Wee Dave but if he has been producing in training well he deserves the reward!
SUFTUM
Can only have two foreigners in a squad.

Carter and Faddes.
Thanks KOTH I should have known!
PS Go on give us a wee hint of who we’re getting lol
No worries. It’s only really this season with alby,Faddes and carter that it’s been noticeable with Ulster.
When you go in search of honey you must expect to be stung by bees.
Don’t the Brum-bees sometimes play at the Manuka Oval? Is this possibly a reference to Carter or could one of his former team mates be on the way?
Love trying to decipher KOTH’s cryptic clues.

:salut: :salut: . Legs - you should have been on that show 321 with Ted Rigers........unless you ever actually needed a bin.

User avatar
big mervyn
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 12413
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Overlooking the pitch (til they built the old new stand)

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by big mervyn » Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:41 pm

Bart S wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 4:36 pm
LegsLikeSausages wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 4:27 pm
kingofthehill wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:59 pm
SparkyClarky wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:37 pm
kingofthehill wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 7:51 pm


Can only have two foreigners in a squad.

Carter and Faddes.
Thanks KOTH I should have known!
PS Go on give us a wee hint of who we’re getting lol
No worries. It’s only really this season with alby,Faddes and carter that it’s been noticeable with Ulster.
When you go in search of honey you must expect to be stung by bees.
Don’t the Brum-bees sometimes play at the Manuka Oval? Is this possibly a reference to Carter or could one of his former team mates be on the way?
Love trying to decipher KOTH’s cryptic clues.

:salut: :salut: . Legs - you should have been on that show 321 with Ted Rigers........unless you ever actually needed a bin.
Talking of Quiz shows, Bees and Manuka, I got the Sale of the Century in Sainsburys just before Xmas - a jar of Steens raw Manuka 15+ UMF reduced from £25.99 to 50p (FIFTY PEE!). Tbh I didn't realise what it was 'til I got home and looked it up,
Volunteer at an animal sanctuary; it will fill you with joy , despair, but most of all love, unconditional love of the animals.
Big Neville Southall

justinr73
Red Hand Ambassador
Posts: 2987
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by justinr73 » Sun Jan 10, 2021 6:12 pm

LegsLikeSausages wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 4:27 pm
kingofthehill wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:59 pm
SparkyClarky wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:37 pm
kingofthehill wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 7:51 pm
SparkyClarky wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 3:16 pm
Would have rather seen Alby going down instead of Wee Dave but if he has been producing in training well he deserves the reward!
SUFTUM
Can only have two foreigners in a squad.

Carter and Faddes.
Thanks KOTH I should have known!
PS Go on give us a wee hint of who we’re getting lol
No worries. It’s only really this season with alby,Faddes and carter that it’s been noticeable with Ulster.
When you go in search of honey you must expect to be stung by bees.
Don’t the Brum-bees sometimes play at the Manuka Oval? Is this possibly a reference to Carter or could one of his former team mates be on the way?
Love trying to decipher KOTH’s cryptic clues.
London Irish share a ground with the Bees.....

UlsterAreBrill
Initiate
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 1:30 pm

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by UlsterAreBrill » Mon Jan 11, 2021 12:33 pm

kingofthehill wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:05 pm
thecrouch wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:02 pm
kingofthehill wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:58 pm
pip14 wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:55 pm
Mcilroy was really good

I really hope we are getting rid of Faddes
We aren’t and you’re being harsh.

McIlroy is a cracker.
It's not harsh kingofthehill. Faddes does not justify a NIQ spot.
Ulster can’t afford to have 3 world class NIQs.
We can't afford to have 1 apparently

User avatar
Cap'n Grumpy
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 13932
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Location: second barrier up, at the half-way line ... or is the third?

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by Cap'n Grumpy » Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:07 am

justinr73 wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 11:24 am
flatpass wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 7:35 pm
Am I the only one who gets cheesed off with the number of times the coverage misses re-starts whether by kick, scrum or line-out because the camera is focused on an individual player or because one of the commentating team gives some analysis of a move? I pay my sub to watch live rugby, not to listen to some ‘expert’ prattle on about something that can easily wait until half-time. Show us the match as it happens, ALL of the match!
You’re not. It’s pi$h-poor production.
That and talking over the ref-mic.

When at the match live I don't want to hear the ref because it puts me off supporting the team. You can't be guldering at him if you're listening to him at the same time - especially if he's actually right. :lol:

But when watching on the box - either live or when I come home to learn how i was wrong at the match, - I want to hear what the ref and his assistants are saying, but all too often, the common tater or his less common pundit are prattling over the top of that. :roll:

How often do they then explain an offence incorrectly which they wouldn't have if they had just listened to the ref.
Sadly the days of people using proper English are went

User avatar
Cap'n Grumpy
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 13932
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Location: second barrier up, at the half-way line ... or is the third?

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by Cap'n Grumpy » Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:49 am

rumncoke wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 10:09 am
When i was playing, might have been a a bit before you Captain with maybe an overlap,head injuries were few and far between and usually due to players getting their head in front of the ball carriers legs ...
With apologies to anyone who has you -know-who on ignore.

I was once told by someone (who I was fortunate to call a friend in his later years) - a very wise man and not a bad player - who probably played around the same time as you, Rumn, that the reason there were fewer injuries in the olden days was because players ran at space. Nowadays they run at each other. It used to be they avoided contact as much as possible, nowadays they go straight into contact as much as possible (or lots of them anyway). The only time players run into space now is when they have knocked seven bells out of one another to create a space to run into.

ok, I paraphrased that last bit, but the point made by the gentleman who sadly is no longer with us, is very accurate.





His name?

Kyle ... Jack Kyle. :salut:
Sadly the days of people using proper English are went

rumncoke
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 6976
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:39 pm

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by rumncoke » Thu Jan 14, 2021 1:20 pm

Very true because back a day or two the only permissible body contact by a ball carrier on the would be tackler was his hand the tackler had freedom to tackle -- but not body check ie shoulder only approach . now the ball carrier is allowed to use hips, knees , forearms, head , and shoulder any contact above the shoulder is assumed to be the fault of the would be tackler.

As I have pointed out before most head injuries are suffered by the would be tackler because the ball carrier is usually the player contributing the most power into the contact ---(power being the product of weight multiplied by speed) which of course is the reason for a rush defence and high tackles --- if you don't have to hand off an opponent and hold the ball with two hands it is easier to off load the ball in the tackle hence the need to smother tackle.

Law changes instead of making the game more safe have actually made it more dangerous and the danger becomes compounded by the desire to provide the attacking team with advantage .

Thus the changes in the law required are :-

Change the scrum to 3 -2 -3 with the addition the number 8 must bind to the wing forwards on the opposition put in -- to enable him to be able to lift the ball at the base of the scrum binding by 8 my be broken when the ball is heeled by his scrum. wing forward can only break after the ball is out.

Binding in this fashion would expose props who fail to push straight _ (Bore ) and provide more opportunity for backs to play one on one from the set piece.

Similarly the line must consist of eight players no more no less -- again providing the backs one on one from the set piece.( quick throw permissible behind the point where the ball crossed the line )

The second being the only contact by the ball carrier on a would be tackler is his hand -- failure to attempt a hand off being a free kick or scrum --

scoring from a free or penalty made possible by drop kick only when out side the 22 --- take the ball outside the 22 you drop kick -- do away with the time wasting tee setting and stupid silence by the crowd -- if the ref has made a howler of a decision. (the players have to accept the decision of a referee the crowd don't.) Silence being reserved for conversions only -- the attacking team having earned the respect due.

Penalties kicked into touch inside the opposition 22 the throw in goes to the opposition -- ie if awarded a penalty you are provided the opportunity to score 3 points turn down that option you don't have the right for the advantage of the throw in . Penalties kicked into touch and out side the opposition 22 you still have the advantage of throw in.

lastly--No prior binding befor a tackle nor shielding a ball carrier from the tackle.

This change would do away with the lift and go on the 5 metre line as practiced by Leinster which last forever until the attacking team score or the ref brings them back for a penalty offence 5 minutes earlier.

Take the Leinster game -- last 4 - 5 minutes Leinster were continuously offside knowing the referee was not going to give another penalty in over time . Thus Ulster instead of progressing to line were actually going backwards on pick and go because the player taking the ball was taking or facing man/men before ball.

And a review of offences to reduce the number of penalty offences to free kicks -- offences against a player must always be a penalty -- offside reduced to a free kick ( note it would be possible score from a free kick by kicking a drop goal )

The intention of rule changes should be two fold to make the game safer and to reduce the influence of a referee in deciding the result any increase in open play being a bonus rather than the intention. Personally I don't consider 5 fat boys running at each other inside the 5 metre line as open play it is at best suspense -- will they or won't they score or f-ck-up.
Within this carapace of skepticism there lives an optimist

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17399
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by BR » Fri Jan 15, 2021 11:31 am

Cap'n Grumpy wrote:
Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:49 am
rumncoke wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 10:09 am
When i was playing, might have been a a bit before you Captain with maybe an overlap,head injuries were few and far between and usually due to players getting their head in front of the ball carriers legs ...
With apologies to anyone who has you -know-who on ignore.

