Munster 2017 -2018

[blockhead]

The scapegoating of Keatley is getting ridiculous now. Eddi O'Sullivan was at it on off the ball on Monday,vans Ruadhrai O'Connor is at it now in the Indo. He played no worse or better than the rest of the team. They were shite all over the place. Even Saint Murray had a mare.

I Agree. BOD was at it on OTB and Bluestalk were too.
Bastids!
TBF, its not just a one game criticism. More of a "will we ever win a trophy with this guy at 10" type thing.
We would struggle with Keats at 10 too.
The BBC podcast with Ugo and co were discussing the Racing/Munster game. They agreed that only 2 Munster players would make it on to the Racing team, Murray and Stander. Then they changed their minds and withdrew those too.
But the Munster lads did look jaded in the 1st half.

[lummix]

I don't think it's scapegoating it's pointing out the obvious that he isn't a good enough 10 to play at the business end of competitions.
They are pointing out if Munster aspire to win the champions cup they need a better 10.

For my money they need better depth/quality 3,5,7,10 and 15 btw.

[offshorerules]

I don't think it's scapegoating it's pointing out the obvious that he isn't a good enough 10 to play at the business end of competitions.
They are pointing out if Munster aspire to win the champions cup they need a better 10.

For my money they need better depth/quality 3,5,7,10 and 15 btw.

The problem is that whenever Munster have a poor performance some Munster fans feel the need to blame someone. If I were to critically analyse that performance I think I could be critical of every single one of the Munster players. So therefore to pick out Keatley for special treatment appears indeed to be 'scapegoating'.

[leinsterforever]

I don't think it's scapegoating it's pointing out the obvious that he isn't a good enough 10 to play at the business end of competitions.
They are pointing out if Munster aspire to win the champions cup they need a better 10.

For my money they need better depth/quality 3,5,7,10 and 15 btw.

I think they should worry about winning a semi first tbh. Six lost semis in a row now, it is (3 with O'Gara, 3 with Keatley). I think looking at Keatley and talking about aspiring to win the thing is missing the point a bit. They need to take baby steps, win a semi first. People have been talking about the quality of outhalf on winning sides, but guys like Myler, Peyrelongue, Vesty, Brock James, Lopez and a very young Paddy Jackson have played in finals (I forget whether it was Jackson or Ian Humphreys who played in the semi final win over Edinburgh in 2012). But anyway, the point is that you can win semis without a stellar outhalf. Surely that's the crux of the matter when it's a last-four loss we're talking about?

Besides, I think it was Munster's diabolical ruck work in the oppo 22 that really let them down. They were a rabble, and weren't producing good ball for the attack to work with. Players seemed confused and there was no authority when it came to removing threats from their breakdown. It was a million miles away from the proficiency of Schmidt's Ireland.

I hindsight, the writing was on the wall from the Toulon game. Munster had a similar sort of flat opening 20 minutes in that game. It's just that Toulon weren't as slick as Racing in exploiting it, and maybe the home support gave Munster a bit of an extra boost that allowed them to hang in there. For me, the head coach is the biggest influence on how a team plays, and Munster are showing some of the traits of van Graan's Springboks when they were putting in tragic displays over the last few years

[tomthefan]

I think they should worry about winning a semi first tbh. Six lost semis in a row now, it is (3 with O'Gara, 3 with Keatley). I think looking at Keatley and talking about aspiring to win the thing is missing the point a bit. They need to take baby steps, win a semi first.

But anyway, the point is that you can win semis without a stellar outhalf. Surely that's the crux of the matter when it's a last-four loss we're talking about?

That's illogical. It's implying, for example, that Munster and Leinster would be better meeting in a semi than a final because they'd BOTH have a better chance of winning.
The only interpretation that would give it some sort of coherence would be if having a good out-half was a disadvantage in a semi but an advantage in a final.

[leinsterforever]

I think they should worry about winning a semi first tbh. Six lost semis in a row now, it is (3 with O'Gara, 3 with Keatley). I think looking at Keatley and talking about aspiring to win the thing is missing the point a bit. They need to take baby steps, win a semi first.

But anyway, the point is that you can win semis without a stellar outhalf. Surely that's the crux of the matter when it's a last-four loss we're talking about?

That's illogical. It's implying, for example, that Munster and Leinster would be better meeting in a semi than a final because they'd BOTH have a better chance of winning.
The only interpretation that would give it some sort of coherence would be if having a good out-half was a disadvantage in a semi but an advantage in a final.

I'm not quite following your train of thought? All I was saying is that a star outhalf isn't a prerequisite when it comes to winning a semi. People are getting a bit ahead of themselves with their talk of aspiring to win the thing. Maybe Keatley isn't good enough to be a cup-winning 10. His big match temperament is questionable. But given the list of outhalves above who have made finals, I don't think it can be stated categorically that he isn't good enough to make a final. And that's what Munster should be focusing on, given the run of losses in semis. It's almost like Ireland and World Cup quarter finals at this stage

[Lar]

Bleyendaal was the outhalf v Saracens last season wasn't he? Not really the point though. When he plays well Keatley is good enough for Munster to win a title. The trouble with Keatley is that there is no consistency, but unsurprisingly he plays a lot better behind a pack that is performing. That is why remarks that blame Keatley for the semi-final loss or suggesting that nothing will ever be won with Keatley at outhalf are so unfair to him.

It was a collective failure that lost Munster the match and despite the possession that Munster had particularly in the second half I really don't think the pack showed up last Sunday and were largely dominated at the breakdown in particular. The speed of ball Racing had in the first 30 minutes was down to incredibly good work from their pack and was to my mind the primary reason Racing got their three tries with such relative ease.

[tomthefan]

The trouble with Keatley is that there is no consistency, but unsurprisingly he plays a lot better behind a pack that is performing. That is why remarks that blame Keatley for the semi-final loss or suggesting that nothing will ever be won with Keatley at outhalf are so unfair to him.

It's a synergistic relationship between a pack and the out-half, the pack will play better if they have an out-half who rewards their efforts.
How morale sapping it must be to see your out-half miss a penalty to touch after you've been under the cosh for a long period.

[Oldschool]

What I find amazing about the Racing game is that both Scarlets and Leinster rested most if not all their first choice players the weekend before their S/F.
Munster, on the other hand, picked an almost first choice team away to Cheetahs.
The coach is the one who should be getting it in the ear.
He set Munster up to fail.
He above all people should have understood the significance of playing at altitude.
Don't give a fidlers what the science or conventional wisdom says, the results speak for themselves.
JS went for it in the 2nd test at altitude in SA and lost it and the 3rd test as a result.
To repeat the Munster head coach should be getting a grilling.

[dropkick]

The scapegoating of Keatley is getting ridiculous now. Eddi O'Sullivan was at it on off the ball on Monday,vans Ruadhrai O'Connor is at it now in the Indo. He played no worse or better than the rest of the team. They were shite all over the place. Even Saint Murray had a mare.

I thought that O'Connor's article was balanced enough. I think it was a legitimate criticism of Keatley's performance, and I am generally a well-wisher of his ... except when Leinster are playing Munster obviously. He didn't play well. He has built up a huge body of experience with Connacht and Munster – almost 250 games, almost 200 starts – and just turned 31 at the start of the month. He's in his prime as an outhalf with loads of experience but not yet at the last chance saloon, and shouldn't be that panicky.

On the other hand, I've read very little criticism of Peter O'Mahony [bar Tony Ward, funnily enough], who was another massive under-performer. That'd lead me to believe that Keatley is – again – having that scapegoat role pushed on him.

O'Mahony has the guts of 50 test caps and [famously] captained the Lions in the first test against the All Blacks. You'd expect more from him than from a guy who has picked up seven test caps, and only three starts, over ten seasons.

As captain, POM completely failed to get his team at the emotional pitch of the game; they never fired a shot, conceded three tries and lost the game in the first 21 minutes. This isn't the first time it has happened in a big game on his watch. Pretty much exactly the same thing happened against the Scarlets in last season's Pro12 final.

