Ireland vs England, Sunday 1st March 3pm; RTE/BBC

stephen_n

England

bilston wrote: »

The interesting thing about Henderson is that Ireland need to replace O'Connell but Ulster need to replace Ferris. I hear what awec is saying about Henderson playing 6, personally I think he can play either to good effect, butnif he replaces O'Connell he could go on to win 100+ caps, if he centres in on 6 then he is up against O'Mahony and Ruddock both of whom will be arpund for quite some time.

The best use of Ireland's resources is for him to play lock, the best use of Ulster's resources is for him to play 6. It's fine at the moment but come next season I could see the IRFU pushing for a permanent move to the engine room.

Edit - alternatively the IRFU should let us sign a WC blindside flanker....

In fairness is it the IRFU stopping that a) what WC blinside is going to come, when more money is on offer in France b) resigning an non world class NIQ backrow didn't really help the cause.

Re: Henderson, up to this season internationaly I was very underwhelmed with him, given all the hype that surrounds him. However his performances since the WH game have been very impressive, if short, he carries with purpose and clears out like a bulldozer, seems to have strengthened up his upper body while laid up and can really use it. In Irish terms it's clear he's being groomed to replace POC and has the potential to fill that role excellently.

George Hook

bilston wrote: »

The interesting thing about Henderson is that Ireland need to replace O'Connell but Ulster need to replace Ferris. I hear what awec is saying about Henderson playing 6, personally I think he can play either to good effect, butnif he replaces O'Connell he could go on to win 100+ caps, if he centres in on 6 then he is up against O'Mahony and Ruddock both of whom will be arpund for quite some time.

The best use of Ireland's resources is for him to play lock, the best use of Ulster's resources is for him to play 6. It's fine at the moment but come next season I could see the IRFU pushing for a permanent move to the engine room.

Edit - alternatively the IRFU should let us sign a WC blindside flanker....

Does it matter if he has a 5 or 6 on his back though? He'll be called on to use his strengths so his around the park play will be the same, it'll be the same at the line-out too. If he is good at calling them he'll be asked to do it regardless of whether he is 5 or 6 -they all have to be able to jump and lift these days too.
Really only determines where he packs down in the scrum these days given the fact players as I said are and should be coached into playing with and using their strengths.

But I was never a forward, is there something I'm missing?

Interested Observer

George Hook wrote: »

Does it matter if he has a 5 or 6 on his back though? He'll be called on to use his strengths so his around the park play will be the same, it'll be the same at the line-out too. If he is good at calling them he'll be asked to do it regardless of whether he is 5 or 6 -they all have to be able to jump and lift these days too.
Really only determines where he packs down in the scrum these days given the fact players as I said are and should be coached into playing with and using their strengths.

But I was never a forward, is there something I'm missing?

Yeah I'd say it definitely does matter. A blindside and a 2nd row will have fairly different roles in the team, he obviously has his strengths but they have to fit in with the needs of the team. He's clearly better at carrying the ball and hitting rucks than Toner is but Toner is far better at the set piece so Toner stays in the side, because the team needs that from Toner.

Also haven't really seen anything from Henderson to show he'll be leading a lineout?

bilston

stephen_n wrote: »

Re: Henderson, up to this season internationaly I was very underwhelmed with him, given all the hype that surrounds him. However his performances since the WH game have been very impressive, if short, he carries with purpose and clears out like a bulldozer, seems to have strengthened up his upper body while laid up and can really use it. In Irish terms it's clear he's being groomed to replace POC and has the potential to fill that role excellently.

I think he has developed his game to do a lot more of the dirty stuff now. With the physical attributes he has he could become a right nuisance at the breakdown, not in terms.of stealing ball but by destroying rucks and maybe forcing the opposition to commit an extra man to the breakdown.

George Hook

Interested Observer wrote: »

Yeah I'd say it definitely does matter. A blindside and a 2nd row will have fairly different roles in the team, he obviously has his strengths but they have to fit in with the needs of the team. He's clearly better at carrying the ball and hitting rucks than Toner is but Toner is far better at the set piece so Toner stays in the side, because the team needs that from Toner.

Also haven't really seen anything from Henderson to show he'll be leading a lineout?

Lineout calling I was just using as an example rather than suggesting it was one of his strengths.

"A blindside and a 2nd row will have fairly different roles in the team."

But to get right down to it, what are those different roles? Can they still be defined in the modern game or are they all just playing to their individual strengths - is what I'm getting at.

As long as the coach clearly defines what their role in the team is based on their strengths and what they should be aiming to do, then they should be able to go out there and perform that task.

And just to point out, I'm not trying to push my argument. I'm just trying to tease out what that significant difference is.

Based on what I've seen in the last 15 or so years, the roles in rugby have been breaking down. It would have been laughable seeing a wing in a ruck years ago and yes I do remember commentators laughing about it then. But now it's essential that they have those skills. All players are becoming more well rounded - props now having good handling and off-loading skills (well they're getting there).

I'm just not seeing what that magical difference is anymore between a 5 and a 6, other than their place in the scrum.

aimee1

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Henderson attempted 400% more tackles in his 15 minutes than Toner did in the previous 65. The stats indicate that Henderson is a significantly better player than Toner, and by your reasoning, he should be starting ahead of him.

Henderson came on when england had more possession in the later part of the game. Shortly before half time I saw a stat on the screen and the tackles made was Ireland 40-80 England.

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

POM is one of our most important players. He's simply a significantly better player than Murphy and there isn't a chance Joe will drop him for Murphy.

POM is not one of our most important players. I dont see him being dropped anytime soon but he isnt a player we depend on like Sexton/Murray for example. Our backrow options are quite impressive and Murphy is going to be part of the setup going forward. His performances so far have been quality.

shuffol

bilston wrote: »

The interesting thing about Henderson is that Ireland need to replace O'Connell but Ulster need to replace Ferris. I hear what awec is saying about Henderson playing 6, personally I think he can play either to good effect, butnif he replaces O'Connell he could go on to win 100+ caps, if he centres in on 6 then he is up against O'Mahony and Ruddock both of whom will be arpund for quite some time.

The best use of Ireland's resources is for him to play lock, the best use of Ulster's resources is for him to play 6. It's fine at the moment but come next season I could see the IRFU pushing for a permanent move to the engine room.

Edit - alternatively the IRFU should let us sign a WC blindside flanker....

Hendersons highest ceiling is at lock IMO, at blindside a lot of emphasis is put on his carrying but carriers can be negated, in some of his performances at lock he's just a suffocating presence around the field for the opposition and adding that niggle to his game that the top guys have. Yet he can still find himself with the ball in his hands sometimes and wreak damage. He's too powerful in too many facets to be confined to a ball carrying role IMO.

stephen_n

England

bilston wrote: »

I think he has developed his game to do a lot more of the dirty stuff now. With the physical attributes he has he could become a right nuisance at the breakdown, not in terms.of stealing ball but by destroying rucks and maybe forcing the opposition to commit an extra man to the breakdown.

He isn't poaching at rucks, he's simply lifting and throwing players out of the way, that causes all sort of disruption, though he may not steal the ball, he slows it down big time, I'm not sure I've seen any other player do some of the things he has done at rucks in the last few weeks, the lay off seems to have stepped up his physicality to another level.

bilston

stephen_n wrote: »

He isn't poaching at rucks, he's simply lifting and throwing players out of the way, that causes all sort of disruption, though he may not steal the ball, he slows it down big time, I'm not sure I've seen any other player do some of the things he has done at rucks in the last few weeks, the lay off seems to have stepped up his physicality to another level.

There have been a couple of poaches since his return (one notable one against France that Barnes disgracefully gave a scrum to France for) but it won't ever be a strength for him given he is frickin' Llama!

Tox56

bilston wrote: »

There have been a couple of poaches since his return (one notable one against France that Barnes disgracefully gave a scrum to France for) but it won't ever be a strength for him given he is frickin' Llama!

I wouldnt be so sure, POC is/was excellent at that, and Henderson has a lower centre of gravity than him so I'd say if he works on his technique a lot in that area he could be useful at it

Tim Robbins

errlloyd wrote: »

Like I'd just disagree with this based on what I have seen and we'd get nowhere. Whenever I watch u12 gaa I just see the ball on the ground all the time.

Fair point.

It probably depends where you are. Growing up on DNS, I played a bit of GAA at Irish camps, school etc and then went up to the local club and was way off the pace so gave up pretty quickly. I went up to local Rugby club and was on the firsts when we had two teams.

GAA teams on DNS are training on mid week nights from U8 up. Bit mental if you ask me. For me, when rugby gets really going is at schools and some youth teams.

The skills you mention rucking, passing etc can really be developed from U13 up.

You can't teach much rugby skills to a U10 year old. Whereas something like Soccers, you can start working on the first touch and both feet from 5 up.

sydthebeat

England

Tim Robbins wrote: »

You can't teach much rugby skills to a U10 year old. Whereas something like Soccers, you can start working on the first touch and both feet from 5 up.

You absolutely can.

I could go so far as to say that it could take an u10s player a few years to out grow bad habits picked up at 7s 8s and 9s.