I was once told by someone (who I was fortunate to call a friend in his later years) - a very wise man and not a bad player - who probably played around the same time as you, Rumn, that the reason there were fewer injuries in the olden days was because players ran at space. Nowadays they run at each other. It used to be they avoided contact as much as possible, nowadays they go straight into contact as much as possible (or lots of them anyway). The only time players run into space now is when they have knocked seven bells out of one another to create a space to run into.

ok, I paraphrased that last bit, but the point made by the gentleman who sadly is no longer with us, is very accurate.





His name?

Kyle ... Jack Kyle. :salut:
And therein lies IRB's solution. Remove the incentive for taking the ball into contact. Return tackles to open-play. Remove bias toward ball carriers and encourage proper legal rucks in preference to clear outs.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

User avatar
Cap'n Grumpy
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 13932
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Location: second barrier up, at the half-way line ... or is the third?

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by Cap'n Grumpy » Sat Feb 13, 2021 4:22 pm

John_e_boy wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:42 pm
... ducking into contact and a ball carrier jumping into contact are not outlawed in our game.
Back to this old chestnut ... :stir: :twisted:

When showing the replay of May scoring against Italy just before half-time, where he jumped and placed the ball with his feet high in the air to avoid being bundled into touch, I noted that commentator and pundit were in agreement that "jumping a tackle in open play is illegal as it is dangerous play, but May is allowed to dive for the line when attempting to score, so that is not applicable here" (or words to that effect).

It was also notable that the Italian defender attempting the tackle, and whose attempted tackle May jumped over, did actually receive a kick on the head from May's trailing boot - albeit, it didn't seem particularly forceful.

I suspect ITV need John_e_boy on their punditry team to counter this fake news being promulgated by these "experts" and former international players. :lol:

Or maybe instead, John_e_boy might just acknowledge that whilst jumping a tackle may not be specifically mentioned in the laws, dangerous play is, and there are still many many people - players, ex-players, coaches etc who consider jumping a tackle as dangerous play and worthy of penalty. It does of course depend on the specifics of each and every tackle and jump, but certainly can be considered dangerous at least some of the time.

And that's a fact!
Sadly the days of people using proper English are went

User avatar
big mervyn
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 12413
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Overlooking the pitch (til they built the old new stand)

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by big mervyn » Sat Feb 13, 2021 4:33 pm

Cap'n Grumpy wrote:
Sat Feb 13, 2021 4:22 pm
John_e_boy wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:42 pm
... ducking into contact and a ball carrier jumping into contact are not outlawed in our game.
Back to this old chestnut ... :stir: :twisted:

When showing the replay of May scoring against Italy just before half-time, where he jumped and placed the ball with his feet high in the air to avoid being bundled into touch, I noted that commentator and pundit were in agreement that "jumping a tackle in open play is illegal as it is dangerous play, but May is allowed to dive for the line when attempting to score, so that is not applicable here" (or words to that effect).

It was also notable that the Italian defender attempting the tackle, and whose attempted tackle May jumped over, did actually receive a kick on the head from May's trailing boot - albeit, it didn't seem particularly forceful.

I suspect ITV need John_e_boy on their punditry team to counter this fake news being promulgated by these "experts" and former international players. :lol:

Or maybe instead, John_e_boy might just acknowledge that whilst jumping a tackle may not be specifically mentioned in the laws, dangerous play is, and there are still many many people - players, ex-players, coaches etc who consider jumping a tackle as dangerous play and worthy of penalty. It does of course depend on the specifics of each and every tackle and jump, but certainly can be considered dangerous at least some of the time.

And that's a fact!
I thought of you when I saw that!

I believe the laws are a bit grey on this one but it is covered by 9.11: “Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others”. Definitely dangerous play in m y mind and should have been penalised with a pen to Italy.

He was only jumping to avoid the tackle and by doing so inevitably puts his knees and feet where the tackler would be reasonably expected to put his head!
Volunteer at an animal sanctuary; it will fill you with joy , despair, but most of all love, unconditional love of the animals.
Big Neville Southall

User avatar
Cap'n Grumpy
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 13932
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Location: second barrier up, at the half-way line ... or is the third?

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by Cap'n Grumpy » Sat Feb 13, 2021 4:42 pm

big mervyn wrote:
Sat Feb 13, 2021 4:33 pm
Cap'n Grumpy wrote:
Sat Feb 13, 2021 4:22 pm
John_e_boy wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:42 pm
... ducking into contact and a ball carrier jumping into contact are not outlawed in our game.
Back to this old chestnut ... :stir: :twisted:

When showing the replay of May scoring against Italy just before half-time, where he jumped and placed the ball with his feet high in the air to avoid being bundled into touch, I noted that commentator and pundit were in agreement that "jumping a tackle in open play is illegal as it is dangerous play, but May is allowed to dive for the line when attempting to score, so that is not applicable here" (or words to that effect).

It was also notable that the Italian defender attempting the tackle, and whose attempted tackle May jumped over, did actually receive a kick on the head from May's trailing boot - albeit, it didn't seem particularly forceful.

I suspect ITV need John_e_boy on their punditry team to counter this fake news being promulgated by these "experts" and former international players. :lol:

Or maybe instead, John_e_boy might just acknowledge that whilst jumping a tackle may not be specifically mentioned in the laws, dangerous play is, and there are still many many people - players, ex-players, coaches etc who consider jumping a tackle as dangerous play and worthy of penalty. It does of course depend on the specifics of each and every tackle and jump, but certainly can be considered dangerous at least some of the time.

And that's a fact!
I thought of you when I saw that!

I believe the laws are a bit grey on this one but it is covered by 9.11: “Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others”. Definitely dangerous play in m y mind and should have been penalised with a pen to Italy.

He was only jumping to avoid the tackle and by doing so inevitably puts his knees and feet where the tackler would be reasonably expected to put his head!
The replay from behind does show that the tackler took contact on his head from May's boot. My understanding was you could dive for the try line, thus preventing a tackle from being made, but not that you can attempt to hurdle the player, because as we have seen, it is potentially dangerous.

Just like if you lift a player, you have the responsibility to lower him to the ground safely, if you put your boot up where it could impact an opponent, it is your responsibility to ensure that it doesn't. If you kick someone on the head because of a deliberate choice to hurdle a tackler, you should be held responsible for that - you chose to do it, no one made you.

But what would I know?
Sadly the days of people using proper English are went

User avatar
UlsterNo9
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 4392
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:02 pm

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by UlsterNo9 » Sat Feb 13, 2021 10:02 pm

Difference between a dive and a jump is?

It's pretty clear in my mind and easy to officiate.

A dive being a downward (plunge) motion, a jump being an upward motion.
BRING OUR BOYS HOME #BOBH
THROWN UNDER THE BUS AND EXILED 14/04/18

eeyore
Initiate
Posts: 388
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by eeyore » Sun Feb 14, 2021 1:50 am

:
Debate about May's jump/dive to avoid tackle/score, on Twitter. Sir Nigel says try should have been disallowed and penalty awarded against May as he "jumps to avoid the tackle".
https://twitter.com/Nigelrefowens/statu ... 76233?s=19

What would he know :scratch:
Wooohooo!! Only donkey left on the board

User avatar
Cap'n Grumpy
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 13932
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Location: second barrier up, at the half-way line ... or is the third?

Re: Leinster v Ulster Fri Jan 8th 7:35pm KO

Post by Cap'n Grumpy » Sun Feb 14, 2021 5:38 am

eeyore wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 1:50 am
:
Debate about May's jump/dive to avoid tackle/score, on Twitter. Sir Nigel says try should have been disallowed and penalty awarded against May as he "jumps to avoid the tackle".
https://twitter.com/Nigelrefowens/statu ... 76233?s=19

What would he know :scratch:
Nigel Owens MBE @Nigelrefowens wrote: Should be pK (penalty kick) he jumps up to avoid tackle that’s not a dive for the line
It is statements like this that make me so glad that Nigel Owens has retired from refereeing internationals.

John_e_boy should clearly be fast-tracked to officiating at test match level ... nay, not just officiating, but training and assessing referees to ensure that referees who do not understand the laws of the game either improve their knowledge or are weeded out of the game asap.

It is now obvious that Mike Adamson, who was refereeing his first 6N match (Scotland's first 6N referee in 6 years to :whistle: in the tournament), should have been refereeing at this level years ago and not held back by incompetents like Owens.

My eyes have been opened. :shock:

(for the avoidance of doubt, that was sarcasm, btw)
Sadly the days of people using proper English are went

Post Reply