Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

siltirocker

Deleted User wrote: »

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.

The manner of the performance and result can not be justified in my eyes, regardless of those players missing. (I'd say the same about the Italian game also). Also the Argentinians were missing just as many big players also Figallo, Orlandi, Leguizamon, Bosch, and Aguila.

awec

Schmidt failed to deliver at 2 World Cups. Excuses can be found, but it was an area he did not succeed at. In fairness to him he is just the latest in a long line of coaches that haven't delivered at that level.

lawrencesummers

awec wrote: »

I reckon this will end up a shambles.

Is it easier for a prop to move tight to loose than it is loose to tight?

Maybe the cauliflower orientated among us can shed some light on that.

hahashake

lawrencesummers wrote: »

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

True, but the knock-on effect of winning that game was playing the future RWC winners in the quarter. Though in an alternate universe, Ireland may have won that game...

lawrencesummers

hahashake wrote: »

True, but the knock-on effect of winning that game was playing the future RWC winners in the quarter. Though in an alternate universe, Ireland may have won that game...

Maybe we should have lost to Scotland and Samoa as well so, then we wouldn’t have had to play either of them.

hahashake

Silver linings and all that.

Former Former Former

Hmmm. Wouldn't be mad about moving Porter but could be a masterstroke if no one else steps up at LH (as is looking increasingly unlikely).

lawrencesummers

Former Former Former wrote: »

Hmmm. Wouldn't be mad about moving Porter but could be a masterstroke if no one else steps up at LH (as is looking increasingly unlikely).

Hard for anyone to step up when nobody is given a chance outside of Cian Healy.

ionadnapokot

Does anyone know the amount of minutes Porter has played this season?
I know he did at least two 80min stints at TH. One v England which really was remarkable & stupid (see Bealham for Healy etc). & One last wk v Munster.

To ask him to fill a gap at LH created by Farrell's own bad selections is really stretching it now.

Former Former Former

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Hard for anyone to step up when nobody is given a chance outside of Cian Healy.

Well, when a player is good enough, he won't need to be 'given a chance', he'll just be picked. That's how it works.

molloyjh

Former Former Former wrote: »

Well, when a player is good enough, he won't need to be 'given a chance', he'll just be picked. That's how it works.

Exactly.

Why do so many people think that the only way for players to be found is for them to be tossed into a Test game for the craic? As though there isn't already multiple stages for players to showcase themselves from training with their province to P14 to HEC to training with Ireland? Its really bizarre.

Or my other favourite; "we need to see these guys play Test games to know if they are up to it". WE don't need to see them at all. The coaches do. And if coaches are playing guys in Test matches because they have no other way of determining if guys are up to it or not, then they simply aren't doing their jobs properly. We need to recognise that we dont have all the info and never will. We can speculate, opine and discuss stuff and thats grand. But we will never have definitive knowledge of this stuff to know anything for sure. Nor should we. Thats not how this works. So being hugely definitive on things is generally daft given our absence of knowledge.

The Inbetween is mine

Switching Porter back to LH is folly, his body shape no longer suits the position...and if we're being honest..he's probably playing well enough at TH to remain there at the moment for province and country.
We have Healy and Kilcoyne for the next 2-3 years... plenty of time for someone to be developed

UAEguy2020

siltirocker wrote: »

The manner of the performance and result can not be justified in my eyes, regardless of those players missing. (I'd say the same about the Italian game also). Also the Argentinians were missing just as many big players also Figallo, Orlandi, Leguizamon, Bosch, and Aguila.

To be fair only Bosch would have been considered a big loss and even then I’d question if he was as big a loss as any of the players we were missing.

I do agree on the first point, it wasn’t necessary the result but the performance, it was a carbon copy of the 2019 performance except against a team not as good so we were allowed a pathway back into the match.

UAEguy2020

hahashake wrote: »

True, but the knock-on effect of winning that game was playing the future RWC winners in the quarter. Though in an alternate universe, Ireland may have won that game...

SA were still a far more preferred match up. While they won the RWC they never really had the look of a RWC winner until that final. NZL seemed to blow their load v Ireland and had nothing left in the tank v England and got hosed.

Yeah_Right

siltirocker wrote: »

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

Also lost to Italy (twice) and Tonga. Got the wooden spoon in the 6 Nations and received some big hidings at home. I would say that French team was seriously inconsistent.

hahashake

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

SA were still a far more preferred match up. While they won the RWC they never really had the look of a RWC winner until that final. NZL seemed to blow their load v Ireland and had nothing left in the tank v England and got hosed.

NZ beat SA in the pool stage, so at the time they would have been considered a worse opponent to face too. Even with the final outcome, I actually agree Ireland may have had a better chance vs SA.

Yeah_Right

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Is it easier for a prop to move tight to loose than it is loose to tight?

Maybe the cauliflower orientated among us can shed some light on that.

Yes it is. To put it very simply, the LH is scrumming against 1 opponent, the TH is up against 2. There is more to it than that but it is definitely easier to go from tight to loose.

Dubinusa

Perhaps Porter should have been left at loose head? At this stage, he probably would be the incumbent. Moving him to th was a smart move though. He is clearly international standard. The problem now is, we are light at lh and there's not many coming up through the system.

dub_skav

Old saying
Most important player on the team is your tighthead, 2nd most important is your backup tighthead

If you have 2 proven international class tightheads, be very happy about it. Don't try to shift one.

I don't see any other tightheads making the case that we have enough quality there to push Porter across.
Have a proper look at all the guys behind Healy and Kilcoyne now instead

AdamD

molloyjh wrote: »

Exactly.

Why do so many people think that the only way for players to be found is for them to be tossed into a Test game for the craic? As though there isn't already multiple stages for players to showcase themselves from training with their province to P14 to HEC to training with Ireland? Its really bizarre.

Or my other favourite; "we need to see these guys play Test games to know if they are up to it". WE don't need to see them at all. The coaches do. And if coaches are playing guys in Test matches because they have no other way of determining if guys are up to it or not, then they simply aren't doing their jobs properly. We need to recognise that we dont have all the info and never will. We can speculate, opine and discuss stuff and thats grand. But we will never have definitive knowledge of this stuff to know anything for sure. Nor should we. Thats not how this works. So being hugely definitive on things is generally daft given our absence of knowledge.

I get what you're saying but we do quite often see players outperform their competition at provincial level, but get told they won't get picked for Ireland as they haven't proven it at a higher level. How do they prove it without getting picked?

Someone will inevitably use the dreaded 'credit in the bank' term. Vomit

Dubinusa

Our situation is precarious, isn't it? Who saw Jack McGrath becoming average 2 years ago? The depth and succession has been upended. Jack and Kilcoyne were the heirs to Healy and now, with Jack having a loss of form, we are floundering.
Now we are still looking at a declining Healy as our lh. Though, this will be last 6nations imo.

The Inbetween is mine

There's talent coming through at the provinces, early days yet but Josh Wycherley was excellent against Clermont, if he keeps on that upward trajectory we could have a special player on our hands

ionadnapokot

dub_skav wrote: »

Old saying
Most important player on the team is your tighthead, 2nd most important is your backup tighthead

If you have 2 proven international class tightheads, be very happy about it. Don't try to shift one.

I don't see any other tightheads making the case that we have enough quality there to push Porter across.
Have a proper look at all the guys behind Healy and Kilcoyne now instead

Said on outside back...Never!

Porter has really come on leaps and bounds this season. I thought he did really well v France. He should be left alone at TH.

Claw the most successful TH to LH in Irish rugby.
Porter is already the most successful LH to TH in Irish rugby.

lawrencesummers

The Inbetween is mine wrote: »

There's talent coming through at the provinces, early days yet but Josh Wycherley was excellent against Clermont, if he keeps on that upward trajectory we could have a special player on our hands

He wasn’t excellent against Clermont.

He was very good after initially getting destroyed, a lesson he learned quickly during the game and one that hopefully is needed to be learned again.

stephen_n

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.

The only possible or plausible explanation of that post, was the poster only started following rugby in 2019. Can’t be ruled out as a possibility either.

The Inbetween is mine

lawrencesummers wrote: »

He wasn’t excellent against Clermont.

He was very good after initially getting destroyed, a lesson he learned quickly during the game and one that hopefully is needed to be learned again.

He was excellent a young man thrown in against a world class scrummager in Slimani and after getting pushed up and backwards he learned... and destroyed Slimani for the rest of his time on the field before Clermont hooked him.

redmca2

Speaking of Lions and LH props what has become of Jack McGrath????

CMcsporty

redmca2 wrote: »

Speaking of Lions and LH props what has become of Jack McGrath????

Contigit quod deficit
Quod aliquis deficit
Qui aliquis deficit

He's gone to Sh!te!

molloyjh

AdamD wrote: »

I get what you're saying but we do quite often see players outperform their competition at provincial level, but get told they won't get picked for Ireland as they haven't proven it at a higher level. How do they prove it without getting picked?

Someone will inevitably use the dreaded 'credit in the bank' term. Vomit

There is a fairly basic hierarchy to selection.

1. Training at your province.

2. Performing in regular P14 fixtures.

4. Performing in P14 derbies and KOs.

5. Performing in HEC games.

6. Performing in HEC KOs.

7. Performing at Ireland training.

8. Test matches against weaker sides.

9. Test matches against tier 1 sides.

Each of these things factor into how players progress. Performance at each level earns you a shot at the next level. And yes, credit in the bank factors in too. Showing an ability to step up to that level does matter. Doing it in the past does increase chances to do it again in future. Rob Kearney proved that pretty definitively.

Players going well in the P14 but not playing in HEC KO games will automatically be behind guys who are. For example when has Carty played in a game like a HEC SF and delivered? While it may not be his fault that he hasn't, he still hasn't. And those kinds of games are far closer to a 6Ns game than any P14 game is.

Former Former Former

AdamD wrote: »

I get what you're saying but we do quite often see players outperform their competition at provincial level, but get told they won't get picked for Ireland as they haven't proven it at a higher level. How do they prove it without getting picked?

You're confusing what people say on the Internet with what the coaches tell players.