Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread

Options
1…285286288290291…322

Comments

  • Options
    #8612
    Fishooks12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,318 ✭✭✭Fishooks12


    danthefan wrote: »
    But I mean that's a bit like saying if I was really fast and strong and could score tries I could have been a world class winger. I wasn't really fast and strong though, just like Buckley wasn't ever a scrummager.

    Did I state otherwise? He was a long way off the full package. But when he first came on the scene he looked like he could be a top player some day and no one could know he wouldn't sort out his scrummaging


  • Options
    #8613
    danthefan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭danthefan


    Otacon wrote: »
    His fitness and scrummaging ability were all within his control though. A blind man could see his potential, but potential is worth nothing if it isn't realised.

    I would strongly disagree that his scrummaging ability was in his control. Just like the fact I wasn't very fast or strong was not in my control. I just wasn't.


  • Options
    #8614
    Fishooks12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,318 ✭✭✭Fishooks12


    danthefan wrote: »
    I would strongly disagree that his scrummaging ability was in his control. Just like the fact I wasn't very fast or strong was not in my control. I just wasn't.

    It obviously wasn't because he never made it and neither of us are saying any different. So are you saying that when Buckley first came on the scene you knew his potential would amount to nothing because he didn't have it in his ability to ever rectify his problems at scrum time?


  • Options
    #8615
    Otacon
    Registered Users Posts: 6,721 ✭✭✭Otacon


    danthefan wrote: »
    I would strongly disagree that his scrummaging ability was in his control. Just like the fact I wasn't very fast or strong was not in my control. I just wasn't.

    Do you think that scrummaging can be thought? What attributes did he lack?


  • Options
    #8616
    totallegend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    Fishooks12 wrote: »
    Did I state otherwise? He was a long way off the full package. But when he first came on the scene he looked like he could be a top player some day and no one could know he wouldn't sort out his scrummaging

    When he first came on the scene, that's fair enough, everyone should get a chance to prove what they can do.

    What's at issue is Smal's comments in February 2010, when Buckley was 29, had been around for ages but couldn't displace a 36-year old Hayes either for Munster or Ireland, and how that reflects on Smal's judgement of players.

    Actually, what's at issue is not his comments because a coach should always back his players in public, the issue is that the coaching ticket bet the farm on Buckley making the step up when it was becoming increasingly obvious that he would not.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8617
    danthefan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭danthefan


    Otacon wrote: »
    Do you think that scrummaging can be thought? What attributes did he lack?

    The attribute to be able to scrummage competently, pretty obvious.
    Fishooks12 wrote: »
    It obviously wasn't because he never made it and neither of us are saying any different. So are you saying that when Buckley first came on the scene you knew his potential would amount to nothing because he didn't have it in his ability to ever rectify his problems at scrum time?

    So what are we talking about? Some completely hypothetical situation where Buckley might have been able to scrummage? Seems a bit pointless.

    I can't even remember when Buckley first came onto the scene. I know he was at Connacht for two seasons and didn't even get a game for them which says a fair bit. I certainly can remember him getting routinely destroyed at ML level and being fairly horrified when Kidney said things like "he is proven on both sides of the scrum". Also confirmed to me what a joke of a head coach Kidney is/was.


  • Options
    #8618
    ScissorPaperRock
    Registered Users Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭ScissorPaperRock


    danthefan wrote: »
    I would strongly disagree that his scrummaging ability was in his control. Just like the fact I wasn't very fast or strong was not in my control. I just wasn't.

    Those attributes are in your control, to the extent that the actions you take play a significant role in determining how fast and strong you are.

    It's a matter of semantics at the end of the day, but he didn't take the appropriate actions to become a prop of international class.


  • Options
    #8619
    Fishooks12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,318 ✭✭✭Fishooks12


    danthefan wrote: »
    The attribute to be able to scrummage competently, pretty obvious.

    You do realise people can develop attributes.

    You're making a mountain out of a molehill here. I only stated that Buckley was seen to have huge potential if he developed his scrummaging and fitness . But alas he never did. I didn't know at the time he wouldn't, but essentially you're saying you did, which I find hard to believe


  • Options
    #8620
    Tox56
    Registered Users Posts: 11,636 ✭✭✭✭Tox56


    ScissorPaperRoc wrote: »
    Those attributes are in your control, to the extent that the actions you take play a significant role in determining how fast and strong you are.

