Clermont make a pig’s ear of a thrilling qtr final
Roar Guru By Dublin Dave, 12 Apr 2010 The Crowd is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Clermont, Heineken Cup, Leinster, Rugby Union
How can a team outscore the opposition by three tries to two, dominate the possession and territory statistics, have a ludicrous penalty count in their favour and still lose a Heineken Cup quarter final match which was one of the most exciting games I have seen in years?
By bringing a kicker who couldn’t hit a cow’s arse with a banjo as Clermont Auvergne did against Leinster in Dublin.
Rugby is a team game and it is unfair to single out one player for a collective failure but really there is no other scapegoat than the Clermont number 10.
In the town where I grew up, the word Brock is a local term for pig swill, unwanted food residue which householders were only too pleased to contribute to local pig farmers. They were a familiar sight in my childhood, trundling through the streets with bins reeking from a week’s leftovers as they made their collections.
Last night Brock James’ kicking stank the RDS out. He landed five, but missed another five – most of them quite kickable.
He also failed abysmally with two late drop goal attempts, either of which would have put his team through.
It would have been no more than Clermont deserved because they had come, with a sizable and noisy travelling support, to do a job and they set about it with gusto.
Completely outmuscling Leinster at the breakdown they were camped in the Leinster half for the first quarter and ran up a 10 point lead. James missed one penalty attempt but converted the first of Julien Malzieu’s three tries the touchline and landed another penalty. Nothing to worry about so far.
However, Leinster were not completely without merit and struck back, first with a penalty from Sexton, who by contrast had an almost perfect night with the boot and then from a sumptuous piece of play from O’Driscoll who took two defenders out with a swing of his hips and a flip pass from the back of his hand that resembled the action of a Shane Warne googly.
The big striding Jamie Heaslip did the rest to part dodge, part crash, his way through two defenders.
Another penalty from Sexton and another try from Heaslip after a generous interpretation of the new kicking out on the full law gave Leinster a lineout 5m from the Clermont line saw the home side take an unlikely 20-10 lead.
This was helped in part by the first stage of Brock James’ kicking decline in which he missed a few penalty attempts. The last kick of the half saw Morgan Parra take over the duties but he fared no better.
The shape of the match was becoming apparent. Clermont were taking it through the phases up front and making huge inroads. Leinster, by contrast, when they did win some ball were spinning it wide at every opportunity and making the Clermont defence look shaky. It was a wonderful contrast of styles and made for a compelling contest.
In the second half Clermont came out all guns blazing and were quickly off the mark. Some powerful carrying and mauling by their forwards, with Argentinian Mario Ledesma to the fore sucked in the defence and Shane Horgan was hopelessly out of position when the ball was fed quickly to his opposite number Malzieu.
Another penalty narrowed the gap to two points. Midway through the half Clermont regained the lead when some lackadaisical defending from Horgan gave the French the time to charge down his clearance and Malzieu was on hand to finish off his hat trick.
The successful conversion put Clermont five points clear but James was still missing attempts that he should have nailed. Leinster might have had a try shortly afterwards but the TMO couldn’t be sure and so they had to settle for a consolation penalty.
The clinching score came from the only sin binning of the game when the Clermont full back flapped down a pass to counter a gaping overlap. The ensuing penalty gave Leinster a single point lead with about 12 minutes remaining.
The remainder of the match was a desperate rearguard action.
Especially when Clermont were back to full strength they camped in the Leinster 22 and James missed the first of his dropped goal attempts. That one seemed like a spur of the moment decision because he was very flat and snatched at it, much to the anger of Malzieu who felt he was in space and clearly fancied his chances of a fourth try against the out of sorts Shane Horgan.
With time up, Clermont were again camped on the 22 and bang in front of the posts. James dropped deep. Then inexplicably, the forwards decided to rumble again which only gave the opportunity to the defence to push them a little wide of the centre of the park.
James accordingly adjusted his footing but not his sights and his ensuing kick sailed wide.
“Ah the poor fecker!” someone shouted in sympathy, in between howls of delight and relief.
A wonderful match, but Leinster know they got out of jail.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- Clermont, Heineken Cup, Leinster, Rugby Union
April 12th 2010 @ 7:12am
Parisien said | April 12th 2010 @ 7:12am | Report comment
Thanks for the article.
The bit about pig swill is harsh but perhaps not undeserved for this match. Clermont are the specialists at losing big matches (is it eight or nine lost french finals to date? I was at the one about seven years ago lost to Toulouse – couldn’t win despite the presence of in form Magne, Rougerie etc – Clermond really are unlucky, and their supporters are used to heartbreak).
Sexton, O’Driscoll and Heaslip were indeed wonderful for Leinster, as was Malzieu for Clermond, but it wasn’t all Brock’s fault – he was so clearly out of form, why did they keep going to him? He does great during the season but fails in the big ones.
Well next up is Toulouse, proven big match performers, and Skrela is on song with his kicking (perhaps ominously for the SF, this is not always the case…). An amazing weekend of rugby.
April 12th 2010 @ 5:31pm
el_Pajovic said | April 12th 2010 @ 5:31pm | Report comment
Leinster, playing in their seventh European Cup quarter-final in nine years are starting to grind out the kind of results that Leicester and Munster have been for years, teams arrive full of gusto and confidence of an upset on the quarter finals only to depart wondering what happened, having acquitted themselves well but somehow having lost. The quarter finals which, may I add are consistently the best club rugby on show in the planet today. 4 Awesome games try fests all sides.
Was fascinating seeing Ospreys with 8 Lions and 2 All Blacks chuck away another quarter final. They have such a glitering squad, but in between all the white and shiney boots, crap tattoos,fancy hair styles and beauty products, the result seems to get left behind when things most matter.
Munster once again, showed Northampton that life is different at the business end of the tournament. O Gara and Wallace were impeccable. ROG’s kicking from hand was the best in town.
I reckon a Munster Toulouse final is on the cards now. Great stuff. Toulouse to edge it in Paris in front of 500,000 Munster fans?
Finally poor old Brock. Article a little harsh on him, but perhaps now we know why he slipped through the Wallaby net?
April 12th 2010 @ 7:05pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 12th 2010 @ 7:05pm | Report comment
As Sir Alex Ferguson has often said, you should never underestimate the importance of luck. The Ospreys had none, Leinster had bags of it, and Munster, meanwhile, had their favourite referee, Nigel Owens.
April 12th 2010 @ 8:01pm
pothale said | April 12th 2010 @ 8:01pm | Report comment
The English papers have been full of articles about that there’s no English team in the semi-finals for the first time since 2003. All of them quote Northampton coach Jim Mallinder saying it’s disappointing for England and is going to get worse before it gets better. The reasons stated are that Ireland focuses more on the European Cup than the Magners League – though that has undoubtedly changed this season and will again next season – and France has twice the salary cap as England.
Is this just exaggeration of the moment? France didn’t have any teams in the semis last year, and have come bouncing back. No doubt, it will happen to Ireland and they’ll do the same. Why so much gnashing of hair and tearing of teeth on English shores? I’m willing to bet Leicester, Northampton, Saracens, et will all be in the mix come the business end of the tournament next season and this will all be forgotten about.
April 13th 2010 @ 4:01am
Colin N said | April 13th 2010 @ 4:01am | Report comment
Because it’s the English press perhaps?
April 12th 2010 @ 8:35pm
Pajovic said | April 12th 2010 @ 8:35pm | Report comment
Nigel was looking quite dapper on Saturday. Saying that VC, you are the first person that has alluded to the referee as being a contributor to Northampton’s downfall. They were seond best.
April 12th 2010 @ 9:14pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 12th 2010 @ 9:14pm | Report comment
Pajovic, it was a one score game until Howlett scored at the end. Owens’ abysmal second half performance was worth at least one score to Munster, imo. Saints are doubtless too polite to moan, but I’m not. This sort of thing seems to happen a lot when Nigel referees Irish sides.
Pothale, it’s more than just a blip. The English sides are just as good as any others in Europe but they are asked to play the HC with one hand tied behind their backs. The French clubs spend twice as much on wages and the Irish provinces, as we know, only care about the HC. As Jim Mallinder said, he wasn’t able properly to focus on Munster until the week of the game. McGahan has probably been analysing Saints for weeks. The way Munster superbly exposed the Northampton defence suggested as much.
It’s just incredible that spivs like McCafferty are talking about expanding the GP to 14 teams. It’s quite clear that the Anglo-Welsh Cup needs to be ditched and the GP needs to be cut to 10 teams with no relegation. Merge Newcastle, Leeds and Sale into some sort of unified Northern club. None of them deserves a spot on their own merits.
April 12th 2010 @ 9:36pm
pothale said | April 12th 2010 @ 9:36pm | Report comment
VC – I would take Mallinder’s comment with a grain of salt. A coach who has just been handed a harsh lesson on the performance required at this stage of the Cup, is inevitably going to seek some solace in the circumstances surrounding the game. I rate Mallinder very highly, but I simply don’t buy the notion that he only started to focus on the game last week.
Equally, Munster would have had one eye on their game with Leinster last week, as much as the game this week. The argument that Irish teams solely focus on the H Cup is a bit of a canard. A few Magners’ teams are finding out this season about having to compete for the playoffs – it has helped enormously in making the league more competitive. As I’ve said before, the league would also benefit from bringing in Top 6/7 qualification places regardless of country.
World Cup player management schedules have been largely deciding when IRFU players play this season, not the Magners or H Cup – as evidenced by some of the more acidic comments from Ulster, Munster and Leinster coaches this season towards Mr Kidney & Co.
I would agree and have been a proponent of ditching the LV cup – complete waste of time- though Welsh teams seem to hanker after it more for some reason. No relegation? Is this not a last bastion of the proper English league which has held its own against all the changes worldwide? I don’t buy the relegation fight as a major issue for the top clubs. Bath and Sale have both regressed for additional reasons besides performance. But undoubtedly, a consolidation of sorts for the Premiership would do wonders for the clubs, and for the national team.
April 12th 2010 @ 9:51pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 12th 2010 @ 9:51pm | Report comment
Mallinder’s not the type to look for excuses. He’s simply stating facts. The GP is infinitely more competitive and demanding than the ML. Munster might have had “one eye” on Leinster but they also very much had one eye on Saints. If Saints played Leicester the week before an HC game, both eyes would be on the Tigers.
Of course relegation is an issue for the top clubs. Northampton themselves were relegated three seasons ago! In fact, I think the only team who haven’t diced with relegation in recent years is Leicester. The salary cap creates a level playing field, and a level playing field means that no one is safe. Every team in the GP is forced to devote itself first and foremost to domestic rugby. The HC becomes a luxury.
Volume of rugby in England is a massive problem. I’d love to know the respective games played for, say, Juandre Kruger versus Donncha O’Callaghan. I suspect that Kruger has played about 10 games more than O’Callaghan this season. It all adds up.
All things considered, I think it’s fair to say that Munster would not have half the HC record they do if they played in the GP.
April 12th 2010 @ 10:31pm
el_Pajovic said | April 12th 2010 @ 10:31pm | Report comment
Hmmm, The Top 14 lasts even longer than the GP, and the argument in France is that weekly ‘high intensity’ clashes prepare players better for top-level Heineken games than sitting on their arses. French sides seem to have managed this year. Also ML sides have (in general), salary resources lower than those available to teams in the GP. Swings and roundabouts.
GP sides seem to have become much less dynamic at the breakdown and players generally struggle with the intensity that international and HC rugby produce. This is the trend now for a while now. I also sometimes wonder of the playoff system in the GP hasn’t somehow affected players’ attitudes. Teams like Northampton, Leicester etc know they can lose some games and still win the league through the play offs. But then again, that would also be true for the ML. Do that at home in the HC and you’re in trouble. Then again, this would ring true for the ML so such a reason must be discarded by the GP cheerleaders.
The Magner’s League exists as it does to overcome the enormous disadvantages regarding playing resources and commercial potential that exist outside of England and France in the NH. It addresses these disadvantages, and it has helped to improve the standards of play in Celtic countries. It is a bit rich to be told that these disadvantages are actually advantages – that central contracts are great even though they only exist because ML sides for the most part would be uncompetitive without central funding. Celtic nations have less players, much fewer, accordingly, teams need to protect them. Saying that, Ireland’s record of producing players means that regardless of the team being fielded in the ML, their teams are generally packed full of emerging and established Irish players. Connacht have done very well this year with the lowest salary pot in the ML, some 50% or so of the amount to the other Irish provinces, yes they are botton of the ML, but they are in the Amlin Challenege Cup semi final with the best record in the competition this year. In the ML, they must play their best team as often as possible due to the fact that their first team, really is their only team. They beat Bourgoin without 7 first choice players.
In addition, the relatively cotton wool clad Super 14 has a much shorter season and gives players much more time to recovered and to develop in the off season, yet people don’t usually seem to cite this as an advantage for SH sides? I’m glad that they don’t because this would merely be whinging.
It all boils down to this, what do players wish to win more? The HC. Therefore, it gets priority in places that can prioritise. Which teams have world class players at their disposal? France? yes, Wales, yes, Ireland yes, England, ermm not really. Perhaps that too could be a factor?
As for Munster’s record. Perhaps that all of their home grown players, i.e. usually 11-12 of their starting 15 come from Munster and are produced by Munster might mean that loyalties, team spirit and tradition have something to do with it. Or are such factors irrelevant in the modern game?
April 12th 2010 @ 10:44pm
el_Pajovic said | April 12th 2010 @ 10:44pm | Report comment
Oh yeah, I suggest that the Anglo-Welsh Cup be ditched. What’s the point of it? Maybe if GP teams didn’t have to particpate in such ham and egg tournaments, it would be to their advantage?
Does any player REALLY care about winning this? The Celtic Cup was ditched seasons ago and rightly so.
April 13th 2010 @ 6:24am
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 6:24am | Report comment
Colin N: Yes in 2006, it was 3,6 mill. As I stated. In 2009 their operaating budget was 5.5. Let me go have a look. Here goes for 2009:
‘Montauban, Munster’s opponents in the pool stages of the Heineken Cup have an annual operating budget of €9.5 million. Munster’s is said to be close to €5.5 million this season.
One report this week suggested that French clubs were willing to offer Springboks centre Jean de Villiers a whopping €500,000 a year to lure him away from South Africa.
Munster are unlikely to get involved in a bidding war of that magnitude.
But money isn’t everything for today’s top professional rugby players.
Moving to play for the two-time Heineken Cup champions is an attractive proposition.
The club has ambition, boasts a terrific work ethic and sense of comraderie.
Players quickly buy into that ethos.’
Source: http://limerickleader-thelockerroom.blogspot.com/2009/05/across-gain-line-with-colm-kinsella.html
Munster is a real rugby team. Players’ like that. It’s nice to work in a non-mercenary environment unlike that of the GP I would imagine (mostly, c’mon be honest).
As for ‘probably yes…….’ please do better than that. I have given you footnotes/links to my facts. I would be most grateful if you would do the same. The fact is, is that the 4m sterling cap is already more than any Irish team could fork out on salaries for players. Munster and Leinster chose their foreign signing carefully and usually have only one or two ‘marquee’ SH signings. The rest of he squad is all home grown and then another handful of foreign ‘cheaper’ imports.
