The Close Calls - Which way will they go?

Username37

I am just wondering whats the general consensus on how they'll go. I believe Kidney will opt for the following:

Mick O'Driscoll v Toner

Jonathan Sexton v O'Gara

Wallace v O'Brien

Cronin v Best

Hayes v Tom Court

Kearney v Murphy

However I'd like Kidney to pick Toner, Sexton, O'Brien, Cronin, Court and Murphy

phog

I hope he does

bleg

Wallace v O Brien isn't a close call. O Brien will probably have his day in the future but next week shouldn't be it.

Username37

I think you might want to look at the pick your team threads, A LOT of people have O'Brien ahead of Wallace (I think the majority do actually) so its quite clearly a closer call than you think. Though maybe not in the eyes of Kidney (then again in the eyes of Kidney Hayes over Court, MOD over Toner wont even be close calls!)

CouchSmart

The only thing keeping SOB and Wallace as a close call is experience and we all know there's only one way to get that.

Username37

CouchSmart wrote: »

The only thing keeping SOB and Wallace as a close call is experience and we all know there's only one way to get that.

I think O'Brien should definitely be given a chance against New Zealand. The only experience Wallace has against New Zealand is getting bested by McCaw. I'm not saying O'Brien won't but at least give him the chance. Hes a young lad who is now more powerful than Wallace, he'll relish the opportunity to play against McCaw.

CouchSmart

Username37 wrote: »

I think O'Brien should definitely be given a chance against New Zealand. The only experience Wallace has against New Zealand is getting bested by McCaw. I'm not saying O'Brien won't but at least give him the chance. Hes a young lad who is now more powerful than Wallace, he'll relish the opportunity to play against McCaw.

This is what I was saying. We seem to have a problem in Ireland where a younger player doesn't get a look in against an incumbent and then to defend it we're given the old classic - we need experience. Would love to see what this Ireland team would be capable of with the Aussie mentality, out with the old, in with the new.

Username37

CouchSmart wrote: »

This is what I was saying. We seem to have a problem in Ireland where a younger player doesn't get a look in against an incumbent and then to defend it we're given the old classic - we need experience. Would love to see what this Ireland team would be capable of with the Aussie mentality, out with the old, in with the new.

It's crazy. I mean look at the quality of players New Zealand have in every position and yet they STILL find space to give young players a go. England, Wales, New Zealand, Australia, France, South Africa they all have given youth a go in the big games. In Ireland Kidney played Sexton. O'Brien came on in a big game because of injury. Earls got his chance in big games because of injury, Muldoon got his chance in big games because of injury, Healy got his chance in big games because of injury, McLaughlin got his chance in big games because of injury, Ruddock got his chance in big games because of injury, you can see where I am going with this.

The current managment are very similar to O'Sullivan, if its a big game the jersey is yours...unless your injured or playing freakishly better than your opposite number (Sexton last season)

hurleronditch

I think kidney and o sullivan before him werent as slow to bring in new guys as people make out. granted mick o driscoll being picked is beyond silly at this point but all of healy, kearney, fitzgerald, sexton (albeit slightly belatedly with the weird persistence with pw as backup ten) and ferris all got in very young, when the men they more or less replaced ie horan, murphy/dempsey, horgan, ogara and quinlan/easterby were still performing at a high level.

Granted O'Brien is pushing wallace and its a coin toss for me as to who should start, but its not like wallace is over the hill and rubbish, he still has a lot to offer this irish team, and on balance has been the best irish back-row over the last ten years (heaslip is better but is only world class for last few years).

Toner in for micko is a must. Leo if fit is a better played but toner could be huge (bad pun) for us for the next 8 years if he is blooded right.

Im a munster man, but i feel that sexton is a better player than ogara. Bar the wembley game where he was awesome, he hasnt been superb (largely due to injury) this season though, so if ogara did start it wouldnt be the end of the world. I think kidney has picked sexton enough at this stage to show that he certainly views him as his long term ten and its not a biased choice to throw ogara in next week if he does.

O'brien deserves a start, though i think it may be worth looking at chopping ferris. he hasnt been great this year, and i think o'brien has been excellent as a 6 this year, and playing 2 sevens may be suited to playing the AB's. ferris is versatile and the wake up call of being benched may not be the worst thing for him.

Id love to see cronin start, think hes a fantastic player.

