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 vs Barbarians Gloucester, 29 May NO TV, NO STREAMS.

11315171819

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 24,815 ✭✭✭✭emmet02


    JustinDee wrote: »
    1. Who should Craig Gilroy replace? Fact that he played in the XV shows to me that he is next up if a back-three injury should occur. I think he's a flipping great player but can't think of a player he should be keeping out. He's still young too. Plenty of time.

    29 players, 3 tests.

    Foresight isn't especially expensive.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,636 ✭✭✭✭Tox56


    It sounds like the second time this season that Zebo has been outplayed by a young, up-and-coming Irish winger at national (or Wolfhounds) level.

    I know nobody saw the match, but everything good came from Gilroy, and he was mentioned 3 times as much as any other player in the live text


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    JustinDee wrote: »
    1. Who should Craig Gilroy replace? Fact that he played in the XV shows to me that he is next up if a back-three injury should occur. I think he's a flipping great player but can't think of a player he should be keeping out. He's still young too. Plenty of time.

    2. Conor Murray is only just back and badly needed game time.

    1) Simon Zebo. Or he could replace no-one and travel as an extra player, this is not the RWC, there are no limits on squad size.

    2) Ah here. If Marshall had come on with 20 minutes to go, wouldn't that have been enough game time for Murray? Or was the extra 17 minutes crucial for him? And where is Murray "only back" from? He played all of the games in Munster's run-in, afaik. You're trying to defend the indefensible there now.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,123 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    JustinDee wrote: »

    2. Conor Murray is only just back and badly needed game time.

    Murray started Munster's last 3 games of the season.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,165 ✭✭✭leftleg


    I love you Declan


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,883 ✭✭✭shuffol


    Kidney explained: “I am not inclined to preordain substitutions before a game"

    :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Murray has been playing regular rugby all season. Marshall hasn't. Yet Murray somehow needs gametime and Marshall doesn't.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,832 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Tox56 wrote: »
    It sounds like the second time this season that Zebo has been outplayed by a young, up-and-coming Irish winger at national (or Wolfhounds) level.

    I know nobody saw the match, but everything good came from Gilroy, and he was mentioned 3 times as much as any other player in the live text

    Kidney’s bias at this stage is getting beyond ridiculous. Gilroy had his breakout year last season, scoring trys at a better rate than Zebo has this season (his breakout season). Despite having a touch of the normal second season syndrome he has come through it and is a much rounded player than Zebo.

    As you say both D. Kearney and Gilroy have shown up Zebo this season but who gets selected, the Munster option.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    1) Simon Zebo. Or he could replace no-one and travel as an extra player, this is not the RWC, there are no limits on squad size
    There's the debate then. Zebo is also a good promise of a player. Both have areas to work upon and in a tight contest, only one of them can get the nod.
    2) Ah here. If Marshall had come on with 20 minutes to go, wouldn't that have been enough game time for Murray? Or was the extra 17 minutes crucial for him? And where is Murray "only back" from? He played all of the games in Munster's run-in, afaik. You're trying to defend the indefensible there now.
    Three full games worth in five weeks wasn't it? Thats why I presumed so.

    I'm not trying to defend anything, by the way. Just gave my opinion on why Conor Murray played almost the entire game.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6 flatley14


    Rog poor defensively, is that why murray got the 77 mins???
    i think the baabaas would have destroyed us up the middle if marshall and rog were on the pitch together.
    sounds like our front row issues are set to continue for some time.
    mike ross please be fit for the first test!!!!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,318 ✭✭✭Fishooks12


    I'd like Zebo and Gilroy to travel considering there's no limit on squad numbers


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    JustinDee wrote: »
    There's the debate then. Zebo is also a good promise of a player. Both have areas to work upon and in a tight contest, only one of them can get the nod.

    Again, no restrictions on squad size, both could have got the nod, but Zebo has far more areas to work on than Gilroy.
    JustinDee wrote: »
    Three full games worth in five weeks wasn't it? Thats why I presumed so.

    I'm not trying to defend anything, by the way. Just gave my opinion on why Conor Murray played almost the entire game.

    That's grand so, we're in agreement.