    It's a matter of semantics at the end of the day, but he didn't take the appropriate actions to become a prop of international class.

    This is the difference, it's not that he didn't try to take the "appropriate actions", he just didn't have the ability.


  • Options
    #8621
    Fishooks12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,318 ✭✭✭Fishooks12


    Tox56 wrote: »
    This is the difference, it's not that he didn't try to take the "appropriate actions", he just didn't have the ability.

    But the point is that none of us were to know that he couldn't develop the ability when he first came on the scene. He had potential, didn't fulfill it, that's what I said and I don't see what's wrong with that!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8622
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,031 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Buckley spent the majority of his time playing second row in school and during that time he even spent a good few months down in NZ being coached in that position. It was only when he left did someone have the bright idea to try to turn him into a TH. In another life he could have been developed into a TH enforcer style lock and he could have been a monster (presuming his side had an athletic enough backrow to compensate for him not really being an option in the lineout).


  • Options
    #8623
    JF100
    Registered Users Posts: 81 ✭✭JF100


    We digress...
    Mr Buckley is earning a crust at Saracens & good luck to the man...

    Question: how good as an "Offensive" Coach is Mr Les Kiss?


  • Options
    #8624
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    JF100 wrote: »
    We digress...
    Mr Buckley is earning a crust at Saracens & good luck to the man...

    Question: how good as an "Offensive" Coach is Mr Les Kiss?

    The result is in the pudding. A sloppy, non-offensive pudding.


  • Options
    #8625
    Former Coach
    Registered Users Posts: 449 ✭✭Former Coach


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Speaking of which what do people make of Smal given that he has publicly backed both Buckley and now Archer as being potential international THs? Given the evidence we've seen so far neither are anywhere near it. How badly does this reflect in him and his judgement?
    Didn't hear or read the quote, but I'd find it very strange for him to refer to Buckley and tight-head in the same sentence. Buckley is an out-and-out loose-head.


  • Options
    #8626
    danthefan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭danthefan


    Former Coach wrote: »
    Didn't hear or read the quote, but I'd find it very strange for him to refer to Buckley and tight-head in the same sentence. Buckley is an out-and-out loose-head.

    Tony Buckley? No he isn't and he absolutely never was.


  • Options
    #8627
    Risteard
    Registered Users Posts: 2,698 ✭✭✭Risteard


    Former Coach wrote: »
    Didn't hear or read the quote, but I'd find it very strange for him to refer to Buckley and tight-head in the same sentence. Buckley is an out-and-out loose-head.

    Talking about his comment on Tony Buckley a couple of years ago.


  • Options
    #8628
    Former Coach
    Registered Users Posts: 449 ✭✭Former Coach


    Apologies! I thought it was Denis Buckley who was being referred to. I think the days of Tony & World-Class prop are well over!


  • Options
    #8629
    JF100
    Registered Users Posts: 81 ✭✭JF100


    Ladies: Our ability to digress never ceases to amaze me ...

    Can we agree that Mr Anthony Foley's contribution as the "Defense Coach" (as I believe he is titled) has indeed been a positive one?


  • Options
    #8630
    danthefan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭danthefan


    JF100 wrote: »
    Ladies: Our ability to digress never ceases to amaze me ...

    Can we agree that Mr Anthony Foley's contribution as the "Defense Coach" (as I believe he is titled) has indeed been a positive one?

    Need to see more games.


  • Options
    #8631
    Fishooks12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,318 ✭✭✭Fishooks12


    JF100 wrote: »
    Ladies: Our ability to digress never ceases to amaze me ...

    Can we agree that Mr Anthony Foley's contribution as the "Defense Coach" (as I believe he is titled) has indeed been a positive one?

    Our defense has been very good alright. Pity our attack is in stark contrast


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8632
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Defense was very good except for at the start of the 2nd half when we conceded that try. But it seems the system is working so long as the players can keep to it.


  • Options
    #8633
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    .ak wrote: »
    The result is in the pudding. A sloppy, non-offensive pudding.

    If you look up sloppy non-offensive pudding on google images one of the first images you get is:

    chocolate+pudding+open.JPG

    And I rather like the look of that. Of course I'm sure you meant sloppy and non-offensive in a slightly less positive way and in reference more to Irelands attack than pudding....it is lunch time though....:o
    JF100 wrote: »
    Ladies: Our ability to digress never ceases to amaze me ...

    Can we agree that Mr Anthony Foley's contribution as the "Defense Coach" (as I believe he is titled) has indeed been a positive one?

    Wasn't that Foleys first game as Defense Coach? I'd be wary of passing judgement after just one performance. But we seemed pretty solid so the signs are good.


  • Options
    #8634
    totallegend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    JF100 wrote: »
    Ladies: Our ability to digress never ceases to amaze me ...

    Can we agree that Mr Anthony Foley's contribution as the "Defense Coach" (as I believe he is titled) has indeed been a positive one?

    No, nor can we say it's been a negative one based on one single game in which the opposing team were not particularly potent in attack. And even if we were rock solid, who is to say that it isn't the residual effect of Les Kiss' tenure?


  • Options
    #8635
    JF100
    Registered Users Posts: 81 ✭✭JF100


    Then may I post the contrasting alternative..?
    That the concentration of Mr Kiss' attentions on Offense have yet to yield tangible dividends?

    The message I would expect to receive would be similar;
    (that it is too early to tell & "the Jury is still out").

    In fairness to Mr Kiss, his record of success in his specific targets has been historically reasonably good...
    (i.e. he gets done what he said he'd do ... Usually).
    So perhaps we should be more optimistic on these pages for the immediate future of the Team.


  • Options
    #8636
    JF100
    Registered Users Posts: 81 ✭✭JF100


    PS Can anyone tell me the name of that pudding ..???


  • Options
    #8637
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    JF100 wrote: »
    Then may I post the contrasting alternative..?
    That the concentration of Mr Kiss' attentions on Offense have yet to yield tangible dividends?

    The message I would expect to receive would be similar;
    (that it is too early to tell & "the Jury is still out").

    In fairness to Mr Kiss, his record of success in his specific targets has been historically reasonably good...
    (i.e. he gets done what he said he'd do ... Usually).
    So perhaps we should be more optimistic on these pages for the immediate future of the Team.

    Kiss has been doing the offensive duties for a while now - since after the RWC IIRC. Obviously he was double jobbing which tied his hands somewhat, but it's not quite the same as Foleys situation.

    Now I am more than willing to accept he could do with more time to fully sort things out, but we need to be a bit less toothless if we're going to beat Argentina. I suppose Kiss is stuck in a difficult position. He couldn't fully focus on attack until the coaching changes came in, and now has little to no time to turn things around.


  • Options
    #8638
    its_phil
    Registered Users Posts: 5,442 ✭✭✭its_phil


    JF100 wrote: »
    Then may I post the contrasting alternative..?
    That the concentration of Mr Kiss' attentions on Offense have yet to yield tangible dividends?

    The message I would expect to receive would be similar;
    (that it is too early to tell & "the Jury is still out").

    In fairness to Mr Kiss, his record of success in his specific targets has been historically reasonably good...
    (i.e. he gets done what he said he'd do ... Usually).
    So perhaps we should be more optimistic on these pages for the immediate future of the Team.

    Why do you sound like my finance lecturer?


  • Options
    #8639
    totallegend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    The inclusion of Fitzpatrick in the Ulster squad this weekend makes the selection of Ross for tomorrow all the more baffling.


  • Options
    #8640
    Cpt_Blackbeard
    Registered Users Posts: 2,456 ✭✭✭Cpt_Blackbeard


    The defense definitely looked better than when Kiss was double jobbing, but much of that could be down to how terrible Kiss has been - or at least how bad the units he is responsible for have been - over the last year.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8641
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    In fairness Kiss wasn't running the attack. It was a joint effort between him, Tainton, Smal and even Kidney. That was O'Driscoll's complaint. That seems to be what they're addressed.

    Now we will see an improvement if Kiss is up to it. South Africa was a step in the right direction compared to earlier in the year (even if some people are completely unwilling to see that).

    I think it's all too late though. Kiss is a very good coach by all accounts but his fate is tied to Kidney's and I don't think Kidney will be able to get the best out of these players. They know the contract situation and they know that the coaching staff haven't delivered since 09. i think therell be an element of Kidney-clock-watching. I don't think Kiss will be able to deliver results regardless of his owna ability as a coach unless he's retained by a new appointment, which would seem unlikely.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement