Semi Final: Leinster vs Ulster Fri May 20th K/O 19:45

[johng]

I'd just love it if we won. I don't really give a chyte if we cure cancer and juggle fire while we do it.

I want to support my team in Embra. And see them with a decent draw for Europe next season.

Any jammy aul 6 5 win will do me.

Of course I'd love it if we cut loose and scored a rake of tries but......

Well we didn't cure cancer but I saw a few pyrotechnics for sure.

[Logorrhea]

Actually one other small bit of play I really enjoyed seeing in the latter stages of the match. Ross Moloney carrying, making a few yards and offloading to Furlong who in turn looked to offload to McGrath (I think).

Skills we always lauded within New Zealand but wouldn't traditionally see in Irish second row's and props.

[the spoofer]

Can anyone explain to me the recent fad with refs to call "use it" when scrums are still going forward. Cronin scored from the resulting play but to me it looked like we could have scored either a push over or penalty try on Friday. Ulster had sheared off and we were going forward but the ref made Jamie pick.

[Dexter]

Can anyone explain to me the recent fad with refs to call "use it" when scrums are still going forward. Cronin scored from the resulting play but to me it looked like we could have scored either a push over or penalty try on Friday. Ulster had sheared off and we were going forward but the ref made Jamie pick.

No idea. Wasn't this the reason that Cheika went absolutely mental (with Clancy I think) after Stade lost the Challenge Cup final a few years ago, the ref awarded a turnover, or something, after they didn't "use it" from a scrum going forward?
Appreciate any enlightenment!

[Fireworks]

Can anyone explain to me the recent fad with refs to call "use it" when scrums are still going forward. Cronin scored from the resulting play but to me it looked like we could have scored either a push over or penalty try on Friday. Ulster had sheared off and we were going forward but the ref made Jamie pick.

Not sure where it came from and I find it annoying. It added up to the ref letting them off the hook and negating our advantage.

[Fireworks]

Enjoyed the game. Thought it was very equal with both teams looking good when they had the ball. I think the difference was we have more quality especially in the pack and with the added intensity that was enough to give us the edge. Still think there is a lot of work to do to get to where they need and should be but it is a promising step in the right direction.

[Dave Cahill]

Can anyone explain to me the recent fad with refs to call "use it" when scrums are still going forward. Cronin scored from the resulting play but to me it looked like we could have scored either a push over or penalty try on Friday. Ulster had sheared off and we were going forward but the ref made Jamie pick.

If a scrum stops moving forward and the ball is playable at the back, the ref will call use it and the scrum half/back man has a short period of time to play the ball. What causes confusion is that people look at the back of their side of the scrum, see it going forward and think that the scrum is going forward. It isn't necessarily the case. For a scrum to be going forward, both sides need to be in motion, one going forward, one going backward. One team compacting into itself, or driving forward on a splintering scrum or driving forward into an interface thats going up, not forward or backwards, isn't defined as being a scrum thats going forward. Sometimes the weaker pack will splinter the scrum or drive the front rows up deliberately, but its up to the ref to decide if this is the case and penalise as appropriate as both can happen 'naturally' also, due to the forces involved.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Actually one other small bit of play I really enjoyed seeing in the latter stages of the match. Ross Moloney carrying, making a few yards and offloading to Furlong who in turn looked to offload to McGrath (I think).

Molony's intercept at the end was a bit freakish too.

[Dexter]

Can anyone explain to me the recent fad with refs to call "use it" when scrums are still going forward. Cronin scored from the resulting play but to me it looked like we could have scored either a push over or penalty try on Friday. Ulster had sheared off and we were going forward but the ref made Jamie pick.

If a scrum stops moving forward and the ball is playable at the back, the ref will call use it and the scrum half/back man has a short period of time to play the ball. What causes confusion is that people look at the back of their side of the scrum, see it going forward and think that the scrum is going forward. It isn't necessarily the case. For a scrum to be going forward, both sides need to be in motion, one going forward, one going backward. One team compacting into itself, or driving forward on a splintering scrum or driving forward into an interface thats going up, not forward or backwards, isn't defined as being a scrum thats going forward. Sometimes the weaker pack will splinter the scrum or drive the front rows up deliberately, but its up to the ref to decide if this is the case and penalise as appropriate as both can happen 'naturally' also, due to the forces involved.

Cheers, that's pretty clear.

[the spoofer]

Can anyone explain to me the recent fad with refs to call "use it" when scrums are still going forward. Cronin scored from the resulting play but to me it looked like we could have scored either a push over or penalty try on Friday. Ulster had sheared off and we were going forward but the ref made Jamie pick.

If a scrum stops moving forward and the ball is playable at the back, the ref will call use it and the scrum half/back man has a short period of time to play the ball. What causes confusion is that people look at the back of their side of the scrum, see it going forward and think that the scrum is going forward. It isn't necessarily the case. For a scrum to be going forward, both sides need to be in motion, one going forward, one going backward. One team compacting into itself, or driving forward on a splintering scrum or driving forward into an interface thats going up, not forward or backwards, isn't defined as being a scrum thats going forward. Sometimes the weaker pack will splinter the scrum or drive the front rows up deliberately, but its up to the ref to decide if this is the case and penalise as appropriate as both can happen 'naturally' also, due to the forces involved.

That's my point. Ulster were shearing off, we were driving forward and straight. It should either have been play on or a penalty. Shouting "use it" is a bag of piss.

[Dave Cahill]

That's my point. Ulster were shearing off, we were driving forward and straight. It should either have been play on or a penalty. Shouting "use it" is a bag of piss.

Its the law though. Thats where it comes down to the interpretation of the ref - as he didn't give a penalty or ask the teams to reset in his view the shear was not deliberate and the ball was playable. Not sure that I would agree with him in the case of the Cronin try, but he is a lot closer than I was and the Leinster front row was getting very perpendicular to the try line before he called.

The scrum is not supposed to be a means of generating penalties, its a means of restarting play. Refs are encouraged to promote the latter and minimise the former as much as reasonable

[hugonaut]

Savage performance from the lads and some good stuff from the Ulstermen too.

Huge credit to Jordi Murphy, who I was very critical of in the build-up, suggesting that he should be dropped for Dan Leavy. I thought that that was the best game he has played in his career, for Ireland or Leinster. Certainly a contender for Man of the Match and in particular a phenomenal effort from him in defense. Great to see a Leinster player shove it back in the face of his nay-sayers [me included]. Sean Cronin also had a blinder off the bench: he didn't put a foot wrong in his time on the pitch and contributed a handful of big moments. Luke Fitz was spectacular in the first half and handily took the honours in his personal duel with Trimble. Heaslip had yet another monster of a performance in a semi-final and J10 was world class.

Big Hendo was particularly impressive for them, as was the Ginger Genius at outhalf. It was mixed fare from their starting centres: some very clumsy handling offset against some forceful running. Olding looked every inch the international in his half hour on the pitch though. Jared Payne was anonymous at fullback ... I thought we kept him out of the game well, but looking at the stats he had 23 possessions and didn't make much happen. I think Payne is a quality fullback, so huge credit to our coaching team for devising a plan that minimised his effect and the players for shutting him down so well.

Too many Leinster players played well to namecheck them all, but it was a really vintage team performance ... up there with any game we've played in the RDS.

Glad that we have a full week to prepare for Connacht, because they are going to absolutely throw the kitchen sink at us and Murrayfield is a big pitch.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Its the law though. Thats where it comes down to the interpretation of the ref - as

Massive tangent here but I thought it was interesting that Mitrea decided to interpret that Nigel Owens was actually the ref on Saturday. At first I thought Owens was just trying to remind everyone he was there but Mitrea really looked lost at times, particularly when it came to scrums and mauls. You could see him waiting for Owens to tell him why he just blew for a penalty on a couple of occasions.

[Dave Cahill]

Its the law though. Thats where it comes down to the interpretation of the ref - as

Massive tangent here but I thought it was interesting that Mitrea decided to interpret that Nigel Owens was actually the ref on Saturday. At first I thought Owens was just trying to remind everyone he was there but Mitrea really looked lost at times, particularly when it came to scrums and mauls. You could see him waiting for Owens to tell him why he just blew for a penalty on a couple of occasions.

I do think that you have highlighted something that is an issue. Having Nigel run the line to upskill less experienced Refs is fine, but its no good if they become intimidated by him, which has happened a couple of times. Ultimately, there must only be one voice, that of the referee and he has to be confident enough to use that voice.

[domhnallj]

Its the law though. Thats where it comes down to the interpretation of the ref - as

Massive tangent here but I thought it was interesting that Mitrea decided to interpret that Nigel Owens was actually the ref on Saturday. At first I thought Owens was just trying to remind everyone he was there but Mitrea really looked lost at times, particularly when it came to scrums and mauls. You could see him waiting for Owens to tell him why he just blew for a penalty on a couple of occasions.

I thought he used his assistants rather well during the game. You could hear Nigel come over the coms quite clearly but I'm not sure he was reffing from the sidelines - he was doing his job which comes across as lacking a lot of the time.