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


    Fishooks12 wrote: »
    We lost? Am I the only one pissed off at that (could be the booze) ?

    I stopped getting pissed off by Ireland losses a while ago.


  • Registered Users Posts: 124 ✭✭Banbridgeman


    Txted a friend who was at the game how the lads performed. He said they were really bad but that Gilroy was absolutely fantastic. Still can't believe uncle Declan has brought Simon Zebo ahead of him. As for Marshall getting 3 mins... Well we all know Murray is a favorite of deccie's so it is to be expected.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,592 ✭✭✭GerM


    I'm sure DK would take 40 players if he could but finances are playing a part here. I do find it odd that they didn't choose to take another 2 or 3 players though. I can see players having to be flown out mid-tour which is not going to come cheap. An additional 10/12 and back row player should be priority. Would only have looked at taking an additional back three player after those slots had been filled. I'd also have brought Dave Kearney plus one of Zebo or Gilroy simply due to the fact that Kearney covers 15 also. If we're determined to take a small squad, versatility is essential.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,832 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    GerM wrote: »
    I'm sure DK would take 40 players if he could but finances are playing a part here. I do find it odd that they didn't choose to take another 2 or 3 players though. I can see players having to be flown out mid-tour which is not going to come cheap. An additional 10/12 and back row player should be priority. Would only have looked at taking an additional back three player after those slots had been filled. I'd also have brought Dave Kearney plus one of Zebo or Gilroy simply due to the fact that Kearney covers 15 also. If we're determined to take a small squad, versatility is essential.

    Why would he if it's clear to everyone but himself and the Irish media that he has no intentions of building a squad towards the future? More tackle bag holders maybe?


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


    Murray getting all the game time wreaks of the IRFU selection panel trying to bash a circular peg into a square hole. Murray is not international standard - he's a good physical SH and could be developed for the side over a few seasons, but the IRFU are determined to make him first choice even after his performances have been sub-par.

    Anyone else up for burying their heads in the sand?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,592 ✭✭✭GerM


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    Why would he if it's clear to everyone but himself and the Irish media that he has no intentions of building a squad towards the future? More tackle bag holders maybe?

    Genuine cover for the inevitable injuries. We're at the end of a seriously long season. The season for these guys started in July of last year. Injuries and tiredness are going to be a serious factor out there. I can see 5 or 6 guys having to play in the last test with knocks or players like Ryan being shoehorned in at 6, Earls at 15 etc.


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 7,807 ✭✭✭fitz


    GerM wrote: »
    I'm sure DK would take 40 players if he could but finances are playing a part here. I do find it odd that they didn't choose to take another 2 or 3 players though. I can see players having to be flown out mid-tour which is not going to come cheap. An additional 10/12 and back row player should be priority. Would only have looked at taking an additional back three player after those slots had been filled. I'd also have brought Dave Kearney plus one of Zebo or Gilroy simply due to the fact that Kearney covers 15 also. If we're determined to take a small squad, versatility is essential.

    I genuinely don't understand how D Kearney has gone from benching during the 6 Nations to third choice after Zebo and Gilroy. I would have had him ahead of both, and Gilroy ahead of Zebo.

    Agree on the player limitations...I think you're right on players getting flown out. What would the cost per player be? Surely bringing 32 wouldn't be prohibitively more expensive than 29...especially with the added risk of needing the extra players anyway due to injury in a relatively lean squad.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,738 ✭✭✭eyeball kid


    Very scrappy game last night. The only real highlights from an Irish perspective was Gilroy. Although the game was played really loose and suited running rugby, Gilroy really looked dangerous everytime with the ball, much more so than Zebo.

    ROG played well and although he did play a beautiful pass to Zebo for his try, i really would have liked to have seen how Madigan would have played in such a game. The pack were fairly quiet with no one really catching the eye, although Muldoon did make a couple of nice bursts.

    Marshall coming on with 3 mins to go was utterly pointless. I don't think he even touched the ball.

