Row in the Irish Camp

youcancallmeal

Taken from the Newstalk 106 Website

The already strained relations between the Irish team and rugby journalists who cover them for the Irish media appears to have escalated into a full blown row that's threatening to jeopardise the remainder of the team's Southern Hemisphere Summer Tour. Journalists walked out of yesterday's team announcement in Auckland after players refused to hold interviews with an Irish Independent writer because of a critical article that he wrote in Tuesday's paper. The row marks a new low-point in relations between the two camps and may upset Irish preparations ahead of next Saturday's second test against the All Blacks. The spate, and the negative image that accompanies it, is also certain to upset the team's new sponsors O2.

Whats this all about then? Anyone know who the writer is or what he even wrote?

mikedragon32

I wouldn't wipe my ar$e with the Indo anyway, but the hack wasn't Tony Ward.

Apparently he questioned EO'S selection policy, but also remarked that some of the players would have been better off topping up their tans in Tahiti. That was reported on Today FM this morning.

Not good for the PR, but that level of criticism is uncalled for.

Raiser

Its reprinted in full in todays Irish Independant - Match report lays blame on certain players for what journo considers to be their failings and then goes on to separately individually rate each player with a score out of ten I think.

Anyone know about this guy David Kelly - is he a clueless hack or does he have some bit of Rugby knowledge ?

* Edit to add that the Irish Independant has gone tabloid in more than its new size in my opinion - they've had some tasteless clangers that The Sun wouldn't have printed recently.....

kermitdfrog

Not commenting either way on whether this is a good or bad move by the players but it'll be interesting to see how it plays out. I do however think its childish of the entire press core to walk out - surely the players are withing hteir rights to choose not to talk to a certain individual if they dont want to? WTF has that to do with everyone else?

It was David Kelly btw, and he's a useless hack. I havent read the article in question, but in general his tend to be very poor, badly written and ill-informed or clueless, and usually resort to attacks, particularily against Ireland or Leinster. Seems to be a footie writer who drew the short straw or something! His reports tend to be of the standard of the tabloid rugby writers.

cruiserweight

You mean this article?

New Zealand 34

Ireland 23

David Kelly

THE message was wearily delivered but forthright nonetheless.

Riled at Saturday's extension of a sorry 101-year winless streak against the All Blacks being heralded as the latest in a line of plucky endeavours, Ireland's genius, Brian O'Driscoll, desperately sought to sow the seeds for a stirring Eden Park revival.

"We put together a 60 to 62-minute performance, but against the All Blacks that's not good enough, you've got to play for the full 80," said the inspiring centre, whose wonderful performance exorcised the demons which must have plagued him ahead of his return to New Zealand soil.

His midfield partner, Gordon D'Arcy was hardly circumspect in his reaction to the crushing defeat. "We lost it," he says quietly, as an icy chill of harsh reality sweeps through the innards of the Waikato Stadium.

So true. Ireland played for just under an hour, then conceded 19 points to slump from being two scores ahead (23-15) to a losing deficit which sided with the handicapper's view.

The havoc the All Blacks caused when they finally hit their stride bears ominous portents. Consider the fact that this was an All Blacks side coming together for the first time since their November Grand Slam triumph and next week's task in Auckland, pretty much a home banker when you're wearing black, resembles a Herculean task.

Buttressed by another week's camp, surely all the faultlines which emerged on Saturday cannot be retained for two successive matches.

And, for their part, will Ireland be able to maintain the intensity of their approach, particularly defensively and at the breakdown, for a full 80 minutes, never mind 60?

For all their apparently limited resources, the All Blacks still managed to make a stumble in this one with the dual openside experiment flopping badly, so much so that the normally circumspect Graham Henry openly admitted that the jury was still out on the ambitious experiment.

A debut second-row, Greg Rawlinson, was utterly ineffective and in midfield, too, a huge responsibility was placed on Aaron Mauger's shoulders, as he nursed out-half Luke McAlister through a nervy start, all the while trying to keep an eye on the enigmatic Ma'a Nonu outside, liable to spill the pill in attack or leave the door open in defence. Yet, despite all these nagging inconsistencies, the All Blacks still managed to win this one pulling away.

