Quins v Ulster match thread

[againstthehead]

lol, we'll agree to disagree on this one the rooster .

[notj]

Well against Leeds (and probably the Ospreys) we will still be missing Botha, Pienaar, Trimble, Danielli, Tuohy, Henry, Wallace and Court, so we're still quite weak. Hopefully Jamie Smith and Paul Marshall are available.

I like what we're doing, but our hand has been forced. If the Ireland guys were available i'd play them. I'm most worried about 10-12-13 on the evidence of the pre-season so far and those guys are all established players.

[Rooster]

lol, we'll agree to disagree on this one the rooster .

and I agree with you about Ireland ticket prices

[Rule13b]

24-0 away from home with a weak squad is not too bad. having had a look at the Harlequins Squaf quickly I thought it could hsave been inthe 40's.

I would have thought that McLughlin might have been happier than Connor O'shea to night.
Harlequins must surely be disappointed.

If Gilroy beat Ogayy then he must be a good prospect.

[promsandwich]

I don't think this is an overly poor result. Quins are ahead of us in their pre-season schedule and they put out a strong side.

This is the perfect opportunity to see how our young players can step up against quality opposition. If any of them have to come in for the ML then they will be better for this experience. Last year we won our pre-season games against weaker opposition and that didn't give any representation of the season we were about to have so these results shouldn't be taken too harshly.

At least it sounded like our pack stood up well until changes were made, which bodes well. I know that we have players to come back in the backs but our basic lack of threat/spark/invention in the backs is a little worrying.

We should be further forward in the Leeds game. I'll be happy if we hit the ground running against the Ospreys.

it looks like we have a couple of potential shoe ins from the young lads

Who looked good?

[Rooster]

Match Report By Lyndsey Irwin
Ulster's young side suffered a 24-0 defeat to Harlequins at The Stoop in the second pre-season friendly. We spoke to Assistant Coach Neil Doak after the game..
Ulster's young side were tested today at The Stoop and while Assistant Coach Neil Doak was disappointed with the result it would appear there are some positives to take from the defensive performance;

"We are disappointed with the result. We just couldn't keep the ball and were forced to defend constantly"

"The boys worked hard defensively and stuck at it but we just weren't able to sustain any territory"

"Defending for long periods of time is very draining and it certainly took its toll on the boys' legs - we just weren't really able to put Harlequins under any sustainable pressure and found it hard to keep hold of the ball when we got it"

Ulster had travelled to London with a young side, particularly amongst the backs with a number of Academy players included in the starting line-up and Doak was impressed with some of their performances;

"It will have been a tough introduction for the young guys but they acquitted themselves well, David McIlwaine had a really good game at full-back and Craig Gilroy got a couple of good runs."

With the season proper just two weeks away another positive is that despite coming under heavy pressure for long periods of the game there appears to have been no major injuries sustained.

Ulster will travel back to Belfast this season and on Monday begin preparations for their third and final pre-season friendly against Leeds at Ravenhill this Thursday coming, 26th August, kick off 7.30pm - tickets are still available.

http://www.ulsterrugby.com/rugby/8419.htm

[darkside lightside]

Thanks to mike and whoever the other one was , aaron or dsls ?
To be honest I was expecting worse on the scoreline

Twas I! Bit disqppointing that we were shut out, and had few chances, but at the same time it didn't feel like a real bad beating - particularly first half, if we hadn't switched off we could have been in just 10-0 down. It was only in the second half we were really squeezed, no possession, aimless kicking, errors crept in.

Defensively we scrambled ok, but just had the look of a side getting used to things.. Quins found too many gaps, and when we were unable to keep the ball, tries just became inevitable..

One plus for me is that the young lads look physically up to the pace - Marshall in particular is a seriously chunky wee fecker.. Their problems weren't physical, they were just a little naive - couple of missed tackles, aimless kicks etc. And none of our backs really looked like they could open quins up.

Not disastrous, just not great

[Big-al]

Notj - Watch your head!!!


The sky might be falling

[Setanta]

Thanks!!

[notj]

Notj - Watch your head!!!


The sky might be falling

What are you talking about?

[mikerob]

Back from game... Positives; the pack was pretty competitive and set pieces were solid. The ref obviously didn't like what the Ulster front row were doing as he pinged them for a series of scrums but feck knows what was going on there.

Definitely more negatives. Ulster had little ball and didn't do much with what they had - no continuity but plenty of lost possession through poor or misdirected passes. Porter and Diack seemed to have no control or co-ordination at the back of the scrum and it was certainly a weak link. NOC, Whitten and Cave created very little. iHump was as guilty as the others of some poor passes but least he did create some movement in the backline.

The back 3 weren't disgraced. Gilroy in particular seems to have lots of confidence - tried to stand-up and hand-off Monye but ran out of space and beat a Quins back in some style a few minutes later.

If BMcL's objective was to introduce the young guys to pro rugby then he succeeded and none of the debutants were shown up, but on the evidence of this and the Bath game, he has his work cut out to put together a backline that will threaten the opposition.

[Rooster]

The back 3 weren't disgraced. Gilroy in particular seems to have lots of confidence - tried to stand-up and hand-off Monye but ran out of space and beat a Quins back in some style a few minutes later.

If BMcL's objective was to introduce the young guys to pro rugby then he succeeded and none of the debutants were shown up, but on the evidence of this and the Bath game, he has his work cut out to put together a backline that will threaten the opposition.

Match achieved at least one of it's objectives, getting all to work together will be his biggest problem though.

[Fly Half]

Pienaar, Wallace, and Trimble will be the creative force in the backs come the serious games.

Of the two games so far and the evidence of last season I'm most concerned about Cave. He is a senior player now and needs to be showing more. Whitten is almost as good defensively but has more penetration in attack, so moving him to 13 when Paddy is back might be worth trying?

[UlsterJock]

not too bad a scoreline but a joke to send such a young side to quins. If we knew that our squad would be so weak then we should have lined up a few easier games. Getting smoked ain't gonna teach the yung uns much.

I agree. Seems that BMcL isn't taking these friendlies seriously enough. Is it really a good idea to have a team lacking confidence in their first ML game against the O's after a couple of losses? (Although I'm not sure what sort of team will play against Leeds)

Do agree with above.

The season hasn't started yet and already the record is beginning to sound all too familiar:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1_5N4sqCYI

fingers crossed there is some grand plan

[Fly Half]

McLaughlin put out his strongest team available against Bath and lost. What more could he have done? A third of the team were new players this season. He is missing his two first choice wingers so he is obviously trying to find the best options for the Ospreys game, which is the only game that matters.

Against Quins he also puts out callow youth. Some like Gilroy and Marshall have been much vaunted following their opening Aviva game, so should he have ignored them? McLaughlin is using these pre-season games to test players when the results don't matter and IMO has done that exceptionally well.

Winning when it matters is what McLaughlin will be judged upon, and these games don't matter except to build the foundation for winning when it does.