Munster in the Aviva 2018 Edition

[Peg Leg]

JLowe and Luke both put the hurt on Carbury yesterday

[artaneboy]

It’s much worse, (I’ll ignore the sarcasm:-) ) the crooked put-in is endemic in the game at this stage- and tolerated by referees for the cynical reason that it gives the advantage to the attacking side and gets the whole mess, that is often the set-piece, over quicker and removes the need for them to make a decision.

It's tolerated by referees because you're allowed to feed the ball crooked.

The law change regarding the put in:

“The scrum-half must put the ball in straight to the scrum, but they are allowed to align their shoulder to the middle line of the scrum.
This means they are putting the ball in a shoulder’s width towards their own team’s side of the scrum.

So the ball has to be put in straight, but rather than being put in down the middle of the tunnel it is put in slightly towards the scrum-half’s own team.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[artaneboy]

JLowe and Luke both put the hurt on Carbury yesterday

Lowe certainly did.

He was a clear MOTM for me. Not necessarily because of it; but it didn’t hurt...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[backrower8]

Also, my jaysus ROL mad a bad read for the Mathewson try. Literally let him walk in.

No he didn't. Coming from the base of the scrum, Mathewson was firstly Rhys's man to cover, then he was the 8's (Seanie or Leavy - not sure who was at 8 at that stage), ROL was perhaps the 3rd or 4th man. If ROL steps in then Mathewson ships it to man outside him and they score.

Mathewson did really well to run back on the put in side as the scrum wheeled coz Rhys was going in the opposite direction supporting Porter, he then ran a wide arc into no-man's-land defensively between the 8s and first outside back's zone. He even managed to sell Luke who was standing behind our 8 (180 degrees opposite Mathewson) and who actually had the best chance to track across and prevent the score (considering the backrow were comitted to a wheeling scrum).

Also, I don't agree with you on Toland. He is well above average as an analyst.

[wixfjord]

Also, my jaysus ROL mad a bad read for the Mathewson try. Literally let him walk in.

No he didn't. Coming from the base of the scrum, Mathewson was firstly Rhys's man to cover, then he was the 8's (Seanie or Leavy - not sure who was at 8 at that stage), ROL was perhaps the 3rd or 4th man. If ROL steps in then Mathewson ships it to man outside him and they score.

Mathewson did really well to run back on the put in side as the scrum wheeled coz Rhys was going in the opposite direction supporting Porter, he then ran a wide arc into no-man's-land defensively between the 8s and first outside back's zone. He even managed to sell Luke who was standing behind our 8 (180 degrees opposite Mathewson) and who actually had the best chance to track across and prevent the score (considering the backrow were comitted to a wheeling scrum).

Ah but he did. Not saying it was all his fault, and McGrath should've covered better, but Mathewson sold him a bad one to waltz in untouched.

Also, I don't agree with you on Toland. He is well above average as an analyst.

You didn't hear his commentary from yesterday then I take it!

[Flash Gordon]

Neil Treacy on Twitter brought up an aspect of Munster's scrum which I didn't see at the match: https://twitter.com/neil_treacy/status/ ... gr%5Etweet

Someone here mentioned it after one of Munster's earlier matches this season alright. Its a penalty offence, back row players must bind on a lock with at least one arm. I guess it explains how they were competitive at the scrums.

That was me but didn't actually realise it was illegal.

Yeah was watching it back with the kids and they spotted it. How did the ref not see it??? They were effectively playing with 3 locks.

[blockhead]

Who gave the MOTM award? Not saying Ross didn't play well, he did. But Jlo was a nailed on MOTM IMHO. Someone trying to wind up munster/carberry/joe?

[hugonaut]

Leinster have won seven out of eight of these fixtures since Leo took over: 1/1 this season, 3/3 in 2017-18, 1/2 in 2016-17, 2/2 in 2015-1:

06.10.18 | Leinster 30 - 22 Munster
19.05.18 | Leinster 16 - 15 Munster [SF]
26.12.17 | Munster 24 - Leinster 34
07.10.17 | Leinster 23 - 17 Munster
26.12.16 | Munster 29 - 17 Leinster
08.10.16 | Leinster 25 - 14 Munster
02.04.16 | Leinster 16 - 13 Munster
27.12.15 | Munster 7 - 24 Leinster

That's a winning percentage of better than 85%.

