Scarlets 14 v 17 Munster

First topic message reminder :

Parc Y Scarlets 10/12/11

In the pre match preamble I asked two questions:
1 will the injury to Howlett make any difference at all?
2 can the Scarlets pack withstand the onslaught they are bound to face and get any sort of decent ball for the Scarlets to get their running game going

They were the wrong questions. In the event Munster chucked it about with abandon (for two or three phases anyway) and Zebo looked quite at home.

The Scarlets had plenty of ball but for the main part were clueless with it.

What are your thoughts?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

Of course I have, and as I just said I love aggression and hitting the opposite team hard. But you aren't just saying that, you are saying about hitting a player's hamstrings if they have an injury there, or hitting their strapping. There is a huge difference. If you aim to hit someone where you know they have suffered injuries before, that is intentionally hurting someone. Two different things.

I think you're overreacting,if a guy goes out on the field he's either fit or he isn't.If you can't stand up to legal hits on any area of your body then you probably shouldn't be playing.

yeah, can't see the problem, even in a sport like cricket a bowler would go for an injury on a batsman if he knew it was there, unless it's a bandage around his forehead of course.

I just don't agree with intentionally injuring someone. Isn't very sportsmanlike.

Cannot wait for this one think its the pick of the weekend along with Harlequins vs Toulouse

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I just don't agree with intentionally injuring someone. Isn't very sportsmanlike.

It's not injuring them,they're already injured you're just punishing them for having the temerity to be on the same pitch as you

Thomond wrote:These guys go out there to cause pain. You want to hit a guy hard and make sure he feels it then go for a place you know he will hurt more!

Thomond..every team/player does exactly what you say. Its not about intentionally injuring someone its about checking out weaknesses perceived or otherwise. When BOD came back from his shoulder injury, every opposing team sent big men down his channel just to check out how he was doing. I don't think you need to explain something that is perfectly clear (except to some)

DOD wrote:

Thomond wrote:These guys go out there to cause pain. You want to hit a guy hard and make sure he feels it then go for a place you know he will hurt more!

Thomond..every team/player does exactly what you say. Its not about intentionally injuring someone its about checking out weaknesses perceived or otherwise. When BOD came back from his shoulder injury, every opposing team sent big men down his channel just to check out how he was doing. I don't think you need to explain something that is perfectly clear (except to some)

Typical snide behaviour of you DOD.. bitching without actually naming names. Typical keyboard warrior. I am pretty sure BOD playing rugby means he has to use his shoulder to tackle bit of a difference.

Anyways, as I have said I am all for the big hits and hard play. I am not a supporter of intentionally injuring players. If someone intentionally did a bad tackle on Ferris's bad knee and ended his rugby career, I would be absolutely furious. To me that would be disgusting behaviour, and I would worry if anyone disagreed with that.

Hang on is anybody really suggesting that physical and mental intimidation is not a legitimate part if the game? It's a contact sport! That's why we have laws and a ref to show what violence is acceptable abd what violence is not. If you did the things you do on a rugby field in the street, you'd be sent to gaol.

Glas a du wrote:Hang on is anybody really suggesting that physical and mental intimidation is not a legitimate part if the game? It's a contact sport! That's why we have laws and a ref to show what violence is acceptable abd what violence is not. If you did the things you do on a rugby field in the street, you'd be sent to gaol.

I haven't seen anyone suggest that actually. What I have seen suggested multiple times is that intentionally injuring someone is bad sportsmanship.

Okay for the record from a Scarlets fan---

Good luck boys because we will need it, Munster are a brutal team who can beat you in the forwards and finish well in the backs,they don't make many mistakes but their biggest strength and the one that matters most is the mental strength they posses.

Munster to win by 7 or more points and the same next week.

But i still think we can take second in the group

Glas a du wrote:Hang on is anybody really suggesting that physical and mental intimidation is not a legitimate part if the game? .

Apparently they are

I haven't seen anyone suggest that actually. What I have seen suggested multiple times is that intentionally injuring someone is bad sportsmanship.

In those stark terms yes. The clearest example is BOD on the Lions tour or Koebus Wisser breaking Derwyn Jones' jaw.

However probing the other sides weaknesses within the laws of the game is fine.

DOD wrote:

Glas a du wrote:Hang on is anybody really suggesting that physical and mental intimidation is not a legitimate part if the game? .

Apparently they are

And again, you say things behind peoples back, without learning to actually read what has been said. If you can quote me where anyone has said that I will think about maybe listening to your opinion. Otherwise, you should stop talking your usual nonsense

DOD how come when ever i see your name i just think this is you?

http://www.chartstats.com/art.php?release=45593

Glas a du wrote:

I haven't seen anyone suggest that actually. What I have seen suggested multiple times is that intentionally injuring someone is bad sportsmanship.