April 12th 2010 @ 10:48pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 12th 2010 @ 10:48pm | Report comment
Nonsense. The French teams spend about twice as much as the English on wages. They are able to rotate players in a way the GP clubs can’t. To compete in the HC, you need either: a) The ability to focus primarily on the HC; or b) Wonga. The Celts have (a), the French have (b), the English have neither.
Your point about dynamism confuses cause and effect. The English clubs look less dynamic at the breakdown for precisely the reasons I mention: they are all fagged from bashing each other in the GP week in and week out. The Irish players can be taken out of the firing line as and when the coaches deem necessary. Jim Mallinder doesn’t have that luxury.
Regarding the southern hemisphere structure, where have you been for the past five years? It’s constantly cited as a contributing factor to their success. It’s about as perfect a calendar as one could hope to fashion. It’s no coincidence that they perform less well when the playing field is level, i.e. at World Cups.
Your penultimate point is wrong again. The English and French would actually rather win their domestic leagues than the HC. In fact, the English did a survey which found that something like 90% of fans would rather win the GP. Look at the massive difference in the numbers of travelling Leicester fans between the GP final and the HC final last year. It’s only the Irish who place this overwhelming focus on the HC – and that because they know it’s the best method they have of putting themselves on the map rather than languishing in obscurity on the periphery.
Your last point, however, is fair enough. Munster’s esprit de corps is a huge factor in their success. One should note, however, that Ireland was fortunate indeed to have a ready-made provincial structure with in-built loyalties. If only the Welsh were so lucky.
April 12th 2010 @ 11:15pm
el_Pajovic said | April 12th 2010 @ 11:15pm | Report comment
Okay, I can’t speak for the GP, but, in France where opinions are mixed, the league and HC are essentially on a similar level respect wise amongst the better sides. France’s love of playing the English and the Welsh etc in Europe is not to be underestimated. Biarritz, where I lived for 8 years as a kid, has an emphasis on HC rugby so, I reject your argument on the French point, although, I do admit that the Irish have more of an emphasis on this for sure. This doesnt mean that the French are any less motivated than other HC participating sides. All of the top sides have serious HC aspirations, but for the lesser French sides, survival is key, therefore, they focus on the Top 14.
‘it’s the best method they have of putting themselves on the map rather languishing in obscurity on the periphery’
Petulant remark, but humourous non the less. They (the Irish) have better players VC. That’s why they beat your lads more often than not. ML teams won 13 of the 20 ML GP collisions this year too. It’s not all down to cotton wool.
At the end of the day, the decision makers at the RFU dropped the ball when it came to the crunch of professionalism. The French have the capital and the players, the Irish had the intellegence and good fortune to (a) recognise the value of the provincial system and (b) insist that the best players could ply their trade on Irish shores. Meanwhile the deluded ‘old money’ blazers, berift of creativity and foresight and armed with a smug sense of innate entitlement insisted that (a) central contracts were a waste of time, (b) their system was the best and (c) that they had a plethora of players that would come through the ranks.
As for your cause and effect arguement, this is too simple, last year the Tigers decided to counter-ruck everything and that won them the GP and dragged them to the final of the H-Cup, it was not a special tigers team but the amount of decent ball they won made even the tigers backs look dynamic.
As for the SH comment, I wished to reference this in a subtle manner as I do not wish to appear to criticise my Southern Hemisphere friends for the fact that they were clever enough to install a system like that in use chez les Celtic nations that (a) focuses on international development and (b) gives players more of a rest. It’s about recognising your resources and acting accordingly.
April 13th 2010 @ 4:17am
Colin N said | April 13th 2010 @ 4:17am | Report comment
“As for your cause and effect arguement, this is too simple, last year the Tigers decided to counter-ruck everything and that won them the GP and dragged them to the final of the H-Cup, it was not a special tigers team but the amount of decent ball they won made even the tigers backs look dynamic.”
I’m not the biggest fan of Leicester, but they have played some excellent rugby under Richard Cockerill. They certainly won the GP final by playing a forward-orientated game and didn’t play particularly well. However, they completely dominated Cardiff for 70 minutes last season in the HC semi, played consistantly good rugby from December onwards (after Meyer left)
“Also ML sides have (in general), salary resources lower than those available to teams in the GP.”
Yes, in general meaning the likes of Ulster, Connacht, Scarlets, Dragons etc. Munster, Leinster and the Ospreys will have more resources than GP clubs. And rather coincidently, who were the ML sides in the quarter-finals?
April 13th 2010 @ 5:35am
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 5:35am | Report comment
Colin N: ‘Yes, in general meaning the likes of Ulster, Connacht, Scarlets, Dragons etc. Munster, Leinster and the Ospreys will have more resources than GP clubs. And rather coincidently, who were the ML sides in the quarter-finals?
Nice try Colin N. But, the truth is somewhat different.
You’re telling that Leicester, Harlequins, Saracens, Northampton, Gloucester etc have less to spend than the Irish teams? Wrong!
