Keith Earls

Tim Robbins

Anybody see the Eagles match? Thought Earls ran some great lines. He needs to seriously work on the offloading and passing though.

Hansel

I take it you didn't see the Churchill Cup matches then? His passing and offloading was top class.

Tim Robbins

Hansel wrote: »

I take it you didn't see the Churchill Cup matches then? His passing and offloading was top class.

No. That's great to hear. His one handed roller passes looked like Tag Rugby on Saturday. did you see it?

Hansel

Tim Robbins wrote: »

No. That's great to hear. His one handed roller passes looked like Tag Rugby on Saturday. did you see it?

You mean when he had three defenders around him? Thought he did ok to even get the ball away.
His break and offload for one of the tries was superb.

Tim Robbins

Hansel wrote: »

You mean when he had three defenders around him? Thought he did ok to even get the ball away.
His break and offload for one of the tries was superb.

He threw a cr*p offload to someone, with one hand, who ended up nocking it on. Look very much a schoolboy, lack of skill error to me.

Hansel

That was a pass to Warwich if we're talking about the same situation. Not great, but he was surrounded by opposition players at the time. A proper pass would have gone to an American player, he had to try something. I've been watching the guy play for years now and passing and offloading is certainly not an issue for him.

Tim Robbins

Hansel wrote: »

That was a pass to Warwich if we're talking about the same situation. Not great, but he was surrounded by opposition players at the time. A proper pass would have gone to an American player, he had to try something. I've been watching the guy play for years now and passing and offloading is certainly not an issue for him.

Doesn't matter if your surrounded, you either make the pass or take the hit and set it up. Anyway, I haven't seen as much as you, so I'll reserve complete judgement.

zAbbo

He was on fire at the CC, I wouldn't worry about a few small mistakes, he defintely has the potential to be international class. His progress will be very interesting.

Amazotheamazing

Truth is Earls is up there with Fitzgerald and Kearney in terms of potential, to me the only real issue is will he be able to physically stand pro rugby, or will he suffer from the same series of injuries that have held back guys like Matthews and Barry Murphy?

BOD will have to move to 12 this season, reckon we'll see either Fitz or Earls at 13 for Ireland very soon.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Truth is Earls is up there with Fitzgerald and Kearney in terms of potential, to me the only real issue is will he be able to physically stand pro rugby, or will he suffer from the same series of injuries that have held back guys like Matthews and Barry Murphy?

BOD will have to move to 12 this season, reckon we'll see either Fitz or Earls at 13 for Ireland very soon.

From what I've seen, it looks more like Earls is another Trimble whereas Fitz or Kearney are potentially another Drico.

[Jackass]

Big fan of earls myself, think he's going to be a big player. Hopefully he'll get decent game time at Munster, but unlikely he'll displace Tipoki for any big games any time soon.

Stev_o

[Jackass] wrote: »

Big fan of earls myself, think he's going to be a big player. Hopefully he'll get decent game time at Munster, but unlikely he'll displace Tipoki for any big games any time soon.

Well the chances are he could be slotted in at FB or Wing to get game time at the expense of either Hurley or Dowling.

Id prefer if it was Tipoki at 12 and Earls at 13 id think it would be a much better backline then.

Hansel

Stev_o wrote: »

Well the chances are he could be slotted in at FB or Wing to get game time at the expense of either Hurley or Dowling.

Id prefer if it was Tipoki at 12 and Earls at 13 id think it would be a much better backline then.

I agree with you, but unfortunately we'll probably never see that backline. With Tipoki's contract up next season, Earls is most like going to see any gametime in the centre with Mafi as it's the most likely future centre combination.

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

From what I've seen, it looks more like Earls is another Trimble whereas Fitz or Kearney are potentially another Drico.

No offence, but it's clear you haven't seen much of Earls. I recall a game in the u-19 RWC where England had three players defending against Earls and he still destroyed them. Outshone Cipriani that day too.

Hansel

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

No offence, but it's clear you haven't seen much of Earls. I recall a game in the u-19 RWC where England had three players defending against Earls and he still destroyed them. Outshone Cipriani that day too.

Don't forget that he was making breaks for fun in the Churchill Cup too. Scored 2 tries alone against the Saxons who won the competition with ease. They were having a nightmare trying to contain him though. No defense could cope with him at the tournament.
The only advantage that Fitz has over him is experience at the moment. Kearney doesn't come into the equation at all, he's a fullback, not a centre.

Amazotheamazing

Hansel wrote: »

Don't forget that he was making breaks for fun in the Churchill Cup too. Scored 2 tries alone against the Saxons who won the competition with ease. They were having a nightmare trying to contain him though. No defense could cope with him at the tournament.
The only advantage that Fitz has over him is experience at the moment. Kearney doesn't come into the equation at all, he's a fullback, not a centre.

One of the reasons, imo, that Earls has been held back is Kidney is smart enough to remember what happened Jeremy Staunton. Staunton played some of his best stuff when he was just out of school and full of confidence, he lost that confidence after being shifted about the team and a few injuries later he wasn't the same player. Brian O'Brien (the then Munster manager) has spoken about how badly they handled him as a player and I often think Kidney has adopted a kid gloves approach to Earls as a result.

Any game I've seen Earls in, he has been a stand-out attacking player, he made Lewis look good this summer too, which says a lot for him. However, he has had to work on his defence, but even that seems hugely improved.

I'm not saying he will definitely make it, but if he realises his potential, he could be a fixture for Ireland.

Incidentally, I've heard it said from guys who've trained with both Earls and Fitz that Earls is a more dangerous player. believe it if you want, but they know more about both players than I do.

Hansel

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Incidentally, I've heard it said from guys who've trained with both Earls and Fitz that Earls is a more dangerous player. believe it if you want, but they know more about both players than I do.

Funny you should say that as I have heard similar stories from some of the guys that I have spoken to. Some (one leinster player included) fancy Earls to overtake Fitzgerald.

Amazotheamazing

Hansel wrote: »

Funny you should say that as I have heard similar stories from some of the guys that I have spoken to. Some (one leinster player included) fancy Earls to overtake Fitzgerald.

It's too early to tell, Ireland will be very lucky if even one of them realise their potential, let alone both of them.

Fitz is unlucky in he's behind relatively young players like BOD, D'Arcy and now, Nacewa, if he's to play in the centres. He might be better served picking a wing and sticking with it.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

No offence, but it's clear you haven't seen much of Earls. I recall a game in the u-19 RWC where England had three players defending against Earls and he still destroyed them. Outshone Cipriani that day too.

No offense taken. I have seen very little of Earls. Trimble looked very good to, a while back, when he younger too.

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

No offense taken. I have seen very little of Earls. Trimble looked very good to, a while back, when he younger too.

Completely different type of player, Trimble is a physical freak, hugely strong and fast for his size which gave him a big advantage underage and when he first came on to the scene, but also meant he had a lot to learn when he was first worked out. He remains a straight line runner with little enough subtlety to his game.

Earls is a completely different player, great broken field runner who can change the angle of his attack by wrong footing tacklers, as well as having the pace needed to exploit gaps. Versatile enough to play 12, 13 or either wing, also played outhalf until he was 16 or so, decent kicker and fairly good hands.

I don't see any comparison, except they are both Irish and young. I don't know why you are making opinions about a player you admit you've seen very little of. Watch him a few more times rather than spout on here.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Completely different type of player, Trimble is a physical freak, hugely strong and fast for his size which gave him a big advantage underage and when he first came on to the scene, but also meant he had a lot to learn when he was first worked out. He remains a straight line runner with little enough subtlety to his game.

Earls is a completely different player, great broken field runner who can change the angle of his attack by wrong footing tacklers, as well as having the pace needed to exploit gaps. Versatile enough to play 12, 13 or either wing, also played outhalf until he was 16 or so, decent kicker and fairly good hands.

I don't see any comparison, except they are both Irish and young. I don't know why you are making opinions about a player you admit you've seen very little of. Watch him a few more times rather than spout on here.

I made it clear from the very beginning what I had and had not seen. At least I admit the limits of my knowledge unlikes some others here!

Trimble has no Rugby brain, there's no point sucking in two playes if you haven't a clue what's going on around you. He's a one trick pony and that's it.

[Jackass]

Ah Trimble is a nobody. He doesn't even come into the reckoning when we're talking about future big players for Ireland.

There are a lot of comparisons that can be drawn with Fitzgerald though. Both really exciting talents, both are versatile through the backs, both have great running ability and turn of pace and agility, great hands and rugby brains. Quite simular in a lot of ways.

I'd say Fitz is ahead of him at the moment for the simple reason, as someone said, he has more experience.

He's started a lot of games for Leinster and he's played big games (and scored twice from the wing againt Tolouse) and hasn't looked out of place.

It is a shame we wont get to see Fitz play too much at centre. for Leinster there are 4 options in Contepomi, D'Arcy, O'Driscoll & Newaca who play centre, then the likes of Horgan will struggle to hold his place and is versatile also and can play 2nd centre, so that's 5 players in competition with, which is a shame, but he'll make a great winger, but I hope he gets his chance at centre, cause as Tony Ward said about Fitzgerald after the babas game this year "He's very simular to how O'Driscoll was at his age, except better".

Not to change the subject though, from what I've seen of Earls (which is one or two ML performances and some CC cup) he looks like a brilliant player and a real star of the future in the Irish centre. Earls & Fitz centre partnership for Ireland?

Stev_o

[Jackass] wrote: »

Not to change the subject though, from what I've seen of Earls (which is one or two ML performances and some CC cup) he looks like a brilliant player and a real star of the future in the Irish centre. Earls & Fitz centre partnership for Ireland?

Would be too light of a centre partnership you'd need someone alot more physical to go at 12 or 13. Id still prefer Fitz to be on the wing then centre.

Tim Robbins

[Jackass] wrote: »

Ah Trimble is a nobody. He doesn't even come into the reckoning when we're talking about future big players for Ireland.

There are a lot of comparisons that can be drawn with Fitzgerald though. Both really exciting talents, both are versatile through the backs, both have great running ability and turn of pace and agility, great hands and rugby brains. Quite simular in a lot of ways.

I'd say Fitz is ahead of him at the moment for the simple reason, as someone said, he has more experience.

He's started a lot of games for Leinster and he's played big games (and scored twice from the wing againt Tolouse) and hasn't looked out of place.

It is a shame we wont get to see Fitz play too much at centre. for Leinster there are 4 options in Contepomi, D'Arcy, O'Driscoll & Newaca who play centre, then the likes of Horgan will struggle to hold his place and is versatile also and can play 2nd centre, so that's 5 players in competition with, which is a shame, but he'll make a great winger, but I hope he gets his chance at centre, cause as Tony Ward said about Fitzgerald after the babas game this year "He's very simular to how O'Driscoll was at his age, except better".

Not to change the subject though, from what I've seen of Earls (which is one or two ML performances and some CC cup) he looks like a brilliant player and a real star of the future in the Irish centre. Earls & Fitz centre partnership for Ireland?

I don't think Fitz is physical enough. As soon as BOD put a few big hits, it was clear he was world class as he's footwork, brain and passing were obvious from the beginning

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I don't think Fitz is physical enough. As soon as BOD put a few big hits, it was clear he was world class as he's footwork, brain and passing were obvious from the beginning

Different era though, BOD wasn't a great defender when he first came through, he was probably even lighter than Fitz and Earls, but you could get away with it then.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Different era though, BOD wasn't a great defender when he first came through, he was probably even lighter than Fitz and Earls, but you could get away with it then.

I strongly disagree with that, he was always a great defender. When he was new on the international scence he played in a ba bas game and put in the tackle of the match.

Amazotheamazing

I don't think he was ever a poor defender, but people forget that when Ireland first brought in a defensive coach after BOD's first season, he had real issues adjusting to it. Now days, he's virtually an extra flanker, and a completely different player to the lithe athlete that first broke through. It's worth youtubing some of his earliest tries to see how slight he was.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

I don't think he was ever a poor defender, but people forget that when Ireland first brought in a defensive coach after BOD's first season, he had real issues adjusting to it. Now days, he's virtually an extra flanker, and a completely different player to the lithe athlete that first broke through. It's worth youtubing some of his earliest tries to see how slight he was.

He was slighter but his technique was spot on. He kept his back horizontal and drove into the tackle. Trimble for example, keeps his back almost upright and grabbles people just trying to use his upper body strength, there's no technique.

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

He was slighter but his technique was spot on. He kept his back horizontal and drove into the tackle. Trimble for example, keeps his back almost upright and grabbles people just trying to use his upper body strength, there's no technique.

Trimble is a lot like Shane Horgan, same attributes, you aren't really comparing like with like if you compare Trimble to BOD. Course Trimble is better than Horgan was at the same age, so we've every reason to hope Trimble will continue to improve.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Trimble is a lot like Shane Horgan, same attributes, you aren't really comparing like with like if you compare Trimble to BOD. Course Trimble is better than Horgan was at the same age, so we've every reason to hope Trimble will continue to improve.

What are you talking about?
Shane Horgan tackles in a completly different manner and is a savage tackler. Remember the amount of times he got Jona Lomu when he was marking him. Dito Jason Robinson. Horgan is a far more intelligent, complete Footballer.

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

What are you talking about?
Shane Horgan tackles in a completly different manner and is a savage tackler. Remember the amount of times he got Jona Lomu when he was marking him. Dito Jason Robinson. Horgan is a far more intelligent, complete Footballer.

You are comparing Shane Horgan at his best to Trimble at the start of his career, another massively insightful comparison on your part.

When Horgan first broke through he was a slow, lumbering wing and a poor first centre. Trimble is far better already than Horgan was at the same age offensively, but is weaker defensively. Horgan improved every year until last year, but in his early days he was a shockingly limited player.

themont85

People underestimate Fitzgearld's physicality He has had very few problems defensively since breaking on the scene a couple of months after leaving school. He can more than hold his own with the Leinster gym teammates since he started with them from what i heard. Of course he still has a long way to go but to discount him as a centre now is not very smart. He played his best rugby at centre and full back in the past, Earls too. It would be a shame if they both got stuck on the wing for their province. They both have so much more to their game.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

You are comparing Shane Horgan at his best to Trimble at the start of his career, another massively insightful comparison on your part.

No. I am comparing him to times when he was marking Lomu and Robinson.
Lomu 2001 - he was just 23
Robinson - 2001 he was just 23.
Trimble is currenty 24.

Hardly a massively insightful comparison.

This conversation is starting to sound really stupid.

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

No. I am comparing him to times when he was marking Lomu and Robinson.
Lomu 2001 - he was just 23
Robinson - 2001 he was just 23.
Trimble is currenty 24.

Hardly a massively insightful comparison.

This conversation is starting to sound really stupid.

You just can't grasp the meaning of "offensively" can you? Trimble is already a proven try scorer. It took Horgan years to get near Trimble's level of finishing, he got there, but he wasn't born with it.

Conbro

When Horgan first broke through he was a slow, lumbering wing and a poor first centre. Trimble is far better already than Horgan was at the same age offensively, but is weaker defensively. Horgan improved every year until last year, but in his early days he was a shockingly limited player.

This is patently not true. Bordering on the absurd

themont85

Conbro wrote: »

This is patently not true. Bordering on the absurd

I dunno I always felt that Horgan was the most improved player on the Irish squad. He started as a centre and has been proved on many occasions, he doesn't have the overall game for it. He looked fairly average until he moved to wing permamently-suits his game more. His handling and running lines have improved with time into a very intelligent player.

Amazotheamazing

themont85 wrote: »

I dunno I always felt that Horgan was the most improved player on the Irish squad. He started as a centre and has been proved on many occasions, he doesn't have the overall game for it. He looked fairly average until he moved to wing permamently-suits his game more. His handling and running lines have improved with time into a very intelligent player.

I agree, when he first broke through he was very much a make-shift wing who wasn't known for having either great hands or much speed. He was good defensively and well able to fall over the line from close range, but he wasn't the player he became. He has worked very hard to be where he is today, it's a pity some of our other wingers like A. Horgan never had the same determination.

It's unfair to write off Trimble, who has plenty of good points, when you see the improvement a less talented (imo) player like Horgan has made.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

You just can't grasp the meaning of "offensively" can you? Trimble is already a proven try scorer. It took Horgan years to get near Trimble's level of finishing, he got there, but he wasn't born with it.

You just can't grasp the concept of looking at the facts.
In Shane Horgan's first season with Ireland in the year 2000.
1. Try against Scotland first cap.
2. Two more against Italy next game.
3. Another try against Wales that season.

Trimble got a few against Romania and France when he started off to, but it beggers believe what evidence you are using to assert: "It took Horgan years to get near Trimble's level of finishing".

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

You just can't grasp the concept of looking at the facts.
In Shane Horgan's first season with Ireland in the year 2000.
1. Try against Scotland first cap.
2. Two more against Italy next game.
3. Another try against Wales that season.

Trimble got a few against Romania and France when he started off to, but it beggers believe what evidence you are using to assert: "It took Horgan years to get near Trimble's level of finishing".

Stop dreaming.

Trimble's first tries were (apart from Romania) against France, NZ, SA and Oz, in other words, top teams. Horgan didn't score against a top team until 2004 (SA), in his fifth season with Ireland. Every other team he scored against were then ranked below us in the IRB rankings. For a period of about 2 years he barely scored any tries at all.

I admire Horgan as a player, but Trimble was doing it against top teams far faster than Horgan. Of course, I guess you think Scotland, Wales and Italy are equivalent to France, NZ, SA and Oz?

Trimble has his limitations, but he's scored against the best in the game.

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

No. I am comparing him to times when he was marking Lomu and Robinson.
Lomu 2001 - he was just 23
Robinson - 2001 he was just 23.
Trimble is currenty 24.

Hardly a massively insightful comparison.

This conversation is starting to sound really stupid.

I let this go earlier, and I really shouldn't have, but Trimble is only 23, he turns 24 this October. You can't even read the stats on the IRFU site correctly ffs.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

I let this go earlier, and I really shouldn't have, but Trimble is only 23, he turns 24 this October. You can't even read the stats on the IRFU site correctly ffs.

You're clutching to a 1/7 of a year there. If the average player plays top flight for 10 years that's 1 / 70 of a player's career.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Stop dreaming.

Trimble's first tries were (apart from Romania) against France, NZ, SA and Oz, in other words, top teams. Horgan didn't score against a top team until 2004 (SA), in his fifth season with Ireland. Every other team he scored against were then ranked below us in the IRB rankings. For a period of about 2 years he barely scored any tries at all.

I admire Horgan as a player, but Trimble was doing it against top teams far faster than Horgan. Of course, I guess you think Scotland, Wales and Italy are equivalent to France, NZ, SA and Oz?

Trimble has his limitations, but he's scored against the best in the game.

The SA fourths you mean!
Perhaps you'd like to name a finish that Andrew Trimble scored that Shane Horgan, at whatever stage of his career would be incapable of scoring.

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

You're clutching to a 1/7 of a year there. If the average player plays top flight for 10 years that's 1 / 70 of a player's career.

No, I'm not, I'm pointing out you have a difficulty understanding simple facts.

I don't really know what you have against Trimble, sure he's a bit suspect defensively, but that can and will be improved.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

No, I'm not, I'm pointing out you have a difficulty understanding simple facts.

1 / 70 of career is an irrelevant fact.

I don't really know what you have against Trimble, sure he's a bit suspect defensively, but that can and will be improved.

