Why Does Connor Murray start over Eoin Reddan?

TonyTonga

I am genuinely preplexed. People talk about Murray's defensive capabilities and two tackles today will be pointed out but Reddan is equally adept at making those tackles. I think Murray made a number of costly mistakes today that lost us momentum and that in a great period of attacking phases he was so brutally slow that it cost us any opportunities.

Murray also has no link play with Sexton. He doesn't even attempt to play in the backline. Also did anyone notice how Reddan marshalls the pack when he comes on? When Murray plays theres no such cohesion.

I find Murray very poor and very detrimental to the team. His defensive capabilities is exactly the same reason used for starting Tomas O'Leary.

So who would you start next week?

Cpt_Blackbeard

Murray was poor for two arguable penalties at the Scrum and had one or two poor boxkicks. Other than that, he had a decent game. His passing was generally good and his defense was top notch. Sensationalism at its finest.

TonyTonga

Murray

His passing was SO SLOW. Unless you are solely referring to accuracy?

Fishooks12

Because Kidney is a bad coach who picks the wrong players

Can we close this thread now before it just becomes another outlet for bashing a player who despite his many flaws put his body on the line today

Banbridgeman

Murray

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

Murray was poor for two arguable penalties at the Scrum and had one or two poor boxkicks. Other than that, he had a decent game. His passing was generally good and his defense was top notch. Sensationalism at its finest.

Take out the 13pts Murray cost us today and he was still poor. Delivery was slower than usual for him which is saying something!

irishbucsfan

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

Murray was poor for two arguable penalties at the Scrum and had one or two poor boxkicks. Other than that, he had a decent game. His passing was generally good and his defense was top notch. Sensationalism at its finest.

Yep, agreed. Wouldn't start him but he was decent.

Cpt_Blackbeard

Banbridgeman wrote: »

Take out the 13pts Murray cost us today and he was still poor. Delivery was slower than usual for him which is saying something!

It really wasn't. The was little to nothing wrong with his speed of delivery once he settled into the game.

twinytwo

does this really need its own thread???... no of us are kidney, only he knows the answer.

Benny Cake

Voted Murray. Love his hair.

tolosenc

Murray

Because of Kidney. Nothing against Murray, but it's clear as day that he's not the best option we have.

TonyTonga

Murray

Its genuinely strange how Kidney refuses to start Reddan and Sexton together when our best performances have been with those two together.

It probably cost us the quarter final against Wales if we're honest. I remember Murray and ROG being abysmal in that game.

But Kidney persists with Murray, and he brings on ROG for the last twenty mins in EVERY game

ironingbored

Murray

Anyone saying Murray wasn't slow out of the ruck, bad with box kicks and or accuracy of passing is living in dreamland.

Why doesn't Kidney pick Reddan and Sexton?
Why did he persist with DOC when Ryan is a far superior player?
Why were POM and Zebo parachuted into the team/squad when the likes of SOB, Ross had to become world class before being selected?
Why did he move Earls to 12 when his best position is wing/OC?
Why does ROG come on in every gameon 60 mins?
Why were the three best young players in Ireland this year (Madigan, D. Kearney and Gilroy) not brought to NZ?

Why?

Because Declan Kidney does not have a clue.

Quint2010

Murray

Can Kidney please just start with Reddan and Sexton so we can put this arguement to bed once and for all!

He wasn't actually that bad but I think it would definitely benefit the team to have the Reddan/Sexton combination starting.

Scioch

Murray

Yeah he wasnt that bad but I think what bothers people is that he never is that good either. And when people want a change they naturally start with who's not stepping up to the level they should be playing at.

Darcy and Trimble weren't poor this season but people expect a bit more from them so if they dont step up people look for the next option. In Darcy's case we didnt have too many options and he still came in for a bit of stick, but in Murray's case we have a great option in Reddan but Kidney doesnt seem keen on making the change.

I think Kidney shares a lot of blame for the growing discontent with Murray, same as he did for turning TOL into a joke. Players should be earning their spot and Murray was denied that opportunity and hasnt proven Kidney right (yet). Then again at this stage he'd have to turn into one hell of a SH to shake off the view he's Kidneys new pet.

I assume Kidney persists with him for the same reason he persisted with TOL. He values physicality over speed at SH. And in my view that severely limits our attack in order to slightly boost our defence.

19543261

I wonder what there'd be to talk about around here if there was no Kidney.

profitius

Did anyone see the Australia Wales game? Genia was outstanding, one of the best in the world in his position. Every time Genia got the ball he had options. Pat McCabes try near the end was an example.

Murray and Reddan had no options like that playing for Ireland. Nobody comes onto the ball at pace and thats a coaching issue. Even Genia would look bad playing for Ireland.

Scioch

Murray

Was 2010 6nations where it all went wrong ? Where we made seven billion handling errors while trying to play a fast paced running game ?

I recall prior to that a visible plan to adopt the running game then afterwards a mess of a team with no idea what to do, falling back on a kicking game against Scotland and Italy in 2011 and then into the world cup with a good defence and a "play it by ear" attacking game.

profitius

LordSmeg wrote: »

Was 2010 6nations where it all went wrong ? Where we made seven billion handling errors while trying to play a fast paced running game ?

I recall prior to that a visible plan to adopt the running game then afterwards a mess of a team with no idea what to do, falling back on a kicking game against Scotland and Italy in 2011 and then into the world cup with a good defence and a "play it by ear" attacking game.

Something like that happened. They played some good stuff in a few games but the results didn't go to plan so Kidney went back to square one.

OldRio

Murray

19543261 wrote: »

I wonder what there'd be to talk about around here if there was no Kidney.

It would be nice to find out.

The answer to the dangerously pointed question that the OP asks is that Kidney likes a physical scrum half that can play as a sweeper in defence. He doesn't look for the attacking option, because in Kidney's gameplans, the backline starts and ends at number 10.

Clegg

LordSmeg wrote: »

Was 2010 6nations where it all went wrong ? Where we made seven billion handling errors while trying to play a fast paced running game ?

I recall prior to that a visible plan to adopt the running game then afterwards a mess of a team with no idea what to do, falling back on a kicking game against Scotland and Italy in 2011 and then into the world cup with a good defence and a "play it by ear" attacking game.

Kidney bottled it. We were having problems with our new gameplan but thats to be expected. We should have stuck with it but we ditched the new gameplan and went right back to square one.

I don't think Murray even had a bad game tonight. The decision which baffled me the most was the substitution of Sexton. He was playing decently enough. ROG came on and proceeded to kick away our best attacking opportunity of the half. If Sexton was injured then the substitution was understandable. If not then Kidney has a lot to answer for.

19543261

Okay so we just saw Australia and Wales play a stunning game, and I was wondering something throughout. Why wasnt there more attempts made at offloading in our game? Plenty often you'd have a player still right-up after a tackle - apparently free to get the ball out of his hands - yet the support comes crashing in only after he's gone to ground (or some other variation). Why?

TonyTonga

Murray

Because this Ireland team isn't Leinster.

To be perfectly honest, Kidney should be starting as many Leinster players as possible and saying 'go out and play the Leinster game'

For years we had ten Munster players and were told to play the 'Munster game' how come now that the shoe is on the other foot theres such bitterness?

profitius

19543261 wrote: »

Okay so we just saw Australia and Wales play a stunning game, and I was wondering something throughout. Why wasnt there more attempts made at offloading in our game? Plenty often you'd have a player still right-up after a tackle - apparently free to get the ball out of his hands - yet the support comes crashing in only after he's gone to ground (or some other variation). Why?

Coaching and skill level. The new generation of Irish players have a higher skill level. With a better coach too we'll see a big improvement in the coming years.

trackguy

Murray

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote:

His passing was generally good

No it wasn't. Still too slow to decide what's he's doing and his pass ain't the quickest
either.

He's picked to defend plain and simple. The back line stands little chance of being creative with the current managment.

We have no specialist backs coach and they continually pick the slowest 9's we have.

Not sensationalism, just fact.

shootermacg

New Zealand would have hockyed leinster, it's just a matter of class, and for the love of god put this club vs international crap to bed where it belongs.
If I hear "we won the heiniken cup so we should be the best" crap any more my head will expload!

Too many Johnny come latelys who obviously haven't a clue, no disrespect to the long time follower who tends to have a more fatalistic view when it comes to the step up to international level.

Fishooks12

shootermacg wrote: »

New Zealand would have hockyed leinster, it's just a matter of class, and for the love of god put this club vs international crap to bed where it belongs.
If I hear "we won the heiniken cup so we should be the best" crap any more my head will expload!

Too many Johnny come latelys who obviously haven't a clue, no disrespect to the long time follower who tends to have a more fatalistic view when it comes to the step up to international level.

<cough>

Clegg

New Zealand would beat Leinster rather easily. Lets not delude ourselves into thinking otherwise.

If we could get the Irish team playing like Leinster then maybe we would stand a chance. That will never happen under our current coaching set up though.

We also need to look at some of our players and whether they are up to test level

Teferi

Ridiculous thread. Murray actually sped up today which was good to see and put his body on the line.

I'd still start Reddan in the next match but fair play Murray, more of this and a good season at Munster and maybe your promise will pay off.

Fishooks12

Teferi wrote: »

Ridiculous thread. Murray actually sped up today which was good to see and put his body on the line.

I'd still start Reddan in the next match but fair play Murray, more of this and a good season at Munster and maybe your promise will pay off.

The two mistakes he made cost us but he was slightly faster at the bass (although not fast enough for Int rugby yet)

Reddan kicked an awful box kick on the halfway line too when we badly needed to hang onto the ball too

Reddan to start next week but Murray being used as a scapegoat is madness.

Then again you'd hardly be surprised considering who started the thread

dtpc191991

Murray

Clegg wrote: »

Kidney bottled it. We were having problems with our new gameplan but thats to be expected. We should have stuck with it but we ditched the new gameplan and went right back to square one.

I don't think Murray even had a bad game tonight. The decision which baffled me the most was the substitution of Sexton. He was playing decently enough. ROG came on and proceeded to kick away our best attacking opportunity of the half. If Sexton was injured then the substitution was understandable. If not then Kidney has a lot to answer for.

It's a sad thing really cos this is what happened to Leinster under Schmidt and Wales under Gatland. It took 5 0r 6 games of silly errors and dropping balls but once it came together both sides became two of the best at their respective levels. Had we persisted I think Ireland has the players to pull that game off. No that game 100% suits the talent we've got. two things have to change.

1. A new head and backs coach are needed that are willing to implement that kind of gameplan.

2. The IRFU need to sacrafice their results at all costs (which has clearly failed) directive and allow for a poor Six Nations while we develop our new game.

TomLamp

Murray

Murray was very poor today but he shouldn't be the scapegoat. Hes pretty much a victim of the Munster hype machine and unhelped by a national coach who doesnt want to believe that hes nowhere near ready for this level.

Fishooks12

TomLamp wrote: »

Murray was very poor today but he shouldn't be the scapegoat. Hes pretty much a victim of the Munster hype machine and unhelped by a national coach who doesnt want to believe that hes nowhere near ready for this level.

The ole Munster hype machine eh? I suppose players from other provinces never get hyped up at all

In saying that I often visit the hype machine on my days off to see how it's ticking along. Pat Geraghty and McGahon usually pick a player out of a hat and the lucky one goes in.

B0X

Murray

Fishooks12 wrote: »

he was slightly faster at the bass

:pac:

Fishooks12

B0X wrote: »

:pac:

Reddan can't slap for ****!

totallegend

To answer the initial question, why does Murray start ahead of Reddan, the answer is:


When Kidney took over in 2008, Reddan had been first choice for the previous Six Nations and summer tour. Since then, he has never been picked for a major game when there has been anything like a credible alternative (credible in Kidney's opinion, i.e. the Munster guy, that is).

Under Kidney, Reddan has started against:

Canada in Autumn 2008; hardly a ringing endorsement
Fiji in Autumn 2009; see above
South Africa and New Zealand in Autumn 2010; O'Leary was injured
Scotland, Wales and England in Six Nations 2011; O'Leary was injured
France and England in 2011 RWC warm-ups; rotation going on
Australia in RWC 2011; first-choice
Scotland and England in 2012 Six Nations; Murray was injured

So, that is one start in a meaningful international match over four years when the Munster first choice has been available. That's one start during the period when he's been first choice SH for the best team in Europe.
That one start coincided with Ireland's most important win in the pro era, yet as soon as Murray had got enough time on the pitch to make it any way feasible, Kidney dropped him again and what happened? We flopped miserably.

There is no rational explanation other than that Kidney has some sort of major issue with Reddan. Whether it's personal or not, I have no idea, but it's pretty bizarre whatever way you look at it; Kidney, of course, was Munster coach when Reddan went to Wasps in 2005 (after Reddan was signed during Gaffney's reign).

Kidney just does not want to pick him and it's been a massive handicap to this team. It's one of the major failings of Kidney's time in charge and just another reason why the sooner Kidney is gone, the better.

onlyrocknroll

Deleted User wrote: »

The answer to the dangerously pointed question that the OP asks is that Kidney likes a physical scrum half that can play as a sweeper in defence.

+1

Why is the question in the title of the thread not the same as the one in the poll? To add more scope for Murray bashing?

.ak

Murray

totallegend wrote: »

There is no rational explanation other than that Kidney has some sort of major issue with Reddan. Whether it's personal or not, I have no idea, but it's pretty bizarre whatever way you look at it; Kidney, of course, was Munster coach when Reddan went to Wasps in 2005 (after Reddan was signed during Gaffney's reign).

Kidney just does not want to pick him and it's been a massive handicap to this team. It's one of the major failings of Kidney's time in charge and just another reason why the sooner Kidney is gone, the better.

It's absolutely sickening to think Kidney gets paid a huge sum of money (a lot of that is the money WE as a fanbase put into the union) and yet the team is suffering in this case because Kidney won't pick Reddan because HE has an issue with him and nothing to do with form. It's scandalous, and downright selfish. I've often tried to think what other reason there would be, but I can't think of any. Absolute disgrace.

chancer12

Murray

.ak wrote: »

It's absolutely sickening to think Kidney gets paid a huge sum of money (a lot of that is the money WE as a fanbase put into the union) and yet the team is suffering in this case because Kidney won't pick Reddan because HE has an issue with him and nothing to do with form. It's scandalous, and downright selfish. I've often tried to think what other reason there would be, but I can't think of any. Absolute disgrace.

TBH,think the IRFU have an issue with those who played overseas, Leo Cullen is another example of a player always being sidelined for those of lesser ability. Either that or the 'red eyed mist' where Munster players are automatically selected irregardless of form

matthew8

Murray

Because Kidney for some reason hates keeping provincial halfbacks together.

Podge_irl

At this stage I tend to agree with the idea that Kidney has some kind of problem with Reddan, personal or otherwise. He never gets a fair shot at the jersey despite him being in place for most of Ireland's best performances.

flyswatter

Murray

Prefer Reddan, he's the best we have but I think his defence is suspect at times. Really want to see Marshall given a shot.

Klunk_NZ

Murray

Ireland never even looked like breaching the line from set play because the ball was predictably distributed from the halves every time. Incredibly easy player to read. I would opt for a less reliable player with more flair, I am unfamiliar with the Irish contenders but could observe the halves as the biggest issue offensively.

Higher

Murray

Bit over the top no?

Yes Murray was ****, and yes he doesnt deserve to be starting but he wasn't so bad that he deserves his own thread!

McFadden and Zebo were disasters on the wing. I lost count of the amount of times Zebo was completely out of position. Earls the same. McFadden was dealing with 2 man overlaps constantly and himself and Earls had poor communication.

Fishooks12

Higher wrote: »

Bit over the top no?

Yes Murray was ****, and yes he doesnt deserve to be starting but he wasn't so bad that he deserves his own thread!

McFadden and Zebo were disasters on the wing. I lost count of the amount of times Zebo was completely out of position. Earls the same. McFadden was dealing with 2 man overlaps constantly and himself and Earls had poor communication.

Earls was far from adisaster. Our most dangerous looking back yesterday

Higher

Murray

I'm referring to positionally.

Our most dangerous back was Sexton to be honest as he was the only one to create a try scoring opportunity. Even then, neither Sexton or Earls could be described as 'dangerous'

Tox56

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Higher wrote: »

Bit over the top no?

Yes Murray was ****, and yes he doesnt deserve to be starting but he wasn't so bad that he deserves his own thread!

McFadden and Zebo were disasters on the wing. I lost count of the amount of times Zebo was completely out of position. Earls the same. McFadden was dealing with 2 man overlaps constantly and himself and Earls had poor communication.

Earls was far from adisaster. Our most dangerous looking back yesterday

I actually think BOD got some unfair
criticism, he didn't look electric with the ball like Earls, but he is so good at creating space for other players and on several occasions the space was there but nobody was on his shoulder quick enough.

He foolishly tried to offload anyway once or twice, but I think the NZ defence was there to be opened up, we just didn't have the support runners they had. I think there was one instance with BOD offloading to Earls and making a good break that showed what was possible.

jm08

totallegend wrote: »

To answer the initial question, why does Murray start ahead of Reddan, the answer is:


When Kidney took over in 2008, Reddan had been first choice for the previous Six Nations and summer tour. Since then, he has never been picked for a major game when there has been anything like a credible alternative (credible in Kidney's opinion, i.e. the Munster guy, that is).

Under Kidney, Reddan has started against:

Canada in Autumn 2008; hardly a ringing endorsement
Fiji in Autumn 2009; see above
South Africa and New Zealand in Autumn 2010; O'Leary was injured
Scotland, Wales and England in Six Nations 2011; O'Leary was injured
France and England in 2011 RWC warm-ups; rotation going on
Australia in RWC 2011; first-choice
Scotland and England in 2012 Six Nations; Murray was injured

So, that is one start in a meaningful international match over four years when the Munster first choice has been available. That's one start during the period when he's been first choice SH for the best team in Europe.
That one start coincided with Ireland's most important win in the pro era, yet as soon as Murray had got enough time on the pitch to make it any way feasible, Kidney dropped him again and what happened? We flopped miserably.

There is no rational explanation other than that Kidney has some sort of major issue with Reddan. Whether it's personal or not, I have no idea, but it's pretty bizarre whatever way you look at it; Kidney, of course, was Munster coach when Reddan went to Wasps in 2005 (after Reddan was signed during Gaffney's reign).

Kidney just does not want to pick him and it's been a massive handicap to this team. It's one of the major failings of Kidney's time in charge and just another reason why the sooner Kidney is gone, the better.

If Reddan was playing so well at that time (08-09), surely his coach at Wasps would have preferred him over Tomas O'Leary for the Lions. The whole of the Wasps coaching team were the selectors for the Lions!

Edit: The Grand Slam was Ireland's most important win in the pro era. The win in Paris in 2000 would be well up there as well as some of the first wins against SA & Aus here.

irishbucsfan

jm08 wrote: »

If Reddan was playing so well at that time (08-09), surely his coach at Wasps would have preferred him over Tomas O'Leary for the Lions. The whole of the Wasps coaching team were the selectors for the Lions!

Edit: The Grand Slam was Ireland's most important win in the pro era. The win in Paris in 2000 would be well up there as well as some of the first wins against SA & Aus here.

That's a good point, however Reddan is a far better player right now than he ever was for Wasps. His play for Leinster is far better. Ireland's success with him starting shows that.

Fishooks12

jm08 wrote: »

If Reddan was playing so well at that time (08-09), surely his coach at Wasps would have preferred him over Tomas O'Leary for the Lions. The whole of the Wasps coaching team were the selectors for the Lions!

Edit: The Grand Slam was Ireland's most important win in the pro era. The win in Paris in 2000 would be well up there as well as some of the first wins against SA & Aus here.

I agree for once. Even in 09 the people calling for TOL to be dropped were looking for Stringer