    Really surprised at the crowd there. Wasn't expecting anyone really. Gloucester season ticket holders must have gotten in for free but there was about 1/5th Irish there I would guess.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    Again, no restrictions on squad size, both could have got the nod, but Zebo has far more areas to work on than Gilroy
    Thats your opinion anyway. My opinion differs and personally speaking, I wouldn't have brought either player. Thats me though. I am not and you are not, a panel selector.

    Further on, the selectors obviously see differently to us, so lets see if their choice pays off when the final test has whistled up.


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


    JustinDee wrote: »
    Further on, the selectors obviously see differently to us, so lets see if their choice pays off when the final test has whistled up.

    Well it hasn't paid off for some years now. They've consistently made wrong choices over past 3 seasons. I know people in jobs that get let go for less.


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 7,807 ✭✭✭fitz


    JustinDee wrote: »
    Thats your opinion anyway. My opinion differs and personally speaking, I wouldn't have brought either player. Thats me though. I am not and you are not, a panel selector.

    The Kearney/Gilroy/Zebo debate is largely opinion based, but it's fairly informed opinion, and there's plenty to back up, as you suggested, neither Gilroy or Zebo being selected for the squad based on the numbers. As I said, I'd have picked Kearney....
    Further on, the selectors obviously see differently to us, so lets see if their choice pays off when the final test has whistled up.

    True, however this argument has been used a lot over the last couple of years. At some point, those selectors need to be held accountable for their lack of success. Do you think that will happen this particular time, or if they're shown to have made the wrong choices again, will there be no consequences for them yet again?


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭Teferi


    JustinDee wrote: »
    Further on, the selectors obviously see differently to us, so lets see if their choice pays off when the final test has whistled up.

    You've advocated this wait and see before judging approach for a while Justin.

    It hasn't worked.

    Kidney is a failed coach with a bad selections policy. I haven't got a clue where you get your (admirable) eternal optimism from but most other fans are becoming frustrated.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,815 ✭✭✭✭emmet02


    Very scrappy game last night. The only real highlights from an Irish perspective was Gilroy. Although the game was played really loose and suited running rugby, Gilroy really looked dangerous everytime with the ball, much more so than Zebo.

    ROG played well and although he did play a beautiful pass to Zebo for his try, i really would have liked to have seen how Madigan would have played in such a game. The pack were fairly quiet with no one really catching the eye, although Muldoon did make a couple of nice bursts.

    Marshall coming on with 3 mins to go was utterly pointless. I don't think he even touched the ball.

    Really surprised at the crowd there. Wasn't expecting anyone really. Gloucester season ticket holders must have gotten in for free but there was about 1/5th Irish there I would guess.

    That matchdaylive credited to POM?

    Muldoon wasn't mentioned once in any of the updates, I thought it was quite suspicious tbh! (tinfoil hats at the ready)


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,165 ✭✭✭leftleg


    Teferi wrote: »
    I haven't got a clue where you get your (admirable) eternal optimism from

    His wallet buddy;

    he gets paid by the you know who fu so he's hardly going to slate anything to do with this and considering his position neither would I;

    wallet wins any day hands down;


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    Teferi wrote: »
    You've advocated this wait and see before judging approach for a while Justin.
    It hasn't worked
    I don't advocate chopping and changing a squad's management until a result is subjectively somehow deemed more approvable, incidental or otherwise.

    I'll post again after the tests as I can't see any change in the natter here in the interim.
    Talk then.
    Good luck.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,815 ✭✭✭✭emmet02


    JustinDee wrote: »
    I don't advocate chopping and changing a squad's management until a result is subjectively somehow deemed more approvable, incidental or otherwise.

    I'll post again after the tests as I can't see any change in the natter here in the interim.
    Talk then.
    Good luck.

    Sounds familiar.

    Did you post this before the RWC?

    And also before the 6N?


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


    The lads were really up for it tho.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    leftleg wrote: »
    His wallet buddy;
    he gets paid by the you know who fu so he's hardly going to slate anything to do with this and considering his position neither would I;
    wallet wins any day hands down;

    I'm a competitive soul. Always have been. My own experience in both codes of rugby shapes my view (seen as optimism here). Nothing else. I just don't share everything here on the internet.
    Remember, as I said before, every opinion I post here is mine. No-one else's.


Advertisement