Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…147148150152153…335

Comments

  • #4472
    Clegg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,834 ✭✭✭✭Clegg


    Granny15 wrote: »
    Kearney had a free ride at the beginning of his pro career due to some effective promoting of him as a player and online bullying to get him through the system faster. The coaches at the time listened to this bile.
    Expand


  • #4473
    Malcolm Echoing Volt
    Posts: 13,106 ✭✭✭✭ Malcolm Echoing Volt


    Thanos wrote: »
    Any know the time needed to recover from a fractured wrist?

    I would imagine it's highly variable. A complicated fracture could be a long time. A nice clean one would be quick enough, 6-8 weeks ish.


  • #4474
    Padraig121
    Site Banned Posts: 69 ✭✭Padraig121


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    What do you mean by expansive?

    Well mostly I mean that the first option wasn't always to kick. The kick and catch tactic was used but not nearly as much as with Ireland. Leinster ran it far more frequently.


  • #4475
    Sanjuro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,241 ✭✭✭Sanjuro


    Thanos wrote: »
    Any know the time needed to recover from a fractured wrist?

    According to a cursory Google search, anywhere between 8 weeks and 6 months for a severe break.


  • #4476
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 20,606 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Thanos wrote: »
    Any know the time needed to recover from a fractured wrist?

    Completely depends on the extent of the damage but I'd hope a bit shorter than a forearm break.

    Tommy Bowe was back in 4 or so weeks after having pins put in during the Lions tour to Australia.

    Surgical options will dictate recovery time but they'll definitely be more cautious as he won't want anything to limit his range of motion moving forward.


  • Advertisement
  • #4477
    Buer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,258 ✭✭✭✭Buer


    Madelynn Glamorous Range wrote: »
    Nobody is giving any evidence.

    People have given multiple examples of where tries were coming from, how Leinster's line breaks were created etc.

    Surely that's evidence?


  • #4478
    Malcolm Echoing Volt
    Posts: 13,106 ✭✭✭✭ Malcolm Echoing Volt


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Well mostly I mean that the first option wasn't always to kick. The kick and catch tactic was used but not nearly as much as with Ireland. Leinster ran it far more frequently.

    The first option for Ireland isn't to kick either. This is a myth. We don't really kick any more or less than our peers at international level.


  • #4479
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Clegg wrote: »
    Expand

    It's gas, but its funnier the more you think about it. His coaches at the time he came through were Michael Cheika for Leinster and Declan Kidney for Ireland (techncially Michael Bradley gave him his Irish debut).

    Can you imagine Cheiks or Kidney wrapped up at home in their blankets on the coach being abused online and then selecting Rob Kearney because they were being forced to by the online brigade. And then the severe amounts of fear causing them to call up Ian McGeechan to make sure Kearney was included in the Lions squad.


  • #4480
    Padraig121
    Site Banned Posts: 69 ✭✭Padraig121


    Buer wrote: »
    You keep on saying that without actually giving any evidence.

    For context, Nacewa as a thirty-something scored more tries in the two seasons since returning to Leinster than he did in his 3 years at his peak under Schmidt. Luke Fitzgerald needed a map to find the try line. BOD scored 9 tries in 3 years under Schmidt.

    We played highly skilled rugby mixing backs and forwards but that is not necessarily expansive.

    Leinsters main tactic was not the garryowen under Schmidt. Ireland's main game plan is the garryowen. This is undeniable.


  • #4481
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Well mostly I mean that the first option wasn't always to kick. The kick and catch tactic was used but not nearly as much as with Ireland. Leinster ran it far more frequently.

    Ireland's first option isn't always to kick.

    Leinster kicked plenty of ball on first phase as well. Especially away from home or in tight games (look at important away European games, off the top of my head Sarries away in 2011 or Llanelli the following season in that game where Maule skinned Drico).

    Because the coach is a pragmatist and is good at putting teams on the field who use the ball efficiently, most of the time.


  • Advertisement
  • #4482
    Padraig121
    Site Banned Posts: 69 ✭✭Padraig121


    Buer wrote: »
    People have given multiple examples of where tries were coming from, how Leinster's line breaks were created etc.

    Surely that's evidence?

    Tries were coming from everywhere, it was far from predictable which Ireland are now.


  • #4483
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Ireland's main game plan is the garryowen. This is undeniable.

    I deny this.


  • #4484
    Thanos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,390 ✭✭✭Thanos


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Leinsters main tactic was not the garryowen under Schmidt. Ireland's main game plan is the garryowen. This is undeniable.



  • #4485
    molloyjh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,767 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Accuracy and ruthlessness yes but with a danger that they could score a try from anywhere. Yes there was set piece moves but it was far more expansive than we see with Ireland.

    Of course things appeared to be more expansive. As I said earlier we had an international quality side playing at club level. It was always going to be easier to find space and exploit it with Leinster than with Ireland. Because at international level the space isn't there to the same degree. You can't just ignore what opposition sides bring to the table when talking about how we play.

    Take for example the strike running of Rob Kearney. At Leinster he was excellent at it and often made yardage there. At international level not so much because there's less room and the defence tends to be a lot better. He tried it against SA the week before last and was stopped on the gain line. Same move, different result. Because it is played at a different level. You simply can't translate the success at Leinster directly over to Ireland.
    Padraig121 wrote: »
    No, we were exposed by an attacking game plan that we just couldn't live with. Kicking the ball to them continuously was exposed very badly. It was a 20+ point defeat wasn't it?

    Our defence was found wanting. We missed 23% of our tackles. And they were just the ones we attempted. At one stage our midfield shooters were Best and Ross. When that happens its very easy for opposition sides to get into the wider channels because they are pretty much unopposed in midfield. Joe Schmidt sides have almost always been happy to give the opposition the ball, knowing that we can back our defence and be clinical when we have the ball. It was that way at Leinster too.
    Padraig121 wrote: »
    We weren't able to attack them! We only had one game plan and it failed, miserably. We're repeating the same mistakes!

    We really are not. At all. But you keep stating it as fact without really being able to address any of the more detailed and analytical posts to the contrary. If you can't back up what you're saying with anything then maybe reconsider what you are saying.


  • #4486
    Buer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,258 ✭✭✭✭Buer


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Leinsters main tactic was not the garryowen under Schmidt. Ireland's main game plan is the garryowen. This is undeniable.

    You should go back and watch games like Leinster away to Bath or Glasgow in the HEC under Schmidt at our peak. We crushed them up front and kicking for field position. Brutal games to watch but highly effective, accurate performances.


  • #4487
    Padraig121
    Site Banned Posts: 69 ✭✭Padraig121


    Madelynn Glamorous Range wrote: »
    The first option for Ireland isn't to kick either. This is a myth. We don't really kick any more or less than our peers at international level.

    It's our main tactic. Murray and Sexton do it more than most and definitely more than southern hemisphere teams. Argentina didn't kick it much when they ripped us apart.


  • #4488
    Padraig121
    Site Banned Posts: 69 ✭✭Padraig121


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Ireland's first option isn't always to kick.

    Leinster kicked plenty of ball on first phase as well. Especially away from home or in tight games (look at important away European games, off the top of my head Sarries away in 2011 or Llanelli the following season in that game where Maule skinned Drico).

    Because the coach is a pragmatist and is good at putting teams on the field who use the ball efficiently, most of the time.

    Leinster kicked but it wasn't the main tactic. It won't work against the top teams at the world cup. We've seen that already.


  • #4489
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    It's our main tactic. Murray and Sexton do it more than most and definitely more than southern hemisphere teams. Argentina didn't kick it much when they ripped us apart.

    We kicked the ball 30 times in that game from hand. Argentina kicked it 22 times.


  • #4490
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Leinster kicked but it wasn't the main tactic. It won't work against the top teams at the world cup. We've seen that already.

    In some games it absolutely was the tactic. When it needed to be. Because that's what you do when you're a smartly coached team.

    And it absolutely has worked for teams at the world cup in the past. There is no reason it won't work so long as your defense is extremely competitive, as ours is right now.


  • #4491
    molloyjh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,767 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Madelynn Glamorous Range wrote: »
    Nobody is giving any evidence.

    "Leinster were more explansive"
    "No they weren't"
    "Yes they were"

    Um, I am?

    I've cited clear examples of similar moves used at Leinster and Ireland. I've quoted stats relating to the Argentina game. I've given solid examples of things that I'm talking about such as the Ross/Best shooter example.....
    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Well mostly I mean that the first option wasn't always to kick. The kick and catch tactic was used but not nearly as much as with Ireland. Leinster ran it far more frequently.
    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Leinsters main tactic was not the garryowen under Schmidt. Ireland's main game plan is the garryowen. This is undeniable.

