Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Would you sack Kidney, yay, or nay ?

Options
1…910121415…18

Comments

  • Options
    #332
    Kayless
    Registered Users Posts: 817 ✭✭✭Kayless


    the man needs to go... I watched the team announcement today and I get his point about "if their good enough to play France, their good enough to play Italy" but wheres the adventure? Whats the point having the likes of Ryan in the team if your not even going to start him? IMO this justifies what people having been saying about kidney and the sooner we get someone that's willing to experiment and make bold decisions the sooner we can win another grand slam ect and be the team most people know we are... Fortune favours the bold


  • Options
    #333
    nerd69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,832 ✭✭✭nerd69


    Kayless wrote: »
    the man needs to go... I watched the team announcement today and I get his point about "if their good enough to play France, their good enough to play Italy" but wheres the adventure? Whats the point having the likes of Ryan in the team if your not even going to start him? IMO this justifies what people having been saying about kidney and the sooner we get someone that's willing to experiment and make bold decisions the sooner we can win another grand slam ect and be the team most people know we are... Fortune favours the bold

    iv always been a fan of kidney but the selection is strange if your trying to bring young players through (sexton, murray) why is doc starting instead of ryan or touhy its the one selection i really cant get my head around


  • Options
    #334
    CatFromHue
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,147 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    Deleted User wrote: »
    just going to leave this here.
    Cumulative winrate under Declan.

    Super Start but...

    193632.JPG

    Spot the introduction of the new rules into the game...

    Can you explain the graph a bit more, I'm not fully sure what I'm looking at e.g. what is title of the vertical axis?


  • Options
    #335
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    CatFromHue wrote: »
    Deleted User wrote: »
    just going to leave this here.
    Cumulative winrate under Declan.

    Super Start but...

    193632.JPG

    Spot the introduction of the new rules into the game...

    Can you explain the graph a bit more, I'm not fully sure what I'm looking at e.g. what is title of the vertical axis?
    Basically the blue line represents our overall win % under Kidney over time.

    The red line represents the win rate of the previous 5 games at any point in time.


  • Options
    #336
    danthefan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭danthefan


    And 1 = 100% I would assume as we went unbeaten in 2009.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #337
    thebaz
    Registered Users Posts: 13,624 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    the problem with kidney is, he never sees any need to change - the only graph I see is Ireland going sideways , and a little bit down , month by month


  • Options
    #338
    leonard7
    Registered Users Posts: 556 ✭✭✭leonard7


    been away for two weeks and come back to the news that kidney hasnt changed the team...no surprise there! would've like to have seen mcfadden given a chance at 12 with o malley at 13 even just to see it one game...now i know people say italy arent going to sit down without a fight but i think its paying more disrespect to italy starting DOC, D'Arcy and Earls (at 13)! im now left think what if the france game had been played....when do the chances end deccie...when will you drop someone!!!!!!AHHH


  • Options
    #339
    totallegend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Basically the blue line represents our overall win % under Kidney over time.

    The red line represents the win rate of the previous 5 games at any point in time.

    Here is a simpler diagram to represent the health of the national team:

    Flatline.jpg


  • Options
    #340
    JustinDee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    Kayless wrote: »
    the man needs to go... I watched the team announcement today and I get his point about "if their good enough to play France, their good enough to play Italy" but wheres the adventure? Whats the point having the likes of Ryan in the team if your not even going to start him? IMO this justifies what people having been saying about kidney and the sooner we get someone that's willing to experiment and make bold decisions the sooner we can win another grand slam ect and be the team most people know we are... Fortune favours the bold

    When top RWC 2015 seedings are achieved then "experimentation" can take place.
    Not before.


  • Options
    #341
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,889 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    JustinDee wrote: »
    When top RWC 2015 seedings are achieved then "experimentation" can take place.
    Not before.

    It's not experimentation if the current players and tactics aren't cutting it.

    The way Kidney ua going we won't achieve top seeding


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #342
    Wynter Sparse Noblewoman
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Wynter Sparse Noblewoman


    JustinDee wrote: »
    When top RWC 2015 seedings are achieved then "experimentation" can take place.
    Not before.

    Surely picking the best players in their best positions is hardly being "experimental"?

    Or perhaps playing to a script/gameplan that has actually brought about any form of success in the past 2 years?

    There's "experimenting" by throwing Fitz at 12 with Bowe at 13, and then there's "making good decisions" like getting Ryan or Tuohy to start, and asking players not to kick the ball away whenever we have it for more than 3 phases.

    The definition of experimenting isn't "doing anything that isn't exactly what you've been doing for 3 years".


  • Options
    #343
    shuffol
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,883 ✭✭✭shuffol


    It seems to be an Irish thing to place a massive weighting on experience above all else but there comes a time when experience turns into predictability, I think we crossed that line a while ago.


  • Options
    #344
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    nerd69 wrote: »
    not cheika its a step sideways what about connor o shea or michael bradley

    Neither are ready to coach a top 8 international side.


  • Options
    #345
    tolosenc
    Registered Users Posts: 6,889 ✭✭✭tolosenc


    JustinDee wrote: »
    When top RWC 2015 seedings are achieved then "experimentation" can take place.
    Not before.

    We are on course for to be a 3rd seed. That is not acceptable. We need to experiment to stop that from happening, as the status quo has us on one trajectory only.


  • Options
    #346
    JustinDee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    tolosenc wrote: »
    We are on course for to be a 3rd seed. That is not acceptable. We need to experiment to stop that from happening, as the status quo has us on one trajectory only.
    If Ireland beat Italy and France over the next two weeks, would you say this course of woe betide doom you see is still there?


  • Options
    #347
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    JustinDee wrote: »
    tolosenc wrote: »
    We are on course for to be a 3rd seed. That is not acceptable. We need to experiment to stop that from happening, as the status quo has us on one trajectory only.
    If Ireland beat Italy and France over the next two weeks, would you say this course of woe betide doom you see is still there?
    If world rankings are such a high priority then why schedule a 3 test tour to a nation we've never beat in our history right before the seeding deadline?


  • Options
    #348
    JustinDee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    If world rankings are such a high priority then why schedule a 3 test tour to a nation we've never beat in our history right before the seeding deadline?

    Because its international rugby. Why wilt away from the top level if you're a competitive international professional sportsman? This isn't Tyson v Cummins.
    Seeding deadline is up following the November tests, as it was in 2008.


  • Options
    #349
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    JustinDee wrote: »
    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    If world rankings are such a high priority then why schedule a 3 test tour to a nation we've never beat in our history right before the seeding deadline?

    Because its international rugby. Why wilt away from the top level if you're a competitive international professional sportsman? This isn't Tyson v Cummins.
    Seeding deadline is up following the November tests, as it was in 2008.
    So we can use the excuse to hide behind when it comes to our selection policy, but not in who we schedule tests against?


  • Options
    #350
    Otacon
    Registered Users Posts: 6,721 ✭✭✭Otacon


    If we lose to New Zealand, because of the way the rankings are calculated, it won't impact us too much.

    However, if we win against them, away from home, then we would get a huge boost to our ranking figure.


  • Options
    #351
    totallegend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,234 ✭✭✭totallegend


    Otacon wrote: »
    If we lose to New Zealand, because of the way the rankings are calculated, it won't impact us too much.

    However, if we win against them, away from home, then we would get a huge boost to our ranking figure.

    Spot on.

    This means, of course, that a win this weekend at home against Italy is of very little benefit in terms of ranking points...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #352
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,889 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I don't think we'd lose any ranking points from losing away to NZ would we?


  • Options
    #353
    CatFromHue
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,147 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    I don't think we'd lose any ranking points from losing away to NZ would we?

    I think we will but not a huge amount of they're ranked No.1 and we're ranked No.8.

    Q. How do you allow for home advantage?

    When calculating points exchanges, the home side is treated as though they are three rating points better than their current rating. This has the effect of 'handicapping' the home side as they will tend to pick up fewer points for winning and give away more points for losing. In this way, the advantage of playing at home is cancelled out.

    Q. How important is 'margin of victory' under the system?

    The research suggested that match results are more important than margins of victory in producing accurate rankings. For instance, whether a side wins by 60 points or 100 points against much lower-rated opposition is not a good indicator of future performance.

    However, the analysis also indicated that it is significant whether sides win relatively comfortably - with 'something to spare' - so a weighting is applied where a side wins a match by more than 15 points.

    Q. Do sides earn credit for losing narrowly to higher rated opponents?

    No they don't. In this system, you can't win points for losing, or lose points for winning. While it may be attractive to award points for heroic defeats, it is less appealing to deduct points from a team that has won. If the close match was an indication of a genuine shift in relative strength, this would be reflected in other results.

    http://www.irb.com/rankings/explain/index.html


  • Options
    #354
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    JustinDee wrote: »
    If Ireland beat Italy and France over the next two weeks, would you say this course of woe betide doom you see is still there?

    There's that word again Justin! :P

    In fairness we've all been saying it for a while and emmets lovely graph illustrates it quite well. There's been a steady decline over the last 2 years. The course was set back then and we've been going that way for a while.

    If the coaching team can turn it around then we'd all be delighted obviously. But what evidence has there been of that so far? Before the 6 Nations kicked off and we saw the training squad we all suggested it'd be the same old story and we were told we were being ridiculous passing judgement before a ball was kicked and what if we beat Wales well etc. Then when the 6 Nations squad and match day squad was announced for Wales we all did the same little dance again. Then we played Wales, and boy was the ball kicked, and we lost to the better side.

    Now we're going into a run of 4 weeks in a row. We already know that, injury permitting, we'll have the same side for the next 2 games at least. Between that and the fact that we were right about the approach in the Wales game we're expressing our concern to be met with "what if we beat France". We can't continually ignore the past and look to the next game in the hope that things will suddenly turn around with the same coaching staff and the same team we've seen continuously over the last 2 years. At what point do we stop and take a look at the whole picture? Surely Deccie doesn't have the IRFU focusing solely on the next game as well does he!?
    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    If world rankings are such a high priority then why schedule a 3 test tour to a nation we've never beat in our history right before the seeding deadline?
    Podge_irl wrote: »
    I don't think we'd lose any ranking points from losing away to NZ would we?

    I don't think we've too much to worry about rankings wise outside of the Scotland game. I'd expect that we would win against Italy this weekend. Losing to France and England (should that happen) won't affect us too much. We'll be away from home to sides ranked ahead of us so it shouldn't impact much. The same with the tour to NZ. Even a loss to Scotland may not be enough to knock us out of the top 8 - had they beaten England that would have been a very different story I though I think.

    The only unknown at this stage is the AIs and our opposition there. We need to beat England and Scotland really though to be sure. Which in itself is a damning indictment of Deccies tenure. How we could be flirting with potential 3rd tier seeding given our squad is incredible if you ask me...


  • Options
    #355
    Wynter Sparse Noblewoman
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Wynter Sparse Noblewoman


    JustinDee wrote: »
    If Ireland beat Italy and France over the next two weeks, would you say this course of woe betide doom you see is still there?

    The man who bets his entire life earnings on a 0 on a roulette wheel is an idiot 35/36 times, and a genius 1 in 36 times.

    If you watched him lose 35 spins in a row, and then saw him win the one, would you think he's "got it right"?

    Though exaggeration, there's an element of this to what you've just asked.

    If the roulette guy wins his next bet, is he an idiot or a genius?
    If we beat Italy and France, is this team suddenly a world beater again? Is our coach suddenly a genius once more? Is our gameplan rock solid?


  • Options
    #356
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,889 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    CatFromHue wrote: »
    I think we will but not a huge amount of they're ranked No.1 and we're ranked No.8.

    Home advantage taken into account, they're about 14 points ahead of us. Anything over 10 and you can't lose any points (unless I'm reading that wrong).

    Losses against France and England and wins against Scotland and Italy would have us hovering roughly where we are now (down a bit I think).

    It'll come down to who we have in the AIs really (unless we somehow manage to beat France or England).


  • Options
    #357
    twinytwo
    Registered Users Posts: 5,217 ✭✭✭twinytwo


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The man who bets his entire life earnings on a 0 on a roulette wheel is an idiot 35/36 times, and a genius 1 in 36 times.

    If you watched him lose 35 spins in a row, and then saw him win the one, would you think he's "got it right"?

    Though exaggeration, there's an element of this to what you've just asked.

    If the roulette guy wins his next bet, is he an idiot or a genius?
    If we beat Italy and France, is this team suddenly a world beater again? Is our coach suddenly a genius once more? Is our gameplan rock solid?

    we wont for one simple reason.. even if we beat italy and give france a run with sob and ferris laying waste to all before them, POC catching lineouts like they were babies etc etc...

    Kidney will still.....
    Have them play to some stupid game plan instead of having them kill everything in a blue jersey that moves.
    play Doc
    play murray with sexton
    not use our subs except for rog/reddan

    and even by the grace of god he does it will be at the completly wrong time.


  • Options
    #358
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    The point is not how many points we'll lose against the kiwis, but rather how many we could have been winning somewhere else.

    I am looking forward to the kiwi tour, I can't wait for a shot at them again, but Justin is giving the impression that the management are worried about losing a small amount of ranking points against Italy, so surely they're petrified of losing a small amount of rankings points three times in a row against New Zealand?


  • Options
    #359
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,889 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    The point is not how many points we'll lose against the kiwis, but rather how many we could have been winning somewhere else.

    I am looking forward to the kiwi tour, I can't wait for a shot at them again, but Justin is giving the impression that the management are worried about losing a small amount of ranking points against Italy, so surely they're petrified of losing a small amount of rankings points three times in a row against New Zealand?

    Again, from my understanding of the rules we'd lose zero. In one respect that makes it more sensible then going to Aus/SA where we could lose some.

    The only place we could tour where we would have a reasonable shot of winning and earning points is Argentina really.


  • Options
    #360
    andrewdcs
    Registered Users Posts: 1,106 ✭✭✭andrewdcs


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    The point is not how many points we'll lose against the kiwis, but rather how many we could have been winning somewhere else.

    I am looking forward to the kiwi tour, I can't wait for a shot at them again, but Justin is giving the impression that the management are worried about losing a small amount of ranking points against Italy, so surely they're petrified of losing a small amount of rankings points three times in a row against New Zealand?


    I think (though pretty sure some clever clogs will look it up... damn internet) it's based on the chess system, with home and away biasing so loosing away to someone way above you costs you very little, its losing at home to someone way below you you are hosed, so Italy would see us out of the seeds and into a group with two other top tier teams. Nightmare for them, nightmare for us.

    We'd then have to beat France away to claw our way back in


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #361
    JustinDee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    Deleted User wrote: »
    If we beat Italy and France, is this team suddenly a world beater again? Is our coach suddenly a genius once more? Is our gameplan rock solid?
    Of course it would mean a world class team. Two defeats of two worthy opponents.

    I'd be expecting the usual comments in the event of a win nonetheless ("flukey", "bad thing for the team" etc etc).


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement