Stringer

muboop1

ok, so coming from a poll thread i have been following. at the moment of writing this, 50% of people have voted that if EOS was to drop a player they would want it to be him.

so who would people replace him with?
what strenghts do these players have that stringer dosent and what weaknesses.
experience, speed etc..

my personal opinion would be to drop him, and possibly replace him with Isaac Boss, but then i just love how he plays so this could be biased i amnt to sure!
Power, speed and imagination are strengths he brings to Ireland's game in my opinion...he has the skills i believe...

siochain

wouldn't drop stringer fro boss, it anyone it would be for Redden purely based on his end of season form for Wasps.

Pride Fighter

Reddin is a far better bet than Boss but we should not drop strings as he is a legend.

Kinetic^

Boss was so slow at getting the ball out against France, not a chance I'd drop Stringer for Boss.

Iompair

Stringers speed at getting the ball to our backs is very important to the way we play rugby, when redden or Boss are playing or when Stringer is having an off patch Ireland do not look half as dangerous in attack.

For all that I love how Boss plays, without Stringer the Irish attack slows down too much.

Tim Robbins

Kenny 5 wrote:

Boss was so slow at getting the ball out against France, not a chance I'd drop Stringer for Boss.

Of course the ball was slowing against France, they destroyed us at the breakdown.
If you want quick ball from a ruck, well the the most important thing is how well your forwards are rucking. This can make a difference of 2 - 5 seconds.
The speed of the pass from the SH can only make a split second difference.

Stringer is the worst scrum half in International Rugby right now.
He is unbelievable predictable which negates his fast pass.
He can't carry the ball, he can't take a ball out from a scrum and set up a ruck when it's under pressure.
If either boss or Reddan were in the Munster team and Stringer was playing in Ulster there is no way we would be havng this conversation. Munster are a winning team, and a more successful team in recent years in the H cup. And players look better in a winning team.
If Stringer played for Connaught he'd be stuck there.

Amazotheamazing

Boss was a journeyman in NZ and he's a journeyman here.

Anyone else hear a rumour that Stringer is out of the RWC, long term injury picked up before the end of last season?

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote:

Boss was a journeyman in NZ and he's a journeyman here.

Anyone else hear a rumour that Stringer is out of the RWC, long term injury picked up before the end of last season?

No, please include all info you have.

muboop1

Amazotheamazing wrote:

Boss was a journeyman in NZ and he's a journeyman here.

Anyone else hear a rumour that Stringer is out of the RWC, long term injury picked up before the end of last season?

any links or anything?

Punchbowl

He won't be dropped, not now. His understanding with ROG is way to important but for next years 6N, I'm sure he'll be gone..

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Tim Robbins

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I'd go with Boss first then Reddan then Stringer. Seen them all play several times.
Stringer does not only have the advantage of playing with ROG but also the back row, 2 / 3 he usually plays with regularly. This is an incredible advantage.

When you think about how much of Rugby is split second decisions, and understanding the guy beside you's game.

If Boss or Reddan had this advantage there is no way 15 people in the survey would be saying drop either of them.

damnyanks

While stringer will hold his own better then boss or reddan I don't think they are incapable of reaching stringers standard. They need more time at intl level to improve.

Stringer is fine as long as he doesnt try to make a break. Obviously when he does and it works its great but most of the time they just pick the ball off him and throw him away.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Sandwich

damnyanks wrote:

Stringer is fine as long as he doesnt try to make a break. Obviously when he does and it works its great but most of the time they just pick the ball off him and throw him away.

Stringer's harm to the team is far greater than his inability to break, or his loosing of the ball if he does so. Not being able to break, or combine with his back row as an attacking option puts pressure on the 3/4s to break the gain line as defenses can concentrate fully on them, and severely limits the variation and tactical attacking options available to the team as a whole.

Yes, he passes well (not outstandingly well tho), certainly better than Boss, but Reddan is not far behind him. And try to look beyond the "isnt he a great fighter for the size of him, never gives up, bounces up again like a rubber ball, a demon to tap tackle etc." cliches and evaluate him for his overall contribution to the team and he is certainly the weakest player in our starting 15.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

thebaz

if only he was a bit bigger he would be class , but his lack of size , is a worry against the bigger and better .. he is still the best scrum half we have , but i think Boss gets a raw deal , he has never let us down in my mind , and does offer the option of a meaningfull break, and take the pressure a bit of o'gara ... and i used to play scrum half

Aldini98

Im not Stringers biggest fan but hes effective and his relationship with ROG is important.

