If we fail to win or pick up a LBP...

[damianmcr]

Ive already said target Parra. Not so he cracks up but because he is small and Ferris could smash him.

Plus I dont like him much so I would watch it over and over for years.

[BaggyTrousers]

I'm not averse to "man-hugging" but not with those who I consider disrespectful to guys who gave everything that they had on the day. As for the other clown stepping in to assist his mate ................ .........wonder was he a failed bully at school too?

- any team with aspirations to win the HEC should aim to win 5 pool games
- when we went to leicester they were in disarray and regardless of their form, that was always the away game to target given Clermont's home record
- despite this we got the tactics wrong and failed to convert simple opportunities

do you disagree with any of that?

Apologies for the delay in replying, I'm normally a stickler for manners and that includes a swift response to queries.

1) - any team with aspirations to win the HEC should aim to win 5 pool games

Completely fatuous, if taken as a simple numeric target, then why stop at 5 wins? Would 6 not be better?*** Nonsense. I haven't researched this but I can confirm from memory of our precarious position last season, where we won 5 matches but not the pool, that no team with 5 wins has ever failed to progress, we came closest and had we not gained the BP against Aironi in the final game we would have created unwanted history.

Of course, nothing is as simple merely fulfilling targets in rugby, hence the usual coaches mantra of "one game at a time". Munster's success was never built on lets win 5 games, it was built on taking every point available from games as they unfolded. They never said this is a bonus point game,they said lets win the game & if we are in a position to go for a TBP then we go for it.

2) when we went to leicester they were in disarray and regardless of their form, that was always the away game to target given Clermont's home record

A bit of a "so what?" response here. Clermont had a magnificent start to the season suffering little if any disarray due to RWC, Leicester on the other hand were indeed in "disarray" early in the season with as many as 20 players missing due to RWC and a rash of injury.

Now the "So what?" part - we were in similar disarray as I have described earlier in the thread, in what way did that give us such an advantage as to believe Tigers were there for the taking?

3) despite this we got the tactics wrong and failed to convert simple opportunities


My disagreement comes in 2 parts, our tactics were predicated on the basis of what players were available - no Pienaar, no Afoa (I know he was never going to be there but many appear to think the current XV have been there all year), no Wallace, no Payne. Without Ruan, Paddy & Jared the only creativity remaining was Darren Cave & good as Darren is he was not a one man attack, we played a minimalist attacking game and clearly were hoping our pack could get something from the game.

"failed to convert simple opportunities" Humph missed one straight forward kick & from a place where I have seen him miss several short range kicks, in a corridor about 10-15 metres wide of the right upright. He appears to have a mental block from that position, he did the same in Glasgie and other games, I believe he doesn't kick through the ball properly , from there, its a bit like a golfer decelerating into a shot & control is lost. Against that single miss, he kicked three outstanding long range kicks, at least 2 of which would have been out of range for most kickers. Given our tactical approach to the game he was under huge pressure to perform and overall his place-kicking was majestic. We all know he is struggling for form even now & he did that day too in general play.

Finally I have had hard words with many posters but with many of those I am subsequently on very decent terms, indeed one or two are amongst my favourite posters. How you react to this tiff is entirely up to you. My disagreement with you is not in your assessment of tactics or that I disagree we could have got some points out of the game, though I struggle to agree with those who felt we should have won given we barely looked like creating a try.

My distaste for your post was squarely based on your assertion of "capitulation at Welford Road." That is a very harsh word which implies a degree of cowardice. I have seen performances where the question of a lack of both perspiration and application could be accused, lack of commitment it you like -that game was no such occasion.


*** I won't give you the opportunity to add that no team having won all 6 pool games has ever won the HC so indeed an argument establishing 5 as the optimum target.

[big mervyn]

Leinster won in 2009 having won 4 Pool games and lost 2.

Topped their group with 20pts and were seeded 6.

[stickinout]

If we don't win or pick up a LBP i don't think of the season as a failure. Heineken Cup rugby is now so competitive, i reckon if you're out of the competition before the last game then yes it's possibly a failure. We're still in the mix, and there are a lot of permutations out there that might mean we get to see a quarter final. Personally, i think the lads deserve a bit of luck that deserted us in previous heinekens when it looked like we'd get through only to be pipped by a point. I think the progression in the last three seasons has been terrific and the lads can only be learning from the big games making further improvement a possibility. Does anybody remember watching Ulster playing in round 5 or 6 and being already out? That was a failure IMO. Things are on the up

[big mervyn]

... and Munster in 2008.

19pts seeded 6.

[BaggyTrousers]

Here's how we'll win, or at least get the LBP (and the Sky pundits have backed me up on this):

Sorry Ruck, but if you have come up with this plan - admittedly a plan so cunning you could stick a tail on it and call it a fox - when the Sky pundits have apparently backed you up before the official launch of your plan ............ err.........is it not their plan?



Keep her lit, Ruck

[uafcadmin]

Apologies for not being on the board for a week or so but BAGGY, you need to chillax... binned for a couple of weeks until you know what I mean by abusive behaviour. Have a nice day.

oh, and even though I agree with most of your observations, doesn't mean I condone your attitude towards others and their legitimate opinions, which just because they aren't the same as yours, does not mean they are a target.

[Jackie Brown]

He does tend to lose the run of himself from time to time. The UAFC's very own Paul Marshall.

[uafcadmin]

I know, but all the same

[stickinout]

Maybe Baggy wouldn't lose the run of himself if moderators paid more attention and nipped it in the bud? If you're going to moderate, please can you look at the board more regularly than once a week otherwise pass your duties over to someone who can look at it more regularly..... Did Baggy get any warning? Not cricket IMO

[Jackie Brown]

In fairness to baggy, he'll just sign in under one of his other personalities...

[uafcadmin]

previously warned, but a failure to understand.

[cables]

It would be pleasing if Leicester finished 2nd in the Pool.

[fermain]

[Tydes]

Apologies for the delay in replying, I'm normally a stickler for manners and that includes a swift response to queries.

2) when we went to leicester they were in disarray and regardless of their form, that was always the away game to target given Clermont's home record

A bit of a "so what?" response here. Clermont had a magnificent start to the season suffering little if any disarray due to RWC, Leicester on the other hand were indeed in "disarray" early in the season with as many as 20 players missing due to RWC and a rash of injury.

Now the "So what?" part - we were in similar disarray as I have described earlier in the thread, in what way did that give us such an advantage as to believe Tigers were there for the taking?

Clermont had a magnificent start to the season suffering little if any disarray due to RWC

Completly wrong about Clermont.
Clermont had also 20 players in NZ .
The only difference is that Clermont young teams are the best in France and some of these young players are about to begin with the French Squad.