[curates_egg]

Who gave the MOTM award? Not saying Ross didn't play well, he did. But Jlo was a nailed on MOTM IMHO. Someone trying to wind up munster/carberry/joe?

Totally agree. Byrne had a good game but I'd have picked three or four ahead of him (Ryan, Lowe, Propane).
We've seen plenty of political MOTMs in Landsdowne Road over the years. It's usually a pundit, so presume it was a Leinster one? Lenihan loved picking ROG when Deccie was scraping for reasons to keep picking him over Sexton.

[artaneboy]

Who gave the MOTM award? Not saying Ross didn't play well, he did. But Jlo was a nailed on MOTM IMHO. Someone trying to wind up munster/carberry/joe?

Totally agree. Byrne had a good game but I'd have picked three or four ahead of him (Ryan, Lowe, Propane).
We've seen plenty of political MOTMs in Landsdowne Road over the years. It's usually a pundit, so presume it was a Leinster one? Lenihan loved picking ROG when Deccie was scraping for reasons to keep picking him over Sexton.

AFAIK it was Liam Tolland on Eir; he certainly announced it on TV. Go figure....

[blockhead]

Francis in the INDO.

This one was a bit like telling your kid brother to give it his best shot. The kid brother refuses because he knows he's going to get beat anyway. You make him an offer he can't refuse: "I'll tie my arm behind my back." Can't say any fairer than that. Go on - give it your best shot.

In terms of a fair fight, well Leinster did have their arm tied firmly behind their back. If you had Scott Fardy, Garry Ringrose, Tadhg Furlong, Jordan Larmour and Jonathan Sexton playing yesterday, the scoreline would have been vastly different.

It is terrible to see him in a red jersey. It is like your old girlfriend walking around the place with an engagement ring from the bloke in town that you hate the most. You still love her, but you can't bring yourself to look at her anymore.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

It’s much worse, (I’ll ignore the sarcasm:-) ) the crooked put-in is endemic in the game at this stage- and tolerated by referees for the cynical reason that it gives the advantage to the attacking side and gets the whole mess, that is often the set-piece, over quicker and removes the need for them to make a decision.

It's tolerated by referees because you're allowed to feed the ball crooked.

The law change regarding the put in:

“The scrum-half must put the ball in straight to the scrum, but they are allowed to align their shoulder to the middle line of the scrum.
This means they are putting the ball in a shoulder’s width towards their own team’s side of the scrum.

So the ball has to be put in straight, but rather than being put in down the middle of the tunnel it is put in slightly towards the scrum-half’s own team.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure what your point is. Were you not giving out that the ball doesn't go down the middle of the tunnel?

[blockhead]

A tweet from one of The42 articles.

What momentum? Are they going to have Whitehouse referee every match to hand them at least 14 points on a silver platter?

Munster beat them in every facet of the game bar open play and goal kicking – their pack was eaten for lunch. If I was a Leinster fan, I would be worried for the rest of the season.

Spot on man!
Q. Why do all refs, bar none, hate Munster?

[artaneboy]

It's tolerated by referees because you're allowed to feed the ball crooked.

The law change regarding the put in:

“The scrum-half must put the ball in straight to the scrum, but they are allowed to align their shoulder to the middle line of the scrum.
This means they are putting the ball in a shoulder’s width towards their own team’s side of the scrum.

So the ball has to be put in straight, but rather than being put in down the middle of the tunnel it is put in slightly towards the scrum-half’s own team.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure what your point is. Were you not giving out that the ball doesn't go down the middle of the tunnel?

No, clearly not. Read the post again- if you care to continue this.

A minor law change to allow the ball to go in closer to the SH’s hooker- but still parallel to the line between the front rows, is the no way an excuse or permission to throw it in at an angle into the second rows as is the typical practice. That was never legal and still isn’t.