Here’s an interesting article that was penned just before the HC final in 2006. Here is how much success cost Munster in 2006:
http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/32m-a-small-price-to-pay-for-munster-98623.html
‘While not enriched to the same munificent degree as the French giants, Munster have still managed to punch above their weight on the European stage, a tribute to their innate competitiveness and the quaint, on this occasion accurate, cliche that money doesn’t necessarily buy success’.
Bear in mind that ‘operating budget pays everything. Not just the players, it pays for cleaners, grounds men, overheads such as rent, electricity,staff, coaches, etc.
Most of the players in Ireland are not in the same wage bracket as O’Driscoll or Paul O’Connell and, elite internationals aside, would earn €50,000 to €60,000 a year. Connacht’s budget is half that again.
Their ( Munster)whole ‘operating budget last year was 5.5 million EURO. Not GBP. Once again, this pays everything. All overheads. Not just players salaries. Connacht, with about 2.7 million Euro (operating budget) to ‘throw around’ are in the Amlin Semi finals. Not bad.
How does that compare to the GP\s top sides?
April 13th 2010 @ 6:13am
Colin N said | April 13th 2010 @ 6:13am | Report comment
“You’re telling that Leicester, Harlequins, Saracens, Northampton, Gloucester etc have less to spend than the Irish teams? Wrong!”
Probably, yes. If so, they would have been the ones signing Jean De Villiers and not Munster. Munster also offered more money for Luke McAlister before he moved to Sale.
“Their ( Munster)whole ‘operating budget last year was 5.5 million EURO.”
Have you got a link to that?
That article was from 2006.
April 13th 2010 @ 5:10pm
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 5:10pm | Report comment
I posted this above in the incorrect slot, so I think Colin N failed to see it:
Colin N: Yes in 2006, it was 3,6 mill. As I stated. In 2009 their operaating budget was 5.5. Let me go have a look. Here goes for 2009:
‘Montauban, Munster’s opponents in the pool stages of the Heineken Cup have an annual operating budget of €9.5 million. Munster’s is said to be close to €5.5 million this season.
One report this week suggested that French clubs were willing to offer Springboks centre Jean de Villiers a whopping €500,000 a year to lure him away from South Africa.
Munster are unlikely to get involved in a bidding war of that magnitude.
But money isn’t everything for today’s top professional rugby players.
Moving to play for the two-time Heineken Cup champions is an attractive proposition.
The club has ambition, boasts a terrific work ethic and sense of comraderie.
Players quickly buy into that ethos.’
Source: http://limerickleader-thelockerroom.blogspot.com/2009/05/across-gain-line-with-colm-kinsella.html
Munster is a real rugby team. Players’ like that. It’s nice to work in a non-mercenary environment unlike that of the GP I would imagine (mostly, c’mon be honest).
As for ‘probably yes…….’ please do better than that. I have given you footnotes/links to my facts. I would be most grateful if you would do the same. The fact is, is that the 4m sterling cap is already more than any Irish team could fork out on salaries for players. Munster and Leinster chose their foreign signing carefully and usually have only one or two ‘marquee’ SH signings. The rest of he squad is all home grown and then another handful of foreign ‘cheaper’ imports.
Colin RSVP!
April 13th 2010 @ 9:13pm
Colin N said | April 13th 2010 @ 9:13pm | Report comment
Fair enough, but the operating budget doesn’t quite hold out for me, logically. I’m guessing that most clubs in Football’s league one have an operating budget (as you call it) similar or higher than Munster’s (excluding Leeds and Norwich) and I’m pretty sure the football club I support (Macclesfield Town), have an operating budget similar to Connacht’s – this despite paying less on wages, seemingly.
Northampton apparently pays out around 5.5m on salaries (includng staff wages), yet you are surely not telling me that the likes of Wallace, O’Gara, Mafi, Warwick, Quinlan, De Villiers (as we know) aren’t on hefty salaries? It may not be as much as some GP players, but it’s certainly going to be a lot more than the likes of Joe Ansbro, Chris Mayor, Christian Day are on.
What would be more interesting would be to see a complete breakdown of their finances. You know an operating budget doesn’t just mean the amount of money they have available but simply a breakdown of their income and expenses?
An operating budget doesn’t take into account investments – De Villiers may well have been paid for by a sponsor.
April 13th 2010 @ 10:22pm
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 10:22pm | Report comment
Colin N, believe me I understand accounts.
Lower league English soccer has nothing to do with this. An operating budget is a detailed projection of all estimated income and expenses based on forecasted sales revenue during a given period (usually one year). It generally consists of several sub-budgets, most important one being the sales budget which is prepared first, following this all out goings can be assessed, i.e. salaries, etc. This would take into account sponsorship (Toyota) etc. That total budget was 5.5 last year.
Don’t forget that most of their squad are home grown players. Something that is rare in such abundance in GP sides. Also, irish players are more likely to stay in ireland as that is where they are most marketable. Sponsors provide Irish stars with their own personal sponsorship as they are huge names in ireland. Move to the UK or France, then your are lesser known and therefore less marketable therefore u get less sponsorship So…….they stay in ireland.
I think you need to know when someone has perhaps proven their point. There are few people who are more often in the wrong than those who cannot endure to be so.