We know what hayes can do, he was average against samoa, and to be honest at this stage i think teh world cup looks a long way away for him. he is really showing the miles on the clock. Id be giving court and ross some th time (i dont think ross is good enough tbh), and hoping we can pull two international class th's from those 3 (incl buckley) over the next year. If we cant, we know hayes is there but lets only have it as a backup backup.

replacement full back is a bit moot as i imagine that fitzgerald will go there if rk isnt fit, with trimble or earls in at 11, probably earls but he might need a half against the aussies on tuesday to put a few yards in the legs.

CouchSmart

hurleronditch wrote: »

I think kidney and o sullivan before him werent as slow to bring in new guys as people make out. granted mick o driscoll being picked is beyond silly at this point but all of healy, kearney, fitzgerald, sexton (albeit slightly belatedly with the weird persistence with pw as backup ten) and ferris all got in very young, when the men they more or less replaced ie horan, murphy/dempsey, horgan, ogara and quinlan/easterby were still performing at a high level.

Healy got in when Horan was injured, Kearney replaced Dempsey at Leinster first, Fitz came in for the retiring Hickie and Sexton only just got in last year because of ROG's terrible performances last year. The fact Sexton didn't start all 3 last year still annoys me but that's all in the past. Easterbys last games for Ireland were terrible after he was begged by EOS not to retire, thus leading to Ferris coming in. EOS did have that one experimental game against the Pacific Islanders, and I use experimental lightly.

hurleronditch wrote: »

O'brien deserves a start, though i think it may be worth looking at chopping ferris. he hasnt been great this year, and i think o'brien has been excellent as a 6 this year, and playing 2 sevens may be suited to playing the AB's. ferris is versatile and the wake up call of being benched may not be the worst thing for him.

Ferris has been out performing Wally this year though. In fact Wally hasn't even had that many starts so it'd be fairly harsh dropping Fez IMO.

subfreq

Username37 wrote: »

It's crazy. I mean look at the quality of players New Zealand have in every position and yet they STILL find space to give young players a go. England, Wales, New Zealand, Australia, France, South Africa they all have given youth a go in the big games. In Ireland Kidney played Sexton. O'Brien came on in a big game because of injury. Earls got his chance in big games because of injury, Muldoon got his chance in big games because of injury, Healy got his chance in big games because of injury, McLaughlin got his chance in big games because of injury, Ruddock got his chance in big games because of injury, you can see where I am going with this.

The current managment are very similar to O'Sullivan, if its a big game the jersey is yours...unless your injured or playing freakishly better than your opposite number (Sexton last season)

As a bit of an outsider, well ten year blow in, I am hearing more and more that it's not down to Kidney but this is a long held problem in Irish Rugby.

You can't get selected until you prove beyond unreasonable doubt that you probably should have been given a chance a season or two ago.

Badgermonkey

When did O'Sullivan bring in youth??

I'd agree on Ferris though, he has yet to consistently deliver as a big game player a la Heaslip.

bamboozle

i was disgusted with wallace's performance (or lack thereof) against SA, when juan smith intercepted for his try you can see wallace who is the next nearest to smith jogging back after him whereas heaslip speeds past him bursting a gut to get back.

sure Wallace can carry ball but i dont ever recall seeing him put in a bit hit in his career.
i'm already resigned to a poor world cup next year as kidney is doing his best not to give younger players an opportunity to garner some top level experience.

Mr Tim Buktoo

Username37 wrote: »

I think O'Brien should definitely be given a chance against New Zealand. The only experience Wallace has against New Zealand is getting bested by McCaw. I'm not saying O'Brien won't but at least give him the chance. Hes a young lad who is now more powerful than Wallace, he'll relish the opportunity to play against McCaw.

Bull****!
wallace is still by far the most powerful and effective ball carrier we have. o brien did **** all yesterday and has a long way to go before he will be as good as wallace.

Username37

Mr Tim Buktoo wrote: »

Bull****!
wallace is still by far the most powerful and effective ball carrier we have. o brien did **** all yesterday and has a long way to go before he will be as good as wallace.

Yeah because Wallace was so effective against South Africa. At least O'Brien actually carried. I dont think I saw Wallace do one thing of note in the South African game. And as another poster said Heaslip ran past him at one stage chasing down a player because Wallace was jogging....disgraceful

thehighground

Username37 wrote: »

Yeah because Wallace was so effective against South Africa. At least O'Brien actually carried. I dont think I saw Wallace do one thing of note in the South African game. And as another poster said Heaslip ran past him at one stage chasing down a player because Wallace was jogging....disgraceful

Wallace was, along with Rory Best, Ireland's top tackler. Heaslip was doing the showy stuff

CouchSmart

thehighground wrote: »

Wallace was, along with Rory Best, Ireland's top tackler.

