This game was a classic case of “poor enough performance, decent result” when you look at it clearly. Looking at a result like this clearly is important and by “clearly” I mean free of the kind of copium that gives you context poisoning and prevents you from seeing things clearly. I’ve been guilty of that in the past, I think. I try to assess my own analysis and writing as intensely as I do players and games and I asked myself this off-season – was I a little too kind last season? Was I suffering from context poisoning? Was I so busy looking at the wood that I ran head first into a tree? I think maybe I did, at times anyway, and I was absolutely defensive when it came to Munster’s performances on social media. That bled into some of my writing and it probably shouldn’t have.

Munster were in year 3 of Larkham and Van Graan’s set-up. We should have been a pure illustration of their vision at that stage and I thought that for some reason – injuries, catch-22s, bad luck – we weren’t.

But we were.

We were the side we were built to be at that stage, it’s just that the side we had become didn’t really have a visible on-field identity. Things had gotten stale. When you look at our metrics last season, we were middle of the road in absolutely everything.

Sure, we scored the third highest amount of tries, had the second lowest amount of tries conceded in the league and fourth-best defence by points conceded but we somehow managed to underperform that metric by finishing 6th. Offensively, we were in the bottom half of the table when it came to metres gained, clean breaks and defenders beat. From a kicking perspective, we had no set strategy that we could point to as a constant. We were ranked eighth in the league when it came to kicking volume, kicking metres and kicks retained. We weren’t a box-kicking team, we weren’t a long counter-transition team, and we shape-shifted every other week as required by the opposition.

We were a good defensive side in that we didn’t concede a tonne of tries or points but we weren’t even as big a turnover threat as you might have assumed – we were eight in the URC for turnovers won. We were a little bit of everything, some of the time, depending on who we were playing.

Ultimately, I think Munster didn’t have a strong on-field identity, we were often too passive and allowed games to happen to us, as opposed to dictating the game to the opposition. So, under the new coaching staff, a new on-field identity would have to be built. That takes time. Even Batman didn’t decide to become Batman on a Tuesday and was out beating up the Joker on Wednesday. He needed time.

So when I say that this losing bonus point defeat is better than it seems on the tin, please understand that I’m doing it free of emotion. What Munster are building – proactive, high-speed, possession rugby with a long, counter-transition style kicking game – is going to take months to nail down. It’s not going to be perfect inside the first game of the season, especially with a shortened preseason in the bank.

With that in mind, what is the biggest issue with a 3-3-1 attacking structure when it is fresh in the minds of the players implementing it?

Breakdown turnovers.

Poorly resourced breakdowns are the #1 side effect of a newly implemented 3-3-1 system because of the width, pace and “flatness” required of the forwards operating the pods that make up the bones of the structure. The flatter you are, the less margin for error there is on a pod hit-up.

Against a side as strong as this Cardiff selection, any inaccuracy will be punished. That’s especially true when you look at their back row and the presence of Rey Lee-Lo in midfield. If you’re too lateral with your passing structure off a set piece, you’ll leave an isolated wide ruck that your backs had better be able to resource on their own. If not – turnover, especially against this particular Cardiff selection.

Pass quality plays a part in this too and Munster’s was far from ideal throughout the game. Some of that came from Patterson’s occasionally erratic delivery, some of it came from sloppy handles under pressure and some of it came from Ben Healy’s growing habit of stepping and slinging to wider pods.

That habit of slinging wide passes without committing inside defenders isn’t unique to Healy – Leinster’s Ross Byrne has the same issue – and this game was, for me, further evidence on top of both preseason games that Healy will need a lot of work to fit in this attacking scheme. You can see the difference that Crowley’s pace made to our longer-range attacks in this clip. A higher quality attack is generated by better movement and high tempo from the primary handler – that is this system working. Not perfectly, mind. If Patterson takes a 45° angle off the previous ruck as opposed to a looping “L” he took following the ball, this is probably a try under the posts after Nash’s break.

But that will come, or should at least.

The three tries we conceded were all the kind of gnarly defensive errors that can easily be buffed out but that were super costly here. For me, Cardiff’s first try should have been a penalty to Munster for Cardiff not releasing after being held in the tackle but you just have to live with it because, well, we all know who the ref was.

That isn’t to say that there weren’t real issues with Munster’s performance – much of them continuations from the previous two friendlies – but for a Category B/C grade selection like this up against a side Cardiff would happily start in a Champions Cup game, a losing bonus point and a sniff at a win heading into the last 20 isn’t a catastrophe by any means.

So, yes, there’s context but actual learning and adaption onfield ahead of next weekend’s trip to Newport is badly needed. It’s a work in progress, for sure, but we need to see that work in progress too, at the same time.

***

Notable Players 

This was a below-average performance for the squad, despite the relative strength of the opposition.

Paddy Patterson was a ball of energy throughout and while there are absolutely issues with some of his decision-making and pass execution, his speed negates most of them, most of the time. He actually created some really high-quality attack for himself and others but his decision-making let him down at key times. Still pretty good stuff for a guy third in the depth chart.

I thought Jack Crowley looked way more system suitable when he came off the bench. He started challenging the Cardiff defence with his first possession and created workable space for others outside. With his threat at the pivot, opportunities to attack the shape outside became that little bit clearer.

You can see how Patterson and himself created opportunities with each other – force multiplying – and how that allowed Fekitoa and Frisch to start making plays into space.

Speaking of Malakai Fekitoa, I thought he grew into the game after a ropey start and I’ve no doubt that he’ll prove himself a top-class signing by the time he’s done with the province. Antoine Frisch looked lively and physical off the bench too and I think the understanding he and Fekitoa have shown already looks like a real plus.

Calvin Nash and Shane Daly looked really good in spells and just needed a little more possession. Overall, I thought they both had decent games.

All six front-row players did really well, for me, and I was particularly impressed with Salanoa’s physicality off the bench and how solid Keynan Knox looked in the scrum. Niall Scannell looked really good too and all the better for his summer tour of New Zealand.

Names	Rating
Josh Wycherley	★★★
Niall Scannell	★★★
Keynan Knox	★★★
Jean Kleyn	★★★
Fineen Wycherley	★★★
Jack O'Donoghue	★★
Alex Kendellen	★★
Jack O'Sullivan	★★★
Paddy Patterson	★★★
Ben Healy	★★
Liam Coombes	★★
Malakai Fekitoa	★★★
Chris Farrell	★
Calvin Nash	★★★
Shane Daly	★★★
Diarmuid Barron	★★★
Dave Kilcoyne	★★★
Roman Salanoa	★★★
Tom Ahern	N/A
John Hodnett	★★★
Neil Cronin	DNP
Jack Crowley	★★★
Antoine Frisch	★★★