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

Burkie1203

irishfan9 wrote: »

why should ireland follow the rest?

also ireland don't have an obvious 12 playmaker to call upon.

Rory scannell

aloooof

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well when Payne was selected, he was a playmaker from 13.

I thought the consensus was that he was more there for his defensive organisation? I remember seeing some analysis of him stepping in as first receiver when playing 15 tho.

irishfan9

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Rory scannell

yeah, as I said no obvious 12 playmaker.

Scannell is decent but not intl level quality as a 12 playmaker.

Buer

Schmidt has always been a fan of the bigger centres and will take a long look at that. On talent and ability, I would have Aki and Ringrose as our starting centre partnership. But Henshaw's raw power and physicality gives him an edge and makes him the least likely centre to be excluded.

If we had a 12 who was able to be a playmaker, maybe he'd look at them but we don't possess that weapon outside of guys like Rory Scannell or Luke Marshall who can crash it up and both have experience at 10. But I don't see either of them as being the creative distributors that are normally associated with a playmaking test level 12 in the shape of classic examples like Catt, Jauzion or Mauger.

connachta

Burkie1203 wrote: »

connachta wrote: »

No. 3 or 4 games are way enough to have an idea of what a player is capable of.
And I don't say T.Farrell should be picked. Neither should for now.

A few weeks ago you dismissed Rob Herrings selection on the back of a good few months at the start of this season. Now you are claiming Chris Farrell shouldnt be picked because of 3 or 4 games you have seen him play in France out of 75 or so that he played.

Yeah. It's not about form. It's about talent, which is easy to notice. For example, Aki has had some really bad games with Connacht, and even in those games, you could see the guy has the potential. There's a difference between an average in form player and a promising one who fails during a specific game.

You also said the wrong Farrell was selected. So you absolutely did claim T Farrell should have been picked.

No, that was provocation, implying I don't see any evidence this season to prove Chris is better 13 than Tom.

Webbs

irishfan9 wrote: »

why should ireland follow the rest?

also ireland don't have an obvious 12 playmaker to call upon.

I didnt say they should follow the rest, I said it be interesting to see if they follow a different gameplan to other top tier nations.

Surely someone like a JJ Hanrahan could fill that roll, it can easily be another 10 to fill that roll if they wanted to go that route.

irishfan9

Webbs wrote: »

I didnt say they should follow the rest, I said it be interesting to see if they follow a different gameplan to other top tier nations.

Surely someone like a JJ Hanrahan could fill that roll, it can easily be another 10 to fill that roll if they wanted to go that route.

JJ isn't a top level player though..

a good coach creates a system around what his best players are good at not, try to force his best players into a system that doesn't suit their strengths.

[Deleted User]

It looked to me that Joe liked using Payne ( when Payne played 15) as a creative 15 joining the line and distributing with the centres split outside him and Sexton again

aloooof

irishfan9 wrote: »

Scannell is decent but not intl level quality as a 12 playmaker.

irishfan9 wrote: »

JJ isn't a top level player though..

JJ is 25. Scannell is 23. Should we write off every player if they aren't top level players by that age? Genuine question.

Burkie1203

connachta wrote: »

Basically you are making up the criteria to suit you view on different players.

Herring is a good player who has had his good form rewarded.

Farrell has come back to ireland and has been given a chance to show his work ons have improved. At the absolute best he is 3rd choice 13. Joe has invested time in the guy while he was away and is investing more now he is home in order to build depth.

Like what is it about this you cannot grasp. Its not difficult to see what the coach is doing here.

irishfan9

aloooof wrote: »

JJ is 25. Scannell is 23. Should we write off every player if they aren't top level players by that age? Genuine question.

not saying write them off, but until they prove themselves to be good enough for international level pointing to them as players Ireland could build a 2nd playmaker at 12 system around is rather foolish.

pick your best players, neither are the best players available to play 12.

Former Former

Webbs wrote: »

I didnt say they should follow the rest, I said it be interesting to see if they follow a different gameplan to other top tier nations.

Surely someone like a JJ Hanrahan could fill that roll, it can easily be another 10 to fill that roll if they wanted to go that route.

I don't think we have an obvious candidate though. Scannell has played 10 but doesn't strike me as a real playmaker. JJ isn't in the frame at Munster, let alone Ireland. Ireland are looking at Carbery as a 10 only. Bleyendaal has played a fair bit at 12 but he's not convincing these days either.

The only guy who maybe fits the bill and would be nearly good enough would be Olding.

[Deleted User]

Only doing the rounds on snapchat at the moment but it looks like Joe could be in a fair bit of bother with the IRFU. Picture floating around of himself and two of the players from 4AM this morning at a lock in...

connachta

Burkie1203 wrote: »

connachta wrote: »

Basically you are making up the criteria to suit you view on different players.

Herring is a good player who has had his good form rewarded.

Farrell has come back to ireland and has been given a chance to show his work ons have improved. At the absolute best he is 3rd choice 13. Joe has invested time in the guy while he was away and is investing more now he is home in order to build depth.

Like what is it about this you cannot grasp. Its not difficult to see what the coach is doing here.

so, again you ignored my points.
Every time I point out the fact players are not talented enough IMO, you think I only have a Connacht agenda
Kearneys C.Farrell and Herring are, for most here, unexpected selections. It's not only about TOH, McCartney
It is (or will be) about J.J, Cronin, Stockdale/Payne/Henshaw as 15 and so on
Yes I disagree about those three, but I agree with 32 others who are not Connacht. Stop caricaturing

[Deleted User]

Hastentoadd wrote: »

what a typical stupid team selection by Joe against a poor team. you get a chance to meld players and instead you just play a second team and absolutely nothing is learnt. it would utterly wreck your head

...

Deleted User wrote: »

Is Joe getting grief for not being conservative enough?

What a time to be alive.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

Only doing the rounds on snapchat at the moment but it looks like Joe could be in a fair bit of bother with the IRFU. Picture floating around of himself and two of the players from 4AM this morning at a lock in...

Bazzo

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I ****ing knew that was coming

[Deleted User]

Bazzo wrote: »

I ****ing knew that was coming

Would you believe I have no formal training in photoshop!

Neil3030

Playmaky 12s need to play behind a monster pack. We're big enough but we don't bully top teams the way England do, for example. I'm not in love with the idea us going down the Wales route either, mind you, i.e., planets colliding in midfield. I think Bundee/Ringrose will have the best balance.

[Deleted User]

Neil3030 wrote: »

Playmaky 12s need to play behind a monster pack. We're big enough but we don't bully top teams the way England do, for example. I'm not in love with the idea us going down the Wales route either, mind you, i.e., planets colliding in midfield. I think Bundee/Ringrose will have the best balance.

Yeah from what I've seen of everyone so far I still think Ringrose is likely to be first choice out of all the centres.

Horses for courses and fitness will dictate Bundi or Henshaw at 12.

Interesting that Henshaw has a decent chance of getting gametime at fullback this weekend.

Still think McCloskey could force his way into contention with the way he is going this season.

FellasFellas

From the original squad named, is Adam Byrne the only player not to be in a 23 yet?

Neil3030

I just can't see how anyone gets in at 12 ahead of Bundee. He can distribute as well as any, bosh it as well as any, and then there's his offloading game which I'm sure we'll build some moves around. He also fit seemlessly into defensive duties last week. Everyone else is fighting for the 13 shirt, imo.

Former Former

FellasFellas wrote: »

From the original squad named, is Adam Byrne the only player not to be in a 23 yet?

Yes (except the injured guys)

Neil3030

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeah from what I've seen of everyone so far I still think Ringrose is likely to be first choice out of all the centres.

Horses for courses and fitness will dictate Bundi or Henshaw at 12.

Interesting that Henshaw has a decent chance of getting gametime at fullback this weekend.

Still think McCloskey could force his way into contention with the way he is going this season.

I'd actually argue the opposite - Bundee is the first name down every time, then if we need more bulk we go with Henshaw at 13, or Ringrose otherwise.

Side note - the Aki-Ringrose partnership must, in all formal communication, be referred to as "KiRing"

irishfan9

Bundee should never be the first name down.

Neil3030

irishfan9 wrote: »

Bundee should never be the first name down.

Who is the better inside centre? Oh and before you respond to this - you're wrong.

irishfan9

Neil3030 wrote: »

Who is the better inside centre? Oh and before you respond to this - you're wrong.

what can aki do that henshaw can't?

Neil3030

irishfan9 wrote: »

what can aki do that henshaw can't?

Pretty much everything; kicking may be Henshaws only edge on him.

[Deleted User]

12 aki , 13 ringrose , 15 henshaw. Henshaw hasn't played at 15 in years but he said it during an interview after he cam back from lions tour. It has a lot of potential if it works out would definitely be worth trying out for a few games

[Deleted User]

ronnoco13 wrote: »

12 aki , 13 ringrose , 15 henshaw. Henshaw hasn't played at 15 in years but he said it during an interview after he cam back from lions tour. It has a lot of potential if it works out would definitely be worth trying out for a few games

We could let things get a bit silly and have a backline of Stockdale, McCloskey, Aki, Byrne and Henshaw.

Would be by a long way our largest ever backline with a lot of hard carriers yet still plenty of guile. It's a real shame if Adam Byrne can't develop his game because his size and ability to beat the first man would be so valuable on the international stage.

With a backline like that and with the pack coming along as they are we could really bully teams.