Only because SOB wasn't playing. :D

Username37

thehighground wrote: »

Wallace was, along with Rory Best, Ireland's top tackler. Heaslip was doing the showy stuff

Other than Buckley the whole pack made 10-13 tackles. Heaslip had 8 tackles but was carrying effectively (Wallace made little ground) and constantly competing on the ground. Wallace did none of this in fact, with the same amount of carries Heaslip made more than 3 times the ground!!! 69 metres to Wallace's 22

bleg

Why are you comparing Heaslip and Wallace, I thought O Brien was the contender. He was poor yesterday against poor opposition. If he had taken the bull by the horns then there would be something to say about including him but on merit O Brien doesn't deserve to start vs NZ.

CouchSmart

bleg wrote: »

on merit O Brien doesn't deserve to start vs NZ.

No problem with this. But on merit does Wally?

Ct25

CouchSmart wrote: »

No problem with this. But on merit does Wally?

No he doesnt......but WHO on form deserves to start? and who on merit will start!

Unfortunately at the minute? what irish player has put their hand up for selection against the All blacks! or against any1

hurleronditch

CouchSmart wrote: »

No problem with this. But on merit does Wally?

So to extend this logic if neither deserves to start on merit, then you are castigating the coach for picking the experienced player who is established in his position for a game against the best team in the world??

rrrriiiiight

phog

CouchSmart wrote: »

No problem with this. But on merit does Wally?

A coach once told me, the player that wants to take the jersey from the current player has to be not alone as good as that player but about 15% better for him to break into the team.

All coaches will trust the devil they know.

CouchSmart

Ct25 wrote: »

No he doesnt......but WHO on form deserves to start? and who on merit will start!

Unfortunately at the minute? what irish player has put their hand up for selection against the All blacks! or against any1

Prior to yesterday SOB was the player in form. His inexperience showed agains Samoa but the only cure for this is from playing and thus gaining experience.

hurleronditch wrote: »

So to extend this logic if neither deserves to start on merit, then you are castigating the coach for picking the experienced player who is established in his position for a game against the best team in the world??

rrrriiiiight

Personally I would pick the less experienced player who is currently playing better than the incumbent. My real point was that some people are quick to say SOB doesn't deserve to start and all I was saying was does Wally?

CouchSmart

phog wrote: »

A coach once told me, the player that wants to take the jersey from the current player has to be not alone as good as that player but about 15% better for him to break into the team.

All coaches will trust the devil they know.

This is the problem with Irish Rugby.

phog

CouchSmart wrote: »

This is the problem with Irish Rugby.

How many teams have you coached and with what success?

CouchSmart

phog wrote: »

How many teams have you coached and with what success?

0. With 0 success. But hey 0 losses too. I didn't know we had to be qualified coaches to post our opinions on this forum, I best be off so.

Ct25

CouchSmart wrote: »

This is the problem with Irish Rugby.

That isn't really a problem, why would you change a player if the only option you have is not an improvement. Its different for Internationals obviously due to all players having a chance to play with clubs/provincials!

For Internationals however, you would only change a player who has lost form or injured......

International games dont happen on a weekly basis, so combinations cant just happen, they need to be formed!

Also i dont believe DK has a clue what is best team is,

I also have a 0 loss record!!!

Teg Veece

bleg wrote: »

Why are you comparing Heaslip and Wallace, I thought O Brien was the contender.

Because Heaslip plays for Leinster and Wallace plays for Munster, obviously.

Wallace is not at his best at the moment. I guess that's what getting old does to you. Unfortunately, he's still the best option that we have at 7 and so he should get the nod.

The game against Argentina is a better chance for SOB to try again with making an impression. Kidney won't be doing him many favours by sending him out against the All Blacks just to have is ass handed to him.

CouchSmart

Ct25 wrote: »

That isn't really a problem, why would you change a player if the only option you have is not an improvement.

This isn't a problem. When a player has to play 15% better than the incumbent then you have a problem

Ct25 wrote: »

Also i dont believe DK has a clue what is best team is,

He doesn't seem to have a clue e.g. MOD.

hurleronditch

CouchSmart wrote: »

Personally I would pick the less experienced player who is currently playing better than the incumbent. My real point was that some people are quick to say SOB doesn't deserve to start and all I was saying was does Wally?

That makes little to no sense. There is very little between sean o brien and wally on current form as i think everyone here is agreed. Any coach in world rugby would use a weaker game to give the younger guy some game time to gain experience. if he does well he gets to step up, if not, you go with what you know for the big game. SOB could very well be back in for the argie game. SOB has been and is getting chances.

Wally has been a top notch provincial player and very good international class for 8-10 years now. sean o'brien has been for 18 months or so. this is a totally normal course of action for a coach to take. I dont know what coach wouldnt do it like this. At least we dont have johnson in charge or we would probably have kevin maggs (mike tindall) in the centre.

This isnt micko vs toner/cullen/(even ryan) which is stupidity. this is a guy with still plenty to offer who is playing good rugby holding his place against a younger guy who is playing well, but not currently ripping up trees.

phog

CouchSmart wrote: »

This isn't a problem. When a player has to play 15% better than the incumbent then you have a problem



He doesn't seem to have a clue e.g. MOD.

I see you didnt take you own advice

CouchSmart

hurleronditch wrote: »

There is very little between sean o brien and wally on current form as i think everyone here is agreed.

SOB has been in much better form, winning numerous man of the matches for Leinster. Wally was dropped from the Munster team, for the Leinster and LI games, for Ronan, that to me says it all. He didn't do much against a well beaten Toulon pack and was OK against a very poor Treviso pack - their second/third string if I'm thinking correctly.

CouchSmart

phog wrote: »

I see you didnt take you own advice

?

Ct25

CouchSmart wrote: »

This isn't a problem. When a player has to play 15% better than the incumbent then you have a problem



He doesn't seem to have a clue e.g. MOD.

My point was that why would you replace a player with someone who is only playing as well as the incumbent!!

Obviously the player waiting in the wings as such would have to be playing better, otherwise why on earth would you replace the incumbent!

Just for the sake of it!


Ha, yeah well............. MOD is a special player!!

Edit: and also I agree with you that SOB is playing better than Wally....But think after the samoa game, DK will play Wallace and then play SOB against the Argies

CouchSmart

Ct25 wrote: »

My point was that why would you replace a player with someone who is only playing as well as the incumbent!!

Choose one of the following:

• The incumbent is 34.
• To give the younger player valuable experience.

I could also argue SOB's playing better but I've already done that.

funky penguin

Look......

SOB is a FANTASTIC player, we know this. Several MOTM performances so far this season to his name. Came back from a bad injury to again cement his place in Leinster's starting XV.

Wallace, as we all know is a monster. He has proven time and again that he is a backrower to be reckoned with. Lots of experience, lots of tackles and hard yards.

So, who should we start against the All Blacks?

On their last two international games, both were below their usual par. Its slightly unfair to say that given the over-all performance of the Irish team, but there you go.

I think it boils down to this:

In a non-competative test match, do we give the 'chance' to someone we KNOW has the ability to produce in a green jersey, or let the youngster have a shot at playing the best team in the world. You know, give him some of that all important experience.

In my opinion, there is no question. SOB has to start.

Ct25

CouchSmart wrote: »

Choose one of the following:

• The incumbent is 34.
• To give the younger player valuable experience.

I could also argue SOB's playing better but I've already done that.

Ok I was talking about the post which referenced the coach saying a player needed to play 15% better than the incumbent!!

I just agreed than SOB is playing better than Wallace.

as i said tho, I feel DK will go with wallace as a result of SOB not having a great game against samoa! A little harsh.

irishbucsfan

CouchSmart wrote: »

Choose one of the following:

• The incumbent is 34.
• To give the younger player valuable experience.

I could also argue SOB's playing better but I've already done that.

Let's see... Against SA our Back Row was great, and Wallace was a big part of that.

Against Samoa SOB was largely anonymous (although not as bad as I believe Hook would have people believe).

So in terms of International form, SOB is certainly not playing better.

Wallace's age is irrelevant as long as he's still the better player. Kidney has shown that he isn't using these games for development. So Wallace, who is the better 7, should start.

SOB should DEFINITELY be on the bench ahead of Leamy though.

Ct25

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Let's see... Against SA our Back Row was great, and Wallace was a big part of that.

Against Samoa SOB was largely anonymous (although not as bad as I believe Hook would have people believe).

So in terms of International form, SOB is certainly not playing better.

Wallace's age is irrelevant as long as he's still the better player. Kidney has shown that he isn't using these games for development. So Wallace, who is the better 7, should start.

SOB should DEFINITELY be on the bench ahead of Leamy though.

Doesnt matter who is on the Bench, Kidney wont bloody use them for the benefit of the team anyway! unless of course Hayes is on the Bench!

CouchSmart

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Let's see... Against SA our Back Row was great, and Wallace was a big part of that.

Wallace's age is irrelevant as long as he's still the better player.

Can't say I agree with either of these. Obviously you should play your best players up to a point, but age has to be a factor. If you have a player who isn't quite at the same level as another, older player but has the potential to reach even greater heights than the old player surely you must put time into this younger player. As it stands SOB and Wally are playing to the same level with the difference being SOB's potential.

phog

CouchSmart wrote: »

Can't say I agree with either of these. Obviously you should play your best players up to a point, but age has to be a factor. If you have a player who isn't quite at the same level as another, older player but has the potential to reach even greater heights than the old player surely you must put time into this younger player. As it stands SOB and Wally are playing to the same level with the difference being SOB's potential.

So you pick a player that has potential over a player with known form :eek:

irishbucsfan

CouchSmart wrote: »

Can't say I agree with either of these. Obviously you should play your best players up to a point, but age has to be a factor. If you have a player who isn't quite at the same level as another, older player but has the potential to reach even greater heights than the old player surely you must put time into this younger player. As it stands SOB and Wally are playing to the same level with the difference being SOB's potential.

Sorry I can't accept that you think SOB's performance on Saturday has put him ahead of Wallace as an openside His defensive contribution isn't nearly enough. Wallace is fantastic, he's well worth his place in the team. He's not quite Jennings off the ball, but he's more valuable than SOB.

I agree with giving young players a chance, but we can't start youth for the sake of youth, they have to show themselves to be better than the starters at the time. Nothing is for free. SOB is a top talent, and should be a great impact off the bench if Kidney sees the light.

CouchSmart

phog wrote: »

So you pick a player that has potential over a player with known form :eek:

To clarify (though I think you're just reading what you want) if two players are in good form and the younger player is playing close to the level of the incumbent I would play the new player. Think Pocock - Smith.

CouchSmart

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Sorry I can't accept that you think SOB's performance on Saturday has put him ahead of Wallace as an openside His defensive contribution isn't nearly enough.

I've said before I don't think SOB's performance yesterday was good - though not as bad as people would have you believe. His defensive issues were just down to inexperience, which is something you have to learn by playing. Wallace in my eyes hasn't out performed SOB once this season. Neither performed to standard in the two internationals they played this season and as such they should be judged on provincial performance, potential etc - not just he's the incumbent therefore it's his jersey.

thehighground

CouchSmart wrote: »

SOB has been in much better form, winning numerous man of the matches for Leinster. Wally was dropped from the Munster team, for the Leinster and LI games, for Ronan, that to me says it all. He didn't do much against a well beaten Toulon pack and was OK against a very poor Treviso pack - their second/third string if I'm thinking correctly.

Wally wasn't dropped from the Munster team. He was late coming back, first of all because he was touring in the summer. His first 20 minutes of the season was as a sub against Glasgow the week before the Leinster game. His first start of the season was against Toulon (the 2nd week of the Heineken Cup).

He has started 3 games this season for Munster, including 80 mins against Treviso (i.e., Munster were trying to give him as much gametime as possible)!

CouchSmart

thehighground wrote: »

Wally wasn't dropped from the Munster team. He was late coming back, first of all because he was touring in the summer. His first 20 minutes of the season was as a sub against Glasgow the week before the Leinster game. His first start of the season was against Toulon (the 2nd week of the Heineken Cup).

He has started 3 games this season for Munster, including 80 mins against Treviso (i.e., Munster were trying to give him as much gametime as possible)!

Just assumed he was dropped. The other Ireland lads were all well back by the time he got a start, wonder what delayed his return. Age must be catching up.:P

thehighground

CouchSmart wrote: »

Just assumed he was dropped. The other Ireland lads were all well back by the time he got a start, wonder what delayed his return. Age must be catching up.:P

Well, you assumed wrong. He had a back injury.

danthefan

CouchSmart wrote: »

Just assumed he was dropped. The other Ireland lads were all well back by the time he got a start, wonder what delayed his return. Age must be catching up.:P

He benched behind Ronan for two big games, seems pretty dropped to me. I can only assume McGahan then realised Ronan is rubbish.

CouchSmart

thehighground wrote: »

Well, you assumed wrong. He had a back injury.

Should he have come back so soon? Can't be overly cautious with a back injury. Surely if he was fit enough for the bench he was fit enough to start?

thehighground

CouchSmart wrote: »

Should he have come back so soon? Can't be overly cautious with a back injury. Surely if he was fit enough for the bench he was fit enough to start?

Most players get a start from the bench when coming back from an injury (i.e., didn't Leo come on for a few minutes against Saracens?). With just 20 mins under his belt, starting Wally against Leinster wouldn't have been a great plan because of the intensity of that game.

Anyway, Ronan was playing fairly well.