Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread II

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Except Wallace made his debut in the 2001/2 season because he was a good young back and Ulster had a very shallow squad and so they put him in at full back. Like Henshaw for Connacht this season. This was remedied thanks to Bryn Cunnigham the next season and Wallace barely played that season. Nothing to do with injury, Ulster had Cunnigham, Bell and Humphreys at 15, 12, 10.

Then the next couple of years he was a bit part player. He was very frustrated during that period because he really thought he deserved to be starting at 12 but he was behind Johnny Bell still and so he was stuck playing for Ballymena that season. Again, absolutely nothing to do with injury, just due to Johnny Bell. Here's what he said about it afterwards:

Again. Not because of injuries, because it was a tough position to break into in the team at that time.

Look at his annual appearances since that season, when he has actually been 1st choice: 24, 20, 15, 16, 21, 15, (+10 this season). Hardly missing a beat, just slightly decreased numbers in seasons he's been with Ireland.

You're just blindly posting numbers from a period you clearly weren't following very closely and then assuming, completely incorrectly, that injuries had absolutely anything to do with it.

EDIT: I'm not saying he wasn't injured during that period by the way, he was as much as any young professional. I'm just putting context to the numbers you were unable to.

My point is that if he had left Ulster because of all the blockages in his early career as a 10 and ending up playing 15 for most of his early career, he probably would have been better off (and playing as a 10 now) and that Ian Madigan should take note of that.

Using the itsrugby.co.uk data base:

11/12 Paddy Wallace: 15 games. Gordan D'Arcy 17. Mafi: 27.
10/11 PW: 21. GD: 18. Mafi: 23.
9/10 PW: 16. GD: 20. Mafi: 23.
8/9 PW: 16. DG: 15. Mafi: 24.
7/8 PW: 19. GD: 11. Mafi: 25.

Bearing in mind that Gordon D'Arcy has another 10-12 international games per season, he doesn't compare that well.

irishbucsfan

jm08 wrote: »

My point is that if he had left Ulster because of all the blockages in his early career as a 10 and ending up playing 15 for most of his early career, he probably would have been better off (and playing as a 10 now) and that Ian Madigan should take note of that.

I'm sorry, no it wasn't. Your point was that Paddy Wallace wasn't big or durable enough and picked up too many injuries. You then attempted to prove it by showing off how few games he played, and proved very little.

Using the itsrugby.co.uk data base:

11/12 Paddy Wallace: 15 games. Gordan D'Arcy 17. Mafi: 27.
10/11 PW: 21. GD: 18. Mafi: 23.
9/10 PW: 16. GD: 20. Mafi: 23.
8/9 PW: 16. DG: 15. Mafi: 24.
7/8 PW: 19. GD: 11. Mafi: 25.

Bearing in mind that Gordon D'Arcy has another 10-12 international games per season, he doesn't compare that well.

And Wallace was in the international squad in the same period, so even though he wasn't playing games internationally he wasn't allowed play for Ulster due to player management., so D'Arcy's international games mean very little. Wallace played 87 games, D'Arcy played 81. He is simply not that injury prone.

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm sorry, no it wasn't. Your point was that Paddy Wallace wasn't big or durable enough and picked up too many injuries. You then attempted to prove it by showing off how few games he played, and proved very little.

I made two points - he always seems to me to have niggly injuries (like broken fingers) and that Madigan should take a good look at how his career (& Stauntons) went being utility 10s.

And Wallace was in the international squad in the same period, so even though he wasn't playing games internationally he wasn't allowed play for Ulster due to player management., so D'Arcy's international games mean very little. Wallace played 87 games, D'Arcy played 81. He is simply not that injury prone.

Players who don't start matches are usually sent back to their clubs to get gametime even if they are in the training squad. For instance, Ronan O'Gara was sent to join up with Munster last 6Ns in Italy to get game time. You will also notice that because ROG is not starting for Ireland is is getting more games with Munster. If he isn't picking up injuries, then PW is being rested (protected?) more than other front-line 12s.

irishbucsfan

Paddy Wallace WAS in match day squads though. Covering for ROG and then inexplicably wearing the 22 jersey after Sexton was introduced. All the while keeping himself pretty injury-free.

The first season he wasnt in match day squads he played 21 games for Ulster, pretty much what you'd expect from a front line 12.

Apart from the hand injury last season, what were these injuries that he was constantly suffering from?

CatFromHue

jm08 wrote: »

Madigan should take a good look at how his career (& Stauntons) went being utility 10s.

I agree here but not just yet for Madigan and similarly for Keatley. Being second choice and still getting a good amount of game time is grand to a point. Eventually though you have to either get the first choice spot or move to another club to get it.

jm08 wrote: »

Players who don't start matches are usually sent back to their clubs to get gametime even if they are in the training squad. For instance, Ronan O'Gara was sent to join up with Munster last 6Ns in Italy to get game time. You will also notice that because ROG is not starting for Ireland is is getting more games with Munster. If he isn't picking up injuries, then PW is being rested (protected?) more than other front-line 12s.

I don't think this was the case up until recently, I could be wrong though. There were no Celtic/Magner League games, or very few, on during the 6N or near international windows. Only with the addition of the Italian teams has the fixture list become jam packed.

Fishooks13

CatFromHue wrote: »

I agree here but not just yet for Madigan and similarly for Keatley. Being second choice and still getting a good amount of game time is grand to a point. Eventually though you have to either get the first choice spot or move to another club to get it.
.

Ting about Keatley is, ROG will probably only give it another year while Sexton will be around for at least another 5.

And Madigan isn't as young as he once was, think he's 24 now??

I just don't see him getting that starting spot over Sexton at 10 in the next 2 years bar injury or a massive loss of form.

Now Madigan plays a serious amount of games in the Rabo at ten, and this year he's played in every Leinster pool game at 15. But considering his talent, I think it would be an awful shame if he spent his mid twenties playing second fiddle to Sexton at 10.

Higher

Fishooks13 wrote: »

Ting about Keatley is, ROG will probably only give it another year while Sexton will be around for at least another 5.

And Madigan isn't as young as he once was, think he's 24 now??

He turns 24 in April I think. I can't see Leinster letting him go considering how often he plays for Leinster. Hes developing at a rate of knots and while he may not be as good as Sexton now he could very well be in a season or two. Lets not forget that Sexton was only getting his first Irish cap at 24. Sexton has come on leaps and bounds since that first cap to becoming the second best outhalf in the world in my opinion. No reason why Madigan won't make similar progress.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Higher wrote: »

He turns 24 in April I think. I can't see Leinster letting him go considering how often he plays for Leinster. Hes developing at a rate of knots and while he may not be as good as Sexton now he could very well be in a season or two. Lets not forget that Sexton was only getting his first Irish cap at 24. Sexton has come on leaps and bounds since that first cap to becoming the second best outhalf in the world in my opinion. No reason why Madigan won't make similar progress.

Madigan has another year on his contract after the end of this season. He should seriously consider his options for after that contract but is probably in the right place at the moment.

CatFromHue

No I can't see Leinster wanting to let him go.

Sexton was behind Contepomi and his moving on, to a degree, helped Sexton. Sexton though, won't be moving on which will be a problem for Madigan if he can't get ahead of him.

It's not a problem for Madigan now but I think next season he should be doing some thinking about his career (he could well have over 50 starts for Leinster at the end of the 2013/14 season and 100 caps for Leinster then). Or whenever his current contract is up anyway. Financially I'm assuming it would be better for him to be first choice somewhere else then second choice in Leinster.

CIARAN_BOYLE

CatFromHue wrote: »

No I can't see Leinster wanting to let him go.

Sexton was behind Contepomi and his moving on, to a degree, helped Sexton. Sexton though, won't be moving on which will be a problem for Madigan if he can't get ahead of him.

It's not a problem for Madigan now but I think next season he should be doing some thinking about his career (he could well have over 50 starts for Leinster at the end of the 2013/14 season and 100 caps for Leinster then). Or whenever his current contract is up anyway. Financially I'm assuming it would be better for him to be first choice somewhere else then second choice in Leinster.

His contract is up at the end of 13/14. I'd say that financially he would be better off first choice somewhere else unless he breaks through as Sexton's backup internationally as well as provincially at Leinster.

molloyjh

CatFromHue wrote: »

No I can't see Leinster wanting to let him go.

Sexton was behind Contepomi and his moving on, to a degree, helped Sexton. Sexton though, won't be moving on which will be a problem for Madigan if he can't get ahead of him.

It's not a problem for Madigan now but I think next season he should be doing some thinking about his career (he could well have over 50 starts for Leinster at the end of the 2013/14 season and 100 caps for Leinster then). Or whenever his current contract is up anyway. Financially I'm assuming it would be better for him to be first choice somewhere else then second choice in Leinster.

This may sound like a silly question, but why can't Irish teams have 2 quality players in a position? Look at Clermont with James and Skrela at OH for example. We always marvel at the strength in depth that the big French sides have. Surely that should be the ideal here too? Yeah that will probably mean playing Sexton in some HEC games and Madigan in others once Madigan has reached that level, but that's no bad thing.

Of course there is the money aspect, but I'm sure Madigan harbours ambitions of playing for Ireland so moving abroad isn't going to be much of an option. Ulster and Munster aren't in any need of him with the likes of Jackson and Hanrahan coming through, although Hanrahan may be more of a 12. Either way he's not going to get more money domestically so the only move, from a financial point of view, would be abroad.

If Leinster have a coach, like Joe, who is willing to use more than 1 player per position there should be no reason for him to go anywhere.

Tox56

Controversial opinion: Madigan should move to Northampton. Their current 10's aren't up to much, Sky will heap praise on him if he performs well, thus raising his profile, and he should get some top level gametime at a decent club. Not yet, but at some point he will need/want to go somewhere.

Fireball07

molloyjh wrote: »

This may sound like a silly question, but why can't Irish teams have 2 quality players in a position? Look at Clermont with James and Skrela at OH for example. We always marvel at the strength in depth that the big French sides have. Surely that should be the ideal here too? Yeah that will probably mean playing Sexton in some HEC games and Madigan in others once Madigan has reached that level, but that's no bad thing.

Of course there is the money aspect, but I'm sure Madigan harbours ambitions of playing for Ireland so moving abroad isn't going to be much of an option. Ulster and Munster aren't in any need of him with the likes of Jackson and Hanrahan coming through, although Hanrahan may be more of a 12. Either way he's not going to get more money domestically so the only move, from a financial point of view, would be abroad.

If Leinster have a coach, like Joe, who is willing to use more than 1 player per position there should be no reason for him to go anywhere.

I suppose the main argument against that is that Madigan has to reach a level where he's as good as Sexton. In theory, it's an excellent idea but when it comes to it, will Madigan be chosen ahead of Sexton? It's hard to know whether that will happen without gametime...Madigan has come on a lot...but Sexton is still a lot better.

By the time he's going to renew his contract, if Madigan isn't seen as a real contender for the 10 shirt, then I don't know if he'll stay.

its_phil

molloyjh wrote: »

This may sound like a silly question, but why can't Irish teams have 2 quality players in a position? Look at Clermont with James and Skrela at OH for example. We always marvel at the strength in depth that the big French sides have. Surely that should be the ideal here too? Yeah that will probably mean playing Sexton in some HEC games and Madigan in others once Madigan has reached that level, but that's no bad thing..

I think it all boils down to whether we want to priortise the provinces or the national team? It can be a mental block to Madigan, that Sexton is the #1 OH in GB&I. He's got a tougher job than anyone else across the isles to displace another 10.

Also the French league has that bit more importance, so it doesn't have that underwhelming feeling to a game that can occur in the Rabo.

But if it was Madigan and Keatley together at Munster that would be interesting. The James/Skrela theory you have could be applied. Good rotation in place and two players who are no more superior than the other fighting each week for the 10 jersey and both capable of wearing it. Not that Madigan isn't capable of wearing the Leinster 10 jersey, just Sexton is a fantastic player and for those big days 9 out of 10 times you are gonna choose Sexton. If he was against Keatley 5/10 times it could be him.

ssaye

Fireball07 wrote: »

I suppose the main argument against that is that Madigan has to reach a level where he's as good as Sexton. In theory, it's an excellent idea but when it comes to it, will Madigan be chosen ahead of Sexton? It's hard to know whether that will happen without gametime...Madigan has come on a lot...but Sexton is still a lot better.

By the time he's going to renew his contract, if Madigan isn't seen as a real contender for the 10 shirt, then I don't know if he'll stay.

Maybe Sexton will be offered an offer by Toulon close to what Dan Carter was offered which would more than cover his tax back in 2 years and Madigan will just slot in for Leinster but hopefully as said earlier all the best players stay in Ireland. If and a big if he does leave do the IRFU go down the Jackson/Madigan etc route as the French probably wouldn't be great at letting him back all the time I imagine. All hypotethical.

molloyjh

Fireball07 wrote: »

I suppose the main argument against that is that Madigan has to reach a level where he's as good as Sexton. In theory, it's an excellent idea but when it comes to it, will Madigan be chosen ahead of Sexton? It's hard to know whether that will happen without gametime...Madigan has come on a lot...but Sexton is still a lot better.

By the time he's going to renew his contract, if Madigan isn't seen as a real contender for the 10 shirt, then I don't know if he'll stay.

its_phil wrote: »

I think it all boils down to whether we want to priortise the provinces or the national team? It can be a mental block to Madigan, that Sexton is the #1 OH in GB&I. He's got a tougher job than anyone else across the isles to displace another 10.

Also the French league has that bit more importance, so it doesn't have that underwhelming feeling to a game that can occur in the Rabo.

But if it was Madigan and Keatley together at Munster that would be interesting. The James/Skrela theory you have could be applied. Good rotation in place and two players who are no more superior than the other fighting each week for the 10 jersey and both capable of wearing it. Not that Madigan isn't capable of wearing the Leinster 10 jersey, just Sexton is a fantastic player and for those big days 9 out of 10 times you are gonna choose Sexton. If he was against Keatley 5/10 times it could be him.

Obviously my point is dependent on Madigan making that final step up to Sextons level. But as with Boss and Reddan, or Healy and VDM the scope is there to utilise real depth. Why not aim to develop it where possible.

irishbucsfan

Neither Sexton or Madigan will want to share game time with anyone. Theres simply no comparison at all to make with James/Skrela

CatFromHue

I think Skrela is leaving Clermont but I assume molloyjh meant something along the lines of Boss/Reddan and Strauss/Cronin (this season).

In theory it works fine but in practice I think it falls down to one of the players being more senior/favoured than the other and for international recognition. Reddan is the more favoured scrum half and Strauss would have been at hooker last season, this season it's a bit different.

From a clubs point of view this is the way to have it but from a players it's not ideal. Murray and Best get all the first team games in their provinces in their positions so are able to put themselves more into the shop window than the Leinster players for Ireland. Then, as others have mentioned, no one likes sharing gametime.

irishbucsfan

And Cronin wasnt happy with the way it was last season.

As for Reddan/Boss, neither player are world class or even top 3 in Europe. Sexton is and therefore if Madigan was as good as him theyd both be. No way they'd share playing time.

From a simple financial perspective it wouldnt be worth it for one party when it came to salaries.

irishbucsfan

So Fanning seemed to indicate today that the next strategic plan is going to be released shortly. If its anything like the last one it'll cover the 5 years from 2013-2017.

I'll be very interested to see the following:

- What goals are we setting ourselves at international level: What do the union think our current squad can achieve over that period? How will that reflect on the past 3 6 Nations?
- What goals are we setting ourselves at club level: Do we consider the dominance of the HEC from '06-'12 to be the norm or to be a one-off?
- Is there any mention of NIQ players...?
- Is there any mention of 7s?

mogwai81

I know this sounds a bit idealistic, but i would love to see the likes of Madigan head to connacht. That would mean
Sexton, Jackson, Keatley and Madigan being first choice at the provinces. It would improve an already young and
exciting back line at connacht.
Similar story with Chris Farrell( although injured ) he will probably struggle to get game time ahead of Luke Marshall,
but could be ideal for Leinster. Jamie Hagan - Munster, Nagle - Connacht etc. It would only be good news for the
national team with more players getting game time.

P.Walnuts

mogwai81 wrote: »

I know this sounds a bit idealistic, but i would love to see the likes of Madigan head to connacht. That would mean
Sexton, Jackson, Keatley and Madigan being first choice at the provinces. It would improve an already young and
exciting back line at connacht.
Similar story with Chris Farrell( although injured ) he will probably struggle to get game time ahead of Luke Marshall,
but could be ideal for Leinster. Jamie Hagan - Munster, Nagle - Connacht etc. It would only be good news for the
national team with more players getting game time.

I really wish it was that simple. Would be great.

danthefan

Ian Madigan has started 29 games for Leinster since the start of the 11/12 season. Would leave a massive hole in the Leinster squad if he left. He's signed on for next season anyway.

totallegend

irishbucsfan wrote: »

So Fanning seemed to indicate today that the next strategic plan is going to be released shortly. If its anything like the last one it'll cover the 5 years from 2013-2017.

I'll be very interested to see the following:

- What goals are we setting ourselves at international level: What do the union think our current squad can achieve over that period? How will that reflect on the past 3 6 Nations?
- What goals are we setting ourselves at club level: Do we consider the dominance of the HEC from '06-'12 to be the norm or to be a one-off?
- Is there any mention of NIQ players...?
- Is there any mention of 7s?

National team goals; I think they have to aim for at least one Six Nations championship in the five year period with third being the lowest acceptable placing each year. The over-arching theme will be prioritising the national team at the expense of everything else.

Provinces; probably something similar to the last plan, i.e. at least one win and a team to reach the semis every year.

Will NIQs be mentioned? Yes, extensively. Part of the document will be a review of how the aims of the last plan were/were not delivered. They'll need to explain how, after a great start, the national team has gone off a cliff in terms of delivering results. The NIQs will be blamed.

I would expect a very wooly mention of 7s, probably some waffle about resources and player numbers, but no actual commitment to doing anything.

P.Walnuts

totallegend wrote: »

National team goals; I think they have to aim for at least one Six Nations championship in the five year period with third being the lowest acceptable placing each year. The over-arching theme will be prioritising the national team at the expense of everything else.

Provinces; probably something similar to the last plan, i.e. at least one win and a team to reach the semis every year.

Will NIQs be mentioned? Yes, extensively. Part of the document will be a review of how the aims of the last plan were/were not delivered. They'll need to explain how, after a great start, the national team has gone off a cliff in terms of delivering results. The NIQs will be blamed.

I would expect a very wooly mention of 7s, probably some waffle about resources and player numbers, but no actual commitment to doing anything.

Should we always focus on the next 6N or plan for World Cups? I dont think we can do both to be honest.

Podge_irl

totallegend wrote: »

Will NIQs be mentioned? Yes, extensively. Part of the document will be a review of how the aims of the last plan were/were not delivered. They'll need to explain how, after a great start, the national team has gone off a cliff in terms of delivering results. The NIQs will be blamed.

I'm particularly looking forward to an explanation of how while the number of NIQs hasn't increased the success of the provinces has exploded while the national team has regressed and its all their fault.

wicklowwonder

P.Walnuts wrote: »

Should we always focus on the next 6N or plan for World Cups? I dont think we can do both to be honest.

We should concentrate on 6Ns and only worry about the RWC maybe for a season or at most two before. We need to be performing constantly in top 2 challemging every year in the 6N to expect success at the RWC and at the moment we are not in my opinion.

P.Walnuts

wicklowwonder wrote: »

We should concentrate on 6Ns and only worry about the RWC maybe for a season or at most two before. We need to be performing constantly in top 2 challemging every year in the 6N to expect success at the RWC and at the moment we are not in my opinion.

This is the crux of the matter I think...

Can we be consistently successful in the 6N while developing players for four years time? I dont think we can....by not looking past the 6N each year we are invariably going to pick players that are the best right now, but who might not be for the next world cup.

wicklowwonder

P.Walnuts wrote: »

This is the crux of the matter I think...

Can we be consistently successful in the 6N while developing players for four years time? I dont think we can....by not looking past the 6N each year we are invariably going to pick players that are the best right now, but who might not be for the next world cup.

Success breads success. We need to constantly pick the best 23 players for every game. We don't do that at the moment, no one should be undroppable and age should be treated only as a number. Look at the likes of James O'Connor is oz think he was 17 when he got his cap, then look at someone like Simon Shaw. If you are good enough you should be picked.

What is the point in spendung four years planning for a tournament we have never got past the quarter finals in? Especially as we don't exactly have stacks of 6N championships in the record books. Is there genuinely a nation other than maybe NZ who actually play from RWC to RWC?

P.Walnuts

wicklowwonder wrote: »

Success breads success. We need to constantly pick the best 23 players for every game. We don't do that at the moment, no one should be undroppable and age should be treated only as a number. Look at the likes of James O'Connor is oz think he was 17 when he got his cap, then look at someone like Simon Shaw. If you are good enough you should be picked.

What is the point in spendung four years planning for a tournament we have never got past the quarter finals in? Especially as we don't exactly have stacks of 6N championships in the record books. Is there genuinely a nation other than maybe NZ who actually play from RWC to RWC?

Aw like I dont mean picking 15 22-23 yr olds for 4 years but every little helps....

I just get frustrated when we are going into another 6N with pinning our hopes on D'arcy-BOD, when both are possibly in their last international season and we don't really have an replacements in line that have any real international experience.

Earls yes, but long term he hasn't shown so far that he can be our long term 13