Passing off both sides, catching and Passing, stepping off both feet. ... and especially tackling positioning all are important basic skills to learn u10s

If a player doesn't have the basics of tackling they will find things very difficult by the time they hit u12s and significantly bigger pitches

Tim Robbins

sydthebeat wrote: »

Passing off both sides, catching and Passing, stepping off both feet. ... and especially tackling positioning all are important basic skills to learn u10s

If a player doesn't have the basics of tackling they will find things very difficult by the time they hit u12s and significantly bigger pitches

In England they only start tackling at U10. In Ireland they start at U8. Tackling is only from the waste down until U12.

There's loads of lads who never play rugby and then go to a Rugby school and start at U13 and go on to be professional players.

I would say if you started something like Hurling or Soccer at U13 it might be much harder to catch up.

The Lost Sheep

This discussion probably could be better in Youths thread or a new thread....

Tim Robbins wrote: »

The skills you mention rucking, passing etc can really be developed from U13 up.

You can't teach much rugby skills to a U10 year old. Whereas something like Soccers, you can start working on the first touch and both feet from 5 up.

You most certainly can and if you try say otherwise you have never coached or have an iota about coaching. Like sydthebeat passing off either hand, footwork, positioning in every way all can most certainly be taught to 7/8/9 year olds - That's what IRFU CDOs etc are doing in schools across the country as well as all club coaches etc

sydthebeat wrote: »

You absolutely can.

I could go so far as to say that it could take an u10s player a few years to out grow bad habits picked up at 7s 8s and 9s.

Passing off both sides, catching and Passing, stepping off both feet. ... and especially tackling positioning all are important basic skills to learn u10s

If a player doesn't have the basics of tackling they will find things very difficult by the time they hit u12s and significantly bigger pitches

+1 I agree on tackling but it varies so much on player by player basis and especially on how good the coaches are at the u12/13 age groups.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

In England they only start tackling at U10. In Ireland they start at U8. Tackling is only from the waste down until U12.

There's loads of lads who never play rugby and then go to a Rugby school and start at U13 and go on to be professional players.

I would say if you started something like Hurling at U13 it might be much harder to catch up.

I ultimately don't see any issue with starting tackling when we do and I speak as a coach and referee when saying that.
Hurling is a completely different thing altogether but if you said Gaelic the catching up to players who started playing much younger would be much easier
And tackling isn't from waist down its arm pit and lower....

Tim Robbins

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

You most certainly can and if you try say otherwise you have never coached or have an iota about coaching.

Thanks for popping into boards Joe :-)

I ultimately don't see any issue with starting tackling when we do and I speak as a coach and referee when saying that.
Hurling is a completely different thing altogether but if you said Gaelic the catching up to players who started playing much younger would be much easier
And tackling isn't from waist down its arm pit and lower....

It is waste down up until U12. Here are the reg's: http://www.irishrugby.ie/downloads/REGULATIONS_Mini_Rugby_2012_to_2015%281%29.pdf

As for when we should start tackling here's a good article here: http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/neurosurgeon-critical-of-rugby-s-excessive-aggression-1.2060907

My own view, is there is no way kids should be doing contact until they have some proficiency in passing, evasiveness and know what a hospital pass is.

sydthebeat

England

We'll agree to disagree Tim

You refer to "Tackling from the waist down" as if its some kind of inferior tackling method? Of course kids should be taught that method as its the safest tackling method. What they are actually being taught is the ability to bend the hips, position the head and shoulder and grab and push. .... the absolute basics of rugby tackling. Where they connect with the ball carrier is generally fine once it's below the shoulders.

I've seen guys pick up rugby at 13/14/15 and get destroyed because their technique is so bad. I've seen senior players who couldn't tackle wet paper because they stay so vertical.

And if you haven't guessed it, Im a minis coach.

Yeah_Right

sydthebeat wrote: »

We'll agree to disagree Tim

You refer to "Tackling from the waist down" as if its some kind of inferior tackling method? Of course kids should be taught that method as its the safest tackling method. What they are actually being taught is the ability to bend the hips, position the head and shoulder and grab and push. .... the absolute basics of rugby tackling. Where they connect with the ball carrier is generally fine once it's below the shoulders.

I've seen guys pick up rugby at 13/14/15 and get destroyed because their technique is so bad. I've seen senior players who couldn't tackle wet paper because they stay so vertical.

And if you haven't guessed it, Im a minis coach.

This is the most important thing to teach the kids. Especially head position to prevent injuries. I don't know about now but when I was growing up in NZ, we were playing tackle rugby a 6 or 7 years old. Spent a lot of time at training on it.

The fact is some people will come to rugby late in life and be great at it. Others will play it their whole lives and never be very good. And vice versa.

rrpc

Rugby can be coached from a very early age.

Not full rugby as we know it, and no tackling, but still a very good foundation:

Our programme has been designed to develop your child’s physical, psychological and social attributes, as well as gently encouraging rugby specific skills such as running with the ball, finding space, kicking, catching, scoring a try and much more.

Tim Robbins

sydthebeat wrote: »

We'll agree to disagree Tim

You refer to "Tackling from the waist down" as if its some kind of inferior tackling method? Of course kids should be taught that method as its the safest tackling method. What they are actually being taught is the ability to bend the hips, position the head and shoulder and grab and push. .... the absolute basics of rugby tackling. Where they connect with the ball carrier is generally fine once it's below the shoulders.

I've seen guys pick up rugby at 13/14/15 and get destroyed because their technique is so bad. I've seen senior players who couldn't tackle wet paper because they stay so vertical.

And if you haven't guessed it, Im a minis coach.

That's interesting fair play. I do agree there is a skill in tackling. I am not a coach but I have a 5 year old and a 2 year old and I bring the 5 year old around to various sports. What I see is that some sports like Soccer are so simple kids can play them easily. They are not doing Headers from outside the box now or over head kicks but they can play it to the point it is enjoyable. Other sports such as GAA and Rugby are a little more complex. So even if it is tip Rugby you have to explain passing it backwards, running behind your man etc that's it's kinda of hard for a 5 year old to get stuck into. As you point out the tackle is a big skilful part of Rugby but in my view that shouldn't start until 10. Because it is too dangerous if a kid doesn't have basic motor, spatial skills.

So that means at 5,6,7,8,9 (in my subjective view) you can only really teach ball skills, footwork, evasion Now these are really important but you'd get the same (if not very similar) skills in other field sports.

Rugby unique skills (again tackling is a great example) get going from 9, 10+

Also, I never meant to be little the mini tackle, you are right, very skillful. I just don't think kids should be doing that until other skills are known first and there are 9, 10+. Full tackle, 12, 13 +

Thoughts...

sydthebeat

England

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Other sports such as GAA and Rugby are a little more complex. So even if it is tip Rugby you have to explain passing it backwards, running behind your man etc that's it's kinda of hard for a 5 year old to get stuck into.

I coach from 4/5 up to 10s, believe it or not rugby is actually a very easy and basic game. All you need to learn at an early age (u7s) is to pass the ball backwards and run forward (with ball in 2 hands) when you have it. The tackle is 2 hands between the hips and shoulders. Youd be very surprise how easy kids get it with some coaching and experience. My u7s at the moment are even playing positions with wingers holding the outsides.

GAA on the other hand is a lot more difficult, you have to pick the ball up properly, kick pass, fist pass, hop, solo etc.

One thing ive seen a lot from kids starting to play rugby is that they are not at all used to contact from other kids. The days of big families are gone so theres less in fighting with kids so when it comes to a contact sport they are not at all used to being bumped, hit, pushed etc. In my opinion having physical contact in sports is integral to a kids development. Its great for their confidence and physicality growing up.

Because it is too dangerous if a kid doesn't have basic motor, spatial skills.

my own son has dyspraxia and has general motor skill issues.... rugby is actually great for him and he has been playing it since he was 7 (now 11). Any OTs we consulted have agreed that Rugby is a great way for him to exercise and play sports... it doesnt actually have the convoluted skills other sports have. Rugby is still a sports for all shapes and sizes at underage levels.. tackling is an intergral part

So that means at 5,6,7,8,9 (in my subjective view) you can only really teach ball skills, footwork, evasion Now these are really important but you'd get the same (if not very similar) skills in other field sports.

actually rugby is quite different than other sports in the fact that in rugby you run whilst carrying the ball, usually tucked in under an arm, which creates an unbalanced posture. In soccer and basketball and even gaa you can use your arms to balance allowing for a much more natural running style thus the speeder kids excel. While we try to teach kids to carry the ball in both hands under 7s 8s 9s etc, it is a skill above that to be able to swap the ball over and us your free hand to hand off etc. So even running is different in rugby.. and again this suits the players of "different shapes and abilities"

Also, I never meant to be little the mini tackle, you are right, very skillful. I just don't think kids should be doing that until other skills are known first and there are 9, 10+. Full tackle, 12, 13 +

i didnt at all take your points as belittling, quite the opposite, debate is always good. In regard to tackling being withheld till youths (u12s) i can only comment that at that age puberty kicks in, and body sizes can be very different in the same age levels.... it would be a lot more dangerous to be only teaching kids tackling if you have a 4 1/2 ft 5 stone 13 yo tackling a 5' 6" 8 stone beasht of a 13 yo....
some of the best tacklers in our club are the smaller scrum half type guys BECAUSE they had to learn how to tackle property at a young age or they would get passed by / hurt.