irishbucsfan wrote: » Well it clearly wasn't nailed on to be Ryan and Henderson from a year out given Toner started and Henderson benched against the world champs. I don't think there's any evidence for this at all that isn't circumstancial. I think Schmidt is pretty pragmatic and wouldn't have an issue dropping anyone if a better alternative arrived out of the blue. I just think the same pragmatism means he takes a pretty consistent approach to how he wants to set up against top opposition and that leads him to pick a pretty consistent team.
Shefwedfan wrote: » You keep having a go at Sexton The option against Wales was to bring on Carty.... Now try leave your bias for once out of it, based on what you have seen from Carty at international level was he a good option to bring on?
awec wrote: » Inferior players? Have you watched Ireland this year? We are brutal, and that's when we pick the supposed "top" players, and these are some of the worst offenders in terms of garbage performances. How anyone can sit here and make excuses about not selecting alternative players after some of the hammerings we've taken this past 10 months, and some of the performances on show, is beyond me. Schmidt took the risk, changed nothing and hoped they'd just return to form again. It didn't happen, they continued to play like drains, and criticism of that is entirely valid.
irishbucsfan wrote: » Carty's performance against Japan is a really good example of why just changing your selection doesn't suddenly fix a general underlying performance problem. I think he underperformed, but I think he's already much better than that. 300 extra minutes in similarly ****e performances against Wales/Englands over the last 2 years would not have magically fixed that. He's a player I'd be really excited to see kick on now in the next year if given a bit of a chance under Farrell. I think he has a real chance of being number 1 when Sexton retires.
Burkie1203 wrote: » NZ sacrificed the tri nations/RC in last 3 RWC years. I think they are odds on to win 3 RWC in a row.
irishbucsfan wrote: » They "sacrificed" the tri nations in 2015 by losing one game in Sydney with the following starting team: Woodcock, Coles, Franks, Retallick, Romano, Kaino, McCaw, Read; Smith, Carter, Savea, SBW, Smith, NMS, Smith
ClanofLams wrote: » I don’t think the suggestion was that he would have played infinitely better with experience, although it certainly wouldn’t have hurt. It was more about the harmful impact guaranteed positions in teams can have. Any thoughts on what Schmidt got wrong this year then? I hope you’re not suggesting that a mental skills expert would have solved all given: (a) Enda McNulty was involved in that role and (b) anyone with any knowledge of the area would tell you it’s laughable to suggest a mental skills expert will not be the difference between getting hammered out the gate and winning.
ClanofLams wrote: » I’m having a go at players being played on reputation. Was my provincial bias relevant when I said O’Mahony should have been dropped for Ruddock/Conan? You tried to imply a while ago that Carty was the only problem against Japan, a moronic position to take. Carty came in against Wales and played a large role in the only points Ireland got on the board in eighty minutes. He did that in the eight minutes he got. He has absolutely struggled at times in this World Cup, he has also played well at times. When he has struggled it has been when all around him have struggled. Those same players who are far more experienced have been struggling in green for considerably longer yet you have repeatedly tried to place the blame on Carty alone. It’s idiotic.
irishbucsfan wrote: » I've written out what I have problems with Schmidt's approach for Ireland multiple times. It's across many areas. I'm sort of over it now so I don't really write it out any more, posts from before and after we just about squeaked past France in 2018 are probably where to look. I do however think a general performance problem is by far our biggest problem and I don't know how that's solved (as I've said here already). I don't know which of the things that I say are laughable, I'd say a good portion, or maybe all of the things I say are laughable to nearly every experienced professional coach at the world cup. But I don't think you have more experience than me when it comes to high performance. So I'd give your laughter no notice whatsoever to be honest.
Donnielighto wrote: » It's no coincidence that they won the non WC years and didn't in the WC years. Throw out smileys if ya want but the point was valid.