In those stark terms yes. The clearest example is BOD on the Lions tour or Koebus Wisser breaking Derwyn Jones' jaw.

However probing the other sides weaknesses within the laws of the game is fine.

Yes, but they are two different things glas..

Going for the other sides weakness, eg a bad tackler, of course you are going to exploit that and mentally and physically dominate them. Nobody is disagreeing with that, as that would be stupid.

Going in to injure someones physical weakness ie, a bad knee/hamstring/whatever, is cowardly.

viewtothegym wrote:DOD how come when ever i see your name i just think this is you?

http://www.chartstats.com/art.php?release=45593

Found out!!! How did you guess?

lol

Do you need a gnawingly awful dirge for Christmas. I could come over to yours and be all creepy and sycophantic to your family.

All for about a billion euro

Going in to injure someones physical weakness ie, a bad knee/hamstring/whatever, is cowardly.

Not sure I agree.

Two scenarios -

1 it's well known a player has a weak left shoulder. The coach tells his players to run to his left shoulder. Sure enough he's crocked on the hour and goes off.

2 a side has a second row who excels in the line out. A player takes hold of his foot when he's in the air so that he falls down onto his side abd injures himself.

The aim to gain an advantage is the same, the result is the same, the intent to injure and the means of inflicting the injury in the second example is what makes it unacceptable though.

Glas a du wrote:

Going in to injure someones physical weakness ie, a bad knee/hamstring/whatever, is cowardly.

Not sure I agree.

Two scenarios -

1 it's well known a player has a weak left shoulder. The coach tells his players to run to his left shoulder. Sure enough he's crocked on the hour and goes off.

2 a side has a second row who excels in the line out. A player takes hold of his foot when he's in the air so that he falls down onto his side abd injures himself.

The aim to gain an advantage is the same, the result is the same, the intent to injure and the means of inflicting the injury in the second example is what makes it unacceptable though.

Once again, they are still different from the point I am making. In the first scenario, you have a coach telling his player to run for his left shoulder which is his bad shoulder (although he would probably be focusing on the game too much to look for which shoulder to run at), but he is not intentionally injuring that player. He is just running at his bad shoulder, because he will be a weaker tackler because of it.

The second one is about someone injuring a perfectly fit player. Neither scenario is what I am getting at. Look at my example above of someone purposely trying to do further damage to Ferris' knee, potentially ending his career. In what way is that okay?

Maybe if we could stick with the Munster v Scarlets debate? There is a forum for debating favourite (if pointless ) topics

DOD wrote:Maybe if we could stick with the Munster v Scarlets debate? There is a forum for debating favourite (if pointless ) topics

Yeah, and since we are talking about rugby, we usually would be right being on the rugby forum.. you will have to try better than that with your smart-ass comments I'm afraid..

Maybe you should stick to not "debating" at all

OK, let's take Ferris.

It's well known he has a glass knee. It's sensible to tackle a man that big low. That carries a higher risk of cooking his knee but so be it. This is how Wales dealt with him in the WC QF

If you see his leg poking out of a ruck and you grab it and give it a tweak, how can that be OK? This was what Ashton did to North.

Glas a du wrote:OK, let's take Ferris.

It's well known he has a glass knee. It's sensible to tackle a man that big low. That carries a higher risk of cooking his knee but so be it. This is how Wales dealt with him in the WC QF

If you see his leg poking out of a ruck and you grab it and give it a tweak, how can that be OK? This was what Ashton did to North.

But once again, that isn't the point I am making glas haha

Ferris SHOULD be tackled low, and with that carries the risk of him injuring his knee. But there is a large difference between intentionally injuring him and accidentally injuring him. If you intentionally aim to hurt his knee, that is a totally different matter for aiming to tackling him low.

Am I making any sense yet?

viewtothegym wrote:Okay for the record from a Scarlets fan---

Good luck boys because we will need it, Munster are a brutal team who can beat you in the forwards and finish well in the backs,they don't make many mistakes but their biggest strength and the one that matters most is the mental strength they posses.

Munster to win by 7 or more points and the same next week.

But i still think we can take second in the group

agree with this, can't see us winning, they've had the wood on us for the last 3 or 4 seasons, they know exactly how to beat us. They'll just grind us down, it'll be boring but effective rugby.

Have a bit of faith boys. We're well up for this one and all we need is to get our fair share of the ball up front and we'll do some damage behind.

C'mon the Scarlets!

DOD wrote:

viewtothegym wrote:DOD how come when ever i see your name i just think this is you?

http://www.chartstats.com/art.php?release=45593

Found out!!! How did you guess?

Did you enjoy the Late Late tonight. Happy 50th birthday

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Thomond wrote: I hope the Scarlets kick all day.

Not likely is it?

Zebo will kill you if he finds a gap. Just ask George North.

Have they faced each other before then?

Yes. Last April in Wales. Zebo scored his first Magners try and won Man of the Match. Some of the match report. Final score was 6-13. North was on Zebo's side.

And it was one of those twenty somethings, Simon Zebo, who notched the crucial score when he pounced on a loose ball in the 68th minute to kick downfield, control and score the try that separated the sides at the final whistle. The Cork Con speedster, who celebrated his 21st birthday last month, also illuminated the first half with a brilliant 15th minute break from his own 22 that ended in the Scarlets 22 and he picked up the Man of the Match accolade for what was a good night's performance.

Is Zebo 21 already? Is he a late developer, hampered by injuries, or just not given opportunities by Munster?

When you have Keith Earls and Doug Howlett ahead of you it'd difficult to get opportunities! Rory, Glas' points are valid. Number one is ok, you know a guy has a bad shoulder and you hit him there(like Ireland do with Wilkinson). Number two is not on,i.e digging him in the shoulder in a ruck.

They are valid Thomond, but what I mean is neither are the scenarios I am talking about. An example of the bad shoulder one, would be purposely tip tackling them onto their shoulder in order to injure them.

Late developer at 21?? Really? He has his entire career ahead of him!

That's not on. I waas talking about Glas' first example you see a guy who has a gimpy shoulder, you run hard fast and straight at it. You make ground it's his own fault/stupidity for thinking he can last on a field against your team with an injury. Shows a lack of respect and you make him pay for it.

Thomond wrote:That's not on. I waas talking about Glas' first example you see a guy who has a gimpy shoulder, you run hard fast and straight at it. You make ground it's his own fault/stupidity for thinking he can last on a field against your team with an injury. Shows a lack of respect and you make him pay for it.

And I agree with you on that. Just the examples I was using was purposely doing harm to another player. Though a player is on the pitch with a bad leg/shoulder, you should run at them hard, or else take them on the outside if they are struggling to run. That is different from intentionally injuring someone.

Munster fans, what do you think of Zebo and his chances to maybe start as an Irish winger in the future?

That's it Thom. Had you said it like that at the start...

Obviously Zebo is still a young guy and is a few years from being the complete article. He has a few kinks in his game, his kicking and positioning could be a bit better and his defence needs to improve a bit. He will have a lot of competition for wings spots so I don't know. It's a tough one to call, he will get a few caps at least but getting 20/30+ is too early to call.

Where do you think he comes in the pecking order of up and coming wings?

If our current wingers are: Bowe, Trimble, Earls, Fitzgerald

And our up and coming wingers are: Carr, Kearney Jr, Conway, Gilroy, Zebo (I'm sure I am missing someone)

He would be ahead of Conway for me, but behind the others for now.

Gaston looked impressive to me last year. I have never rated Carr but Dave Kearney has surprised me over the last few months.

Anyone know any bookies giving odds on an O'Gara drop goal to win the match?

Surprised Paddy Power don't have a special going.

Carr has been impressive for Leinster lately and would be the top of that list for me, but he is missing his chance. He is older than both Fitz and Earls.

Gaston isn't getting any gametime at all for Ulster. I'm not sure he has played this season.

Carr played 9 games this season. One as a sub. Hasn't been involved in the HC squad and has 2 tries to his name. I haven't seen the last few Leinster games but I always thought he failed to do it against bigger sides.

I am talking about the last few games, where he was very dangerous in attack. He set up a fantastic try for the prop White, and his defensive duties are very good and he seems to be a very all around player too. But as I said, he is 26 now I think, only a year or 2 younger than Bowe and Trimble.

North a late withdrawl. Zebo will have to settle for skinning Lamont. Sky just said a "a clash of styles" they sure love us in England! It is true though.

Not a good start. 8-0 Scarlets. Lack of discipline and an awful mistake leading to a Scarlets try. Should be more.

Oh dear. What mistake was made?

Chambers gave a poor pass, Zebo dropped it and they pounced. Poite riding us but msot are correct. You want a link?

Thomond wrote:North a late withdrawl. Zebo will have to settle for skinning Lamont. Sky just said a "a clash of styles" they sure love us in England! It is true though.

So you criticise 'English Sky' for being truthful. How weird.
Was it one of the 2 Irish commentators that said it?

Preistland is not having a great game, some poor kicking so far - hopefully he will settle down.

Munster pressing on the Scarlets line

Scarlets win the penalty

What happened to clinical Munster? They look poor today.

No the fellas in studio they love to have a crack off the Irish teams though. . Why didn't ROG just take the points from the penalty? This could be a cracker!

Im sure that was forward off POM