Or rather, to return to D'Arcy's pained view of things, they managed to thieve the win from under Ireland's noses. Individual criticisms are often invidious in circumstances such as this but Peter Stringer and Paul O'Connell won't need to be reminded of their late faux pas; O'Connell emphatically so, with the hurried pass, meant for Shane Horgan, leading to Flavell's decisive score.

Nevertheless, the composed Stringer, who so adroitly ghosted down the Biarritz blindside just a few weeks ago, must surely regret his reckless kick into open field. Beneath his posts. With his side just a point down against the All Blacks? Suicidal stuff. That it was replacement Troy Flavell who managed to benefit from Stringer's brainstorm is indicative of the manner in which the All Blacks deployed their bench at key stages, however envious one is of their endless supply of talent.

Ireland, unfortunately, are still reluctant to use the numbers allowed by the IRB to supplement the starting 15. It is a damning indictment of the unused replacements who continue to grow splinters on the Irish international bench that they are not deemed worthy of adequate, impactful game time. It is quite inconceivable why Geordan Murphy was allowed to remain on the field for 79 minutes before being replaced by Girvan Dempsey. One presumes that Murphy had been fulfilling the wishes of the management in what he admitted was a limited attacking approach on his behalf.

If not, the logic dictated that his replacement should have arrived much, much earlier than shortly after that lone, almost definitive daring break from his own half which led to the McAlister intercept. Alternatively, what does it say to Dempsey about the faith in his ability to alter the tempo of a game at such a crucial time? Ditto the rest of the bench, a point forcefully emphasised by the delay in replacing a tiring David Wallace - who had just conceded a penalty - with a groundhog (Keith Gleeson) when a ball carrier was needed at that stage, as the All Blacks stepped up their own barrage of ball-carrying. Sadly, there are players on this tour who would be better off sunning themselves in Tahiti as their value in terms of this summer's enterprise appears to be negligible unless there is some radical shift in emphasis this week.

One marvels at how McAlister's mental strength will have hardened in manifold ways as a result of Saturday's experience. In stark contrast, when Ronan O'Gara misfires, there is nobody on the bench to light a fire under him.

It is this comfort zone which allows the frequent lapses which creep into his performances to disappear into a worrying vacuum of almost desultory analysis. O'Gara is indubitably number one but wouldn't it be nice to see what his number two, or heaven forebid, number three look like?

Niall O'Donovan will hope his lineout work pays dividends once more next week, Brian McLaughlin will pat himself on the back after the exhaustive breakdown work, transcending forwards and backs, while the ultimate high fives will go Graham Steadman's way.

The defence coach has managed an utterly smooth transition since Mike Ford's departure.

That the All Blacks reverted to a mauling, close quarters battle, while also abandoning the flatness of their attack, concentrating on support behind the ball instead of risking offloads, was a measure of how they were forced to adapt to the immense defensive challenge presented to them. In attack, though, Ireland struggled to make their mark. Until chasing the game, there was an element of sameness about the play, save the one occasion when Shane Horgan replicated his Leinster tactic by seeking work in midfield, taking a brilliant line which bamboozled the All Blacks.

Andrew Trimble, despite his fantastic finish and ceaseless defence, is uncomfortable on the wing.

The havoc the All Blacks

caused when they hit their

stride bears ominous

portents

D'Arcy might crave extra space. Dempsey is having the year of his life. Murphy may need to be shaken up a tad to produce his magic more regularly. Denis Hickie, unused on Saturday, is on tour. So too Gavin Duffy. And whatshisname? That Staunton fellah.

"I was happy with our attack but it was hard to do anything with limited ball," said O'Sullivan, before tying himself in knots when he admitted that All Blacks held on to the ball and Ireland didn't as the game entered its defining period.

With Shane Horgan's jaw merely bruised, only Alan Quinlan seems likely to force himself into the 22.

But Ireland should not only surprise their supporters, but themselves too, by showing some more fluidity in their back-line selection which just might keep these formidable All Blacks awake. Because they certainly won't start in a slumber two weeks running.

kermitdfrog

Hmmm - nothing wrong with that article at all.

Crash

Cept for the fact its crappily written though. reads like **** :P

Raiser

David Kelly seems to be suggesting that you can "grow splinters" - reads like he wrote it on the bus after a long night out on the town with his literary genius mates.

