6n 2019 Scotland Vs Ireland build up thread

randomname2005

sanjose1 wrote: »

Roux put in 3 tackles agast England, Lawes put in three times as many in less time, he just aint dynamic enough for a top modern lock

What were the possession stats for that time period?

Faugheen

sanjose1 wrote: »

Roux put in 3 tackles agast England, Lawes put in three times as many in less time, he just aint dynamic enough for a top modern lock

2 of those 3 tackles he won the collision, which is a key point you’re leaving out. He also hit a lot of rucks. Are you telling me you’re basing work rate on the number of tackles he makes?

Do you suggest we have no line out caller against Scotland as well?

When has Roux played a bad game for Ireland?

Buer

sanjose1 wrote: »

Roux put in 3 tackles agast England, Lawes put in three times as many in less time, he just aint dynamic enough for a top modern lock

It's almost as if Ireland had the vast majority of possession in that period.

If you check the attacking stats for Lawes i.e. passes, carries, metres made, offloads etc. you'll see they're all the same....zero. In 28 minutes on the field he never touched the ball once. He was doing nothing but defending.

aloooof

sanjose1 wrote: »

Roux put in 3 tackles agast England, Lawes put in three times as many in less time, he just aint dynamic enough for a top modern lock

This is exactly the argument Neil Francis has today. Did you just read that and regurgitate it?

johnnyskeleton

ClanofLams wrote: »

Best has proven himself repeatedly. Excellent display against NZ only a couple of months ago and he was far from the only one who struggled on Saturday. Not saying he's a certainty to start in the World Cup but he's more than enough credit in the bank to retain his place this week.

I don't think it is any criticism of Best to say that Cronin is simply playing consistently well for Leinster so is worth starting?

I'm also looking forward to seeing Quinn Roux fill in for Toner!

Zzippy

Roux is a workhorse, it's why Joe likes him and it's why he gets into Ireland squads. He doesn't make big runs like Ryan. He doesn't overpower tacklers like Henderson/Dillane. Ask him to clear ruck ball and he'll do it all day long. He's solid in the lineout and steals the odd opposition throw. He orchestrates and gets mauls moving forward. He does the grunt work around rucks and mauls, but because he isn't flashy like Ryan/Hendo he is considered not good enough. Fair enough, those guys are ahead of him in the pecking order, but he's a solid, dependable backup option that won't cost you a game.

Eod100

Think it's a great sign of Irish squad depth when we're debating 2nd choice players

Squidgy Black

Zzippy wrote: »

Roux is a workhorse, it's why Joe likes him and it's why he gets into Ireland squads. He doesn't make big runs like Ryan. He doesn't overpower tacklers like Henderson/Dillane. Ask him to clear ruck ball and he'll do it all day long. He's solid in the lineout and steals the odd opposition throw. He orchestrates and gets mauls moving forward. He does the grunt work around rucks and mauls, but because he isn't flashy like Ryan/Hendo he is considered not good enough. Fair enough, those guys are ahead of him in the pecking order, but he's a solid, dependable backup option that won't cost you a game.

To add to this, Roux is probably the closest Toner replacement we have in terms of work rate and lineout (although he's not as good due to the fact Toner is a giraffe). We all know how Joe likes to stick to his game plans, and the Ryan/Toner combo is one we've had a lot of success with at provincial and international level.

reg114

Former Former wrote: »

He has a dead leg. He trained earlier in the week.

Yes and now he's ruled out of yet another game... its happening too often for comfort.

Former Former

The "well, Joe likes Roux" argument is somewhat undermined by the fact that he was left out of the squad to begin with. His subsequent elevation through the ranks is due to his lineout calling and bulk for the tighthead side, neither of which Dillane provides. I'm not sure who else we have that fits the bill. Treadwell?

FWIW I'd pick him over Dillane every day of the week but Roux is a big unknown at this level.

Faugheen

Former Former wrote: »

The "well, Joe likes Roux" argument is somewhat undermined by the fact that he was left out of the squad to begin with. His subsequent elevation through the ranks is due to his lineout calling and bulk for the tighthead side, neither of which Dillane provides. I'm not sure who else we have that fits the bill. Treadwell?

FWIW I'd pick him over Dillane every day of the week but Roux is a big unknown at this level.

It’s because of the player that was injured. If Ryan wasn’t playing rather than Toner, then Dillane would have started this game.

