Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread VIII - ** MOD NOTE POST #4781 **

Interested Observer

Deleted User wrote: »

I think people have completely unrealistic expectations of what Ireland are capable of in rugby to be honest. If we lose on Saturday it will be quite significant, I'll be very surprised if we lose.

Well this is where we disagree then. I am convinced we're capable of more than we've seen since winning the 6N in 2015.

Interested Observer

Liam Toland and Andy Dunne on OTB last night seem to think our attack is pretty bad as well, listening to it now.

pickarooney

pickarooney wrote: »

https://www.instagram.com/p/BfeDNpslbli/

I think I have 7 or 8

Sigh. Unzips.

irishbucsfan

My expectations are that Ireland should be able to make at least a single line break against a team ranked 7 places in the world below them (or if you ignore the fairly meaningless world rankings, just a team who are far inferior). My expectations are that they should be extremely disappointed with themselves if they fail to do that, not celebratory. That expectation is entirely realistic.

Doesn't mean I think this isn't one of the best teams we've ever had, but it's an extremely relevant and reasonable concern to have going into this game against Wales.

prawnsambo

There were a few issues with the France game apart from the fact that we very seldom win there. I think people were cautious about the result in advance of the game because of the 'new coach' factor, the inability to accurately assess their potential playing style and the addition of so many new or newish caps to their squad. And that's just from posters here.

But the main issue on the day was their ability to slow down our ruck ball unpunished. In the stadium (did I tell you I was there? ) you could see their defence having plenty of time to fan out and present a wall to our attack. The weather conditions also mitigated against us getting a bit looser with ball in hand. If you look back at the first half and in the very early possession we had, we were making very good gain line success without clean breaks and they were getting penalised. But they kept in touch on the scoreboard and when the conditions worsened in the second half, we really didn't get the opportunity to stretch them.

Rattlehead_ie

pickarooney wrote: »

https://www.instagram.com/p/BfeDNpslbli/

I think I have 7 or 8

Murray,Furlong(i think), Zebo
SOB, Sexton, Kearny
BOD, UNKNOWN, POM

Buer

Rattlehead_ie wrote: »

Murray,Furlong(i think), Zebo
SOB, Sexton, Kearny
BOD, UNKNOWN, POM

Your Furlong is Jack McGrath and the unknown looks like a ginger Henderson to me.

mangobob

irishbucsfan wrote: »

My expectations are that Ireland should be able to make at least a single line break against a team ranked 7 places in the world below them (or if you ignore the fairly meaningless world rankings, just a team who are far inferior). My expectations are that they should be extremely disappointed with themselves if they fail to do that, not celebratory. That expectation is entirely realistic.

Aside from the completely understandable elation and celebration at the end, what leads you to believe that the team and coaches were not not disappointed with themselves after the game? Joe's demeanor after the game was anything but celebratory.

Perhaps you are talking about the reaction of some of the fans, in which case I would agree with you. That last epic play coloured many peoples view of the preceding 78 odd minutes, some of which was disappointing and in a places concerning. But the only views that matter are those of the coach and the team, and I would be 100% confident that they anything but rose-tinted when evaluating their performance in that match.

irishbucsfan

mangobob wrote: »

Aside from the completely understandable elation and celebration at the end, what leads you to believe that the team and coaches were not not disappointed with themselves after the game? Joe's demeanor after the game was anything but celebratory.

Perhaps you are talking about the reaction of some of the fans, in which case I would agree with you. That last epic play coloured many peoples view of the preceding 78 odd minutes, some of which was disappointing and in a places concerning. But the only views that matter are those of the coach and the team, and I would be 100% confident that they anything but rose-tinted when evaluating their performance in that match.

Yeah, I'm talking about the suggestion from a fan that my expectations are unrealistic.

I would certainly hope that the coaches and players were not happy at all with how they used the ball in Paris.

Interested Observer

mangobob wrote: »

Aside from the completely understandable elation and celebration at the end, what leads you to believe that the team and coaches were not not disappointed with themselves after the game? Joe's demeanor after the game was anything but celebratory.

Him apparently getting very defensive when asked about our style of play?

The proof will be in the pudding anyway, if we go out and just run into Wales all day (and I can't see any reason to think we won't) then it's clear enough that's how Schmidt wants the team to play.

mangobob

pickarooney wrote: »

https://www.instagram.com/p/BfeDNpslbli/

I think I have 7 or 8

I looked at that and calmly thought "Ok...Sextons the hottest one..." What the actual fupp. I am never going to be able to look at Johnny again without feeling a certain weirdness. Thanks for that

pickarooney

mangobob wrote: »

I looked at that and calmly thought "Ok...Sextons the hottest one..." What the actual fupp. I am never going to be able to look at Johnny again without feeling a certain weirdness. Thanks for that

How about having Alun Wyn Jones haunting your dreams?

https://www.instagram.com/p/BfdlIpDFGzY/

Buer

Gatland looks like a character off Prisoner Cell Block H.

joseywhales

prawnsambo wrote: »

joseywhales wrote: »

On the upside I think we can absolutely destroy their lineout(or any international lineout) with our three jumpers. It could be a hard day for Wales to get any territory.

Wales have a very good lineout, both offensively and defensively. It wasn't always so, but it certainly is now.

I understand but toner Ryan and pom should be the best lineout in world rugby. It will be an interesting battle

pickarooney

pickarooney wrote: »

How about having Alun Wyn Jones haunting your dreams?

https://www.instagram.com/p/BfdlIpDFGzY/

Bit of a Keira Nightly vibe off Alun Wyn Jones.

Feckin Warburton looks like a house wife on the Soprano's. Jesus my eyes lads.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yes, Schmidt said our play is very balanced. But it's not, at all. I've already showed that statistically against France that our style of play was anything but balanced. Massively focused on running down the throat of the beefy French tight 5, over and over and over again with no change. 0 line breaks, very little success, escaped with a victory against a team in deep crisis by the skin of our teeth.

A sample size of one game is, as Franno might say, poor. The weather and the fact that France were allowed to lie all over the ball all day certainly played their part.

It's probably far more relevant to say that Ireland struggle against certain types of teams/defences. Wales and France are 2 teams that we've struggled with over the last few years relative to our position in the rankings. We've managed well enough against England though during that same period. Even against NZ we've done well. The Aussies are 4th and our record against them has been very good.

At the end of the day we still have limitations in our squad too. Our back row, as I've been talking about a bit so far this Championship, is a bit out of whack with Heaslip missing. And we haven't really found a good balance to the back row since. It hasn't been a massive problem in that we're still winning games without him, but it is hurting how we play the game. And it's hard to see how we can fix that with the options we have available right now.

Our midfield hasn't been at all settled in the last few years. Henshaw-Payne, McCloskey-Henshaw, Henshaw-Ringrose, Aki-Henshaw and now Aki-Farrell are the centre partnerships we've had to use in this and the last 2 6Ns. That's 5 different partnerships in 10 games. We've struggled a bit for a second play maker. We had Payne do it for a bit. Then we had Zebo fill that roll. Now we don't really have anyone to do it without chucking Carbery in at FB, which is hardly ideal. Losing Payne and Zebo was always going to hamper us.

At the end of the day the journos spent the entire video part of the press conference asking how big a loss the players who are missing are and why we've consistently struggled against Wales and if we'd see better rugby from Ireland. All relevant questions, but when they are the only questions being asked you can understand why Joe might get a bit pissed off. It was all negative. Every bit of it. We're topping the table. We're the highest in the rankings we've ever been. We're favourites to win this game. I'm sure there could have been a different question or angle in there somewhere. Like maybe "how excited is Andrew Porter to be starting his first 6Ns game?" or "Rob Kearney spoke about Biggars tells. Do you plan on targeting him given his lack of game time and do you expect he'll be rusty". There's any number of other things they could have spoken about.

Joes response was that he felt over the last few years we've shown a lot of balance to our game and that if you look at the Welsh game last year we had a try disallowed for a small mistake that could have put us in front (Henshaw joining the maul slightly ahead of the ball). Then we tried to overplay and gave up a cheap score. Had we gotten the try the cheap score wouldn't have happened and we could have won the game. That was the fine margins he was talking about, Henshaws entry into a maul. And in the context it made complete sense.

molloyjh

Ah here lads, why......

mangobob

irishbucsfan wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Cumoski/status/966672383791849473

Ok I have just watched the video of the press conference and I have to say the tenor of Joes statement is completely different from that suggested by Cummiskeys tweet. His tone was in fact totally relaxed and I felt not defensive at all. He disagreed with the premise of the question, but he explained his reasoning calmly and in some depth.

He also was misquoted at the end. With respect to the differences in how we play from 2 years ago, he didn't say "I'm not going to explain them...that's your job" he said "I'm obviously not going to explain them...that's your guys challenge, I guess."

Subtle differences but it completely changes the interpretation. Sloppy journalism.

mangobob

mangobob wrote: »

Ok I have just watched the video of the press conference and I have to say the tenor of Joes statement is completely different from that suggested by Cummiskeys tweet. His tone was in fact totally relaxed and I felt not defensive at all. He disagreed with the premise of the question, but he explained his reasoning calmly and in some depth.

He also was misquoted at the end. With respect to the differences in how we play from 2 years ago, he didn't say "I'm not going to explain them...that's your job" he said "I'm obviously not going to explain them...that's your guys challenge, I guess."

Subtle differences but it completely changes the interpretation. Sloppy journalism.

Members of the media trying to distort the truth and present a narrative to sell papers?

Never.

Buer

mangobob wrote: »

Subtle differences but it completely changes the interpretation. Sloppy journalism.

I don't think there's anything sloppy about it. That would suggest it was a mistake.

Sangre

Fair play to McFadden. Whether you think he should be there or not, the guy gas worked his socks off since coming back from injury.

irishbucsfan

mangobob wrote: »

Ok I have just watched the video of the press conference and I have to say the tenor of Joes statement is completely different from that suggested by Cummiskeys tweet. His tone was in fact totally relaxed and I felt not defensive at all. He disagreed with the premise of the question, but he explained his reasoning calmly and in some depth.

He also was misquoted at the end. With respect to the differences in how we play from 2 years ago, he didn't say "I'm not going to explain them...that's your job" he said "I'm obviously not going to explain them...that's your guys challenge, I guess."

Subtle differences but it completely changes the interpretation. Sloppy journalism.

I was the one who called it defensive. That was how I heard it at the time.

"That's your job" is obviously paraphrasing "That's your guys challenge, I guess", remember this is a tweet sent while Joe was saying it.

D14Rugby

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yes, Schmidt said our play is very balanced. But it's not, at all. I've already showed that statistically against France that our style of play was anything but balanced. Massively focused on running down the throat of the beefy French tight 5, over and over and over again with no change. 0 line breaks, very little success, escaped with a victory against a team in deep crisis by the skin of our teeth.

In those conditions that's what's called for, working penalties from a notoriously ill disciplined team,if you make breaks off missed tackles great but in those conditions you keep the ball close and tight, throw in the odd going wide to keep them on their toes, and build the score while keeping the ball from your opposition, going wide would have resulted in turnovers with that ball and allowed them the chance to score.

irishbucsfan

D14Rugby wrote: »

In those conditions that's what's called for, working penalties from a notoriously ill disciplined team,if you make breaks off missed tackles great but in those conditions you keep the ball close and tight, throw in the odd going wide to keep them on their toes, and build the score while keeping the ball from your opposition, going wide would have resulted in turnovers with that ball and allowed them the chance to score.

No. It's absolutely not what's called for.

Going over and over again down the throat of an opponent who are playing havoc with the ball on the ground, giving them chance after chance to wreck possession and slow you down. Please...

However they wanted to do it, whether it was putting the ball behind Thomas/Vakatawa or shifting the French tight 5 laterally to stop them having such a huge influence, they should have achieved it. Going back to the same place over and over again is absolutely what "what's called for" at any level unless you're doing it successfully.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I was the one who called it defensive. That was how I heard it at the time.

"That's your job" is obviously paraphrasing "That's your guys challenge, I guess", remember this is a tweet sent while Joe was saying it.

Hang on a second, are you Cummisky?

And he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt on his reporting. Regardless of whether he can't tweet and listen at the same time, he wasn't trying to be accurate, he was trying to be sensationalist.

I'd actually rather just watch the press conference on the IRFU website than try and glean through whatever agenda the Media has this week to get the facts.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Hang on a second, are you Cummisky?

And he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt on his reporting. Regardless of whether he can't tweet and listen at the same time, he wasn't trying to be accurate, he was trying to be sensationalist.

I'd actually rather just watch the press conference on the IRFU website than try and glean through whatever agenda the Media has this week to get the facts.

He was reporting on what Schmidt was saying. And he was pointing out that Schmidt was challenging the media which is particularly relevant given his and his employer's recent behaviour.

arsebiscuits1

irishbucsfan wrote: »

He was reporting on what Schmidt was saying. And he was pointing out that Schmidt was challenging the media which is particularly relevant given his and his employer's recent behaviour.

Come off it.

Cummisky knew exactly what he was inferring when he "quoted" Schmidt here.

I know you're firmly on the side of the media here, baffling as that is. But even you must see that Cummisky is acting the complete bollox here.

As a print journalist, he knows better than anyone that tone cannot be read. And has used that to his advantage

irishbucsfan

arsebiscuits1 wrote: »

Cummisky knew exactly what he was inferring when he "quoted" Schmidt here.

Go ahead then. Are you saying he was not inferring exactly what I said in my post? Because it's entirely obvious what he was saying to me, but maybe you read it differently. There's a fair amount of agreement with people I know as to exactly what Schmidt was referring to.

joseywhales

Sangre wrote: »

Fair play to McFadden.  Whether you think he should be there or not, the guy gas worked his socks off since coming back from injury.

Has anyone ever been out as long and returned to international rugby?
He is an example of determination.

arsebiscuits1

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Go ahead then. Are you saying he was not inferring exactly what I said in my post? Because it's entirely obvious what he was saying to me, but maybe you read it differently. There's a fair amount of agreement with people I know as to exactly what Schmidt was referring to.

Replace "Chancellor Palpatine" with "the media"

Replace "The Jedi" with "The IRFU"

This is essentially what is happening right now.

You are lost. I will pray for you