The defences they are up against are fairly manky but some quality tries all the same. Handling, use of space and unconventional play is top-class.

Little is handy with the boot too.

Potential is always limitless, identifying the means of harnessing that potential is tricky. The IRFU would be wise to leverage their current position instead of gripping tightly to previous successes. Now is the time to build. Now is the time to talk.

Potential is always limitless, identifying the means of harnessing that potential is tricky. The IRFU would be wise to leverage their current position instead of gripping tightly to previous successes. Now is the time to build. Now is the time to talk.

Win Together, Lose Together.

A wise man once said this, but I don’t know his name,

Never Will!

Slán agus Beannacht…..

Let’s take it as a given that to ensure improvement, players need feedback, regardless of standing or standard.

As a coach, how consistent should our feedback to players be? How do we pitch it just right? Should it be tailored to the player? Should it be data driven? Positive or negative?

A simple idea is immediate feedback where we coach in the moment. Players can only take on so much information at once. Focusing on one or two different aspects of their game is enough in any conversation. And it should be a conversation.

Do two things mid training.

1) Ask the player one specific aspect of their game they are doing well in training.

2) Ask the player one specific aspect of their game that they were not happy with.

After training, give your own review. Offer one aspect of the player’s game that is progressing and one aspect that needs more time, effort and thought. That gives us two positives, two works in progress and four tangibles!

A two-way chat requires the player to reflect on their own game rather than passively accept the views of the coach. The review and feedback sticks more if it comes from the player themselves.

As coaches, players and fans we can easily overlook the evolutionary process of the game. The current tendency towards kicking away possession is a reminder of how quickly the game can change.

Mark Ella, Australia and Randwick Rugby Club were the catalyst for a shift in back-play. They pioneered the Flat Attack, with Ella as the main protaganist.

Ella played tight to his 9, fixing the opposition backrow and forcing them to defend at a dificult angle. He then encouraged his support runners to play flat off him, allowing him, or any passer, to quickly re-enter the game after off-loading a pass.

“Having delivered his pass, he invariably, it seems to me, keeps moving, getting himself between centre and wing on an extended loop – or even outside his wing! Such off-the-ball running is a true sign of greatness…”  - Gareth Edwards

As a 10, Ella was the master, not only at creating space for his outside teammates by drawing and fixing the defence, but at following his pass. The clip shows his innate ability to pick a spot for support and finish the move.

His style of play is relevant to today’s debate on kicking.

If teams were more adept and willing to play flat and keep the ball alive, thereby preventing the ball from going to deck, we would see less turnovers and more attacking play. This requires attacking will, better handling and a work rate typified by Ella. Individuals and teams can change the direction of the game. Take a look at the Wallaby ’84 Grand Slam side. Their lines of movement and are still applied at every level of the game today.

At what point is cheating in rugby actually cheating? When is a ban, a fine and an expulsion from competition justified? People who have played the game understand how tight the lines of legality are. Cheating, if you want to call it that, is, rife. For players, it is not a case of where the line is, but whether you are caught at the opposite side of that line. This cynicism is largely protected by the authorities within the game.

The Harlequins case reveals the pressure support staff are under to produce results, be that for the vindication of the coach or the profit and loss margins of the Chief Executive. It reveals the ERC’s desire to protect the credibility of a competition (and sponsors) only when they are faced a situation as ludicrous as a chartered physiotherapist purchasing fake-blood in a joke shop with intent to supply. The verdict, and the punishments bestowed, do nothing to deter the real cynicism that permeates our game. The gouging, the collapsed scrums, the tampering of lineouts, killing the ball… the list goes on.

The severity of the judgement taken against Harlequins, Dean Richards, Tom Williams and Steph Brennan is not out of a desire to protect the integrity of the game, but out of a need to placate sponsors in a buyers market. If the ERC are serious about cleaning up the game, they would want to do more than punish a coach who has been corrupt for many years and a player  and physio acting under obvious coercion. 

Dean Richards is a man conditioned by his sport to cheat. Richards has history. A lot of it. The Leicester Tigers team he groomed were animals in the loose, pushing the limits of the law beyond the ability of any competent referee. When Neil Back swiped a Munster scrum in the final moments of the 2002 Heineken Cup Final, we saw a power-play of a cheat executed without remorse. For Richards, the ends justified the means. He is certainly not alone.

He has plenty of time to mull over the consequences of re-introducing Nick Evans. One thought may cross his mind. Why should he not have been allowed to re-introduce Nick Evans late in the second half? 10 is a specialized position, like front row, although without the safety concerns. What difference does it make if he comes on? If anything, the laws favored Leinster by preventing Evans from returning to the field despite injury. 

I disregard the people who say that this is not rugby that this is not a realistic impression of our game. Cheating is part of the sport and will never be entirely contained. What must be examined are the reasons we want to eradicate it from the sport. The cynics of the game who represent some of the top teams in the world need to be put on the same list as Richards, Quins et al.

Eskimo Rugby: Direct to your inbox.

Munster are renowned for playing with an edge. Lets not forget they have been at the top of European game for nearly ten years now, despite last week’s wash-out. Psychologically, physically and tactically they have stuck it to teams they often had no right to beat. 

In 2006 Sale came to Thomond Park as the form team in the English Guinness Premiership with a pack led by Sebastian Chabal; their primary ball carrier, their go-to forward. Chabal set the tone for that Sale side. 

And Munster battered him. They targeted him in the loose early on and nailed him from a kick-off. O’Gara spoke about this in his book, he called it “hammering the hammer.” Pick out the oppositions biggest, most influential forward and drive him out of the game, put in a place where he does not want to see the ball.

In real terms it may be argued that breaking this player can break a pack allowing a team to get on top at the breakdown and on the gainline. Rugby is an elemental sport. It plays on the ebb and flow of momentum. Munster got the momentum that day. They broke Chabal early.

Eskimo Rugby: Direct to your inbox.

Fingers to the face. Right across the eye. Leo Cullen’s reaction says it all. In slow-mo it certainly looks like the Quinlan was scraping Cullen’s face. But is it a full on gouge? Quinlan will have a few nervous days before the citing commission convene. He will definitely face a hearing and given the stage of his career I would imagine he will risk an appeal if found guilty. Bear in mind that Neil Best got 18 weeks earlier this season for gouging James Haskell having admitted intent. If Quinlan pleads not-guilty he may be facing a bigger problem than just missing a Lions tour.

Either way, allowing this to happen is incredibly stupid on Quinlan’s part. Any game covered by Sky will not miss a beat in breakdowns that open up to the cameras. Given the surprise at Quinlan’s selection and the reputation he has fostered as an ‘annoying player,’ its no real shock that the cameras picked this up yesterday.

Any physical game like rugby is going to create moments where players are right on the edge. This is understandable, however gouging cannot be condoned, regardless of degree.

NFL: Total Access on Sky Sports 3 is a program produced by the NFL Network in collaboration with NFL Films to offer a subscribing public a level of access  to NFL teams that rugby fans could only dream about. Training sessions, draft selections, salary cap debate and exclusive video of an in-house draft meeting all featured in the one hour show with former players contributing to the analysis and presenting. The whole set-up blows our conventional tv panel out of the park.

If we want to grow rugby outside of the traditional base, we need to develop a means of packaging the game in a way that makes it accessible and attractive to potential fans. Rugby Union is no longer the baby of professional sport. We must stop taking our lead from football (soccer), where a closeted, autocratic system controls media coverage and fan interaction is reduced to tabloid speculation and fantasy leagues.

Even in Ireland, where there is a tiny media market, our rugby teams are a closed shop. In interviews we are subjected to cliches and bland statements that feign modesty. The Irish rugby public are often treated with indifference when it comes to the disclosure of team related information or opinion. Rugby administrators are spending hundreds of thousands of euro on PR consultants who throw out the same old pre-packaged muck.

The games best asset are the players and the coaching staff. They should be used in any way possible to increase access to the game. NFL: Total Access offered the viewer an opportunity to sit in on a draft meeting with the top tier of the Atlanta Falcons management team. They discussed selection policy, character references and weaknesses within the squad that needed to be addressed with the upcoming draft.

Imagine Setanta Sports getting access to McGahan, Fisher and Payne shooting the breeze about future Munster signings. It sounds far-fetched but it is exactly the kind of coverage the Magners League needs to accelerate growth. NFL: Total Access is largely scripted and tele-prompted. It is packaged professionally and choreographed to perfection. It mixes that cringeworthy American humour with forthright opinion and honesty. It works, and I want to watch it again and learn more about the draft system and the NFL process.

Rugby Union exists in a much smaller market. The fight to win hearts, minds and season subscriptions is a lot tougher. Teams should be open to the media and what they have to offer: a direct link to the public, instead of being treated with contempt. A philosophy of openness creates and grows an idea. Shutdowns and blackouts and limiting information kills it. Management within Rugby Union must reassess how they communicate and interact with the public through the media. If they want a bit of inspiration they should just look across the water where access is still controlled, but more meaningful to the fan.