Ferris a 7

Tim Robbins

Hi,
The first time I saw Ferris play, (think it was Celtic League a few years ago), I thought he was very good a player. Good at the break down and a strong ball carrier. Now I don't think he's break down specialist. I have only seen him play about 6 times.
What do other people think?
I'm thinking, if Eddie leaves Glesson at home we have no break down specialist playing 7 in the back row?
I know the arguments that Leamy, Drico and D'Arcy are like having two breakdown specialists not in your team so we can play this way. But is it wise to leave a genuine 7 at home?
Comments please...

De Deraco

Wallace is a very good breakdown speaciist as is Easterby???

Tim Robbins

De Deraco wrote:

Wallace is a very good breakdown speaciist as is Easterby???

Wallace can't bend quick enough and get low enough to be effective as they third man. He is better at other things like turning players in a tackle and of course carrying the ball. Leamy is better at the breakdown than Wallace IMO.

carlowboy

Is it worth playing Gleeson though? He hasn't had a good season and looks past it. Jennings will be starting for Leinster when he gets back from injury. Ferris has played nearly all his rugby at 7 for Ulster with Best doing the ground work.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Stev_o

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Dont forget George Smith :P

marco_polo

Tim Robbins wrote:

Hi,
The first time I saw Ferris play, (think it was Celtic League a few years ago), I thought he was very good a player. Good at the break down and a strong ball carrier. Now I don't think he's break down specialist. I have only seen him play about 6 times.
What do other people think?
I'm thinking, if Eddie leaves Glesson at home we have no break down specialist playing 7 in the back row?
I know the arguments that Leamy, Drico and D'Arcy are like having two breakdown specialists not in your team so we can play this way. But is it wise to leave a genuine 7 at home?
Comments please...

I think you answered your own question there. If we don't need a specialist 7 because other guys are good enough on the ground then why bring one? Better to bring someone with like Heaslip or Ferris who may be able to bring something different to the party. (PS Shame they both can't go)

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote:

Wallace can't bend quick enough and get low enough to be effective as they third man. He is better at other things like turning players in a tackle and of course carrying the ball. Leamy is better at the breakdown than Wallace IMO.

In the year leading up to the Munster Leinster semi, Wallace had turned over more ball than Gleeson, according to the official stats. People go on about Wallace not being able to get low enough, but he's actually brilliant at it.

On the Ferris as a 7, it's not that uncommon for a 6 to be played at 7, Quinlain spent a season or 2 there for Munster when Williams was playing, but no-one would argue he's a traditional 7 either. The traditional 7 is disappearing from rugby, as Dave points out, at the top level there's very few of them left.

marco_polo

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

maybe Martin Williams as well? Probably doesn't really have the physical stature to ever be considered a world class back rower but he is a good specialist groundhog.

carlowboy

I think Martin Williams is more of a linkman, similar enough to Gleeson that way. Gleeson has really gotten weak at tackling and protecting the 10 channel which Wallace has plenty of practice with playing with the defensive titan, ROG so often!

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote:

In the year leading up to the Munster Leinster semi, Wallace had turned over more ball than Gleeson, according to the official stats. People go on about Wallace not being able to get low enough, but he's actually brilliant at it.

On the Ferris as a 7, it's not that uncommon for a 6 to be played at 7, Quinlain spent a season or 2 there for Munster when Williams was playing, but no-one would argue he's a traditional 7 either. The traditional 7 is disappearing from rugby, as Dave points out, at the top level there's very few of them left.

Any chance of a link to those stats?

I think Wallace and can turn someone over in the tackle due to his strength but as for being the third man to the tackle and slowing it down or turning it over, I don't think so.

Amazotheamazing

They were in an article in the Sunday Times the day of the match. They might be online on timesonline.co.uk.

quagmire69

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

bergamasco is a class player too. best 7 in northern hemisphere (not many of em tho)

nacho libre

quagmire69 wrote:

bergamasco is a class player too. best 7 in northern hemisphere (not many of em tho)

I think Tom Rees will soon be challenging him for that honour. He's a great prospect.

Tim Robbins

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Excuse me going off on a bit of a tangent -
I think the breakdown is crucial in Rugby. A lot of work goes on that we don't see. I remember the last time we beat England in Twickenham a few of the English forwards said Leamy was all over them, I remember the last time Leinster beat Munster, POC said Leinster destroyed them at the breakdown, the last time France beat us, they destroyed us at the breakdown.

It's not just about turning the ball over, but also getting low enough so that it is harder for the other team to ruck and you are slowing their ball down legally. It is also about of course about protecting your own ball.

I don't think we put enough emphasis on rucking (and off loading but that's another point) in Irish Rugby this is why we are consistently coming up short even though we have some world class players.

Kiwis, put a huge emphasis on rucking. All their players can ruck. They usually have the best 7 in the world and is usually their best player.
McCaw, Kronfield, Jones.

There are far more rucks than Scrums in Rugby but we see to think that there are more scrums they way we go on sometimes.

marco_polo

Tim Robbins wrote:

Excuse me going off on a bit of a tangent -
I think the breakdown is crucial in Rugby. A lot of work goes on that we don't see. I remember the last time we beat England in Twickenham a few of the English forwards said Leamy was all over them, I remember the last time Leinster beat Munster, POC said Leinster destroyed them at the breakdown, the last time France beat us, they destroyed us at the breakdown.

It's not just about turning the ball over, but also getting low enough so that it is harder for the other team to ruck and you are slowing their ball down legally. It is also about of course about protecting your own ball.

I don't think we put enough emphasis on rucking (and off loading but that's another point) in Irish Rugby this is why we are consistently coming up short even though we have some world class players.

Kiwis, put a huge emphasis on rucking. All their players can ruck. They usually have the best 7 in the world and is usually their best player.
McCaw, Kronfield, Jones.

There are far more rucks than Scrums in Rugby but we see to think that there are more scrums they way we go on sometimes.

I would agree with most of that, I think that Ireland are usually one of the top sides in the world at this facet of play. Ireland definately play their best rugby when they are competing well on the ground and recycling the ball quickly for the backs. Unfortunately we have only seen them at their best in patches since the Autumn Internationals.

Tim Robbins

marco_polo wrote:

I would agree with most of that, I think that Ireland are usually one of the top sides in the world at this facet of play. Ireland definately play their best rugby when they are competing well on the ground and recycling the ball quickly for the backs. Unfortunately we have only seen them at their best in patches since the Autumn Internationals.

Personally I think the reason why Ireland aren't winning as much as we should be is because we aren't good enough at rucking.

In the France game this year, Leamy and Wallace spend a huge amount of time in the midfield when we were being destroyed in the Breakdown by Betson et al.
This was either tactical, they were nackered or they got positional play wrong. You don't know unless you are part of the team.
My guess is it was tactical and Eddie got it wrong.

When we play France again, the breakdown will be crucial and where the game will be won or lost.