Crash

Well if trees grow, and splinters come from trees or wood, then surely splinters grow? Duh like :P

TarfHead

I've seen Dave Kelly on Setanta's The Hub with Daire O'Brien and he has a 'outsider looking in' attitude to rugby, as opposed to Gerry Thornley or Tony Ward or Peter O'Reilly who grew up in with the game.

IMHO the players are being precious. Brian O'Driscoll's remark about needing to play for 80 minutes is, to say the least, trite. On this basis will they be boycotting Stephen Jones ?

I'm sure this will add to Dave Kelly's sense of victimhood.

Diamondmaker

I did not think there was anything to get too upset about.
"It is this comfort zone which allows the frequent lapses which creep into his performances to disappear into a worrying vacuum of almost desultory analysis. O'Gara is indubitably number one but wouldn't it be nice to see what his number two, or heaven forebid, number three look like?"

the preceding probably the most upseting to the team/coach but well as the Bud as says "True"..........

In his defence today he wrote that it may be an attempt to just stir up a littel interest as the world cup and bogger ball is dominating the headlines at the minute.

RuggieBear

TarfHead wrote:

I've seen Dave Kelly on Setanta's The Hub with Daire O'Brien and he has a 'outsider looking in' attitude to rugby, as opposed to Gerry Thornley or Tony Ward or Peter O'Reilly who grew up in with the game.

IMHO the players are being precious. Brian O'Driscoll's remark about needing to play for 80 minutes is, to say the least, trite. On this basis will they be boycotting Stephen Jones ?

I'm sure this will add to Dave Kelly's sense of victimhood.

I agree with most of this.

Kelly is not a good rugby journalist imo...i really don't think he has any love for the ggame at all.

but at the same time the players are being very thin skinned.

crybaby

he never struck me as the type of the journalist who really is in love with the game but the reaction from the squad is genuinley pathethic.

but also remarked that some of the players would have been better off topping up their tans in Tahiti.

WRONG. His point was that some of the squad would be better off sunbathing as O'Sullivan will never bring them into the game, he was not talking about any of the starting 15. All of his criticisms seem fairly on point to me.

youcancallmeal

Just heard on the Radio the Issue is believed to be resolved now with the players agreeing to do the interviews

mikedragon32

crybaby wrote:

he never struck me as the type of the journalist who really is in love with the game but the reaction from the squad is genuinley pathethic.



WRONG. His point was that some of the squad would be better off sunbathing as O'Sullivan will never bring them into the game, he was not talking about any of the starting 15. All of his criticisms seem fairly on point to me.

As I said in my post crybaby, I was going on what I heard on the Radio this morning and didn't have the benefit of having read the article for myself.

Having now read the article I can see it for myself.

Having also read this:

crybaby wrote:

you do not blood players against the best team in the world, you try and beat them. he has to stop being so afraid of replacing players that are not performing up to stratch though, O'Gara was very...

It would seem that you would also subscribe to bringing players along for no reason at all.

If the fringe players don't get the opportunity to prove themselves they'll never develop, otherwise they're only there as tacklebags for the starting XV. The purpose of so-called friendly tests is to develop your team, not just the 15 or so who will play in 6N or WC.

kermitdfrog

If the fringe players don't get the opportunity to prove themselves they'll never develop, otherwise they're only there as tacklebags for the starting XV. The purpose of so-called friendly tests is to develop your team, not just the 15 or so who will play in 6N or WC.
___________

Ordinarily I'd agree, but it's clear this summer that they didn't take many of the fringe players to Nz as it was felt they were better off playing in the CC. Players like A.Horgan and Foley are clearly not on the fringes of the squad, yet by bringing them it means that the likes of Kearney, Heaslip, Wallace etc got meaningful gametime in North America instead of being tacklebags in the SH. Whatever about agreeing with that you must be able to see the logic in it.

Besides, I'm sick of always hearing we need to blood more - if we're constantly developing, when do we stop and play our strongest side? Solely in World Cups? We're not NZ, we dont have that luxury. We blood a far larger number of players than people realise or give credit for - of the starting XV against NZ, Flannery only won his first cap in Nov, as did Best, and Trimble, while Leamy has only been playing for Ireland since last year, and Boss and Young are awaiting debutes while MOD and Best have less than five caps each.

Crash

I have no respect for Setanta's "panel" anyhow - especially after they showed an interview released by D'arcy about the test matches last year and what he felt they did wrong etc - and when asked his opinion, one of them turns around and says "thats a pr nightmare, look at him in donnybrook with his sunglasses on, what a terrible interview.

They then spent FIVE MINUTES arguing about D'arcy's sunglasses and the location of the interview instead of anything he said in the interview.

Bizarre.

kermitdfrog

crash

Totally agree - that "analysis" was a farce. But with a panel that can include David "I dont actually like rugby" Kelly, Neil "I want to be Stephen Jones" Francis and presented by a man who is completely unable to hide his Munster bias, wheter talking about Ireland, Ulster, Leinster, Connact, the Lions, etc, what do you expect?

carlowboy

Kelly is a pretty poor journo alright and it is true that he was a football journolist before he wrote rugby. Indo's rugby coverage really pales in comparison to the Times (although I read both)

Crash

Thats cus you gotta love Gervaise Thornley et al

mikedragon32

kermitdfrog wrote:

Ordinarily I'd agree, but it's clear this summer that they didn't take many of the fringe players to Nz as it was felt they were better off playing in the CC. Players like A.Horgan and Foley are clearly not on the fringes of the squad, yet by bringing them it means that the likes of Kearney, Heaslip, Wallace etc got meaningful gametime in North America instead of being tacklebags in the SH. Whatever about agreeing with that you must be able to see the logic in it.

Besides, I'm sick of always hearing we need to blood more - if we're constantly developing, when do we stop and play our strongest side? Solely in World Cups? We're not NZ, we dont have that luxury. We blood a far larger number of players than people realise or give credit for - of the starting XV against NZ, Flannery only won his first cap in Nov, as did Best, and Trimble, while Leamy has only been playing for Ireland since last year, and Boss and Young are awaiting debutes while MOD and Best have less than five caps each.

Fair point Kermit, well made.

I'd just feel that Ireland have no chance this weekend, but the following weekend we have a great opportunity to take the Aussies on home soil, so why not give others a run out with that in mind? It's a moot point anyway, given the team is selected already.

Anyway, back to the point of the OP.

It seems like it's all going to get brushed under the carpet again and Eddie will play his XV plus 2 or 3 like he always does. The hack may have been correct it what he said, but he says it with no authority.

Diamondmaker

Besides, I'm sick of always hearing we need to blood more - if we're constantly developing, when do we stop and play our strongest side? Solely in World Cups? We're not NZ, we dont have that luxury. We blood a far larger number of players than people realise or give credit for - of the starting XV against NZ, Flannery only won his first cap in Nov, as did Best, and Trimble, while Leamy has only been playing for Ireland since last year, and Boss and Young are awaiting debutes while MOD and Best have less than five caps each.[/QUOTE]

very true...New blood all over the place, Trimble, Flannery and Best looking good for their few caps so far too.
The blooding of an out half however is a serious issue not addressed by EOS the NZ games not the games for it but it is long over due a season at least I think. Scrum half like wise.

kermitdfrog

Diamondmaker wrote:

very true...New blood all over the place, Trimble, Flannery and Best looking good for their few caps so far too.

Exactly

The blooding of an out half however is a serious issue not addressed by EOS the NZ games not the games for it but it is long over due a season at least I think. Scrum half like wise.

Absolutely. Unfortunately, until now we had no options to look at! Staunton has only looked a likely successor this season, and Wallace has had so little gametime he's doesnt look realistic either. I've been saying for a long time we should have looked at Murphy there. Now at least Stan gives us an option, and having seen Wallace in the CC I hope he gets more time at Ulster (why oh why did the PAG stop Leinster signing him? THIRD choice at Ulster, he was let go to waste). The likes of Dunne, McAllister, Hickey just haven risen up as genuine contenders as yet.

Similarily, until this season the scrumhalf cupboard looked very barren. Now we have Reddan, O'Leary, Keane, Boss all looking like options. We need to start playing Boss in particular, as he has exactly what we miss with Stringer.

Diamondmaker

yeah I Like what I have seen from Boss too.....cuts a tidy little break quite often!:cool:

Trojan

Someone mentioned the journo's being wrong in walking out. I don't think so. They're professionals and earn their living from this. If they lose access to interviews due to a petulant player, that is seriously hampering their ability to do their jobs. This is strike action, plain and simple, and I think they have a good case.

As for the rest of the debate, I don't even see the point talking about it. EOS is a bad manager, plain and simple. He might have been good once, but it's years past time for someone who isn't afraid to make decisions.

MarVeL

Then again if they're not talking to journalists it gives the team more time to get ready. Do we really need to hear the same trite comments from players again and again? Might it not be better if they just did their work on the pitch? From a rugby perspective if not a commercial perspective?

kermitdfrog

Trojan wrote:

As for the rest of the debate, I don't even see the point talking about it. EOS is a bad manager, plain and simple. He might have been good once, but it's years past time for someone who isn't afraid to make decisions.

It's not plain and simple, and ignores many many relevant arguments and facts against such a view. It's well worth talkign about. EOS is far, far from perfect, and has some major faults, but much of the criticisms aimed at him tend to be ill-informed, unfounded and mindless repetition of others opinions(*). I'm yet to see any of the most common criticisms (too conservative, bad tactics, doesnt take chances, doesnt blood players) stand up to closer scrutiny. Its easy to level arguments against his actions, harder to come up with alternatives. And indeed many of the criticisms against him are complete speculation and nonsense. At least the most recent current criticism (re: replacements) is based in reality.

* Criticism of the 2005 season excepted, though much of the flaws in the plans that season only became apparent in hindsight

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Trojan

kermitd: it's easier to prove a positive than a negative, so you'll have a tough time with the debate. I'll just use one example.

We travel to Japan on a "Development Tour" (IRFU phrase, not mine).

We start Humphries and Stringer as half-back combination.

I'm sorry for being so opinionated, but that for me is end of debate, case closed.

(I'll attempt to be a little less facetious when I get back from my coffee)

RuggieBear

Trojan wrote:

kermitd: it's easier to prove a positive than a negative, so you'll have a tough time with the debate. I'll just use one example.

We travel to Japan on a "Development Tour" (IRFU phrase, not mine).

We start Humphries and Stringer as half-back combination.

I'm sorry for being so opinionated, but that for me is end of debate, case closed.

EOS: "But the japanese tour is not the time to be experimenting..."*


*: Eddie might not have actually said this

crybaby

It would seem that you would also subscribe to bringing players along for no reason at all.

despite quoting it you obviously didn't read the sentence where I clearly stated that he needs to stop being afraid of replacing players who are performing poorly during matches, how Murphy and O'Gara were not replaced at the 50 minute mark is beyond me

However I still stick to the point that you dont give players there debuts against teams like New Zealand due to the simple fact that we are at the point where we could actually beat them if we have an all round team performance, if we were at the point that England are currently at then I would be all for it.

youcancallmeal

RuggieBear wrote:

EOS: "But the japanese tour is not the time to be experimenting..."*


*: Eddie might not have actually said this

Ah come on now ya couldnt go experimenting against those feckin ninjas

mikedragon32

crybaby wrote:

despite quoting it you obviously didn't read the sentence where I clearly stated that he needs to stop being afraid of replacing players who are performing poorly during matches, how Murphy and O'Gara were not replaced at the 50 minute mark is beyond me

However I still stick to the point that you dont give players there debuts against teams like New Zealand due to the simple fact that we are at the point where we could actually beat them if we have an all round team performance, if we were at the point that England are currently at then I would be all for it.

Fair enough...

I think we're looking at this from different perspectives, and I'm quite pessimistic about saturday, hence my wanting to get the others onto the pitch.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Think they can take Aus though. You?

Trojan

But seriously, folks. I am actually interested in seeing valid arguments from kermitd and any other EOS apologis^Wfans who believe he's not a bad manager.

Admittedly it's easy in hindsight to criticise decisions, so let's criticise with foresight the mistakes he's going to make this Saturday.

Number 1: "We're allowed tactical substitutions now?"

Diamondmaker

2. ROG should be instructed to give up that dummy show/ pass. he got planted against the ABs trying it one moment...who deos he think he is fooling

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Funkstard

"as an icy chill of harsh reality sweeps through the innards of the Waikato Stadium."

Oh jesus, how is he a broadsheet journalist

Chucky the tree

THe indo is pretty much a tabloid now. Its a load of cock.

Cant believe they refused to answer questions. What a shower of girl's blouses.

Trojan

No Steady Eddie apologists ready to take up the argument?

Diamondmaker

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

fair enough...but seriously hell get killed one day...and its crap! My mum knows what hes about to do!