April 13th 2010 @ 10:33pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 13th 2010 @ 10:33pm | Report comment
Pajovic, don’t forget the special tax arrangements that Irish players enjoy. Most of the big names would probably be playing in France but for that. I’m sure the GP wishes HM Treasury was so generous.
(Actually, on that point, do you agree with this in principle? Should well-paid rugby players receive a tax break whilst the Irish economy is in turmoil?)
April 13th 2010 @ 10:45pm
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 10:45pm | Report comment
Fair point VC, they can claim back a percentage of tax paid on their ten most ‘lucrative’ seasons (once they have retired). This goes for foreign players too and is an advantage for sure.
I think that it is a good idea. A similar scheme is in place for musicians. The vast majoyiry of whm dont have two pence to rub together.
In my opinion, I think that for Ireland retaining their best players means that the interest is retained in the game. Kids like winners. Kids like seeing their winners in the flesh without having to fly to the Nou Camp or Old Trafford to see them. In addition, parents like not having to shell out for such visits, instead, grab a few magners tickets on the cheap and bring all the kids along. Everyone wins, including the Irish provence ususally. Kids can relate to their own Irish heroes that live on their streets, or live in their cities. Success in obtaining a career is more tangible than that of a soccer star. Accordingly, this drives a hell of a lot of irish kids to play rugby. This wasn’t the case 10-15 years ago. its popularity has exploded. Soccer is at risk of being left behind. Gaelic Footie and Hurling are always popular, but hurling is suffering in Limerick if the accounts I hear are true. Playing for smaller clubs like Galwegians or Garryowen, kids can see players that used to train on the same pitches, now having made the step up to provential level. Talented junior grade kids play in the under age provential system. This makes hard work an ambition seem worthwhile and achievable, it also makes success feel within touching distance.
So, yes, tax breaks for rugger stars are a good idea. Keeps the interest in the game at the higest possible levels.
April 13th 2010 @ 10:57pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 13th 2010 @ 10:57pm | Report comment
Interesting. Better hope they keep winning then. People might not be so keen to subsidise a bunch of losers!
April 13th 2010 @ 11:49pm
Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 11:49pm | Report comment
That’s exactly why they don’t have that system in the GP I suspect.
April 14th 2010 @ 12:04am
Colin N said | April 14th 2010 @ 12:04am | Report comment
fair enough.
April 15th 2010 @ 11:52am
pothale said | April 15th 2010 @ 11:52am | Report comment
Spot on in your calculation, VC. Kruger has been an exceptional player this season having missed only three games out of 31 so far. He’s clocked up 2,201 minutes of play.
O’Callaghan the elder in contrast has played in a lot less league games, same number of H Cup games, no LV cup games, but has played test matches. And he was injured for a number of weeks, plus he got a delayed return because of Lions tour and didn’t start until the 4th match of the ML rounds. He’s clocked up 1,446 minutes of play, albeit about 480 of that at test level.
Dylan Hartley has clocked up nearly 1,800 minutes, between league, LV, Heineken and test matches.
April 12th 2010 @ 9:56pm
Fitzer said | April 12th 2010 @ 9:56pm | Report comment
Leinster weren’t lucky they were unlucky not to be awarded the try on the line that wasn’t given and not to get a penalty try for the deliberate knock down.
Clermont was lucky that Horgan was playing, he had a howler, probably his poorest game for Leinster and hence the hat trick for Malzieu.
Without playing well Leinster managed to get another win, that is 3 in a row won by less than 3 point, now that’s what should be lauded “their sheer bloody mindedness”.
Leinster will prefer being the underdogs to Toulouse though and will have to keep it tight to stop the Toulouse Swagger.
April 12th 2010 @ 10:51pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 12th 2010 @ 10:51pm | Report comment
Leinster were lucky that Brock James missed more kicks in one match than he probably has all season. They should have lost by 15 points.
April 12th 2010 @ 11:17pm
el_Pajovic said | April 12th 2010 @ 11:17pm | Report comment
I suppose they would be slogging it out (and losing) to the likes of Worcester and Leeds if they were in the GP?
April 12th 2010 @ 11:33pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 12th 2010 @ 11:33pm | Report comment
Leinster would die from shock if they had to slog it out in the GP each week.
P.S. The fact they couldn’t beat London Irish in two attempts this season, lost badly at Wasps last season, and scraped past Quins in the QFs, suggests to me they’d be doing well to finish in the Top Half.
April 13th 2010 @ 12:06am
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 12:06am | Report comment
GP, no, France Yes.
April 12th 2010 @ 11:30pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 12th 2010 @ 11:30pm | Report comment
You have a remarkable knack of being about 180 degrees wrong on everything, Pajovic. First, it’s common knowledge that the French clubs place the Top 14 first, second and third in their priorities. Perhaps the likes of Toulouse have a genuine HC tradition, but for the likes of Perpignan, Bourgoin, Brive & Co, the HC is very much a second order priority. Even Clermont fielded a second string team at Munster last year.
You say my point was “humorous” but if you’re honest with yourself, you’ll admit it’s spot on. The French have their own league, the English have their own league, what do the Celts have? A ragtag league which none of them really care about. What do the Celts actually care about? Proving themselves to the English. That’s why the Welsh clubs are desperate for cross-border games against the English, and it’s why the Irish care so much about doing well in the HC.
Your comments about the RFU are unfair for the simple reason that England and France are unique in having robust, privately funded clubs with their own power base. It’s easy to scoff at “old blazers” but the IRFU didn’t have to confront multi-millionaire club owners on the ego trip of a lifetime. The RFU cares too much about the bottom line but then that is equally true of the clubs.
Interesting point about Leicester. I wonder whether they would still have lost narrowly last year if they hadn’t had to biff their way past London Irish in the GP final a week earlier? Leinster, as I recall, had their pipe and slippers on.
As for having the nous to develop a good system – absolutely, that’s what I’ve spent the entire thread trying to convince you of. It is this HC favourable system rather than silly assertions about “we have better players than you” that explains Ireland’s success in the tournament.
April 12th 2010 @ 11:43pm
Fitzer said | April 12th 2010 @ 11:43pm | Report comment
Ireland respects their prize assets and have setup a structure that prevents mercenaries and foster teamwork. The English and French flog their players. leading to players playing for money and not for the team.
April 12th 2010 @ 11:53pm
Viscount Crouchback said | April 12th 2010 @ 11:53pm | Report comment
Precisely. Couldn’t have put it better.
April 13th 2010 @ 12:13am
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 12:13am | Report comment
I too agree with this, but still I don’t think that it should be used as a stick to beat the Irish with everytime they go and win something.
April 13th 2010 @ 12:05am
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 12:05am | Report comment
It would appear that the Irish aren’t so bothered about the English these days, they win almost every year now, so, IMO the emphasis is on the French these days. Reading Gerry Thornley, George Hook et al, that’s definitley the feeling I get. As for the Scots and the Welsh, they feel undervalued as peripheral regions in the UK, hence their emphasis on beating England. Besides, the English fans are always a friendly bunch, be it a HC game I atttend in France or an International in Paris, London or Dublin. Yes, the French want to beat the English, but Irish fans in my opinion, generally hate losing to the Welsh more than anyone else.
As for your French HC point, many teams may put an emphasis on the Top 14, but the powerhouses really care about the HC too. The likes of L’equipe’s Alain Penaud and Bertrand Lagacherie generally don’t go scrambling for excuses when French teams lose. Instead of moaning, they generally seek the positives in other structures. The British media almost criticises the ML for having a decent structure in place.
‘It is this HC favourable system rather than silly assertions about “we have better players than you” that explains Ireland’s success in the tournament’.
The fact that ML sides rest players give a chance for the younger players to get a game and to develop as players, then when the time comes, in many instances, the ML team will look at youth, as opposed to shelling out for another Antipodian or South Sea Islander every time. This is why Ireland has significantly more world class players than England.
Either develop a system that works,stop compalining, or leave the HC to teams that don’t make excuses. Finally being 180 degrees from your point of view isn’t necessarily such a bad thing.
April 13th 2010 @ 12:25am
Viscount Crouchback said | April 13th 2010 @ 12:25am | Report comment
Come on, Pajovic, that’s laughable. The Irish hate losing to the Welsh the most? Yeah. Sure. Must be the 800 years of Welsh oppression, eh? Come on, old bean, there’s no shame in admitting the obvious.
I don’t know where you get this idea that the British media is criticising the ML. No one is criticising the ML. In fact, the British media (no doubt aware of how thin skinned the Irish can be) generally goes out of its way to be positive about Irish rugby. The amount of guff on the BBC about Croke Park would have made An Phoblacht blush.
Finally, if, as you suggest, the English did “leave the HC”, then there wouldn’t be an HC.
April 13th 2010 @ 12:58am
Dublin Dave said | April 13th 2010 @ 12:58am | Report comment
He’s right VC. For people of a certain age, eg myself, Wales were the bad guys of our child hood and the team we most wanted to win against, mainly because for 10 years we couldn’t.
The first season of international rugby I remember watching was 1969. In that year, ireland went to Cardiff looking for the Triple Crown/Grand Slam and got nothing but a thick ear. Several thick ears, in fact. The Welsh put in the fist and boot early and ran away with the match and the championship. There are some old men round these parts who have never forgiven them for that.
And your jibe about 700 years of Welsh oppression is truer than you might think. The original invasion of Ireland by the Normans in the 12th century, under the authority of the then King of England, was undertaken by Norman barons who had settled in Wales. They brought with them a propagandist chronicler who painted the native Irish as an unwashed barbaric rabble in sore need of civilisation by the invaders. He was sort of like an “embedded journalist” of today. He was known as Geraldus Cambrensis, which translates directly from Latin into Gerald of Wales.
They’ve a lot to answer for.
April 13th 2010 @ 1:03am
Viscount Crouchback said | April 13th 2010 @ 1:03am | Report comment
Haha. Okay then.
April 13th 2010 @ 12:40am
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 12:40am | Report comment
Your last point is true, I said that in a moment of petulance and, I wholeheartedly agree with your view. Don’t mention that to fans of Simon Mason and Ulster Rugby though.
Honestly though, in my experiences living in Ireland, the Irish, although they do loving winning against the English, tend to have a closer rivalry. Back in the 80′s and 90′s when the Irish and Welsh rarely won againt the ‘old foe’ they always fancied a punt against each other. Hence the ding-dong record that they have against each other. Losing to Wales was always a sickener, the Scots usually had a better team and there was no Italy to shield the worst home nation from a wooden spoon spanking. Accordingly, the animosity between the Welsh and Irish fans grew. Ireland’s fans disliking the Welsh harping on about the good old days and the Welsh disliking the Irish due to the fact that they had they audacity to think that they could dine at the same table as them. In reality, they were just two rubbish teams propping up the 5 Nations. In later years, as both teams’ fortunes changed the irish having had so many close calls with 6 nations sucess in the last ten years were guiled to see the Welsh pick up a few grand slams whilst they, despite an impressively consitent decade, only had a few shallow triple crowns to crow about up until least year.
As for the English media, they are slightly one eyed if you ask me. Still, they have papers to sell to a lot more englishmen than to irishmen so fair enough.
April 13th 2010 @ 12:49am
Viscount Crouchback said | April 13th 2010 @ 12:49am | Report comment
Indeed, old bean. Ulster’s triumph is rather forgotten nowadays. As for the English media, I think every nation’s press looks one-eyed to foreigners. That is certainly true of some of the comical stuff one reads from the likes of Neil Francis and occasionally Hugh Farrelly in the Irish press. The English media is not so much one-eyed as irredeemably facile.
April 13th 2010 @ 1:12am
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 1:12am | Report comment
Francis is essentially a ‘shock jock’ of rugby reporting, although I did enjoy his article ‘Luck of the Drop’ this week. Work a cheeky read whilst your waiting for the kettle to boil. He is still an arrogant and irritating man though. The RTE pundit Hook regularly slaughters the Irish team in his articles and is as critical as man of his home nation as one could possibly hope to find in world rugby. He’s a decent skin too and always has a few amusing anecdotes and yarns interwoven with his maych reports or opinions. Him, Tom McGuirk (the guy that asks the obvious questions that uninformed sections of the public would like to ask), Pope and O Shea are always excellent analysts due to their differing opinions and the banter they provide. Saying that, a lot of what I read on the Irish domestic front can be eyed for sure.
Positive journalism though is always a joy, have you read Bob Casey’s weekly column in the Irish Times? In addition, Liam Toland writes an excellent piece each week in that paper too, he really knows his rugby inside out and always has an interesting observation or two that stokes ones thoughts. David Flatman in the (UK) Independent always writes an enjoyable piece too, with his bit on Powell being a recently amusing article one that springs to mind.
As for the English media being irredeemably facile, well, why do you see as being objective and who are less than objective?
I can have a little look for myself and maybe, I might change my mind?
April 13th 2010 @ 1:28am
el_Pajovic said | April 13th 2010 @ 1:28am | Report comment
VC – Typo correction from my above post: ‘As for the English media being irredeemably facile, well, who do you see as being objective and who are less than objective?
Should make more sense now!
April 13th 2010 @ 1:42am
Viscount Crouchback said | April 13th 2010 @ 1:42am | Report comment
I’ve come across the RTE panellists a few times. Hook’s a super old fellow. O’Shea speaks well. McGurk is just awful – if a BBC presenter carried on like that, he would be rightly banned from broadcasting. Toland’s pieces are interesting but somewhat slapdash. Casey is interesting. Hugh Farrelly’s modus operandi is growing rather tired – any English opponents are portrayed to be arrogant and presumptuous, e.g. Northampton for having the temerity to suggest they weren’t going to roll over and die at Thomond, or the other silly one this season was that apparently all of England expected a Grand Slam this year when, in fact, any oaf with an internet connexion could have told Farrelly that all of England was crucifying the team.
I think the English media are very quick to praise foreign teams. In fact, often I think they overdo it. The English are so used to having Celts and foreigners among them that they sometimes go out of their way to seem fair. John Inverdale, for instance, knows full well that if he seems too Anglocentric, thousands of angry Celts will email the BBC and complain. It’s a form of discipline that, say, Tom McGurk doesn’t quite have to worry about. Other nations tend to be rather more insular and perhaps, because few foreigners have access to their media, they believe themselves to be unbiased when in fact they aren’t.
As I see it, the great problem of the English rugby media is that very few journalists actually understand the game. Instead, they repeat the same tired old mantras ad nauseam. Thus, for Stuart Barnes the problem is always that England aren’t ambitious enough. For Stephen Jones, the problem is always that England aren’t gnarly and big enough. Other journalists just tend to echo the latest popular line. There’s no real effort to do what, say, Gerry Thornley does and actually dig under the surface a little. The English media prefers a simple narrative. Thus Johnno is the Saviour. No, actually, Johnno is a calamity. Etc. The only two chaps I find consistently excellent are Paul Rees of the Guardian and David Hands of the Times. I certainly think the English could do with a better written version of Toland. Will Greenwood is about halfway there, but he prefers to write about players who’ve caught his eye rather than anything too detailed.