The point is in any case, that refs consistently fail or decide not to ref the scrum in accordance with the laws- and why they act that way: fear, ignorance, laziness, lack of support- take your pick.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Don't need to reread it, I just didn't think it made sense that you'd give out about the feed being crooked if the solution was to be strict on the law as opposed to going back to the old one. The law is there to give the advantage to the team feeding it, that's pretty much the point. It also has to be hooked which helps to ensure it's not thrown straight into the second row as it is. I can't see I've seen many blatantly illegal feeds, it's certainly not any kind of major issue in the game.

If it is indeed rife then there must be loads of hookers who are at full stretch and almost falling over when they try to hook it back, can't say I've seen that.

[artaneboy]

Don't need to reread it, I just didn't think it made sense that you'd give out about the feed being crooked if the solution was to be strict on the law as opposed to going back to the old one. The law is there to give the advantage to the team feeding it, that's pretty much the point. It also has to be hooked which helps to ensure it's not thrown straight into the second row as it is. I can't see I've seen many blatantly illegal feeds, it's certainly not any kind of major issue in the game.

If it is indeed rife then there must be loads of hookers who are at full stretch and almost falling over when they try to hook it back, can't say I've seen that.

The point of the rule change was to give some advantage to the attacking team- not remove the competition. So it is not "pretty much the point" at all. A non-competitive way of restarting the game is what the Rugby League scrum is. The Union law wasn't changed to do mimic that.

So feeding the ball in crooked directly to the feet of the hookers is the norm - but still illegal. Feeding it in beyond even that (behind his feet), is a very regular practice. As to whether hookers would be falling over, etc- don't see how that's likely- they just hook to help the ball through on its original route. Sometimes they get blown if they don't at least pretend to hook- as often they are let away with it.

But all that's a distraction to the point- that in contradiction of your claim on my original post. So now that we are agreed that you are not allowed to feed the ball in crooked, we can argue if you choose on how much there is of that in the game. I see plenty; you don't. That's fine...

[LeRouxIsPHat]

The law is there to give the advantage to the team feeding it, that's pretty much the point.

The point of the rule change was to give some advantage to the attacking team- not remove the competition. So it is not "pretty much the point" at all.

I mean...that's a bit mental tbh.

Scrums are very competitive, not sure what games you've been watching.

What you're saying happens regularly is actually physically impossible unless Devin Toner is the hooker but please point out when it happens next time. I thought that you were saying the feeds were crooked because they didn't go down the middle of the tunnel...I was obviously wrong to infer that. You were just wrong in a completely different way.

[artaneboy]

The law is there to give the advantage to the team feeding it, that's pretty much the point.

The point of the rule change was to give some advantage to the attacking team- not remove the competition. So it is not "pretty much the point" at all.

I mean...that's a bit mental tbh.

Scrums are very competitive, not sure what games you've been watching.

What you're saying happens regularly is actually physically impossible unless Devin Toner is the hooker but please point out when it happens next time. I thought that you were saying the feeds were crooked because they didn't go down the middle of the tunnel...I was obviously wrong to infer that. You were just wrong in a completely different way.

Let's just agree that you are half right!

I'm leaving it at that- but more than happy to argue over other more 'thread relevant' issues- such as the eternal JGP V Luke McGrath debate. Thought booth went well, still favour Jamie for this Friday against Wasps.

[alanair]

In a scrum put in , the ball never had to go down the centre of the tunnel.... The Law says that a part of the ball must dissect the imaginary centre line between the 2 front rows ... so, as long as the tip of the ball does so, the law is obeyed

[bails]

I was very surprised at the difficulties we had with the Munster scrum, particularly in quarters 3 & 4 on Saturday.
Nothwitstanding both Munster looseheads scrummaging with their backsides facing the touchline, I could not understand how we could not deal with it.

On second inspection it appeared That Peter O'Mahony was binding with his arm through and under his looseheads leg, which had the effect of making Munster have a 4 man front row.

I had a quick look at the laws, and the relevant law : 20.3 (f)
" Binding by all other players. All players in a scrum, other than front-row players, must bind on a lock’s body with at least one arm prior to the scrum engagement. The locks must bind with the props in front of them. No other player other than a prop may hold an opponent. Sanction: Penalty kick"

And as always, Munster fans believe they were the team that were victims of poor refereeing decisions.