Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

UAEguy2020

dublin49 wrote: »

The small amount of Irish players currently being discussed as possible Lions starters is a good pointer to our current status in World Rugby.There is a natural order to our standing,above Scotland & Italy,level with Wales and below France and England.There is also a Kelly/Roche aspect to it as well where we get occasionally once in lifetime have players like Drico/O Connell or we get the Munster bounce of 2009 but generally we know our place and I am always amazed that some fans feel if only the coach would get his act together we would never lose a game.Farrell does not inspire the same confidence that Joe did so he probably will deliver on expectations as listed above and anything more is a bonus and he should be judged accordingly.In essence we lack flair players,have a decent panel of good internationals with the best of them coming to the end of their careers so a mediocre year is to be expected.

You must not have been watching Wales in 2020.

The complaints aren’t the results it’s the performance levels, things like the set piece and attacking set up aren’t good enough for professional rugby. When so many players aren’t performing the questions have to be sent to the coaching.

UAEguy2020

Yeah_Right wrote: »

The financial side of it is what has me conflicted. Obviously the IRFU desperately needs money AND winning trophies is always good. But for the long term of seeing Ireland actually perform at RWC23 I wonder if improving the performance and establishing some fresh blood in the team is more important. Ideally both would happen but I was curious on other's feelings because I wasn't really happy with how the ABs went in the TriNations. Yes they won and there a couple of very good performances but there was also some rubbish.

We look very rudderless at the moment and when that’s the case we need to fix that before we talk about blooding youngsters. Players like Ross Byrne are further proof of why throwing youngsters in and telling them to sink or swim is a terrible idea. With the experience and young talent currently in the side we should focus on getting the best from that and once that’s done we can start blooding youngsters. Blooding players comes in step 3 or 4 but we are currently on step 2 so jump a step or 2 isn’t going to improve things.

aloooof

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

You must not have been watching Wales in 2020.

The complaints aren’t the results it’s the performance levels, things like the set piece and attacking set up aren’t good enough for professional rugby. When so many players aren’t performing the questions have to be sent to the coaching.

Really?? Do you not this is a touch overboard?

OldRio

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

We look very rudderless at the moment and when that’s the case we need to fix that before we talk about blooding youngsters. Players like Ross Byrne are further proof of why throwing youngsters in and telling them to sink or swim is a terrible idea. With the experience and young talent currently in the side we should focus on getting the best from that and once that’s done we can start blooding youngsters. Blooding players comes in step 3 or 4 but we are currently on step 2 so jump a step or 2 isn’t going to improve things.

Do you think that's how it works? 'Throwing youngsters in and telling them to sink or swim'? Seriously?

UAEguy2020

aloooof wrote: »

Really?? Do you not this is a touch overboard?

Not really, a crap shoot of a lineout is not up to professional standards. Our opposition are more likely to score from an Irish lineout than Ireland are which isn’t a good. If we aren’t capable of putting together at the very least an acceptable lineout than things are much worse than it seems.

UAEguy2020

OldRio wrote: »

Do you think that's how it works? 'Throwing youngsters in and telling them to sink or swim'? Seriously?

Pretty much over the last 2 years. If Sexton was as horrendous as he was in Twickenham what makes the coaches think a young inexperienced 10 will be any better?

aloooof

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

Pretty much over the last 2 years. If Sexton was as horrendous as he was in Twickenham what makes the coaches think a young inexperienced 10 will be any better?

Straw man. Where did Andy Farrell or any of the coaches say they expected RB to be better than Sexton?

aloooof

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

Not really, a crap shoot of a lineout is not up to professional standards. Our opposition are more likely to score from an Irish lineout than Ireland are which isn’t a good. If we aren’t capable of putting together at the very least an acceptable lineout than things are much worse than it seems.

Which is more likely. That we have a set piece and attacking setup that isn't good enough for:
International
Champions Cup
Pro 14
Professional rugby.

From a head-coach who was involved with the Lions.

Or that you're overstating this?

UAEguy2020

aloooof wrote: »

Which is more likely. That we have a set piece and attacking setup that isn't good enough for:
International
Champions Cup
Pro 14
Professional rugby.

From a head-coach who was involved with the Lions.



Or that you're overstating this?

Farrell isn’t the lineout coach is he?

Chucking the ball into the lineout and hoping for the best isn’t good enough for professional rugby no.

UAEguy2020

aloooof wrote: »

Straw man. Where did Andy Farrell or any of the coaches say they expected RB to be better than Sexton?

It appears that’s what the fans expect, no chance you could just relax and let a player develop rather than putting unrealistic expectations on a 10 so early into his test career.

aloooof

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

Farrell isn’t the lineout coach is he?

Chucking the ball into the lineout and hoping for the best isn’t good enough for professional rugby no.

Yep, that was definitely the plan.... :rolleyes:

Anyways, I'm out.

Yeah_Right

thomond2006 wrote: »

You're never going to get an answer so don't bother asking.

Yeah I know. I just sometimes like calling people on their BS.

OldRio

aloooof wrote: »

Yep, that was definitely the plan.... :rolleyes:

Anyways, I'm out.

Me as well.

TRC10

I'd say we're likely to see this v Wales

15-Keenan
14-Larmour
13-Ringrose
12-Henshaw
11-Earls
10-Sexton
9-Murray
1-Healy
2-Herring
3-Porter
4-Beirne
5-Ryan
6-Stander
7-O'Mahony
8-Doris

16-Kelleher
17-Kilcoyne
18-Furlong/O'Toole
19-Henderson/Dillane
20-van der Flier
21-Gibson-Park
22-Burns
23-Aki

molloyjh

Some of the absolute garbage being posted on here lately is, well, as poor as it is unsurprising heading into the 6Ns. Schmidt apparently dragged us to nothingness. Yeah, nothing but 3 6Ns titles (including 1 GS) in his 6 years in charge. He won half the 6Ns Championships he was involved in. Ireland won more Championships under him than in the entire 30 years before he took over. In his 6 years in charge Ireland won 3 Championships, England won 2 and Wales won ther other 1. He led us to our first and only 2 wins over NZ. He led us to our only ever number 1 ranking. He led us to a tour victory in Australia for the first time in my lifetime. But the last year was bad so all those achievements count for nothing to some. Unbelievable garbage.

Oh and Farrell is only in the door and has made substantial changes during a year that was impossible to plan for. But just because he didn't deliver perfection when faced with a rejuvenated French side and a settled and powerful England side, he's getting grief as well. Perspective be damned.

The hyperbole is strong here at times. Very, very strong.

UAEguy2020

molloyjh wrote: »

Some of the absolute garbage being posted on here lately is, well, as poor as it is unsurprising heading into the 6Ns. Schmidt apparently dragged us to nothingness. Yeah, nothing but 3 6Ns titles (including 1 GS) in his 6 years in charge. He won half the 6Ns Championships he was involved in. Ireland won more Championships under him than in the entire 30 years before he took over. In his 6 years in charge Ireland won 3 Championships, England won 2 and Wales won ther other 1. He led us to our first and only 2 wins over NZ. He led us to our only ever number 1 ranking. He led us to a tour victory in Australia for the first time in my lifetime. But the last year was bad so all those achievements count for nothing to some. Unbelievable garbage.

Oh and Farrell is only in the door and has made substantial changes during a year that was impossible to plan for. But just because he didn't deliver perfection when faced with a rejuvenated French side and a settled and powerful England side, he's getting grief as well. Perspective be damned.

The hyperbole is strong here at times. Very, very strong.

Sadly a lot of people have created a pre determined narrative and rather be proven right than Ireland win a match. England lost in Paris by a similar margin and if anything their loss was much worse as atleast we were in the game against France for long periods whereas England were 24-0 down at one point. I don’t recall seei by Eddie getting the same level of grief that Andy got and that was with arguably the most settled side in the championship.

Despite what people said Ireland do need to aim to win the championship as it’s the only way to shut up the fair weather fans on here, as anything positive other than a championship win and this set of fans will try minimize it.

Louis Friend

The anti-Joe Schmidt stuff is gas.

The man is God in the context of Irish rugby.

dublin49

Louis Friend wrote: »

The anti-Joe Schmidt stuff is gas.

The man is God in the context of Irish rugby.

Totally.a cohort of Irish supporters don't believe in accruing equity from achievements in previous seasons.I thought Kidney shipped criticism much too early after getting us to the holy grail in 2009,having waited since the 70's he will always be a hero to me.Joe even more so,

lawrencesummers

Louis Friend wrote: »

The anti-Joe Schmidt stuff is gas.

The man is God in the context of Irish rugby.

And like god, Joe had flaws as well.

Buer

lawrencesummers wrote: »

And like god, Joe had flaws as well.

I'll admit there were differences between them.

For example, god took Sundays off.

lawrencesummers

Buer wrote: »

I'll admit there were differences between them.

For example, god took Sundays off.

God had a sense of humor

Buer

Interesting to see Farrell openly reference the option of moving Porter back to loose head if Furlong is fully fit. Would certainly make sense in terms of getting our best players on the field.

He'd need to be starting there for Leinster too but I don't see that as much of an issue given Leinster don't necessarily have a stand out option there either.

thomond2006

Is there any precedence for this at test level, since the move to match-day 23s?

bilston

molloyjh wrote: »

Some of the absolute garbage being posted on here lately is, well, as poor as it is unsurprising heading into the 6Ns. Schmidt apparently dragged us to nothingness. Yeah, nothing but 3 6Ns titles (including 1 GS) in his 6 years in charge. He won half the 6Ns Championships he was involved in. Ireland won more Championships under him than in the entire 30 years before he took over. In his 6 years in charge Ireland won 3 Championships, England won 2 and Wales won ther other 1. He led us to our first and only 2 wins over NZ. He led us to our only ever number 1 ranking. He led us to a tour victory in Australia for the first time in my lifetime. But the last year was bad so all those achievements count for nothing to some. Unbelievable garbage.

Oh and Farrell is only in the door and has made substantial changes during a year that was impossible to plan for. But just because he didn't deliver perfection when faced with a rejuvenated French side and a settled and powerful England side, he's getting grief as well. Perspective be damned.

The hyperbole is strong here at times. Very, very strong.

Agree with all of this.

Schmidt's record speaks for itself, one bad WC (where we were on a hiding to nothing in that Q/F anyway given it was NZ or SA) doesn't change that.

As for Farrell...he lost three games in his first year, twice to England and once to France. We beat everyone else and beat them well. Forget Georgia, that was a nothing match and actually we were probably one questionable TMO decision before half time away from hammering them anyway.

I've said it before but..Farrell has to contend with something that Joe, and even Deccie didn't, and that is a seriously good French team, combined with England that means the 6Ns becomes much harder and our expectations need to mirror that.

bilston

Buer wrote: »

Interesting to see Farrell openly reference the option of moving Porter back to loose head if Furlong is fully fit. Would certainly make sense in terms of getting our best players on the field.

He'd need to be starting there for Leinster too but I don't see that as much of an issue given Leinster don't necessarily have a stand out option there either.

I've been wondering this myself since listening to Quinnie talk about it on OTB a few months ago. We could do with a TH emerging to cover Furlong that isn't Porter to facilitate it. It might be O'Toole, or maybe someone else, but there is logic to this idea.

siltirocker

bilston wrote: »

Schmidt's record speaks for itself, one bad WC (where we were on a hiding to nothing in that Q/F anyway given it was NZ or SA) doesn't change that.

Not to be pedantic, but I'd call both his World Cups poor.

I'd also say the French teams Deccie came up against were seriously good. Won a Grand Slam, got to a RWC final, etc.

siltirocker

siltirocker wrote: »

Not to be pedantic, but I'd call both his World Cups poor.

Sexton, O'Brien, O'Connell, POM and Payne.

The five most critical players bar maybe Heaslip to the Ireland team.

All lost between the start of the tournament and the Argentinian game.

Look at the team sheets for other teams, take their 5 best players out - how far are they getting?

Yes it was poor to go out again in a quarter again and there is no * beside any results but you can't ignore context either.

lawrencesummers

bilston wrote: »

Agree with all of this.

Schmidt's record speaks for itself, one bad WC (where we were on a hiding to nothing in that Q/F anyway given it was NZ or SA) doesn't change that.

As for Farrell...he lost three games in his first year, twice to England and once to France. We beat everyone else and beat them well. Forget Georgia, that was a nothing match and actually we were probably one questionable TMO decision before half time away from hammering them anyway.

I've said it before but..Farrell has to contend with something that Joe, and even Deccie didn't, and that is a seriously good French team, combined with England that means the 6Ns becomes much harder and our expectations need to mirror that.

The failure of the World Cup in Japan was losing to Japan.
That was a terrible result.

awec

Buer wrote: »

Interesting to see Farrell openly reference the option of moving Porter back to loose head if Furlong is fully fit. Would certainly make sense in terms of getting our best players on the field.

He'd need to be starting there for Leinster too but I don't see that as much of an issue given Leinster don't necessarily have a stand out option there either.

I reckon this will end up a shambles.

ionadnapokot

bilston wrote: »

I've been wondering this myself since listening to Quinnie talk about it on OTB a few months ago. We could do with a TH emerging to cover Furlong that isn't Porter to facilitate it. It might be O'Toole, or maybe someone else, but there is logic to this idea.

Farrell was also on about Porter at LH during the Autumn
"its always been in our mind about the opportunity...option of swapping him over. But at this moment in time he's 100% our no.1 TH with Tadgh been injured"
I thought he was joking

I don't see the long term logic or benefit when you consider Furlongs injury profile and the lack of talent at TH.

LH talent is also a problem but it would be very unfair to Porter to ask him to switch back to LH as a stop gap during a 6N.