Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

sprucemoose

irelandrover wrote: »

Was there games where Byrne was picked at 10 and Carberry didnt play?

possibly, im just going by europe in his last season and JC was either at 15 or on the bench up until the quarters, came on at 15 if i remember correctly when RK got injured away to montpellier and JS was already out. could be down to injuries too i suppose but in Kearneys book he basically said the leinster coaches wanted carbery at 15 ahead of him but joe schmidt preferred kearney. id imagine someone in the IRFU had a quiet word with Cullen & Lancaster about it and suddenly JC found himself as the 10 cover on the bench (obviously hes versatile too but nacewa could generally cover 10-15 so it was less of a reason at that time)

Richie_Rich89

Carbery's definitely a bit of an enigma when it comes to controlling a game. He is capable of seeing the space and kicking for territory. There were one or two good kicks in his first European game for Leinster against Castres. But then there are some games when he doesn't really put his stamp on it at all in terms of Ross Byrne-style game management.

I was thinking Cooney and Carbery might be a good pairing - let Carbery do his thing, and have Cooney control the game.

Podge_irl

irelandrover wrote: »

I know that RB played 10 and carberry 15. But was there a time when Byrne played and a fit carberry was on the bench.

I always thought that Byrne at 10 and Carberry at 15 was just the best use of resources rather than a clear preference for Byrne over Carberry.

Against Montpelier in the final group game. Byrne started with Carbery on the bench

TRC10

Richie_Rich89 wrote: »

Carbery's definitely a bit of an enigma when it comes to controlling a game. He is capable of seeing the space and kicking for territory. There were one or two good kicks in his first European game for Leinster against Castres. But then there are some games when he doesn't really put his stamp on it at all in terms of Ross Byrne-style game management.

I was thinking Cooney and Carbery might be a good pairing - let Carbery do his thing, and have Cooney control the game.

Yeah I do feel he doesn't have the commanding influence of Sexton or Byrne. Sexton and Byrne are like the conductors of the orchestra, Carbery is a section of the orchestra, if that makes any sense. No less ability, it's just a different dynamic.

I feel he'd excel with more of a game managing, commanding 9 inside him like Murray or Cooney (or Doak down the line). He'd probably fit right into most French teams, the way the roles of their halfbacks are essentially reversed from what we do in Britain and Ireland.

That being said, he did close out the NZ game in Chicago magnificently well on his debut. So yeah it's indeed an enigma.

yerrahbah

O'Mahony, Farrell and Larmour wont be involved vs the USA


https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1412012368683491333

TRC10

yerrahbah wrote: »

O'Mahony, Farrell and Larmour wont be involved vs the USA


https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1412012368683491333

Coombes, Hume and Baloucoune

Lets goooo

FellasFellas

Really begs the question of him playing at all in the Japan game if he was just going to be released for the USA game. Opportunity lost to have Coombes play a tough, quick game against good opposition.

thomond2006

FellasFellas wrote: »

Really begs the question of him playing at all in the Japan game if he was just going to be released for the USA game. Opportunity lost to have Coombes play a tough, quick game against good opposition.

Japan turned out to be a tricky opponent for that team and they were better for POM's presence.

sydthebeat

FellasFellas wrote: »

Really begs the question of him playing at all in the Japan game if he was just going to be released for the USA game. Opportunity lost to have Coombes play a tough, quick game against good opposition.

POM was instrumental in the win

so patently (QED and all that jazz) it was the correct decision to include him.

Buer

bilston wrote: »

Farrell appears to have hinted at a much changed team this weekend.

I'd expect to see the likes of O'Toole, Molony, Coombes, Casey, Daly (the Connacht one) and Baloucoune start. I'd be disappointed if they aren't involved at all.

As a Leinster and Molony fan, I really hope he doesn't start. It's a pointless exercise.

If we're bringing someone in for game time they should either be a) a player that is capable of playing tier 1 test rugby or b) someone that is likely to develop into a player that is capable of playing tier 1 test rugby.

As good as Molony has been this season, he doesn't fall into either category for me. He's 27 and unlikely ever to be a test option particularly when we have guys like Ryan, Baird, Henderson, Beirne and Dillane. I would put it in the same bracket as capping guys like Billy Holland or James Downey. Happy for them as players but I don't know how it benefits the national team ultimately.

OneLungDavy

Buer wrote: »

As a Leinster and Molony fan, I really hope he doesn't start. It's a pointless exercise.

If we're bringing someone in for game time they should either be a) a player that is capable of playing tier 1 test rugby or b) someone that is likely to develop into a player that is capable of playing tier 1 test rugby.

As good as Molony has been this season, he doesn't fall into either category for me. He's 27 and unlikely ever to be a test option particularly when we have guys like Ryan, Baird, Henderson, Beirne and Dillane. I would put it in the same bracket as capping guys like Billy Holland or James Downey. Happy for them as players but I don't know how it benefits the national team ultimately.

Wholly agree. A complete bolter like Ahern would have been a good call. He may not be test quality yet, but at least it would let him know he's seen as a future international.

bilston

Buer wrote: »

As a Leinster and Molony fan, I really hope he doesn't start. It's a pointless exercise.

If we're bringing someone in for game time they should either be a) a player that is capable of playing tier 1 test rugby or b) someone that is likely to develop into a player that is capable of playing tier 1 test rugby.

As good as Molony has been this season, he doesn't fall into either category for me. He's 27 and unlikely ever to be a test option particularly when we have guys like Ryan, Baird, Henderson, Beirne and Dillane. I would put it in the same bracket as capping guys like Billy Holland or James Downey. Happy for them as players but I don't know how it benefits the national team ultimately.

Who else is in the squad?

Baird and Ryan to start maybe..

4 Baird
5 Ryan
6 Coombes
7 Penny isn't in the squad is he?
8 Doris

shootermacg

OneLungDavy wrote: »

Wholly agree. A complete bolter like Ahern would have been a good call. He may not be test quality yet, but at least it would let him know he's seen as a future international.

I think the young guys would be better served focusing on making the starting lineup for their province before getting a call up to international duty.

Richie_Rich89

shootermacg wrote: »

I think the young guys would be better served focusing on making the starting lineup for their province before getting a call up to international duty.

The trouble is that you might have a player who is a very good option at provincial level, but isn't really going to make a difference at international level.

There isn't as much incentive for the province to fast track a potentially top, top player, because they've already got a guy who's good enough to win against the opposition they face.

Bent would be a good example; a club stalwart who was more than good enough in the league and could hold his own at European level. He was a very good player, but in 2017 when Ireland were facing Japan it made more sense to select a player with potential to be considerably better, but who was lower down the pecking order at that stage.

I think there's a lot to be said for giving more weighting to potential in a few key selections in Summer or Autumn squads, especially against non-Tier 1 nations. I would like to have seen Ahern in for Molony.

shootermacg

Richie_Rich89 wrote: »

The trouble is that you might have a player who is a very good option at provincial level, but isn't really going to make a difference at international level.

There isn't as much incentive for the province to fast track a potentially top, top player, because they've already got a guy who's good enough to win against the opposition they face.

Bent would be a good example; a club stalwart who was more than good enough in the league and could hold his own at European level. He was a very good player, but in 2017 when Ireland were facing Japan it made more sense to select a player with potential to be considerably better, but who was lower down the pecking order at that stage.

I think there's a lot to be said for giving more weighting to potential in a few key selections in Summer or Autumn squads, especially against non-Tier 1 nations. I would like to have seen Ahern in for Molony.

Potential isn't really a metric. If the guy with potential is better, he'll probably start for his province. The provincial coaches have access to GPS, stats etc.

When a guy realizes his potential, then, I figure, he'll get a start. But potential on its own isn't enough.

Giving out caps like cookies to young inexperienced players, does nothing for them in the long run. Let them progress with the ultimate reward being a cap and they'll appreciate it much more.

TRC10

I'd be surprised if Molony plays.

As someone already said, I'd say he's just there so they can get a look at him and so he'll be up to speed on the systems and patterns if they ever need to call upon him in the future.

He's not a test quality player now and he's 27.

The 3 locks in the squad will probably be the same as last week with Baird possibly starting.

TRC10

shootermacg wrote: »

Potential isn't really a metric. If the guy with potential is better, he'll probably start for his province. The provincial coaches have access to GPS, stats etc.

When a guy realizes his potential, then, I figure, he'll get a start. But potential on its own isn't enough.

Giving out caps like cookies to young inexperienced players, does nothing for them in the long run. Let them progress with the ultimate reward being a cap and they'll appreciate it much more.

Didn't do Porter and James Ryan too much harm in 2017

shootermacg

TRC10 wrote: »

Didn't do Porter and James Ryan too much harm in 2017

Both players were exceptional players. And it was recognized and acted on. So there ARE exceptions made for deserving players. If any other deserving players pop up, they'll get their shot.

Next off the rank was Coombes, he was one of the best back row forwards, played an entire season as a starting back row, excels and gets his call.

TRC10

shootermacg wrote: »

Both players were exceptional players. And it was recognized and acted on. So there ARE exceptions made for deserving players. If any other deserving players pop up, they'll get their shot.

Next off the rank was Coombes, he was one of the best back row forwards, played an entire season as a starting back row, excels and gets his call.

So giving caps to young inexperienced players DOES benefit them in the long run, if they're good?

shootermacg

TRC10 wrote: »

So giving caps to young inexperienced players DOES benefit them in the long run, if they're good?

Exceptions exist for every rule.

Buer

TRC10 wrote: »

Didn't do Porter and James Ryan too much harm in 2017

Tadhg Furlong, Donnacha Ryan, Luke Fitzgerald, Jack McGrath, Rob Kearney, Dan Leavy....none of them were first choice when they made their test debuts.

Now, I don't think Thomas Ahern should be thrown into test rugby but we absolutely should not be considering first choice at a province to be a pre-requisite for international selection. We have 4 teams to pick from; we would let a glut of players stagnate if we declined to call them up due to not being established in their provincial starting teams.

Former Former Former

Should we pick young inexperienced guys? Absolutely.

Should we have picked Ahern? No.

That's about it really.

thomond2006

Ahern has had a few injuries this season. He's better off resting up and getting a full pre-season etc in. He'll have opportunities at Munster in the initial weeks with Snyman in SA and Beirne presumably rested.

Richie_Rich89

I think they should have selected Ahern.

Neil3030

TRC10 wrote: »

Coombes, Hume and Baloucoune

Lets goooo

Like something you'd hear in a Christy Moore song...

Down in Neenagh
Singing a tune
With Coombes, Humes and Baloucoune...

Neil3030

POM withdraws from the Ireland squad to commence his "off-season"...

Same week U.S. troops fully withdraw from Afghanistan, and the Taliban are closing in on Kabul...

Hope he goes easy on em.

TRC10

You just know Conway will start on the right wing...

This thread could be ugly this time on Thursday

aloooof

Neil3030 wrote: »

Like something you'd hear in a Christy Moore song...

Down in Neenagh
Singing a tune
With Coombes, Hume and Baloucoune...

Or a dodgy law firm.

Neil3030

TRC10 wrote: »

You just know Conway will start on the right wing...

This thread could be ugly this time on Thursday

For me, it'd all depend on the rest of the selection. If you put Hume at 13, an experienced wing makes sense. If you have more experience at 13, you gain more from looking at a new winger. You want to blood as many players as you can into a team that plays as similarly as possible to the first team. It's a balancing act.

aloooof

TRC10 wrote: »

You just know Conway will start on the right wing...

This thread could be ugly this time on Thursday

Personally, I don't think so. But your example, in a nutshell, sums up the issue with this place from time to time; a single selection decision doesn't go their way, and some posters over-react.

Whereas the reality is Farrell has given out new caps to, what, 13-14 new players in an interrupted season and a half? I'd wager he's well ahead of his predecessors in terms of blooding new players.