Can Ireland play good attacking rugby in the future without huge centres?

Tox56

Piliger wrote: »

I don't know who said this was a silly topic. It is a critical topic in the current development of the game. If size becomes decisive then it changes one whole area of the game.

'Huge', however, is not needed. But what is needed are centres who can consistently tackle big guys! And right now we don't have them. McFadden, O'Malley, Wallace cannot tackle big guys. They have shown that consistently. D'Arcy can and O'Driscoll can.

D'Arcy and O'Driscoll also developed a double teaming strategy that they honed to perfection. That allowed them to seal off the midfield no matter who the opposition were.

How on earth did you come to that conclusion? I hate using 1 example to prove a point, but Banahan picked out O'Malley and was running fult tilt, and O'Malley dumped him on his backside. Likewise D'Arcy was flattened v France last year by a larger player.

Obviously this isn't conclusive proof, but you cannot simply make a sweeping statement like that, especially when (at least McFadden + EOM) have shown they can. If anything, I would trust those in defence more than D'Arcy as he currently is.

CatFromHue

totallegend wrote: »

Ok, so if we assume that the answer is no, we can't compete with big centres, what do we do then? It's not like D'Arcy, Earls, McFadden are being picked at the expense of a couple of strapping 17 stone monsters, we have to adapt our play to what we have and go from there.

Exactly, we can't play the way we did against Wales again. We were far too slow. If you give a defence time to get set, it will get set. We did this repeatedly in the game. When you're on the defence against bigger players you have to have a good tackling technique (Morgan Parra on Ma Nonu in the RWC final for example). Rob Kearney can't tackle, McFadden has his moments, Trimble tends to run in hard on the guy but get bounced because he doesn't wrap his arms around the tacklee, and D'arcy doesnt look hungry enough (for Wales's first try he wasn't even handed off properly yet still could do nothing to stop Davies even though he had a very good angle on him)

I'm beginning to get worried about the tour to NZ now. If we play against them like we did against Wales we'll get another 66 points put on us.

To put it in perspective our team that day was:

Kearney, Trimble, BOD, D'Arcy, Bowe, ROG, TOL, Heaslip, Wallace, Muldoon, MOD, DOC, Buckley, Cronin, and Healy.

Muldoon, MOD, and Cronin would have been the new/second string players in the team. Buckley was Man of the Match contender that day. It was effectively a first choice backline and they were rubbish.

jimbomalley

Leinster7 wrote: »

As I've mentioned in another post this sort of question really just shows up the ignorance of those people asking it or stating it. Ireland didn't lose to Wales because we have smaller centres. Such nonsense and I urge you to tell those 'people' who are spouting this stuff to learn a bit more about the game of rugby. Conrad Smith was 6,1 if I recall, hardly a monster centre and easily NZ's best centre for years....

What?? :eek: is he shrinking?:D

profitius

totallegend wrote: »

Ok, so if we assume that the answer is no, we can't compete with big centres, what do we do then? It's not like D'Arcy, Earls, McFadden are being picked at the expense of a couple of strapping 17 stone monsters, we have to adapt our play to what we have and go from there.

Play to their strengths. Firstly though its up to the coach to have a gameplan that plays to the strengths of the players. Ireland looked good when they held onto possession and attacked the Welsh.

Big players have weaknesses. They're slower to turn and would struggle to match the workrate of smaller players. For example Vicent Clerc seems to pop up all the time to score for France against us. With a higher workrate it means a team can look like they've more players on the pitch.

shuffol

We've had small centers for the best part of a decade and its only now that their size is becoming an issue, funny that.

Problem isnt small centers but that at the moment we've average test centers who are made to look worse by playing in a side that has no idea what its trying to achieve.

Center is just an area where we are weak at the minute and will be for a few years yet IMO, its only natural after having the same center partnership for 7 years and never looking to develop viable alternatives for a rainy day.

Piliger

CatFromHue wrote: »

Exactly, we can't play the way we did against Wales again. We were far too slow. If you give a defence time to get set, it will get set. We did this repeatedly in the game.

I could not believe how deep we lined up in defence and how slow we were to get out of the blocks when the Welsh swung it wide. It was total suicide. Was this some kind of bizarre new tactic ? it was insane.

GerM

Piliger wrote: »

I could not believe how deep we lined up in defence and how slow we were to get out of the blocks when the Welsh swung it wide. It was total suicide. Was this some kind of bizarre new tactic ? it was insane.

It wasn't according to the players. They were just poor in their line speed and their attacking of the carrier. It was moments like those last 5 minutes where you really saw the value of BOD. He would have stepped up and slammed the door shut in those closing minutes with a big hit. Similar scenarios in the Australia game when he flung himself in with one shoulder in the closing seconds or against S.A. in 2009 when he absolutely buried Kirchner on our own 22 with the last play to kill the move. We just don't have anyone in the back line that can make a play like that when he's gone.

Piliger

GerM wrote: »

We just don't have anyone in the back line that can make a play like that when he's gone.

Total brains and total balls. Legend.

Ardillaun

Benny Cake wrote: »

They play different positions but if it was a straight choice, I'd have Smith over Nonu every time.

Smith and Nonu have complimentary talents. Having somebody like Nonu beside him makes Smith's job a lot easier. And neither of them looked comfortable against Rougerie in the RWC final, esp. in the second half.

We should at least agree that being heavier is an advantage in rugby, other factors being equal. Very few BOD-sized players can compensate for their small size as well he has.

bamboozle

i dont think the size of the centre is critical, what's more important is their ability to pass and offload and even more imporatant is the presence of a game plan to utilise the skill sets of each player to the benefit of the team and to play the best players in their best positions.

rrpc

For me, the effectiveness of centres is predicated on the amount of room and time they have on the ball.

Playing against Wales, our centres were getting the ball (when they got it) in too much traffic to be effective. The Welsh centres otoh were getting so much time and space that they could run at us at will and invariably make good gainline advantage.

siltirocker

Piliger wrote: »

I don't know who said this was a silly topic. It is a critical topic in the current development of the game. If size becomes decisive then it changes one whole area of the game.

'Huge', however, is not needed. But what is needed are centres who can consistently tackle big guys! And right now we don't have them. McFadden, O'Malley, Wallace cannot tackle big guys. They have shown that consistently. D'Arcy can and O'Driscoll can.

D'Arcy and O'Driscoll also developed a double teaming strategy that they honed to perfection. That allowed them to seal off the midfield no matter who the opposition were.

He may be battered to mince meat after (hence the nick name) but his best performances for Ireland in my memory have been for defence against Nonu & Jauzion.

Wallace is great is defence for such a small man IMO. And really gets fcuk all respect from us on these boards.

irishbucsfan

siltirocker wrote: »

Piliger wrote: »

I don't know who said this was a silly topic. It is a critical topic in the current development of the game. If size becomes decisive then it changes one whole area of the game.

'Huge', however, is not needed. But what is needed are centres who can consistently tackle big guys! And right now we don't have them. McFadden, O'Malley, Wallace cannot tackle big guys. They have shown that consistently. D'Arcy can and O'Driscoll can.

D'Arcy and O'Driscoll also developed a double teaming strategy that they honed to perfection. That allowed them to seal off the midfield no matter who the opposition were.

He may be battered to mince meat after (hence the nick name) but his best performances for Ireland in my memory have been for defence against Nonu & Jauzion.

Wallace is great is defence for such a small man IMO. And really gets fcuk all respect from us on these boards.

People just assume he can't tackle because he's small. Those people are just completely wrong. Some people have a bit of a problem with Wallace, although I suppose its understandable that they might develop a grudge against him because of the silly managerial obsession with using him at 10, which even McLoughlin woupdnt do. He's a great defender at 12 and is a great playmaker, I'd personally have him ahead of DArcy.

The Wallace flak amounts from his seemingly incredible ability to pick up "bench caps", i.e spending 80 minutes of an international on the bench. We must remember that this is no fault of his own whatsoever.

Wallace should only ever start, or not be involved, same as D'Arcy, he's simply not a bench option.

I don't understand people questioning the guys defence, his flakiness, (if ever apparent), was in poor decision making going forward. He's an incredibly solid defender!

totallegend

Deleted User wrote: »

The Wallace flak amounts from his seemingly incredible ability to pick up "bench caps", i.e spending 80 minutes of an international on the bench. We must remember that this is no fault of his own whatsoever.

Wallace should only ever start, or not be involved, same as D'Arcy, he's simply not a bench option.

I don't understand people questioning the guys defence, his flakiness, (if ever apparent), was in poor decision making going forward. He's an incredibly solid defender!

All of the above is correct. However, the real reason Wallace is not rated by most people here is that he plays for Ulster and most rugby fans don't bother watching their games.

cork exile in london

As a race i believe we are not generally as big as other nations like england. hence our low number of props and for yrs relying on poc and doc as our locks with only cullen coming close to challenging them. look at the scots they have been poor for yrs but they have a serious amount of huge forwards. people will dissagree but i live in uk and i do believe genetics has a little bit to do with this.

Podge_irl

Irish people are not genetically much different from English people.

Reloc8

Good small players will have their problems against good big players especially against good big fast players.

Be that as it may, the problems I've seen in the Ireland team have been :-

1. In Defence.

When our line speed is slow as against Wales we can be run through and over. Same goes for every team who is not generating intensity in defence. Given good line speed and commitment from the available players this should not however be a problem. Its probably been said but teams like Leinster don't have monsters at 12 and 13 and yet maintain a miserly defence against top teams.

2. In Attack

Smaller men get wrapped up easier and if they do the recycle will often take longer allowing a defence to reset after a line bust. This can be addressed with good strength and technique in ball presentation, or, looking to offload in or prior to contact. Again, big men will usually find it easier to get their hands free in close contact but this is a technique and attitude thing. Its also a matter of having players running good support lines.

What you can't do is expect smaller men to truck it up and continually make significant attacking yards in heavy contact. This shouldn't be a huge problem for Ireland because we do have powerful ball carriers sprinkled throughout the team and in terms of strike runners in the back line neither Tommy Bowe or Rob Kearney lacks physical size. Sexton is also a good size for his position.

What I have found most frustrating of late is the dearth of attacking play and inability or unwillingness to play for offloads.

While I found very difficult to take against Wales the lack of speed and intensity in defence - we stood right off and let their power runners come at us, giving up yardage easily time after time - that would in fairness appear to be a recent 'thing' or, hopefully, an isolated bad performance.

The lack of incisive attacking play is much more worrying. Everything seems to hinge on Ferris or SOB demolishing whoever tries to tackle them, or we kick the ball. There is little effort to play deception from first phase (aside from the now telegraphed Sexton loop) and little evidence of good support lines and offloading in broken play. We also have a weakness in our passing in midfield.

Sexton can hit a long skip pass - how many others of our backs can we say that of. It makes us much easier to mark - line up on the power runners and double team them, safe in the knowledge that we are laboured going wide.

The problems in attack are not down to size issues in the centres.

WeeBushy

cork exile in london wrote: »

As a race i believe we are not generally as big as other nations like england. hence our low number of props and for yrs relying on poc and doc as our locks with only cullen coming close to challenging them. look at the scots they have been poor for yrs but they have a serious amount of huge forwards. people will dissagree but i live in uk and i do believe genetics has a little bit to do with this.

Our current understanding of genetics would disagree with you as well.

irishbucsfan

The biggest disadvantage that the leinster centers will get from their height is how awkward theyll look celebrating with Toner after the hundreds of tries theyll score.

peterako

totallegend

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The biggest disadvantage that the leinster centers will get from their height is how awkward theyll look celebrating with Toner after the hundreds of tries theyll score.

Just so long as they manage it with more dignity than Boss did a few weeks ago...

dtpc191991

Based on what I've read here the answer is exactly as i initially thought, the problem doesn't like in the size of our centres but in the way we utilise them. The problem lies in the gameplan, that responsibilty lies with the coaches. The way to solve this is to implement a proper rush style, defence plan that doesn't rely on BOD and to get a backs coach that will get our centres offloading to our strike runners and get our strike runners taken those offloads on good support lines.

dtpc191991

Something alot like this would be nice

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPXlXeQ7vCU

CatFromHue

dtpc191991 wrote: »

Something alot like this would be nice

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPXlXeQ7vCU

The Aussie centre's that day were Mortlock, 6'3" and 16st 7lb, and Lote Tuqiri, 6' 3" 16st. Their wingers were Mark Gerrard, 6' 4" and 16st.

wp_rathead

cork exile in london wrote: »

As a race i believe we are not generally as big as other nations like england. hence our low number of props and for yrs relying on poc and doc as our locks with only cullen coming close to challenging them. look at the scots they have been poor for yrs but they have a serious amount of huge forwards. people will dissagree but i live in uk and i do believe genetics has a little bit to do with this.

dtpc191991

CatFromHue wrote: »

The Aussie centre's that day were Mortlock, 6'3" and 16st 7lb, and Lote Tuqiri, 6' 3" 16st. Their wingers were Mark Gerrard, 6' 4" and 16st.

Exactly and we handled that with much smaller backs save Horgan, because we had a decent attacking gameplan.

Leinster7

rrpc wrote: »

For me, the effectiveness of centres is predicated on the amount of room and time they have on the ball.

Playing against Wales, our centres were getting the ball (when they got it) in too much traffic to be effective. The Welsh centres otoh were getting so much time and space that they could run at us at will and invariably make good gainline advantage.

This is an entirely 'valid' statement and an accurate one. In possession, the breakdown work is as equally important as in defence. This is the main area where Ireland lost the game to Wales. If you watch closely, there is a distinct difference to how the 2nd rows and back row play for Munster and Leinster as to how Kidney has them playing. After a few phases in attack or defence the Irish breakdown seems to go quite awry. Just watch vs Italy this weekend guys, after 3 or so phases of possession how 'loose' things become and how ragged the running lines and decisions of the back 5 players become. POC eg. out of position slowing down the attack by taking ball on as first receiver when there is no gap or inside space or intention to offload inside or out, breaking a tackle etc..(This happens too much). Also look at the running lines of O'Brien in defence. How little or if ever he gets in the opposite 10s face and the lines taken to the breakdown.

Many comment on how Ireland have not settled on a style since the 09 GS. This has much to do with how we approach the breakdown post 1st/2nd phase imo. Also playing 2 natural sixes in the back-row really doesn't help either.

Hagz

I wonder how long it will take for the PlanetRugby article to surface on this thread.. .

cork exile in london

WeeBushy wrote: »

Our current understanding of genetics would disagree with you as well.

how? English people descended from danish and german genes. both tall and ireland is an island that has little mixing of foreign folk. On wicklepedia it does a good piece on this. Its just my opinion and i have seen it first hand in uk for yrs.The average height of males in ireland is estimated at 5 9" and england is 5 11" god only knows where they get figures from but there is a wee bit of truth in there theory re genetic mixes.

we do produce a few good ones like shaggy on the wing though. Maybe a few polish will come on board soon