[alanair]

The difference in Professional Rugby , is that the guys running the lines are not touch judges , they're Assistant Referees, and so they will constantly advise the man with the whistle. In effect though , the 'main' Referee is really just the spokesperson for the team of Referees , although of course he does also have the ability to overrule the assistants.

[Ruckedtobits]

That's my point. Ulster were shearing off, we were driving forward and straight. It should either have been play on or a penalty. Shouting "use it" is a bag of piss.

Its the law though. Thats where it comes down to the interpretation of the ref - as he didn't give a penalty or ask the teams to reset in his view the shear was not deliberate and the ball was playable. Not sure that I would agree with him in the case of the Cronin try, but he is a lot closer than I was and the Leinster front row was getting very perpendicular to the try line before he called.

The scrum is not supposed to be a means of generating penalties, its a means of restarting play. Refs are encouraged to promote the latter and minimise the former as much as reasonable

But is it the Law Dave and if so, since when? I can't find in IRB / World Rugby site, a clear indication of when the "directive" originated and if he does exist, why only some refs apply it. In general, "Directives" are not intended to try to influence Coaching tactics but rather to outlaw interpretations which negate the Laws of the game. Having a superior scrum and using it to gain the ascendancy over your opponents may not light up the candles for Stuart Barnes, but that does not make it illegal.

Obviously I stand to be corrected, but I consider this interpretation to be highly selective and weighted against good scrums.

[Dave Cahill]

That's my point. Ulster were shearing off, we were driving forward and straight. It should either have been play on or a penalty. Shouting "use it" is a bag of piss.

Its the law though. Thats where it comes down to the interpretation of the ref - as he didn't give a penalty or ask the teams to reset in his view the shear was not deliberate and the ball was playable. Not sure that I would agree with him in the case of the Cronin try, but he is a lot closer than I was and the Leinster front row was getting very perpendicular to the try line before he called.

The scrum is not supposed to be a means of generating penalties, its a means of restarting play. Refs are encouraged to promote the latter and minimise the former as much as reasonable

But is it the Law Dave and if so, since when? I can't find in IRB / World Rugby site, a clear indication of when the "directive" originated and if he does exist, why only some refs apply it. In general, "Directives" are not intended to try to influence Coaching tactics but rather to outlaw interpretations which negate the Laws of the game. Having a superior scrum and using it to gain the ascendancy over your opponents may not light up the candles for Stuart Barnes, but that does not make it illegal.

Obviously I stand to be corrected, but I consider this interpretation to be highly selective and weighted against good scrums.

Perhaps his interpretation wasn't to taste - as I said it wasn't to mine, but he called 'use it' which what is described in 20.10. He didn't give a reset for a wheel or consider there to be a penalisable offence. You might argue there was, others could argue there wasn't. He simply considered the scrum to have ceased its forward momentuum.

[leinsterforever]

Its the law though. Thats where it comes down to the interpretation of the ref - as

Massive tangent here but I thought it was interesting that Mitrea decided to interpret that Nigel Owens was actually the ref on Saturday. At first I thought Owens was just trying to remind everyone he was there but Mitrea really looked lost at times, particularly when it came to scrums and mauls. You could see him waiting for Owens to tell him why he just blew for a penalty on a couple of occasions.

I do think that you have highlighted something that is an issue. Having Nigel run the line to upskill less experienced Refs is fine, but its no good if they become intimidated by him, which has happened a couple of times. Ultimately, there must only be one voice, that of the referee and he has to be confident enough to use that voice.

Mitrea is quite deferential to TMOs as well, so maybe that's just his style

[molloyjh]

Perhaps his interpretation wasn't to taste - as I said it wasn't to mine, but he called 'use it' which what is described in 20.10. He didn't give a reset for a wheel or consider there to be a penalisable offence. You might argue there was, others could argue there wasn't. He simply considered the scrum to have ceased its forward momentuum.

We've seen a good few cases over the last few months of refs calling "use it" at the back of a scrum without indicating a penalty only to then give a penalty if the side in possession don't use it. It's been an odd one over the last while and obviously refs have been told to be more proactive when getting the ball back into play at the back of scrums. It's hard to know what to make of it from that perspective. Still, quite how Henry avoided a yellow around that time period is beyond me. Not only was there the deliberate knock-on, but after the first scrum he disengaged from the scrum and picked the ball straight from under Jamies feet as our scrum was going forward. Two professional fouls 5m from the line in a matter of minutes and yet he stayed on the pitch. If I was to get confused/pissed at a decision around then it wouldn't have been the "use it" call.