    This is categorically incorrect. Go to the 6 Nations homepage (here). At the bottom is a set of stats from the last 6Ns. Here's 2 of them for you:

    Most carries: Ireland (844)
    Most passes: Ireland (1,094)

    Now, if our main tactic is to kick the ball, how exactly do we do that and carry it more than anyone else and pass it more than anyone else?


  • Advertisement
  • #4492
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,752 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    Leinsters main tactic was not the garryowen under Schmidt. Ireland's main game plan is the garryowen. This is undeniable.
    It's patently not. Unless you mean something different by 'game plan' than everyone else seems to.

    We very seldom use the garryowen in the red zone. It's something we use in the middle of the pitch mostly. It's part of our game, but we also use the maul, the scrum and one out runners. We kick for territory and we sometimes kick to empty space for a winger to run on to. As Carbery did for Sweetnam against SA.


  • #4493
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,815 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    It's our main tactic. Murray and Sexton do it more than most and definitely more than southern hemisphere teams. Argentina didn't kick it much when they ripped us apart.

    In the last 6N the Wales game was the only match where Ireland's kicking percentage was greater than their opponent's.


  • #4494
    molloyjh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,767 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    ....southern hemisphere teams....

    I really should have seen that coming. I'm out. This is just daft. You're flying in the face of all reason and evidence.....


  • #4495
    Padraig121
    Site Banned Posts: 69 ✭✭Padraig121


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Of course things appeared to be more expansive. As I said earlier we had an international quality side playing at club level. It was always going to be easier to find space and exploit it with Leinster than with Ireland. Because at international level the space isn't there to the same degree. You can't just ignore what opposition sides bring to the table when talking about how we play.

    Take for example the strike running of Rob Kearney. At Leinster he was excellent at it and often made yardage there. At international level not so much because there's less room and the defence tends to be a lot better. He tried it against SA the week before last and was stopped on the gain line. Same move, different result. Because it is played at a different level. You simply can't translate the success at Leinster directly over to Ireland.



    Our defence was found wanting. We missed 23% of our tackles. And they were just the ones we attempted. At one stage our midfield shooters were Best and Ross. When that happens its very easy for opposition sides to get into the wider channels because they are pretty much unopposed in midfield. Joe Schmidt sides have almost always been happy to give the opposition the ball, knowing that we can back our defence and be clinical when we have the ball. It was that way at Leinster too.



    We really are not. At all. But you keep stating it as fact without really being able to address any of the more detailed and analytical posts to the contrary. If you can't back up what you're saying with anything then maybe reconsider what you are saying.

    I have backed it up. People are using the excuse of injuries for our defeat v Argentina. I believe we would have lost anyway! They were playing rugby on a different level. Offloading, quick rucks, different angles of attack. Our hoofball style was ineffective and we had no plan b. We were brushed aside.
    All people are saying is that Leinster played exactly as Ireland do, this is clearly false. Leinster ran far more and used the garryowen far less.


  • #4496
    FACECUTTR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭FACECUTTR


    Madelynn Glamorous Range wrote: »
    Why on earth would Carbery for example move to Connacht?

    I never said Carbery should.


  • #4497
    Padraig121
    Site Banned Posts: 69 ✭✭Padraig121


    Buer wrote: »
    You should go back and watch games like Leinster away to Bath or Glasgow in the HEC under Schmidt at our peak. We crushed them up front and kicking for field position. Brutal games to watch but highly effective, accurate performances.

    It happened irregularly. It is Ireland's main area of attack.


  • #4498
    Padraig121
    Site Banned Posts: 69 ✭✭Padraig121


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    We kicked the ball 30 times in that game from hand. Argentina kicked it 22 times.

    Exactly, we kicked it away and then when we had to attack we just couldn't do it to anywhere near the level Argentina could. They taught us a lesson in attacking play, a lesson we haven't learned from it seems!


  • #4499
    molloyjh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,767 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Padraig121 wrote: »
    All people are saying is that Leinster played exactly as Ireland do

    Nobody has said that. Absolutely nobody. Please just stop.


  • #4500
    mfceiling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,003 ✭✭✭✭mfceiling


    Lads enough of the facts.

    You'll never beat opinion with facts.


  • Advertisement
  • #4501
    Padraig121
    Site Banned Posts: 69 ✭✭Padraig121


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    In some games it absolutely was the tactic. When it needed to be. Because that's what you do when you're a smartly coached team.

    And it absolutely has worked for teams at the world cup in the past. There is no reason it won't work so long as your defense is extremely competitive, as ours is right now.

    Well that's your opinion, mine is that I think it will be exposed against the top teams at the world cup.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement