Earls Versus Murphy

rugbynut

I'm a big Kidney fan but can't understand his logic in not having Keith Earls on the bench. Murphy has had numerous chances but hasn't come up to the mark in some of the games. Earls looks to have the temperament, he has pace, creativity and has bulked up also. His defence is also good. Should Kidney not be giving him at least the last 10 minutes of the Scottish game and should have done something similiar for the Italy game.

remus808

rugbynut wrote: »

I'm a big Kidney fan but can't understand his logic in not having Keith Earls on the bench. Murphy has had numerous chances but hasn't come up to the mark in some of the games. Earls looks to have the temperament, he has pace, creativity and has bulked up also. His defence is also good. Should Kidney not be giving him at least the last 10 minutes of the Scottish game and should have done something similiar for the Italy game.

I agree, I don't understand why Earls isn't worth his place on the bench- the guy is a gamebreaker. Only reason I can see for Murphys selection is fitness concerns over Kearney? Hope to see Earls on the bench for Wales- we may need someone to come on and create something.

anonymous_joe

I like Keith Earls a lot. I'm a little worried he's being overhyped. However, I think we have to remember that Geordan Murphy's one of the best players Ireland ever produced, and has never really been used properly by the international side.

He's a more mercurial player than Kearney, but has years of experience. If he'd never had that broken leg he'd probably have been rivalling O'Driscoll to be called our best ever (modern) player.

bamboozle

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I like Keith Earls a lot. I'm a little worried he's being overhyped. However, I think we have to remember that Geordan Murphy's one of the best players Ireland ever produced, and has never really been used properly by the international side.

He's a more mercurial player than Kearney, but has years of experience. If he'd never had that broken leg he'd probably have been rivalling O'Driscoll to be called our best ever (modern) player.

+1
So far Earls is overhyped, he's scored mainly in the magner's league and has the physique of a scrum half. he needs a season or two to build on his obvious talent.

thomond2006

Kidney was a PE teacher at Pres and worked with young players and so will know how to use/blood Earls properly. I'm sure Deccie has a plan to use Earls, most likely during the summer if Earls isn't selected for the Lions, which is looking unlikely given his lack of international exposure during 6N 2009.

In fairness to Murphy, it would be lousy for Deccie to do an EOS WC 2007 and drop him from the bench.

chupacabra

Earls isnt ready yet, his defense needs improving but his all around game is good. I just havent seen him do anything special in the last few months to justify getting a bench place this 6 nations. And tho murphy was prone to some absolute nightmare blunders in his career for ireland, he is still rock solid and has tons of experience.

Also on current form, of the young lads its Cave who i would rather see getting the nod, he is turning into a superb center.

outwest

if any of the back 3 got injured in the game thats tight who would u want to come on in edenbrugh. earls who hasnt played a big match in a while or mister murphy.a proven big match player

earls was unlucky to get injured. i would of had in my 22 at the start but 2 games away fro ma grand slam is not the time to throw him in.

he is a bit overhyped for a palyer who claims his postition in centre has palyed most games at 15. cant wait to see him paly centre. hope he doesnt end up like an other danny cip.

the summer will be the time to blood the young. please the likes of horgan and dempsey, should not travel. nether mod. let the like of ryan caldwell. cave earls.

earls will get his chance. just not till the summer.

rugbynut

The fact that Earls has been playing as a utility player (wing, centre anf full back) seems to be going against him. I've been watching him since he was a schoolboy and he really does stand out. In fact I would have played him in the centre instead of Paddy Wallace - injury permitting. He's a game breaker and makes things happen around him.
As an aside - his Dad, Ger, should have got an Irish cap!

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I like Keith Earls a lot. I'm a little worried he's being overhyped. However, I think we have to remember that Geordan Murphy's one of the best players Ireland ever produced, and has never really been used properly by the international side.

He's a more mercurial player than Kearney, but has years of experience. If he'd never had that broken leg he'd probably have been rivalling O'Driscoll to be called our best ever (modern) player.

thehighground

outwest wrote: »

he is a bit overhyped for a palyer who claims his postition in centre has palyed most games at 15. cant wait to see him paly centre. hope he doesnt end up like an other danny cip.

I think you are mixing him up with Fitzgerald about claiming to be a centre. Or Kearney wanting to be a FB. He seems to me to be a very level headed fellow. When he got his first Ireland cap and was asked what was his favourite position, he actually said he'd play prop if he was told to by his coach.

He seems to have a lot of class both on and off the pitch. Plenty of time for him to develop from the summer on, though, it wouldn't surprise me if Deccie put him on the bench for the Welsh game. He put him on the bench for the Heineken Cup Final last year Presumably, Deccie was trying to have some sort of a surprise element for the video analysts to have to work on.

thehighground

thomond2006 wrote: »

Kidney was a PE teacher at Pres and worked with young players and so will know how to use/blood Earls properly. I'm sure Deccie has a plan to use Earls, most likely during the summer if Earls isn't selected for the Lions, which is looking unlikely given his lack of international exposure during 6N 2009.

In fairness to Murphy, it would be lousy for Deccie to do an EOS WC 2007 and drop him from the bench.

Kidney was a maths & career guidance teacher who coached rugby. I'd trust Deccie will look after and develop him well. Look at the number he has brought through in Munster.

Wouldn't surprise me if Earls was brought along for the experience on the Lions although I think he might be better with Deccie & Irish coaches at the Churchill Cup.

twinytwo

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I like Keith Earls a lot. I'm a little worried he's being overhyped. However, I think we have to remember that Geordan Murphy's one of the best players Ireland ever produced, and has never really been used properly by the international side.

He's a more mercurial player than Kearney, but has years of experience. If he'd never had that broken leg he'd probably have been rivalling O'Driscoll to be called our best ever (modern) player.

While I agree that Murph is one of the best talents to come out of this country .. broken leg or not you cant compare him to O'Driscoll who is in a league of his own. The man in prime was unstoppable

anonymous_joe

rugbynut wrote: »

The fact that Earls has been playing as a utility player (wing, centre anf full back) seems to be going against him. I've been watching him since he was a schoolboy and he really does stand out. In fact I would have played him in the centre instead of Paddy Wallace - injury permitting. He's a game breaker and makes things happen around him.
As an aside - his Dad, Ger, should have got an Irish cap!

Utility players do suffer in every sport.

I've been relatively impressed with Paddy Wallace, and given his form and dedication I think Wallace deserved that jersey more than anyone.

twinytwo wrote: »

While I agree that Murph is one of the best talents to come out of this country .. broken leg or not you cant compare him to O'Driscoll who is in a league of his own. The man in prime was unstoppable

I honestly don't think we'll ever know. And I'm still extraordinarily píssed off with the fact that Leicester got him and not Leinster. :P

A backline with Hickie, Murphy and Dempsey (not to mention Shaggy) would have always had 3 world-class outside backs. That would have been something to see.

It doesnt matter who the fullback is on the bench because we dont use our back 3 like they should be utilised anyway.

Complete waste of talent.

twinytwo

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Utility players do suffer in every sport.

I've been relatively impressed with Paddy Wallace, and given his form and dedication I think Wallace deserved that jersey more than anyone.


I honestly don't think we'll ever know. And I'm still extraordinarily píssed off with the fact that Leicester got him and not Leinster. :P

A backline with Hickie, Murphy and Dempsey (not to mention Shaggy) would have always had 3 world-class outside backs. That would have been something to see.

True that... Any Players playing on/having the potential to play on the senior team playing out side of Ireland is a joke... granted there isnt many but Murph and reddan in england is gay

Chucky the tree

thehighground wrote: »

Wouldn't surprise me if Earls was brought along for the experience on the Lions although I think he might be better with Deccie & Irish coaches at the Churchill Cup.

I'd probaly die of a heart attack if Earls makes the Lions team. Far better players ahead of him who have alot more experience.

anonymous_joe

twinytwo wrote: »

True that... Any Players playing on/having the potential to play on the senior team playing out side of Ireland is a joke... granted there isnt many but Murph and reddan in england is gay

I disagree 100% with the idea that them playing outside Ireland is bad - it could be good. But whereas Reddan went over because Kidney told him he wasn't going to be first choice, so he went over to play for Wasps, Murphy never played for Leinster. If he hadn't been getting his game here it would be one thing, that Leinster never had him in their squad is another. :mad:

Chucky the tree

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I'd probaly die of a heart attack if Earls makes the Lions team. Far better players ahead of him who have alot more experience.

I wouldnt.

They always bring an uncapped player,I cant think of any other uncapped player that would get that spot ahead of him.Thats why imo Kidney has not capped him,he could have easily given him 10 minutes but he hasnt.

outwest

earls was capped against canada remember.

better chance bradley getting sacked then earls making lions tour now. sorry to disapoint

outwest

outwest wrote: »

earls was capped against canada remember.

better chance bradley getting sacked then earls making lions tour now. sorry to disapoint

Oh yeah,forgot that.

Yeah,he wont tour then.

stephen_n

Aubrey Uneven Beginner wrote: »

It doesnt matter who the fullback is on the bench because we dont use our back 3 like they should be utilised anyway.

Complete waste of talent.

That's true!!


Earls time will come but I do believe that Murphy deserves his place on the bench and if called upon would have the experience to deal with the pressures of this match!

Serenity Now!

karmabass wrote: »

I agree, I don't understand why Earls isn't worth his place on the bench- the guy is a gamebreaker

So is Murphy who is playing great stuff for Leicester at the moment.

ch2008

Putting earls in the lions squad would be just like Sven putting walcott in the england world cup squad.its far too early for him.look what the hype did to dennis hurley,he's only really recovering now.

Stealdo

When oh when will the Geordan Murphy apologists give it up?

The guy has never had a consistant turn of form for Ireland and if it's not Gerry Thornley apologising and making excuses for him it's sky sports. His reputation is based on the very odd flash of something and rumours of training ground brilliance. Remember when we used to have the quotes from Leicester players about how 'if you saw the things this guy does in training', 'George Best of Rugby' all useless cos he has never done it on the International pitch. To say he could have been as good as O'Driscoll if he hadn't broken his leg is like saying I could have been if that fat prop hadn't sat on me in first year and made me into a scardy cat.

While I wouldn't yet place a huge amount of trust in Earls yet, I'd have him of Dempsey or any number of other players ahead of Murphy.


By the way - the Lions uncapped player thing is an absolute myth, even if Earls didn't have a cap, which he does, there is no tradition of including a uncapped player with the Lions. The Barbarians traditionally include at least one uncapped player for games against international sides. He might have had a shout if he'd got a run of games in the 6N, he has no chance of being taken to SA.

Serenity Now!

Stealdo wrote: »

When oh when will the Geordan Murphy apologists give it up?

When he retires?

I'm sure Dec Kidney & Co haven't a clue on what they're doing, eh? :rolleyes:

anonymous_joe

Stealdo wrote: »

When oh when will the Geordan Murphy apologists give it up?

The guy has never had a consistant turn of form for Ireland and if it's not Gerry Thornley apologising and making excuses for him it's sky sports. His reputation is based on the very odd flash of something and rumours of training ground brilliance. Remember when we used to have the quotes from Leicester players about how 'if you saw the things this guy does in training', 'George Best of Rugby' all useless cos he has never done it on the International pitch. To say he could have been as good as O'Driscoll if he hadn't broken his leg is like saying I could have been if that fat prop hadn't sat on me in first year and made me into a scardy cat.

While I wouldn't yet place a huge amount of trust in Earls yet, I'd have him of Dempsey or any number of other players ahead of Murphy.


By the way - the Lions uncapped player thing is an absolute myth, even if Earls didn't have a cap, which he does, there is no tradition of including a uncapped player with the Lions. The Barbarians traditionally include at least one uncapped player for games against international sides. He might have had a shout if he'd got a run of games in the 6N, he has no chance of being taken to SA.

Bit harsh on the boy.

He's done enough to have around 60 caps and 20 tries for Ireland.

Add to that he's one almost everything there is to win with Leicester. So I hardly think he's a bad player. Hardly a flash in the pan.

Stealdo

Serenity Now! wrote: »

When he retires?

I'm sure Dec Kidney & Co haven't a clue on what they're doing, eh? :rolleyes:

Yep - I'll file that comment alongside the following...

"Sure if Leicester think he's good enough"
"He was never given a chance to play in his natural position"
"He scored a try against a SH team in 2006"
"He was great in 2002/3"

(They're all in the "Things people say to support Geordan Murphy's claims to being a top class rugby player when they have no actual evidence to support it" drawer)


Oh - nearly forgot the sarcasm smiley - here you go....:rolleyes: and maybe I'll back up my opinion by saying FACT!

anonymous_joe

Stealdo wrote: »

Yep - I'll file that comment alongside the following...

"Sure if Leicester think he's good enough"
"He was never given a chance to play in his natural position"
"He scored a try against a SH team in 2006"
"He was great in 2002/3"

(They're all in the "Things people say to support Geordan Murphy's claims to being a top class rugby player when they have no actual evidence to support it" drawer)


Oh - nearly forgot the sarcasm smiley - here you go....:rolleyes: and maybe I'll back up my opinion by saying FACT!

59 caps 18 tries.



That's a decent return from fullback.

Better scoring ratio than Kearney or Fitzgerald, and around the same as O'Driscoll and Horgan.

Serenity Now!

Stealdo wrote: »

Yep - I'll file that comment alongside the following...

"Sure if Leicester think he's good enough"
"He was never given a chance to play in his natural position"
"He scored a try against a SH team in 2006"
"He was great in 2002/3"

(They're all in the "Things people say to support Geordan Murphy's claims to being a top class rugby player when they have no actual evidence to support it" drawer)

Oh - nearly forgot the sarcasm smiley - here you go....:rolleyes: and maybe I'll back up my opinion by saying FACT!

How melodramatic.

Fact is that he is an attacking fullback with plenty experience who scores tries and sets up tries for Ireland. Not a bad bench player to have in one's first 6N as coach, eh?

Stealdo

anonymous_joe wrote: »

59 caps 18 tries.



That's a decent return from fullback.

Not only that - it's a reasonable argument for having him in the squad. The thing with Murphy is, it's my opinion that he was always a liability at international level. Mainly because everything he does seems to be half arsed. As in he looks like he's second guessing himself with every move. Maybe it's pressure to perform to his reputation who knows. Dempsey used to do the same thing when he got the ball going forward - he'd appear half committed to the decision he makes. Kearney is a breath of fresh air in this regard because you can't doubt that when he makes a decision to come for a ball, or when he comes into the line - he's fully committed to what he's doing.
The problem I have with Murphy is less him as the reasoning people usually trot out to support his inclusion. He's a decent player who has serious flaws, particularly his defensive positioning and decision making. The arguments in his favour generally ignore these issues and consist of inane statements as to someone else (usually connected to the Guinness Premiership) thinking he's brilliant.
I've no issue with someone having the opposite view of this and thinking he's great, it just irks me when they back it up by saying - things like the above.

Stealdo

Serenity Now! wrote: »

How melodramatic.

Fact is that he is an attacking fullback with plenty experience who scores tries and sets up tries for Ireland. Not a bad bench player to have in one's first 6N as coach, eh?

Fair enough if you see those things as being the most important aspects of his play. I don't, I see a full back as primarily a defensive player and secondly an attacking one. I'd have a full back that was a great defender (tackling, fielding, kicking) who's limited attackwise before a great (stretching it in Murphy's case) attacker who can't defend.
If I was in my first 6N season as coach, I wouldn't have him anywhere, he would stay in Leicester and Stuart Barnes and the rest of them could cry for him all day long. But thankfully I'm not we have a slightly more insightful and experienced man for that.

outwest

if not murphy name a fullback that is stronger in defence then.


u sound a bit like of a anti guiness premership man. barnes is a tool fair enough but he murphy has won a lot of cups with a very top team. hes pros outways his cons.

Serenity Now!

Stealdo wrote: »

I'd have a full back that was a great defender (tackling, fielding, kicking) who's limited attackwise before a great (stretching it in Murphy's case) attacker who can't defend

Murphy missing tackles and dropping ball these days? When was that exactly?

Stealdo

outwest wrote: »

if not murphy name a fullback that is stronger in defence then.


u sound a bit like of a anti guiness premership man. barnes is a tool fair enough but he murphy has won a lot of cups with a very top team. hes pros outways his cons.

I won't even bother with the first half of that.

I have nothing at all against the GP. How exactly does one be anti a league?
The argument that he has won things with Leicester is one of the ones that annoys me. So has Andy Goode, not too many people think that highly of him.

Stealdo

Serenity Now! wrote: »

Murphy missing tackles and dropping ball these days? When was that exactly?

Listing individual instances of dropped balls or missed tackles is as useless an argument as citing individual tries to suggest he's good (even if I could). Thankfully he hasn't had the opptunity to do it at international level lately.
You need to look at his overall performances not just the bits that support your argument.

Serenity Now!

Stealdo wrote: »

Listing individual instances of dropped balls or missed tackles is as useless an argument as citing individual tries to suggest he's good (even if I could). Thankfully he hasn't had the opptunity to do it at international level lately.
You need to look at his overall performances not just the bits that support your argument.

So a general 'feeling' about how he plays is your reasoning but no hard examples of these faults you fail to list?
Hmmm...interesting.

prem

Earls is class and will be around for a long time. But Murphy is a great player, never given a chance in the time of Eddie for whatever petty reasons. He is consistently one of the top players in the Guinness premiership, turning out man of the match displays for Leicster. If anything I would like to see Murphy play more, its some praise to Kearney that he is keeping Murphy off the Irish team.

old boy

kidney does not hand out caps for the sake of it, could it be that murphy will come on at some stage next saturday to try a play (set piece)

anonymous_joe

Stealdo wrote: »

Not only that - it's a reasonable argument for having him in the squad. The thing with Murphy is, it's my opinion that he was always a liability at international level. Mainly because everything he does seems to be half arsed. As in he looks like he's second guessing himself with every move. Maybe it's pressure to perform to his reputation who knows. Dempsey used to do the same thing when he got the ball going forward - he'd appear half committed to the decision he makes. Kearney is a breath of fresh air in this regard because you can't doubt that when he makes a decision to come for a ball, or when he comes into the line - he's fully committed to what he's doing.
The problem I have with Murphy is less him as the reasoning people usually trot out to support his inclusion. He's a decent player who has serious flaws, particularly his defensive positioning and decision making. The arguments in his favour generally ignore these issues and consist of inane statements as to someone else (usually connected to the Guinness Premiership) thinking he's brilliant.
I've no issue with someone having the opposite view of this and thinking he's great, it just irks me when they back it up by saying - things like the above.

Well in fairness, I don't see much of Murphy, and I'd say a lot of Irish people don't, because he plays abroad.

As a result it's easy to get caught up in reputation.

But with his try scoring ratio I'd want him in the squad for sure.

Stealdo wrote: »

Fair enough if you see those things as being the most important aspects of his play. I don't, I see a full back as primarily a defensive player and secondly an attacking one. I'd have a full back that was a great defender (tackling, fielding, kicking) who's limited attackwise before a great (stretching it in Murphy's case) attacker who can't defend.
If I was in my first 6N season as coach, I wouldn't have him anywhere, he would stay in Leicester and Stuart Barnes and the rest of them could cry for him all day long. But thankfully I'm not we have a slightly more insightful and experienced man for that.

Full backs are primarily defensive, but only because you make them that way. If you look at the French, the full back really operates as a winger for the centre, with a lot of running and seeking out gaps, etc.

Our style of play requires a defensive full back, which Kearney is a fine example of - a different style of play might want a different style of fullback - Murphy gives that kind of option.

Stealdo

Serenity Now! wrote: »

So a general 'feeling' about how he plays is your reasoning but no hard examples of these faults you fail to list?
Hmmm...interesting.

I'll humour you....There are plenty of hard examples of what you're looking for. On the international stage we could point to the previous 3 games we've had against France in each of which he had serious moments. He was only on for a couple of mins this year and nearly did for us. But for every missed tackle there's a made tackle, for every dropped ball there's a caught ball. Good players drop balls and bad players catch balls - where's a couple of examples going to get us? Whoever suggests more is right is that it?