His tactical decision-making was very flawed, with repeated decisions to forgo easy kicks at goal in favour of longshot try attempts off mediocre set-pieces; his tackling was mediocre [a 66% success rate with three missed from nine attempts]; his carrying – as usual – was ineffectual, with 3m gained off 7 carries [an average carry of about 43cm/carry]; and his lineout work was a complete non-event - Munster's lineout was a huge flop and he couldn't exert any real pressure on Racing ball.

So to me it was a big underperformance from him as both a player and a captain – a double whammy. It was a big game and he never showed up. It happens, nobody can play their best rugby in every game. But if you're a critic and you go after Keatley and let O'Mahony off the hook, I think it diminishes your credibility. One is a popular thing to say, the other isn't. But I think they're both reasonable and legitimate.

You're doing the same with POM again. Murray and a few others were also below par but you single out POM.

[leinsterforever]

The scapegoating of Keatley is getting ridiculous now. Eddi O'Sullivan was at it on off the ball on Monday,vans Ruadhrai O'Connor is at it now in the Indo. He played no worse or better than the rest of the team. They were shite all over the place. Even Saint Murray had a mare.

I thought that O'Connor's article was balanced enough. I think it was a legitimate criticism of Keatley's performance, and I am generally a well-wisher of his ... except when Leinster are playing Munster obviously. He didn't play well. He has built up a huge body of experience with Connacht and Munster – almost 250 games, almost 200 starts – and just turned 31 at the start of the month. He's in his prime as an outhalf with loads of experience but not yet at the last chance saloon, and shouldn't be that panicky.

On the other hand, I've read very little criticism of Peter O'Mahony [bar Tony Ward, funnily enough], who was another massive under-performer. That'd lead me to believe that Keatley is – again – having that scapegoat role pushed on him.

O'Mahony has the guts of 50 test caps and [famously] captained the Lions in the first test against the All Blacks. You'd expect more from him than from a guy who has picked up seven test caps, and only three starts, over ten seasons.

As captain, POM completely failed to get his team at the emotional pitch of the game; they never fired a shot, conceded three tries and lost the game in the first 21 minutes. This isn't the first time it has happened in a big game on his watch. Pretty much exactly the same thing happened against the Scarlets in last season's Pro12 final.

His tactical decision-making was very flawed, with repeated decisions to forgo easy kicks at goal in favour of longshot try attempts off mediocre set-pieces; his tackling was mediocre [a 66% success rate with three missed from nine attempts]; his carrying – as usual – was ineffectual, with 3m gained off 7 carries [an average carry of about 43cm/carry]; and his lineout work was a complete non-event - Munster's lineout was a huge flop and he couldn't exert any real pressure on Racing ball.

So to me it was a big underperformance from him as both a player and a captain – a double whammy. It was a big game and he never showed up. It happens, nobody can play their best rugby in every game. But if you're a critic and you go after Keatley and let O'Mahony off the hook, I think it diminishes your credibility. One is a popular thing to say, the other isn't. But I think they're both reasonable and legitimate.

You're doing the same with POM again. Murray and a few others were also below par but you single out POM.

He didn't make much of a mark though, did he? Surely that's a problem, when his status means he should be one of Munster's go-to guys? Was his lack of physical impact a contributing factor to van Graan not picking Conor Oliver because the other flanker was going to have to pick up some of the physicality slack? Munster were crying out for a genuine openside on the day

[Oldschool]

His lack of impact alongwith others was due to travel fatigue allied to altitude fatigue.

[olaf the fat]

The pack had 83m from 70 carries - and people blame the outhalf?

Munster won what 13 from 17 lineouts? and a lot of play off that lineout ball simply did not work - and people blame the outhalf for failing to find touch once?

Van Graan should be shipping most of the blame for failing to address their run of poor starts in recent games. Munster went behind early against the Southern Kings and Cheetahs, only to come back into the game, do that against a better team and they will just do enough to keep you at bay until 80.

[dropkick]

The pack had 83m from 70 carries - and people blame the outhalf?

Munster won what 13 from 17 lineouts? and a lot of play off that lineout ball simply did not work - and people blame the outhalf for failing to find touch once?
.

Keatley isn't being made a scapegoat. That's something people are dreaming up.
This is a post from cowboy on Munsterfans.

I think this points to just how odd the weekend was, we've seen the loss attributed to:

• Losing the collisions in the opening quarter
• Unforced errors in the opening quarter
• Donn Ryan in a bloody racing jersey
• Donn Ryan reading the lineout dummy to stop the 15.30 CJ express from lineout-town to trysville
• Ian Keatley
• Bringing the front line to South Africa i.e. player management
• Not having enough 'quality options' in the wider squad
• Arrogance of the new coaches wanting wins on the tour to South Africa
• Changing coaches 33% of the way through the pool
• Benching Zebo
• Warming up too long
• Starting Scannell at 2
• Injuries to Cloete TOD Farrell & Taute & Tyler
• Racing easing up after taking a large lead
• Racing backing pwning ours in the opening 20
• Inexperience in some backline positions
• Sammy held up at the padding
• Pass to Copeland deemed forward
• The absolute certainty that almost phucking nothing bounced our way on the day
• Systems failures galore

Wouldn't be so bad if we could point to one moment of madness that led to a key sinbinning or red card to cost us the tie. But what all these suggestions show is that it might be a combination of all 20 and it was just a shytty day all round.

[OTT]

Keatley isn't being made a scapegoat. That's something people are dreaming up.

Agreed. I think because of the past experiences where he was often made the scapegoat people on here are a bit sensitive to that, we all know he got some awful personal abuse in the past, none of it called for.

I just think he lacks something at the highest level, glad he is Munsters 10 and not one of ours, everyone will come on and disagree with me but I have never seen a bring back Keatley thread or him mentioned in the ones that got away in the 10 years he has been gone.

It is Munsters problem that they won't move on though they had the opportunity to move on for this season and gave him a new contract at the 11th hour.

None of that would mean that he is the reason that Munster got knocked out, the team were clearly flat from the start but Leinster fans who can't see that he might not be the full package are being disingenuous as are Munster fans who demand that he is parachuted into the Ireland 23 when he has a good game against the Dragons or whoever.

[Logorrhea]

The trouble with Keatley is that there is no consistency, but unsurprisingly he plays a lot better behind a pack that is performing. That is why remarks that blame Keatley for the semi-final loss or suggesting that nothing will ever be won with Keatley at outhalf are so unfair to him.

It's a synergistic relationship between a pack and the out-half, the pack will play better if they have an out-half who rewards their efforts.

Wow. That is amazing.

[fourthirtythree]

The trouble with Keatley is that there is no consistency, but unsurprisingly he plays a lot better behind a pack that is performing. That is why remarks that blame Keatley for the semi-final loss or suggesting that nothing will ever be won with Keatley at outhalf are so unfair to him.

It's a synergistic relationship between a pack and the out-half, the pack will play better if they have an out-half who rewards their efforts.

Wow. That is amazing.

Yeah, by the same logic an outhalf will not miss touch from a penalty if the pack doesn't mess up the lineout when he does....

So actually any of Keatley's flaws on Sunday were really the pack's fault because they totally did mess up critical lineouts.

[tomthefan]

Yeah, by the same logic an outhalf will not miss touch from a penalty if the pack doesn't mess up the lineout when he does....

So actually any of Keatley's flaws on Sunday were really the pack's fault because they totally did mess up critical lineouts.

I'm not basing my criticisms of Keatley on just one match.
Everyone can have a poor game occasionally

[olaf the fat]

If Keatley is considered not good enough to win a CC final, then by the same metrics, neither are the likes of Kilcoyne, Archer, Holland, O Donoghue, Arnold, and Wotton.

[Logorrhea]

I'm not basing my criticisms of Keatley on just one match.
Everyone can have a poor game occasionally

Of course not.

I also assume that Munsters pack did not reached their decision to be shite because of just one Keatley performance. I assume their abject performance on Sunday was a result of many shite performances from Keatley.