Comparing Leo to MOC

[neiliog93]

I would be the first to say that performances have been much improved under Leo when compared to MOC, in terms of both style and substance. But let's look at the figures.

MOC lasted two seasons at Leinster, which counted for 61 games. He won 40 of them, drew 5, and lost 16. Win percentage 65.6%. He won a Pro 12, missed the play-offs the next season, and made European 1/4 and 1/2 finals.

Leo, after two seasons, also stands at exactly 61 games. He has won 41 of them, drawn 1, and lost 19. Win percentage 67.2%. He has a Pro 12 runners-up and semi-final to his name, and European semi-final and group stage exit.

Now, MOC's good first season with BOD still playing probably skews his results upwards, and we are obviously miles ahead of the dross of MOC's second season. But still, after the same number of games, Leo's Leinster have won only one more game and lost three more.

[Oldschool]

I would be the first to say that performances have been much improved under Leo when compared to MOC, in terms of both style and substance. But let's look at the figures.

MOC lasted two seasons at Leinster, which counted for 61 games. He won 40 of them, drew 5, and lost 16. Win percentage 65.6%. He won a Pro 12, missed the play-offs the next season, and made European 1/4 and 1/2 finals.

Leo, after two seasons, also stands at exactly 61 games. He has won 41 of them, drawn 1, and lost 19. Win percentage 67.2%. He has a Pro 12 runners-up and semi-final to his name, and European semi-final and group stage exit.

Now, MOC's good first season with BOD still playing probably skews his results upwards, and we are obviously miles ahead of the dross of MOC's second season. But still, after the same number of games, Leo's Leinster have won only one more game and lost three more.

Maybe it's time to
Scrap Leo

[Peg Leg]

I would be the first to say that performances have been much improved under Leo when compared to MOC, in terms of both style and substance. But let's look at the figures.

MOC lasted two seasons at Leinster, which counted for 61 games. He won 40 of them, drew 5, and lost 16. Win percentage 65.6%. He won a Pro 12, missed the play-offs the next season, and made European 1/4 and 1/2 finals.

Leo, after two seasons, also stands at exactly 61 games. He has won 41 of them, drawn 1, and lost 19. Win percentage 67.2%. He has a Pro 12 runners-up and semi-final to his name, and European semi-final and group stage exit.

Now, MOC's good first season with BOD still playing probably skews his results upwards, and we are obviously miles ahead of the dross of MOC's second season. But still, after the same number of games, Leo's Leinster have won only one more game and lost three more.

Havent looked it up but I would believe that Leo's success rates have improved in season 2. Unlike MOC

[domhnallj]

Yep, I'd find it hard to believe their results are linear. Leo is on the up whereas Moc wasn't.

[Logorrhea]

after the same number of games, Leo's Leinster have won only one more game and lost three more.

while playing an exciting brand of rugby and bringing through a new generation of Leinster players.

[Raydollard]

Leo has had a chance at boss. While he should not have got the job - including that under MOC for a few seasons - the fact is that while things may have improved slightly, he is not up to the job.

[simonokeeffe]

yeah have to agree its not a valid comparison with Leos results improving and younger players being utilised

plus theres a lot less cribbing about refs, NIQ quotas, Schmidt, etc

[dropkick]

Leo has had a chance at boss. While he should not have got the job - including that under MOC for a few seasons - the fact is that while things may have improved slightly, he is not up to the job.

I'd say give him time. He was very inexperienced so he is basically having to learn on the job. Last season Leinster played bad rugby. This season there has been a big leap which shows Cullen learned from his mistakes. I'm sure he'll learn more after this season. Biggest lesson is probably on player rotation and having more consistency.

[Logorrhea]

the fact is that while things may have improved slightly, he is not up to the job.

Would suggest that the improvement is a great deal more that "slight". Would also suggest that Leo has played his part in that improvement.

[Raydollard]

4 seasons have gone by and - nothing much. Just a job for the boy.

[neiliog93]

after the same number of games, Leo's Leinster have won only one more game and lost three more.

while playing an exciting brand of rugby and bringing through a new generation of Leinster players.

Yeah, I acknowledge that.

[ronk]

Season comes down to a few weeks which separates losing 2 semi finals to winning tournaments.

It's more disappointing when we knew there was a shot at winning, but we should also give a coach credit that there was a reason our hopes were up.

If the lesson that Leo learns from this is that he was rotating too much when he should have risked guys like Sexton more often, then maybe the wrong lesson will get learnt. Even the greats have off days.

[carlow man]

I think sexton would struggle to play any more than he has this year. He's constantly got niggles, the medics are on the pitch tending to him 3/4 times during games with leinster and Ireland. Not the same player who left for Paris. To think he's the highest paid (irish) player in the country but never seems fully fit for any length of time seems bizarre. He's a class player but it could be that injuries have taken their toll on him. As soon as he takes contact he's in trouble for the rest of the game. Saying that, he was let down by most of his team mates who seemed to struggle to do the basics last night. Can't blame the coach for their performances though.

[wise7]

''There are times when we don't recognise the space in behind,particularly in the second half when we had a bit of a breeze at our backs and we could have gained cheap territory'' - Leo Cullen in today's Sunday Times.

Despite this, the coach allowed JS to stay on for 79 mins when clearly either he couldn't kick or wouldn't kick for territory. Is the coach intimidated by JS who should have been subbed after his fallout from contact on 25 minutes or so ? He eventually had Ross Byrne ready to come on at 73 mins (the same time as Kirchner for Ringrose) but then didn't send him on. Go figure !

[wixfjord]

''There are times when we don't recognise the space in behind,particularly in the second half when we had a bit of a breeze at our backs and we could have gained cheap territory'' - Leo Cullen in today's Sunday Times.

Despite this, the coach allowed JS to stay on for 79 mins when clearly either he couldn't kick or wouldn't kick for territory. Is the coach intimidated by JS who should have been subbed after his fallout from contact on 25 minutes or so ? He eventually had Ross Byrne ready to come on at 73 mins (the same time as Kirchner for Ringrose) but then didn't send him on. Go figure !

Ross Byrne is it?

[simonokeeffe]

Wheres all this Johnny is too powerful/intimidating/narky for Leo to deal with suddenly coming from?

[nc6000]

He needed to be taken off as it just wasn't happening for him and he was also injured. Cheika would have replaced him.

[hugonaut]

Wheres all this Johnny is too powerful/intimidating/narky for Leo to deal with suddenly coming from?

That chap who posts about Ross Byrne all the time.

[simonokeeffe]

Wheres all this Johnny is too powerful/intimidating/narky for Leo to deal with suddenly coming from?

That chap who posts about Ross Byrne all the time.

Theres 2 or 3 saying it

I agree he shouldve been subbed but that was a gamble and or lack of faith in Byrne

[Dave Cahill]

Ross Byrne has been Leinster's best outhalf this season.

9 times out of ten, 9 coaches out of ten would take 50% of Johnny Sexton over 100% of pretty much anyone else.

So, was the delay in substituting Sexton wrong? In hindsight, yes it was.

Was it understandable? Entirely.