ClanofLams wrote: » Right it’s a general performance problem, good to know. That you seem to have suggested tonight a ‘mental skills expert’ will solve. So simple, if only Ireland thought of that! We could have won it
Shefwedfan wrote: » Wales had won the slam and didn’t give a s**t.... Sorry but he got chances in 6 nations and done nothing, came on against Italy and killed the game. Disappeared against Wales after a ok start. Japan after 20 mins he replicated the Welsh performance, was terrible for majority of Russia half he got. If he was a Leinster player the knives would be out from you. You bring up Sexton but we can’t discuss Carty? How does that work? So is it one rule for some players and another rule for others? Not sure why you need to start calling names and insults because I mention Carty, he was supposed to be the back up to allow Sexton to miss games, anytime Sexton wasn’t on the pitch it was a disaster till Joey returned.
irishbucsfan wrote: » Fair enough, I disagree. If New Zealand were throwing the rugby championship in order to develop alternatives at all costs, I don't think they would be starting Dan Carter, Kieran Reid and Richie McCaw at home to Argentina.
awec wrote: » Why do you think he can kick on now under Farrell, but wouldn't have kicked on under Schmidt if given a bit of a chance in 2019?
Donnielighto wrote: » It doesn't have to be throwing it away just prioritising the big one. I doubt any of those 3 underperforming in the run up to the Argentina game. At any rate we didn't drop anyone.
irishbucsfan wrote: » Either you know my posts didn't say that and your post holds absolutely no value whatsover, or you don't understand that I didn't say that and your opinion does.
irishbucsfan wrote: » Sure. And maybe dropping someone might have changed something. I just don't think it would have fixed problems that were running far deeper than that, for years.
ClanofLams wrote: » I mean that’s all you have said tonight. That and the suggestion that I should trawl through your however many thousand posts to find your thoughts on Schmidt’s approach because you are ‘over’ talking about it. You’re here defending Schmidt’s approach this year or certain aspects of it at least, insulted by the notion you are saying Schmidt got nothing wrong but refusing to comment on anything he got wrong. If you think that’s a good faith way to approach a debate, then there is absolutely no point talking to you.
Donnielighto wrote: » The team had it's best year in 2018. The issue was not keeping players on their toes.
irishbucsfan wrote: » I haven't defended anyone involved with Ireland this year, bar Carty maybe as a side point (and I guess Farrell by saying I am hopeful he'll improve things). You're mistaking me thinking your opinion is flawed for a defense of someone else's. I have never once said that Schmidt is right. I just don't think his approach to selection was the primary reason for our failure, or even that much of a contributing factor at all. Again, I'm saying you are wrong. You being wrong would not automatically make Schmidt right. Somehow you have magically invented me defending Schmidt's approach this year out of thin air, if you can understand this you'll understand why I'm not going to regurgitate my other thoughts on-demand.
irishbucsfan wrote: » I think a few reasons. I think there's always a natural bounce under a new coach. I think he's more likely to be given a chance if Farrell decides to clean the slate a bit. I think/hope Farrell is naturally capable of producing big performances given some of his best victories were built on pretty great defensive performances from England/Lions/Ireland. I think we're going to go at this 6 Nations very hard while our biggest rivals might take their foot off the pedal depending on the rest of the world cup. And I am hoping, without a huge amount to base it on, Catt will come in with some ideas to improve our attack in open play in the opposition half.
ClanofLams wrote: » You have defended his selection policy which is a substantial part of the remit of a couch.
irishbucsfan wrote: » I dunno, was it? And would just randomly dropping players be the answer there? Or is it something much more difficult to achieve than that? As I said, I think this selection thing is just selection bias. I think fans just see selection as a big problem because its their biggest window into a sports team. And when the only thing you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I may be wrong of course.
ClanofLams wrote: » Andy Farrell has never been a head coach in his life. Good assistant coaches don’t necessarily make good head coaches. There’s a lot of hope in that post alright.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/ad289898c0c6dda7e667bf900ae26d0c.svg)