Nothing against him. I am arguing against your ridiculous assertion:

"Course Trimble is better than Horgan was at the same age, so we've every reason to hope Trimble will continue to improve."

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

1 / 70 of career is an irrelevant fact.


Nothing against him. I am arguing against your ridiculous assertion:

"Course Trimble is better than Horgan was at the same age, so we've every reason to hope Trimble will continue to improve."

Leaving made up fractions aside, at 23, despite being shunted around the pitch, Trimble has scored against the top four rugby nations in the world. Whereas Horgan had scored against some teams ranked below us.

It's simple facts, Trimble is currently a better player than Horgan was when he was 23. Perhaps you don't recall Horgan's first few seasons as a pro. (I followed them quite closely as one of my good mates is good friends with him, even have a jersey from when he wore 12 for leinster, doubt it's worth much, it's a nice thing to have but I digress). He was a limited player who has worked incredibly hard to improve every bit of natural ability he has. Trimble is by far a more naturally talented player. There are parts of Trimble's game that need work, but you'd expect that from a young player.

Earlier on you said Trimble didn't have a rugby brain, are you sure you've nothing against him?

anonymous_joe

Why does this forum always descend into petty arguments? ^^

At the end of the day, Trimble and Horgan are quite different players.

Trimble burst onto the scene and found himself expected to step up to the level of seasoned professionals. The guy was probably played too early, but ignoring that, he's still a relatively young centre with time on his side. He's blessed with speed and strength, and with a bit of luck could definitely do great things for Ireland.

Horgan took a while to establish himself as the player he is, but he did it. No reason Trimble can't do the same. Horgan's a much better player, but then, he's got lots of experience.

Amazotheamazing

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Why does this forum always descend into petty arguments? ^^

At the end of the day, Trimble and Horgan are quite different players.

Trimble burst onto the scene and found himself expected to step up to the level of seasoned professionals. The guy was probably played too early, but ignoring that, he's still a relatively young centre with time on his side. He's blessed with speed and strength, and with a bit of luck could definitely do great things for Ireland.

Horgan took a while to establish himself as the player he is, but he did it. No reason Trimble can't do the same. Horgan's a much better player, but then, he's got lots of experience.

Do youy think Trimble's future is in the centre though? I reckno with Cave, Fitz and Earls, as well as BOD and D'Arcy, he might be better off focusing on the wing.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Leaving made up fractions aside, at 23, despite being shunted around the pitch, Trimble has scored against the top four rugby nations in the world. Whereas Horgan had scored against some teams ranked below us.

It's simple facts, Trimble is currently a better player than Horgan was when he was 23. Perhaps you don't recall Horgan's first few seasons as a pro. (I followed them quite closely as one of my good mates is good friends with him, even have a jersey from when he wore 12 for leinster, doubt it's worth much, it's a nice thing to have but I digress). He was a limited player who has worked incredibly hard to improve every bit of natural ability he has. Trimble is by far a more naturally talented player. There are parts of Trimble's game that need work, but you'd expect that from a young player.

Earlier on you said Trimble didn't have a rugby brain, are you sure you've nothing against him?

What a stupid argument. Why the hell would have something against someone I don't even know.

Amazotheamazing

Tim Robbins wrote: »

What a stupid argument. Why the hell would have something against someone I don't even know.

I don't know, but here's what you said about him earlier.

"Trimble has no Rugby brain, there's no point sucking in two playes if you haven't a clue what's going on around you. He's a one trick pony and that's it."

I reckon that's a very harsh assessment of a talented player, maybe it's nothing personal, but you clearly don't like him.

Tim Robbins

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

maybe it's nothing personal, but you clearly don't like him.

What do you mean 'maybe'?
How can something be personal, when you don't know, never met a person.
It's absolute nonsense. I am surprised you enter into discussion with people about Rugby when you are prepared to make such ridiculous accusations.

TarfHead

Does this thread just re-heat the same claims that were being made for Barry Murphy 2 years ago ?