Quint2010

For me Farrell is a better bet at 13 than Henshaw would have been. Still a conservative selection tho.

Annabella1

So happy Kearney back
Back 3 look much more solid
Hopefully has shaken off rustiness

Former Former

Faugheen wrote: »

It’s because of the player that was injured. If Ryan wasn’t playing rather than Toner, then Dillane would have started this game.

??

Isn't that exactly what I said?

swiwi_

If you go to LiveLeak you can see Robbie Henshaw being fed to the sharks.

Zzippy

Quint2010 wrote: »

For me Farrell is a better bet at 13 than Henshaw would have been. Still a conservative selection tho.

Not in a million years. Henshaw is on a par with Aki for 12 and just behind Ringrose for 13. Then a big gap to Farrell who isn't far ahead of his namesake. In fact I think Chris Farrell would be a better 12 than 13. He's more of a power runner suited to inside centre IMO.

aloooof

Zzippy wrote: »

Not in a million years. Henshaw is on a par with Aki for 12 and just behind Ringrose for 13. Then a big gap to Farrell who isn't far ahead of his namesake. In fact I think Chris Farrell would be a better 12 than 13. He's more of a power runner suited to inside centre IMO.

I've seen this mentioned a few times, and it makes a lot of sense to me. But I think Drico was on a podcast recently and mentioned he's definitely / solely a 13 so there's obviously something I'm missing in this regard?

Zzippy

aloooof wrote: »

I've seen this mentioned a few times, and it makes a lot of sense to me. But I think Drico was on a podcast recently and mentioned he's definitely / solely a 13 so there's obviously something I'm missing in this regard?

I don't see it. I know he plays 13 for Munster, but he doesn't play like most 13s, he trucks it up and uses power to make gains, he doesn't use footwork to make a break, and he doesn't distribute a lot either. For me Tom Farrell is more in the 13 mould, spots a gap and seems to find space better. Certainly he has outplayed CF when they've come up against each other.

arsebiscuits1

Zzippy wrote: »

I don't see it. I know he plays 13 for Munster, but he doesn't play like most 13s, he trucks it up and uses power to make gains, he doesn't use footwork to make a break, and he doesn't distribute a lot either. For me Tom Farrell is more in the 13 mould, spots a gap and seems to find space better. Certainly he has outplayed CF when they've come up against each other.

Jackman had an explanation for it on some interview a while back based on his time at Grenoble.

Basically he's a very good 12 because he's so physical. But what sets him apart at 13 is there is slightly more room down that channel where he really prospers. But his distribution is fantastic so he can draw defenders and release players into space a lot more effectively.

Pudsy33

If Ryan was the one injured I suspect we'd be seeing a Dillane Toner partnership this weekend. Roux is simply a more like for like replacement for Toner. I suspect he'll go well.

Perifect

It's just a real pity that Henderson and Beirne are out. We need to weigh up what they can bring and compare it with Toner. Lineouts are an issue which pushes Toner forward in the pecking order but the others add so much in other areas. Maybe we change it depending on opposition but I'd favour Henderson starting with Beirne on the bench. It's a really tight call that one. I wouldn't have Toner on the bench as the other two are better impact players.

troyzer

arsebiscuits1 wrote: »

Zzippy wrote: »

I don't see it. I know he plays 13 for Munster, but he doesn't play like most 13s, he trucks it up and uses power to make gains, he doesn't use footwork to make a break, and he doesn't distribute a lot either. For me Tom Farrell is more in the 13 mould, spots a gap and seems to find space better. Certainly he has outplayed CF when they've come up against each other.

Jackman had an explanation for it on some interview a while back based on his time at Grenoble.

Basically he's a very good 12 because he's so physical. But what sets him apart at 13 is there is slightly more room down that channel where he really prospers. But his distribution is fantastic so he can draw defenders and release players into space a lot more effectively.

That's it I imagine. He has all of the skills of 12 but he has that extra spark which means he can play 13. You don't put a battering ram in the channel where all of the battering rams are if you can put him in a channel where he's the only battering ram but isn't caught out by lack of fundamentals.

bob mcbob

Weather forecast for the game on Saturday.

I don't think it is going to be a day for Garryowens.

Edinburgh
Yellow warning of wind

From
00:15 GMT on Sat 9 February
To
15:00 GMT on Sat 9 February

A spell of strong winds will push from west to east through the day, bringing potential travel disruption.

Perifect

bob mcbob wrote: »

Weather forecast for the game on Saturday.

