nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Steve

Continuing on from the previous thread....

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Erik Shin

Bridge93 wrote: »

I literally haven't seen anyone, anywhere else even discuss the pass as anything other than clearly forward. There's been zero debate on it.

Well d'uh! It was clearly perfect and there was absolutely no need to debate it obviously!

RichieRich89

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Lol. The ball travelled forward straight from Farrells hand. Your deluded with the rest of your post.

You havent bothered to mention the length of the pass. The ball travelled 25m before Earls caught it. So of course Farrell was able to travel 5m forward.

Of course the time the ball is in the air, i.e. the length of the pass, is extremely important. I referenced that in a post above. But the only thing that ultimately matters is that Farrell travelled 5m forward in the same time the ball travelled 3.5m forward. I don't see why you'd make the excuse that Farrell was only able to travel forward substantially because the pass was in the air for a long time. You have look at the time Farrell is running for while the ball is in the air. It wouldn't make sense to compare any other time period

RichieRich89

Y'all pay lip service to the momentum rule, without actually having a full appreciation for it. None of you probably even did Physics and Applied Maths in school

Zzippy

Take the forward pass talk to the relevant match thread lads. Off topic here.

Bridge93

RichieRich89 wrote: »

Y'all pay lip service to the momentum rule, without actually having a full appreciation for it. None of you probably even did Physics and Applied Maths in school

I actually did do both. Not that it's relevant. All you needs is eyes to see it was forward.

Edit Zzippy just posted apologies

RichieRich89

Zzippy wrote: »

Take the forward pass talk to the relevant match thread lads. Off topic here.

Don't think it was forward

turnikett1

Possible South Africa selection?

Carbery
Conway
Ringrose
Henshaw
Earls
Sexton
Murray
Stander
SOB
POM
Toner
Henderson
Furlong
Scannell
McGrath

Cronin, Healy, Ryan, Treadwell, VDF, Marmion, Marshall, Stockdale

IMO that looks like a fine team full of in-form players. Some more so than others. Some playing very well this season, no one playing awfully. If we can outmuscle their pack (it'll be tough) then I have faith in that back 3 to do some magic. I reckon this will be a high scoring game for both sides. Within reason anyways.

errlloyd

turnikett1 wrote: »

Possible South Africa selection?

Ringrose
Henshaw
Murray
Stander
SOB
POM

IMO that looks like a fine team full of in-form players. .

I don't really think any of those players are even close to being in form. It's not that I disagree with your selection, but definitely disagree with your assessment.

Former Former

Zebo will be there if fit. Luke Marshall won't be within 100 miles of the 23. I don't think Ringrose will be back, expect Aki at 13.

[Deleted User]

turnikett1 wrote: »

Possible South Africa selection.....

Very few games this season allow for a true assessment of form. Running in tries against the Kings tells you very little. The interpro games, the Ulster v Scarletts games are all reasonable indicators and this weekend will be the best indicator.

As for your selection, it's hard to know with some of the players. Zebo if fit I'd have ahead of Carbery at full back. Stockdale v Conway is an interesting one too.

I'd also be putting VDF as first choice back row currently, with SOB moving to 6 if fit and Stander at 8.

Don't think Scannell is quite as bolted on at Hooker as people think. He was poor at the weekend, Munster's line out is a shambles.

Might also be a bit early for Ringrose. I don't see him dropping in for his first game back in a full test against the South African's.

Think the second test was a blip personally, All Blacks well below par and gave a sucker a fair chance. I think we'll win with a bit of room to spare.

turnikett1

errlloyd wrote: »

I don't really think any of those players are even close to being in form. It's not that I disagree with your selection, but definitely disagree with your assessment.

Well obviously we haven't had a chance to see Ringrose that was bad writing on my part. POM hasn't been great tbf, but the rest haven't been bad (or particularly special) or what do you think? Bare in mind I've only had to chance to see 2 games of Munster and Leinster each this season so perhaps my judgement is a bit skewed.

Still from what I've seen this looks like the squad that would be picked. Intensity levels will be ramped up under Ireland/Schmidt, they always are. I'd say it's one of the better looking squads we've had in a few years.

[Deleted User]

turnikett1 wrote: »

Well obviously we haven't had a chance to see Ringrose that was bad writing on my part. POM hasn't been great tbf, but the rest haven't been bad (or particularly special) or what do you think? Bare in mind I've only had to chance to see 2 games of Munster and Leinster each this season so perhaps my judgement is a bit skewed.

Still from what I've seen this looks like the squad that would be picked. Intensity levels will be ramped up under Ireland/Schmidt, they always are. I'd say it's one of the better looking squads we've had in a few years.

Id say you are certainly close to the mark even with limited view time so fair play on that.

The one thing that might throw us all for a bit of surprise is that there are no seeding issues at play between now and the World Cup so Joe might look to bed in some new formations.

I'd say the build up to 2019 begins now effectively so there might be further changes.

I could well see Porter on the bench by way of example.

[Deleted User]

Carbery, Conway, Aki, Henshaw, Stockdale, Sexton, Murray, Stander, VdF, SOB, Toner, Henderson, Furlong, Best, McGrath

Something like that. If Best isn't fit replace as needed. I think Ringrose is out so not sure who to go with at 13, guess it'll be Aki. I don't think he's hit the heights of Connacht's league winning season ever since.

RichieRich89

I think the backrowers in the squad should be:

6s: Ruddock, McKeon
7s: Reidy, van der Flier
8s: Conan, Murphy

b.gud

RichieRich89 wrote: »

I think the backrowers in the squad should be:

6s: Ruddock, McKeon
7s: Reidy, van der Flier
8s: Conan, Murphy

Glad someone finally had the balls to say what we've all been thinking. Those 3 Lions back rows are way overrated and should be nowhere near the Irish squad :rolleyes:

[Deleted User]

RichieRich89 wrote: »

I think the backrowers...

That's a very interesting selection that we should definitely quote a number of times and discuss / disagree with for a few pages.

salmocab

RichieRich89 wrote: »

I think the backrowers in the squad should be:

6s: Ruddock, McKeon
7s: Reidy, van der Flier
8s: Conan, Murphy

just to be crystal clear Mc Keon ahead of POM and Reidy ahead of SOB?

sydthebeat

salmocab wrote: »

just to be crystal clear Mc Keon ahead of POM and Reidy ahead of SOB?

He's done this before, just attention seeking in my opinion.

b.gud

Interested Observer wrote: »

think Ringrose is out so not sure who to go with at 13, guess it'll be Aki. I don't think he's hit the heights of Connacht's league winning season ever since.

Anyone reckon that if Henshaw and Aki are the centres that it'll be Henshaw 13 and Aki 12? That's the where they played when they were at Connacht and they were a really devastating combo.

With regards Aki not hitting the heights that he previously did I've actually been thinking about this recently and I think the reason is that he's a marked man, every time he gets the ball there's about 2 or 3 people on him and teams can get away with doing that because we normally don't have any other players that really worry teams there. When we won the league we had Henshaw as an option too so teams couldn't put as many numbers into Aki as they were also worried about Henshaw. I think that is what is limiting his performances a bit

[Deleted User]

b.gud wrote: »

Anyone reckon that if Henshaw and Aki are the centres that it'll be Henshaw 13 and Aki 12? That's the where they played when they were at Connacht and they were a really devastating combo.

With regards Aki not hitting the heights that he previously did I've actually been thinking about this recently and I think the reason is that he's a marked man, every time he gets the ball there's about 2 or 3 people on him and teams can get away with doing that because we normally don't have any other players that really worry teams there. When we won the league we had Henshaw as an option too so teams couldn't put as many numbers into Aki as they were also worried about Henshaw. I think that is what is limiting his performances a bit

No doubt he is considered a threat but that's been going on a while. The really top drawer guys can find more to their game. Sean O'Brien for example in 2011 was making some insane carries but now he's known more for his breakdown work than his carrying.

I think Aki is probably just finding his feet in a new setup like everyone else. I'd say KK is quite different to Lam going by their public demeanour.

I'd say Aki has a good shot of starting at least one if not two games this Autumn.

arsebiscuits1

Deleted User wrote: »

No doubt he is considered a threat but that's been going on a while. The really top drawer guys can find more to their game. Sean O'Brien for example in 2011 was making some insane carries but now he's known more for his breakdown work than his carrying.

I think Aki is probably just finding his feet in a new setup like everyone else. I'd say KK is quite different to Lam going by their public demeanour.

I'd say Aki has a good shot of starting at least one if not two games this Autumn.

I think the biggest problem is if not Aki then who? Earls has never been a proper option at 13 at international level and will probably be much more important on the wing anyway/

Payne hasn't played any rugby and doesn't look like he will before November

Ringrose... ditto

Farrell is barely here a week and not capable yet of defending 13 channel at test level.

Even the 12 options if you push Henshaw out one aren't overly promising.

Marshall isn't good enough, far too prone to mistakes or anonymity.

McCloskey has obvious threats going forward, I have my doubts about that effectiveness against the Boks though.

Scannell maybe a possibility. But he needs a good showing now in Europe.

We could do worse than a Scannell Henshaw axis but I don't think it offers the least flaws.

I miss BOD

[Deleted User]

arsebiscuits1 wrote: »

I think the biggest problem is if not Aki then who? Earls has never been a proper option at 13 at international level and will probably be much more important on the wing anyway/

Payne hasn't played any rugby and doesn't look like he will before November

Ringrose... ditto

Farrell is barely here a week and not capable yet of defending 13 channel at test level.

Even the 12 options if you push Henshaw out one aren't overly promising.

Marshall isn't good enough, far too prone to mistakes or anonymity.

McCloskey has obvious threats going forward, I have my doubts about that effectiveness against the Boks though.

Scannell maybe a possibility. But he needs a good showing now in Europe.

We could do worse than a Scannell Henshaw axis but I don't think it offers the least flaws.

I miss BOD

Think Payne is back fairly imminently. I'd imagine Marshall is ahead of Scannell / Farrell etc. Unless some kind of catastrophe happens I doubt we'll see Earls starting at centre.

If the status quo persists I imagine we'll see Aki Henshaw as 12 / 13.

If Payne is back that might change for SA. Though it could well be Aki / Payne if that was the case, just to have a bit of a roflocopter with Kimmage.

[Deleted User]

b.gud wrote: »

Anyone reckon that if Henshaw and Aki are the centres that it'll be Henshaw 13 and Aki 12? That's the where they played when they were at Connacht and they were a really devastating combo.

I don't think Schmidt will move Henshaw away from 12, but it's possible, sure.

arsebiscuits1

Deleted User wrote: »

Think Payne is back fairly imminently. I'd imagine Marshall is ahead of Scannell / Farrell etc. Unless some kind of catastrophe happens I doubt we'll see Earls starting at centre.

If the status quo persists I imagine we'll see Aki Henshaw as 12 / 13.

If Payne is back that might change for SA. Though it could well be Aki / Payne if that was the case, just to have a bit of a roflocopter with Kimmage.

He's not back this weekend sadly.

I'd say if he manages over 100 minutes before the South Africa game he's straight in that 13 channel

RichieRich89

Maybe Keane switched Aki and Tom Farrell specifically because Schmidt asked for Aki to be played at 13?

Former Former

RichieRich89 wrote: »

Maybe Keane switched Aki and Tom Farrell specifically because Schmidt asked for Aki to be played at 13?

Where do you come up with this stuff?

Cos it's GENIUS.

Dravokivich

RichieRich89 wrote: »

Maybe Keane switched Aki and Tom Farrell specifically because Schmidt asked for Aki to be played at 13?

Schmidt has previously said that he felt 12 and 13 are interchangeable. So unless he's changed his mind, he isn't too concerned where they are, as long as they've got time in the centre.

thomond2006

Quotes.

b.gud

thomond2006 wrote: »

Quotes.

Joe Schmidt wrote:

I believe 12 and 13 are interchangeable

Hope this helps clear things up

mfceiling

RichieRich89 wrote: »

Maybe Keane switched Aki and Tom Farrell specifically because Schmidt asked for Aki to be played at 13?

Is Tom Farrell playing now? It's just I met him at the Citywest Hotel 3 weeks ago and aside from the fact that he's nearly 50 now, he's also got a savage gut on him.