Drop Shaggy if we're dropping anyone. Over-rated, cant catch a ball and it should take 3 fellas to take him down but its generally one.

Tim Robbins

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Can you name a couple of games?
I thought he was good: Leinster V Ulster and Ireland V France which were the only two times I saw him play live.

Can I ask what exactly people want Strings to do? He's proven himself continually over the last two years to be better than his opposite number every time they played (I wouldn't regard him as a better player than Peel but he's been better when they played against each other), he provides quick service to the backs without taking loads of steps out of it like Boss.

He is too predictable, and fringe defenders now they can line up the next player. He reminds me of a girl player someone playing tag rugby, as obvious as 1 + 1 = 2, where he is going to pass. So if you are the marker all you have to do is line up that player.
Usually if a scrum is under pressure (happens to the best scrums in the world), the scrum half is supposed to pick it up and set up the next phase. Stringer can't do this because he is too small.

I'm utterly convinced Boss offers nothing to the team, he can break but chooses his times to do this unwisely and delays the pass every time. I believe Reddan may offer more than Stringer but we don't know this and it wouldn't be the first time a player looked amazing at HEC but never cut it at International.

I think the problem with Boss is that he takes to long to make the decision whether to make the break or not. He should have that decision before he puts his hands on the ball a la Dawson. But he puts his hands on the ball, then decides.
He's not perfect but his far better than Stringer.
I have a bias here that I think every Rugby player should be able to carry the ball, tackle and do more than one thing when they have the ball.
Other people believe that each position has one really important thing and if a player is the best at that then it's really is the best for that position.

Tim Robbins

Aldini98 wrote:

Im not Stringers biggest fan but hes effective and his relationship with ROG is important.

Drop Shaggy if we're dropping anyone. Over-rated, cant catch a ball and it should take 3 fellas to take him down but its generally one.

He's probably the best winger at catching cross field kicks.
Shaggy's weakness is that he has no deftness of foot and his hands let him down sometimes.

muboop1

realy wat it comes down to wit me is,

i think redding is on par with boss, i think redding has better pass, but at same time, i think if boss could just make up his mind faster he could be just as fast, but i find that in my opinion boss is better defensively so i feelit makes up for it(but personally i like boss better,although i have no good reason for this)

i love the dimensions in tacttics these 2 bring to the game, stringer just cant do some things like pick n drive or anything, or form up with backs very well! but these 2 can, this stops narrowing down irelands game making us less predicable, and give us more scoring options aswell as more defensive due to these 2 being superior at tackling!

yes strings has themost experience, but its gonna keep being that way until they give someone else a chance! and true him with rog etc is very good thing to have, but i think the extra running and picking dimensions that would be gained by such a switch would more then compensate for the lack of knowing ROG so well!

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Amz

Hrm ...

Tim Robbins

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

yeah it sounds silly when you cut it up. But, what
I mean in terms of it's so predictable what a girl is going to do when playing tag, it makes the game a farce. 49 / 50 it is easy to predict what Stringer is going to do. It's not just the fact Munster can't break, it's his general Rugby ability. Every Rugby player should be able to carry the ball, tackle and pass. What happens in open play if Stringer is in the middle and gets a pass?

Well you might say, what's Stringer doing there he's a scrum half. That's fair enough, but that's the very structured view of playing the game.
The SH does this. The OH does this.

My bias is the other way, where the game should be as open as possible and the emphasis is on all round skills not specific skills.

I don't know any team (except Munster and Ulster in the H Cup) that went for specialist style as opposed to the broader style of Rugby.

Now I hope I have managed to communicate my point rationally and reasonably.

Kinetic^

Predictability eh? They couldn't predict his winning try last year in the Heino cup :rolleyes:

Amz

Tim Robbins wrote:

yeah it sounds silly when you cut it up. But, what
I mean in terms of it's so predictable what a girl is going to do when playing tag,ate my point rationally and reasonably.

It sounds silly because it is silly, you're a moron and I hope that you're a future Darwin award winner.

marco_polo

Tim Robbins wrote:

Can you name a couple of games?
I thought he was good: Leinster V Ulster and Ireland V France which were the only two times I saw him play live.


He is too predictable, and fringe defenders now they can line up the next player. He reminds me of a girl player someone playing tag rugby, as obvious as 1 + 1 = 2, where he is going to pass. So if you are the marker all you have to do is line up that player.
Usually if a scrum is under pressure (happens to the best scrums in the world), the scrum half is supposed to pick it up and set up the next phase. Stringer can't do this because he is too small.

Picking up from the base of a messy scrum is generally the number 8's job. Scrum halves will usually only break from a solid scrum.

Tim Robbins wrote:

I think the problem with Boss is that he takes to long to make the decision whether to make the break or not. He should have that decision before he puts his hands on the ball a la Dawson. But he puts his hands on the ball, then decides.
He's not perfect but his far better than Stringer.
I have a bias here that I think every Rugby player should be able to carry the ball, tackle and do more than one thing when they have the ball.
Other people believe that each position has one really important thing and if a player is the best at that then it's really is the best for that position.

If Boss can't make a quick decision by now he never will, you can't coach instinct. He may be big strong athletic scrum half but his decision making is far two poor for an international scrum half.

To my eyes me he looks for the break first and eventually if he decides it isn't on he passes it out wide eventually. Is that any less easy to defend against that stringers supposed predictability? Sure when he makes a incisive break it looks great, but I am not convinced that these occasions are a result of spotting a gap with good vision and more to do with the sheer number of times he tries it whether it is actually on or not.

Stringer is a much better decision maker end of. That is the key attibute for the position not who is the better passer, kicker etc. He may have some limitations but he is still the only scrum half with proven top level tests experience. Boss is considered a journeyman scrum half back in his own country, are Ireland so hampered by Stringers lack of a break that they will settle for this?

Reddan for me is still somewhat unproven, the GP is some way below international test standard bespite what sky would have you believe. I am all for giving him more chances to prove himself before the RWC and he is definately a better prospect than Boss and should be number 2.

Sangre

People are focusing way too much in the SH's attacking ability. What about their decision making? Its more than just passing/breakings. Its passing which way, to go out wide or down the blind? To box kick or not? To let your forwards pick and go or not? As the first back who touches the ball his decision making is crucial.
How do Boss and Reddan compare to Stringer in this department?

Also are they as strong defensively as our 1st choice? Will they be the first player someone tries to run at in open play?

I'm not making any decisions about this, I just feel this discussion is ignoring huge aspects of a SHs game.

Sandwich

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I have indeed and they are far from ideal. But unless they cannot hold up a scrum at all, an inferior prop is far less harmful to the team than an inferior scrumhalf,

And while we might wish for better props, I dont think there is any real doubt that the best ones are being picked. We may have had better in the past, but the currect guys are deserving of their places at the moment.

The same cannot be said for scrumhalf where viable alternative do exist.

Tim Robbins

Amz wrote:

It sounds silly because it is silly, you're a moron and I hope that you're a future Darwin award winner.

Is that required or constructive?

Tim Robbins

marco_polo wrote:

Picking up from the base of a messy scrum is generally the number 8's job. Scrum halves will usually only break from a solid scrum.

Disagree on that one.

If Boss can't make a quick decision by now he never will, you can't coach instinct. He may be big strong athletic scrum half but his decision making is far two poor for an international scrum half.

To my eyes me he looks for the break first and eventually if he decides it isn't on he passes it out wide eventually. Is that any less easy to defend against that stringers supposed predictability? Sure when he makes a incisive break it looks great, but I am not convinced that these occasions are a result of spotting a gap with good vision and more to do with the sheer number of times he tries it whether it is actually on or not.

Stringer is a much better decision maker end of. That is the key attibute for the position not who is the better passer, kicker etc. He may have some limitations but he is still the only scrum half with proven top level tests experience. Boss is considered a journeyman scrum half back in his own country, are Ireland so hampered by Stringers lack of a break that they will settle for this?

I don't think Stringer does any tactical decision making. He does the same thing every time.

Reddan for me is still somewhat unproven, the GP is some way below international test standard bespite what sky would have you believe. I am all for giving him more chances to prove himself before the RWC and he is definately a better prospect than Boss and should be number 2.

Fair enough.