I don't think it is going to be a day for Garryowens.

Edinburgh
Yellow warning of wind

From
00:15 GMT on Sat 9 February
To
15:00 GMT on Sat 9 February

A spell of strong winds will push from west to east through the day, bringing potential travel disruption.

Unfortunately, I think it more than likely means a day for garryowens and not for expansive rugby.

clsmooth

Perifect wrote: »

Unfortunately, I think it more than likely means a day for garryowens and not for expansive rugby.

Which should suit us down to the ground

Perifect

clsmooth wrote: »

Which should suit us down to the ground

If we're sticking to the same old game plan. We need to mix it up!

leakyboots

Zzippy wrote: »

I don't see it. I know he plays 13 for Munster, but he doesn't play like most 13s, he trucks it up and uses power to make gains, he doesn't use footwork to make a break, and he doesn't distribute a lot either. For me Tom Farrell is more in the 13 mould, spots a gap and seems to find space better. Certainly he has outplayed CF when they've come up against each other.

Chris Farrell is most definitely a distributor when he wants to, well able to throw skip passes out to the wing. He's got great hands.

How many times have CF and TF faced each other?

I think people are forgetting how impressive CF was in his last outing for us, MOTM if I remember?

Edit: I think he's the right call for 13 behind Ringrose.

bob mcbob

Perifect wrote: »

Unfortunately, I think it more than likely means a day for garryowens and not for expansive rugby.

You think so?
Murray's skill with these is the chaser arrives at the same time as the ball.

With the wind it is going to be very difficult to judge.

Overcook it and it gives Hogg counterattack opportunities.
Undercook it and the chaser is static with Scottish backs attacking him.

lawred2

Perifect wrote: »

Unfortunately, I think it more than likely means a day for garryowens and not for expansive rugby.

Wind like that makes kicking to the sky a lottery.

Not exactly something that would excite Jo.

Larbre34

I'd have had Ruddock on the bench for this one all day long.

Dubinusa

Agree with the Farrell call. I would have liked to see Addison, but Farrell is fine.
Delighted for Conan!! Hope he goes well. He's a very good player and has bided his time.
If Murray is as poor as last week, we'll be in trouble.

Perifect

bob mcbob wrote: »

You think so?
Murray's skill with these is the chaser arrives at the same time as the ball.

With the wind it is going to be very difficult to judge.

Overcook it and it gives Hogg counterattack opportunities.
Undercook it and the chaser is static with Scottish backs attacking him.

It'll be wet and windy. I think playing through the hands might seem too risky for Joe. I hope I'm wrong because we really need to work on something different.

Perifect

lawred2 wrote: »

Wind like that makes kicking to the sky a lottery.

Not exactly something that would excite Jo.

He might prefer it to keeping it in hand if it's still wet and slippy!

kuang1

Perifect wrote: »

... because we really need to work on something different.

No we really don't.

We need to show up ready to play. And then keep playing the way we've been playing for the last year or more.

DellyBelly

Happy enough with that team. Would like to have seen Carbs starting but after losing last week I can see why he went with Johnny. Delighted Earlsey is fit. I expect a big game from him. Be interesting to watch how Roux and Conan go.

Quint2010

Zzippy wrote: »

Not in a million years. Henshaw is on a par with Aki for 12 and just behind Ringrose for 13. Then a big gap to Farrell who isn't far ahead of his namesake. In fact I think Chris Farrell would be a better 12 than 13. He's more of a power runner suited to inside centre IMO.

Well I'm going on his performance as a 13 against Wales last year when he got MOTM. Maybe a bit optimistic of me. He plays there for Munster. Henshaw has never convinced me as a 13 TBH.

Perifect

kuang1 wrote: »

No we really don't.

We need to show up ready to play. And then keep playing the way we've been playing for the last year or more.

We've been exposed. Some of us have always thought that we need a plan b, the England game proved it.

aloooof

Perifect wrote: »

We've been exposed. Some of us have always thought that we need a plan b, the England game proved it.

Can you point to your posts prior to the England game where you said we need a plan b? Cos I don't recall any.

EDIT: To be fair, you did post this:

"Box kicking has worked really well for us. As has the garryowen. I just have a feeling we'll need something more come world cup time. It's happened before where we were caught off guard by something different."

But I think that sets up a false premise that box kicking is all we have. Just look back to Standers try versus England last year.

troyzer

aloooof wrote: »

Perifect wrote: »

We've been exposed. Some of us have always thought that we need a plan b, the England game proved it.

Can you point to your posts prior to the England game where you said we need a plan b? Cos I don't recall any.

As if on cue....

https://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/2019/0207/1028153-schmidt-shoots-down-talk-of-one-dimensional-ireland/

Perifect

aloooof wrote: »

Can you point to your posts prior to the England game where you said we need a plan b? Cos I don't recall any.

EDIT: To be fair, you did post this:

"Box kicking has worked really well for us. As has the garryowen. I just have a feeling we'll need something more come world cup time. It's happened before where we were caught off guard by something different."

But I think that sets up a false premise that box kicking is all we have. Just look back to Standers try versus England last year.

Time has moved on. England read us like a book. We need more variety. If we get beaten in the air, we lose the match. Standers try was great but it was off a set piece move. From open play we are way too predictable and lack any invention. The box kick is our main play and we have very little creativity.
As I've also said, it's good that this has been exposed now, we have time before the world cup to fix it.

mfceiling

Buer wrote: »

Is there another Robbie Henshaw playing in a parallel universe that has some sort of insane injury record?

The one I know of is still only 25, has 116 provincial appearances and 37 Irish caps (which is already more than Fitzgerald who retired just before his 29th birthday).

You're thinking of Ronnie Henshaw...Never really gets mentioned because he's almost always injured and therefore never gets too many column inches.

Jump_In_Jack

Larbre34 wrote: »

I'd have had Ruddock on the bench for this one all day long.

Ah, he’d be wasted on the bench all day long, be better to bring him on as a substitute.
😜

tmc1963

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

With the exception of Watson and possibly Barclay almost all of those injured players are crap anyway, so most of them won't be any loss to them. WP Nel is out too though which will be a blow. Generally they look weak in both prop positions so we should be going after their scrum from the start.

I think we are stronger in almost every position from 1-10 with the exception of hooker, so if we perform to our standards in the forwards we should be able to grind it out without giving their outside backs a chance to do too much damage.

Can I ask if these are widely held views - it's just that they seem a bit dismissive.

ClanofLams

Wouldn't be overly confident, the number of changes make it hard to have much cohesion. Big chance for Conan and Roux, the former to potentially make a case for a starting position, although he will need to be excellent for the remainder of the 6N given how consistent Stander has been and the latter to solidify his place in the squad.

Roux has improved a lot over the last couple of years, think he will go well, the only fault I would have with him is he can give away silly penalties but hopefully that won't happen. The criticism of him last week on here was bizarre, someone suggested he should never see a squad again or something daft like that, how they reached that conclusion was beyond my understanding.

The game probably hinges on Murray and Sexton, if they are back to somewhere approaching their best, Ireland should be fine. But if they're anything like last week it could be a long afternoon.

molloyjh

ClanofLams wrote: »

Wouldn't be overly confident, the number of changes make it hard to have much cohesion. Big chance for Conan and Roux, the former to potentially make a case for a starting position, although he will need to be excellent for the remainder of the 6N given how consistent Stander has been and the latter to solidify his place in the squad.

Roux has improved a lot over the last couple of years, think he will go well, the only fault I would have with him is he can give away silly penalties but hopefully that won't happen. The criticism of him last week on here was bizarre, someone suggested he should never see a squad again or something daft like that, how they reached that conclusion was beyond my understanding.

The game probably hinges on Murray and Sexton, if they are back to somewhere approaching their best, Ireland should be fine. But if they're anything like last week it could be a long afternoon.

The game hinges on our pack I think. They didn’t show up last week the way we all know they can. Murray and Sexton were poor enough, but England won the battle up front all day long and their line speed and physicality was so good that even on form the half backs would have struggled. It’s a cliche for a reason, but forwards do generally win games.

My biggest concern isn’t in selection, it’s the attitude. If they show up looking as lethargic as they did last week we’ll lose. Get our heads right and we should win.

ClanofLams

molloyjh wrote: »

The game hinges on our pack I think. They didn’t show up last week the way we all know they can. Murray and Sexton were poor enough, but England won the battle up front all day long and their line speed and physicality was so good that even on form the half backs would have struggled. It’s a cliche for a reason, but forwards do generally win games.

My biggest concern isn’t in selection, it’s the attitude. If they show up looking as lethargic as they did last week we’ll lose. Get our heads right and we should win.

Yeah that's fair enough. I expect the pack to be able to get parity at worst and probably have the better of it. Just thought the half backs were so poor last week that even with parity or a slight edge Scotland could quite easily win if they don't improve, particularly because Schmidt tends to leave them out there for close to 80.

Murray and Sexton are obviously being judged on a different scale too when I say they were terrible, it's on the basis of them being the best combination in world rugby.

swiwi_

IMO, none of the Irish players would make the Scottish side











*World Rugby Regulation 8

wittycynic

Selection for this match is a big of a missed opportunity to bring in some younger players with a view towards the autumn.

At the next World Cup the age profile of (arguably) our first fifteen will be:

Cian Healy (32)
Rory Best (37)
Tadgh Furlong (26)
James Ryan (23)
Devin Toner (33)
Peter O'Mahony (30)
Sean O'Brien (32)
CJ Stander (29)

Conor Murray (30)
Johnny Sexton (34)
Keith Earls (32)
Bundee Aki (29)
Garry Ringrose (24)
Jacob Stockdale (23)
Rob Kearney (33)

That's nine players in their 30s, with four 33 or over, and an average team age of 30. The cumulative effect of all this is a team that won't have the same ability to get through work, or recover, as one even two or three years younger on average.

While Schmidt's hands are tied around experimentation at second row in a sense, abandoning the Henshaw at full back idea after one game (dropped players under Schmidt routinely appear to have picked up a face-saving knock) and failing to give time to Larmour at full back are errors. As is not looking to Scannel at hooker at this stage.

Last year was an incredible one for Irish rugby, but looking at the profile of the team, you increasingly get the view it was a last hurrah for a lot of players who are now moving past their prime.

Neil3030

wittycynic wrote: »

Selection for this match is a big of a missed opportunity to bring in some younger players with a view towards the autumn.

At the next World Cup the age profile of (arguably) our first fifteen will be:

Cian Healy (32)
Rory Best (37)
Tadgh Furlong (26)
James Ryan (23)
Devin Toner (33)
Peter O'Mahony (30)
Sean O'Brien (32)
CJ Stander (29)

Conor Murray (30)
Johnny Sexton (34)
Keith Earls (32)
Bundee Aki (29)
Garry Ringrose (24)
Jacob Stockdale (23)
Rob Kearney (33)

That's nine players in their 30s, with four 33 or over, and an average team age of 30. The cumulative effect of all this is a team that won't have the same ability to get through work, or recover, as one even two or three years younger on average.

While Schmidt's hands are tied around experimentation at second row in a sense, abandoning the Henshaw at full back idea after one game (dropped players under Schmidt routinely appear to have picked up a face-saving knock) and failing to give time to Larmour at full back are errors. As is not looking to Scannel at hooker at this stage.

Last year was an incredible one for Irish rugby, but looking at the profile of the team, you increasingly get the view it was a last hurrah for a lot of players who are now moving past their prime.

Remove best and the average age is 29. That's the same as NZ when they won in 2015.

troyzer

wittycynic wrote: »

Selection for this match is a big of a missed opportunity to bring in some younger players with a view towards the autumn.

At the next World Cup the age profile of (arguably) our first fifteen will be:

Cian Healy (32)
Rory Best (37)
Tadgh Furlong (26)
James Ryan (23)
Devin Toner (33)
Peter O'Mahony (30)
Sean O'Brien (32)
CJ Stander (29)

Conor Murray (30)
Johnny Sexton (34)
Keith Earls (32)
Bundee Aki (29)
Garry Ringrose (24)
Jacob Stockdale (23)
Rob Kearney (33)

That's nine players in their 30s, with four 33 or over, and an average team age of 30. The cumulative effect of all this is a team that won't have the same ability to get through work, or recover, as one even two or three years younger on average.

While Schmidt's hands are tied around experimentation at second row in a sense, abandoning the Henshaw at full back idea after one game (dropped players under Schmidt routinely appear to have picked up a face-saving knock) and failing to give time to Larmour at full back are errors. As is not looking to Scannel at hooker at this stage.

Last year was an incredible one for Irish rugby, but looking at the profile of the team, you increasingly get the view it was a last hurrah for a lot of players who are now moving past their prime.

Even though I can't fully appreciate it being Irish and on the inside as it were, I have to laugh at the ludicrous overreaction of a single defeat to one of the best teams in the world who badly wanted it.

It's madness.