In my opinion short of recording a game and watching it back with the specific purpose of singling out a player's performance the only way you can judge them is on an overall impression that the games leaves you with. If you want to mockingly call that a 'feeling' that's fine by me. If you actually made a point in support of your argument that would be cool too.

ch2008

I have to admit that i thought he was a bit young but someones just pointed out to me that Fitzgeralds actually younger. Not an indictment of Earls, but just an example of how someone whos good enough is old enough

Stealdo

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Well in fairness, I don't see much of Murphy, and I'd say a lot of Irish people don't, because he plays abroad.

As a result it's easy to get caught up in reputation.

But with his try scoring ratio I'd want him in the squad for sure.


Full backs are primarily defensive, but only because you make them that way. If you look at the French, the full back really operates as a winger for the centre, with a lot of running and seeking out gaps, etc.

Our style of play requires a defensive full back, which Kearney is a fine example of - a different style of play might want a different style of fullback - Murphy gives that kind of option.

I don't go out of my way to watch Leicester in GP - if it's on great. I think too many people are happy to watch a 5 minute highlight pack and make decisions based on that, or on the analysis pieces in the papers leading up to games. His try scoring record is good, no doubt, but I'm obviously going to say there's more to the decision than that alone. I think the French situation is exceptional, but guys like Poitrenaud are actually worse than Murphy in many ways you're right.
Murphy is obviously a talented guy, my view is that so many commentators, like the otherwise great Thornley, cheerlead for him for so many years that they're actually blinkered when it comes to his short comings and this feeds public opinion. If someone says as you do, I think he has scored plenty of tries, has lots of internation experience and is a valuable part of the team then that's a point of view and fine.
Mine is more, he's a poor tackler, he's average for a full back under a high ball, his position is questionable etc

Amazotheamazing

ch2008 wrote: »

I have to admit that i thought he was a bit young but someones just pointed out to me that Fitzgeralds actually younger. Not an indictment of Earls, but just an example of how someone whos good enough is old enough

Your source is wrong, Earls is a few weeks younger than Fitz.

anonymous_joe

Stealdo wrote: »

I don't go out of my way to watch Leicester in GP - if it's on great. I think too many people are happy to watch a 5 minute highlight pack and make decisions based on that, or on the analysis pieces in the papers leading up to games. His try scoring record is good, no doubt, but I'm obviously going to say there's more to the decision than that alone. I think the French situation is exceptional, but guys like Poitrenaud are actually worse than Murphy in many ways you're right.
Murphy is obviously a talented guy, my view is that so many commentators, like the otherwise great Thornley, cheerlead for him for so many years that they're actually blinkered when it comes to his short comings and this feeds public opinion. If someone says as you do, I think he has scored plenty of tries, has lots of internation experience and is a valuable part of the team then that's a point of view and fine.
Mine is more, he's a poor tackler, he's average for a full back under a high ball, his position is questionable etc

I'm a Leinster fan whose happiest memories involve that game against Toulouse.

Basically, I'm a romantic - I would always take the flair player even if there's a chance of them fooking up. It's how I am. :pac:

rugbynut

The Irish seem really concerned about the age of players. But O'Driscoll was 21 when he scored 3 tries against France. The new French centre is only 19. Other conuntries seemed to have the mantra ' if you're good enough you're old enough'

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Your source is wrong, Earls is a few weeks younger than Fitz.

rugbynut

rugbynut wrote: »

The Irish seem really concerned about the age of players. But O'Driscoll was 21 when he scored 3 tries against France. The new French centre is only 19. Other conuntries seemed to have the mantra ' if you're good enough you're old enough'

Yeah but Fitzgerald is a rare case.He was playing profesional rugby consistently alot sooner than Earls probably nearly 2 years ahead of him in terms of development,because Earls only started playing consistently this year or at the end of last year.

I agree if your good enough your old enough but they are at completely different stages in terms of hours played at top level.If Earls was good enough he would have played,it wasnt because he is young.Im not questioning his talent but in terms of his rugby brain debvelopment,experience and defence he obviously isnt ready.

Amazotheamazing

Aubrey Uneven Beginner wrote: »

Yeah but Fitzgerald is a rare case.He was playing profesional rugby consistently alot sooner than Earls probably nearly 2 years ahead of him in terms of development,because Earls only started playing consistently this year or at the end of last year.

I agree if your good enough your old enough but they are at completely different stages in terms of hours played at top level.If Earls was good enough he would have played,it wasnt because he is young.Im not questioning his talent but in terms of his rugby brain debvelopment,experience and defence he obviously isnt ready.

Also, it's far easier to break into the Leinster team at the minute than it is to break into the Munster one.

remus808

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Also, it's far easier to break into the Leinster team at the minute than it is to break into the Munster one.

For a back? I think not.

Amazotheamazing

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Also, it's far easier to break into the Leinster team at the minute than it is to break into the Munster one.

Thats not true at all.
When he broke in he was fighting for his place with hickie,Dempsey and Horgan.

Earls is the same age,who was he fighting for his place with at 18?
Howlett wasnt there,I dont think tipoki or mafi were either was Cullen there?
Munster had no back line when he was 18,no excuse that he didnt break in then.


He was a prodigy at schools level ,he is good enough but he has a complete game now due to Leinster signing him at 18 and he was good enough to play for Leinster at a young age.

Amazotheamazing

Aubrey Uneven Beginner wrote: »

Thats not true at all.
When he broke in he was fighting for his place with hickie,Dempsey and Horgan.

Earls is the same age,who was he fighting for his place with at 18?Howlett wasnt there,I dont think tipoki of mafi were either ,Cullen was crocked etc


He was a prodigy at schools level ,he is good enough but he has a complete game now due to Leinster signing him at 18 and he was good enough to play for Leinster at a young age.

Firstly Fitz hasn't nailed down his specific spot yet with either either Ireland or Leinster, last Autumn he was a centre, now he's a winger, the guy himself wants to play fullback.

Secondly, Fitz only really got his chance when Hickie retired, up to then he was mostly coming on as a sub. Around the same time, Dempsey got injured, which allowed Kearney get a serious run at fullback, but even at the start of this season, Kearney was preferred as a winger ahead of playing Fitz on the wing.

Earls is different, in Munster we had Payne at fullback (Earls only started playing fullback this year), Howlett on the wing (Earls has rarely played on the wing for Munster but played there a lot for Garryowen last year), Dowling on the other (who is one of our most important defensive players) and Tipoki at 13 (probably our best back last year, imo).

Ultimately, it's harder to break into a team which is going for a second HEC in three years than one which has had a lot of injuries and a high profile retirement.

Amazotheamazing

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Firstly Fitz hasn't nailed down his specific spot yet with either either Ireland or Leinster, last Autumn he was a centre, now he's a winger, the guy himself wants to play fullback.

Secondly, Fitz only really got his chance when Hickie retired, up to then he was mostly coming on as a sub. Around the same time, Dempsey got injured, which allowed Kearney get a serious run at fullback, but even at the start of this season, Kearney was preferred as a winger ahead of playing Fitz on the wing.

Earls is different, in Munster we had Payne at fullback (Earls only started playing fullback this year), Howlett on the wing (Earls has rarely played on the wing for Munster but played there a lot for Garryowen last year), Dowling on the other (who is one of our most important defensive players) and Tipoki at 13 (probably our best back last year, imo).

Ultimately, it's harder to break into a team which is going for a second HEC in three years than one which has had a lot of injuries and a high profile retirement.

What was the Munster backline when Earls was 18?
I didnt think Howeltt was there?

Questions still have to be asked as to why he is only getting gametime in recent times.

Amazotheamazing

Aubrey Uneven Beginner wrote: »

What was the Munster backline when Earls was 18?
I didnt think Howeltt was there?

Questions still have to be asked as to why he is only getting gametime in recent times.

Earls isn't a wing, so it doesn't matter if Howlett was here or not, imo.

Kidney (as Munster coach) was asked about this, and he replied "we don't make it easy to get into this team". The fact is, Earls had to work on his game and serve his apprenticeship in the AIL, like every homegrown Munster player. The last time we (really) rushed a player through was Jeremy Staunton, and Brian O'Brien has said publicly it was a mistake which shattered Staunton's confidence. We're lucky we have a good number of top level AIL clubs we can rely on to develop players.

All that being said, Kidney still had him on the bench for the HEC final last year, he was ready if we needed to call him.

I'm not praising Earls just for the fun of it, I think he's going to be a top class player provided his body can take pro rugby.