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 XI: Team of nervoUS MOD warning Post 1

[Deleted User]

Continued from here
https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057953711/251
All Ireland Senior XV related talk here.

MOD: Bear in mind this thread is starting during the World Cup window and the zero tolerance policy is in force. Trolling will be rewarded with an instant ban. For the duration of the tournament any mention of Zebo in this thread will not be permitted, it is just dragging current Ireland squad talk off topic.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Jump_In_Jack

I don't know why we have to have a long-running captain anyway, why can't we select the best team to play and then select the captain for that day? Worked well like that for every team I've ever played on anyway.

FWIW, if we are looking for captain material, I think CJ Stander is the stand out candidate.

blinding

jmayo wrote: »

Jaysus looking at that listing the old EOS joke really does apply to Schimdt.

"Form is temporary, selection is permanent"

Another Irish Coach making the same old mistake .

Shefwedfan

Clegg wrote: »

There's a poll on the 42.ie asking people to vote on who should be the next Ireland captain. PoM won it with 30% of the vote. But I think he's one of the players we should be looking to transition out of the side.

He's another of those layers I was talking about in the above post. In the past Schmidt has gotten performances out of him when he wasn't necessarily playing at his best for Munster. But against NZ it didn't happen. Didn't really happen at all in the World Cup either. Much like Kearney, I think PoM on the downward slope of his career.

Schmidt mentioned that PoM was a "moments player." Someone who could have an impact at key times with a lineout steal or a turnover at the breakdown. But that's come at the expense of overall workrate imo. As he's slowing down as a player he just isn't putting in the consistent effort required at the top level.

Large section of media are Munster fans, RTÉ for one, Pom could lie down in middle of pitch for entire game and do nothing and they would find a positive.....

I don’t know how many times they said “Pom needs a big game this week”, no big game and said comments the following week

I read the Sunday World after Japan game and the main review was exMjnster player and had him MOM....

For the standard fan they have no idea and just go by media. It will be the first test of Farrell and I will be disappointed if he goes with POM.....

I don’t want Sexton either, Hendy has done it for Ulster so could be in with a shout? The Ryan is too young camp is incorrect imo.....

Front row is a good place to start, anyone for Furlong?

Clegg

There's a poll on the 42.ie asking people to vote on who should be the next Ireland captain. PoM won it with 30% of the vote. But I think he's one of the players we should be looking to transition out of the side.

He's another of those layers I was talking about in the above post. In the past Schmidt has gotten performances out of him when he wasn't necessarily playing at his best for Munster. But against NZ it didn't happen. Didn't really happen at all in the World Cup either. Much like Kearney, I think PoM on the downward slope of his career.

Schmidt mentioned that PoM was a "moments player." Someone who could have an impact at key times with a lineout steal or a turnover at the breakdown. But that's come at the expense of overall workrate imo. As he's slowing down as a player he just isn't putting in the consistent effort required at the top level.

ClanofLams

Character assassination? FFS talk about being overly dramatic. I think most people on this thread have acknowledged he has been the greatest coach Ireland ever had and left a huge legacy behind, I certainly have said it repeatedly. Pointing out mistakes he may have made in what was a massively disappointing season doesn’t mean that is not being acknowledged nor does it attack his character. I haven’t followed the media particularly closely but anything I have read or heard (Off the ball, Second captains, Irish Times) hasn’t been anything like that either, I’m sure there have been a few outlandish remarks from the usual suspects but that’s par for the courses.

Clegg

In hindsight, Schmidt got his selection wrong. But at the time it probably made sense to make those calls. He was in some ways a victim of his own success. His greatest achievements have come when he put pressure on players struggling for form. He was rewarded with great performances from them.

But this year he went to the well one too many times. The WC was basically an extension of last season. It felt so long that I'd forgotten a few things. Namely that Rob Kearney had been dropped by Ireland and by Leinster a number of times. For the Six Nations game against England and then the Champions Cup QF against Ulster. Kearney is one of those players who'd upped his game when Schmidt applied pressure, but the writing was on the wall that the upswing in performances couldn't last forever. He was really struggling for form. It's probably more than a form thing now. He's just not as good as he used to be.

The Rape of Lucretia

Joe has been fantastic overall - his trophy win rate is terrific. Its very easy to bleat about not doing better at the world cup, but at least while not doing better than his predecessors at the world, he didnt do better than his predecessers at the world cup while winning lots more than they did. We wish him well, and am sure he can do a great job at Connacht.

Shefwedfan

Few thing

I had a PM earlier about me hating a player. I don’t hate any player. I am critical of players in terms of ability, all these players are probably lovely people in real life and this is a job, but just because I don’t think they should be in the team doesn’t mean I hate them

In regards to Joe, yes I’m a fan. Yes I think he made some mistakes during his tenure.

But the character assassination on here and the media is terrible. The guy was excellent for Irish rugby, better than anything before and I doubt we will see another lie him again

Irish rugby have moved on leaps and bounds with a huge part of it because of joe...it’s funny how other coach’s leave a country and just move on, that’s not ireland......

It will be final post on Joe, I wish him well. I will always remember him as the genius he is.....

Thanks Joe.....

Onward now with Farrell and I can’t wait to see his first game. First squad etc

jmayo

Jaysus looking at that listing the old EOS joke really does apply to Schimdt.

"Form is temporary, selection is permanent"

blinding

It was hard to get off Joe’s favoured 15 regardless of how you were playing . It ended badly .

The Rape of Lucretia

Interested Observer wrote: »

Certainly shuts up those voices saying Joe didnt allow players time to play themselves back to form. He was willing to do it for 13 players per game. He was certainly no chop and change panic button pusher. Yet another of his extraordinary methods revealed like a Murray Kinsella frame-by-frame play.

[Deleted User]

awec wrote: »

And Carty got hardly any compared to Sexton (same as Carbery), and in reality Carty was no worse than Sexton was.

Sexton played almost all of the Six Nations minutes, despite stinking the place out. Like, even if you're too afraid to drop him, at least sub him off before 70 minutes and give the alternative a real go when he's THAT bad!

Someone posted on PR the starting teams of the 5 games we lost this year (Wales, Eng x2, Japan, NZ) and it was basically the exact same starting XV for all of them, with the odd injury/Jean Kleyn thrown in. That was Schmidt's team and he was sticking to it, didn't matter how badly they played or how many games they lost.

Edit, here it is.

ionadnapóca

awec wrote: »

Was it this year that Schmidt played on with Conor Murray against Wales, after he had clearly injured his arm to the point where he could barely use it?

Schmidt's attempt at building depth at half back was half-hearted and poor at best, and he paid a heavy price for that this year.

That was Cardiff 2017
Edit Marmion came on ‘45

Foxtrol

lord quackinton wrote: »

Some posts here are trying to portray a certain narrative

Nobody wanted sexton or Murray dropped in the World Cup that was too late
Time for that was 6 nations

If they were going to make a decision like that they had to go all in on it in order to bed them in and get the required experience.

Then what do you do if the replacements perform poorly during the 6 nations or Sexton/Murray form improves during the knockout phases of last season? Do you switch back again?

Foxtrol

awec wrote: »

Come on now Foxtrol.

1. Nobody is saying that it is a fact that players can't play themselves into form. This is complete and utter nonsense. What people are saying though, is that when players are consistently NOT playing themselves into form then it's time to look at alternatives. Nobody is talking about anyone being dropped after one poor outing.

Ahem...

awec wrote: »

Well if 2019 has taught us anything it's that they don't recover it being continually picked. We can stop beating that horse, it's well and truly dead.

2. "Won't somebody think of the squad players". Hyperbolic crap. Competition for places is a basic premise across any sport. There is not a sports person or coach on the planet who will tell you it is good for a player to know that no matter how poorly their competition plays, they aren't getting a real go at it.

Don't think it is nearly as hyperbolic crap as this:

awec wrote: »

Honestly, Joe Schmidt could select Furlong at full back and some on here would be defending it. There is a general refusal among certain quarters to accept that he is capable of getting it wrong.

As I keep repeating, I agree with you to a point but it isn't an absolute rule. Yes, there is a risk of impacting squad morale by having players play through poor form but there also is a risk to morale by dropping one of the leaders of the team, who on their day is the best in the world. We've seen complaints that players were afraid to make mistakes under Schmidt, I'm sure that wouldn't be made worse by dropping their leadership group.

I don't see how you're so absolutist on this, you're acting like there can never be any situation for an exception.

3. "When the drop off is so large you can't do it". The drop off is not as large as some are making out on here. Yea, Sexton and Murray are a class above but not when they're playing hopelessly badly.

What we saw in the WC that the team fell apart when Sexton wasn't out on the pitch. I'm not arguing he is the only reason for this but the idea that we had ready replacements doesn't hold up either.

Either choice by the coach was a gamble and I think it was a no win situation.

4. If the coach sticks with "undroppables" who are playing very poorly, and they continue to play very poorly for an entire calendar year worth of fixtures, then yes, that is absolutely something the coach needs to be criticised for. This "you can't prove it didn't work" stuff is just wishy washy attempts to avoid having to be critical.

People on here are (rightly) praising Schmidt for building up squad depth. "Best we've ever had". Then, on the other hand, they are arguing that Schmidt was right to not use that squad depth, cause the players aren't good enough.

'Best we've ever had' does not equal having replacements of equal talent at every position. Coaches can only do so much, they can't magic up talent that simply isn't there. I am plenty critical of many aspects of the WC and selections of certain out of form players, but at SH and OH I see the difficulties they faced and why the decisions were made.

It seems that some want to have their cake and eat it.

Not seeing everything as absolutes and understanding that not all situations are the same is not wanting to have your cake and eat it.

[Deleted User]

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Does Murrman's drop off in form coincide with Zebo's expatriation ? Its just a thought, but there may be a solution therein.

As for Sexton. We're done. He really just does more harm than good. I never want to see him besmirch a green jersey (unless its a Connaught one) again. Has one youngwan's regret ever cost Irish rugby so much? We really have to invest deep in Carbery now.

Besmirch again?

C'mon.

Even if you're in on the in-joke that made me wince.

The Rape of Lucretia

Former Former wrote: »

The squad depth thing was a major fallacy. It has been declining for a couple of years, I would say it peaked in 2016 or 2017 but the squad is probably at its weakest since Joe took over.

I couldnt agree with that. Look back as some past squads from not even that so long ago and see how weak we were in so many positions.
Yet this time, we were well covered across the front row (remember when the loss of one prop would have almost had us calling off a game as unable to field a team?), most would have been happy with Toner as a starter, as various stages we lost Heaser, OBrien, Leavy, Conan, and could still field a quality international back row (one many would have had by first choice if they could overlook their revisionist history since Saturday), a scrummie who beat the all blacks (how many Irish scrumhalves can say that?), outhalves who werent just converted centres or borderline interprovincial level, 4 centres from which perm any two according to your taste, and Larmour and Conway as rather tasty back three cover.
How our expectations change. We have never seen anything like the above before.

Former Former

awec wrote: »

People on here are (rightly) praising Schmidt for building up squad depth. "Best we've ever had". Then, on the other hand, they are arguing that Schmidt was right to not use that squad depth, cause the players aren't good enough.

The squad depth thing was a major fallacy. It has been declining for a couple of years, I would say it peaked in 2016 or 2017 but the squad is probably at its weakest since Joe took over.

The Rape of Lucretia

Does Murrman's drop off in form coincide with Zebo's expatriation ? Its just a thought, but there may be a solution therein.

As for Sexton. We're done. He really just does more harm than good. I never want to see him besmirch a green jersey (unless its a Connaught one) again. Has one youngwan's regret ever cost Irish rugby so much? We really have to invest deep in Carbery now.

Wegians89

lord quackinton wrote: »

Some posts here are trying to portray a certain narrative

Nobody wanted sexton or Murray dropped in the World Cup that was too late
Time for that was 6 nations

Summer tour even

lord quackinton

Some posts here are trying to portray a certain narrative

Nobody wanted sexton or Murray dropped in the World Cup that was too late
Time for that was 6 nations

Wegians89

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Carty got more time this year compared to Carbery. Including a few starts. Nobody is asking for him to be excellent but at least don't disappear at the first sign of trouble which was a regular occurrence.

Carbery spent much the year injured when Ireland played so he couldn't get more minutes.

For the love of god can we drop the whole carty disappearing thing? Carbery was no better than him. It’s not easy playing well at 10 when 1-9 are playing well below their standard. The only reason Sexton looked any good was because he literally was the best player in the whole world last season. He’s a class apart and even when he’s not great he’s better than most. Carty, carbery, Byrne, Madigan, Jackson, any other ten at all would have struggled playing behind that pack.

blinding

Schmidt fupped up on both Sexton and Murray .

He lost his focus because he was out the door and just wanted one last Jig but the Jig was up .

Schmidt failed in his last year and badly failed at that .

awec

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Carty got more time this year compared to Carbery. Including a few starts. Nobody is asking for him to be excellent but at least don't disappear at the first sign of trouble which was a regular occurrence.

Carbery spent much the year injured when Ireland played so he couldn't get more minutes.

And Carty got hardly any compared to Sexton (same as Carbery), and in reality Carty was no worse than Sexton was.

Sexton played almost all of the Six Nations minutes, despite stinking the place out. Like, even if you're too afraid to drop him, at least sub him off before 70 minutes and give the alternative a real go when he's THAT bad!

awec

Foxtrol wrote: »

You need to go back a few pages but there were plenty of broad claims thrown around (not necessarily all by ClanOfLams) that if a player isn't performing they should be benched, 'won't somebidy please think of the squad players' if stars are underperforming and aren't dropped, and that in 2019 we've learned for a fact that players cant play themselves into form.

The point where I jumped in was that I agree in most cases and have seen Schmidt do this repeatedly, as both Leinster and Irish coach, but when it comes to star players where the drop off is large it becomes a much grayer area, where that absolute talk doesn't work, it isn't really the fault of a coach if there are players that are deemed 'undroppable' and the choice to stick with the incumbents isn't proved the wrong approach if results don't go their way.

Come on now Foxtrol.

1. Nobody is saying that it is a fact that players can't play themselves into form. This is complete and utter nonsense. What people are saying though, is that when players are consistently NOT playing themselves into form then it's time to look at alternatives. Nobody is talking about anyone being dropped after one poor outing.

2. "Won't somebody think of the squad players". Hyperbolic crap. Competition for places is a basic premise across any sport. There is not a sports person or coach on the planet who will tell you it is good for a player to know that no matter how poorly their competition plays, they aren't getting a real go at it.

3. "When the drop off is so large you can't do it". The drop off is not as large as some are making out on here. Yea, Sexton and Murray are a class above but not when they're playing hopelessly badly.

4. If the coach sticks with "undroppables" who are playing very poorly, and they continue to play very poorly for an entire calendar year worth of fixtures, then yes, that is absolutely something the coach needs to be criticised for. This "you can't prove it didn't work" stuff is just wishy washy attempts to avoid having to be critical.

People on here are (rightly) praising Schmidt for building up squad depth. "Best we've ever had". Then, on the other hand, they are arguing that Schmidt was right to not use that squad depth, cause the players aren't good enough.

It seems that some want to have their cake and eat it.

jmayo

Shefwedfan wrote: »

The fact we could pick the team and squad a year out with the entire squad having experience was seen as a huge plus

Now in hindsight everyone is saying it’s a negative?

It is no use having experience if their form and by extension their confidence is fooking terrible.
For some reason Joe didn't seem to subscribe to that.

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I agree. More or less the answer was to drop XYZ from the team. The problem was the replacement player wasn't good enough...

Take Sexton for example who is the prime target for all this. They did drop him, for the Japan match and it was a disaster.

They did take him off at half time in Russia match, again it was a disaster. Murray didn't start and this forum was full of how s**t McGrath was.

Anytime McGrath came on for last 20 mins or so, again forum full of how s**t McGrath was.

Then comes the NZ match and everyone wants both Sexton and Murray dropped, but for who?

I am not saying Joe was 100% right either.....

As others have said, (and I have said on other thread) Sexton and Murray were pure muck at times this year, especially against say Wales.
Now maybe it was my Connacht head, but why the fook were Marmion and Carty left sit on their asses in the stand for over 60 and 70 minutes ?
It was a disgrace and was really poor man management.

You seem to claim that they, and all the rest, are not good enough to stand in for the great Irish halfback combination.

Well if the world beaters are playing near the previous ability then that is indeed true, but what if they are having a mare and in Sextons case getting visibly ratty to boot ?

What message was Schmidt sending to the backups ?
What was it doing for their confidence ?

Has anyone ever thought that having your once impervious half backs play shyte has major knock effect on confidence of rest of team and then there is added pressure on standins to try correct all of that when they are given the gig ?

Someone mentioned Matt Williams and he made point about Schmidt not using tours and autumn internationals, even 6 nations, more to really blood players.

Was he under pressure from IRFU to just make sure he kept winning and thus didn't totally overhaul teams ?
Every match now it seems is deemed important for ranking points so is that all IRFU worries about ?

Shefwedfan

awec wrote: »

Nonsense.

The problem is not that Murray and Sexton were picked against New Zealand, the problem is that the problem was simply allowed to fester all year.

Your logic is flawed here. Carty got a few short cameos and wasn't excellent, therefore he's not good enough?

Reality is, Sexton got loads of opportunities and wasn't good enough. The backup 10s got no real exposure, no real development time. When it comes to them not excelling, at least they have a valid excuse.

Carty got more time this year compared to Carbery. Including a few starts. Nobody is asking for him to be excellent but at least don't disappear at the first sign of trouble which was a regular occurrence.

Carbery spent much the year injured when Ireland played so he couldn't get more minutes.

Shefwedfan

awec wrote: »

Was it this year that Schmidt played on with Conor Murray against Wales, after he had clearly injured his arm to the point where he could barely use it?

Schmidt's attempt at building depth at half back was half-hearted and poor at best, and he paid a heavy price for that this year.

That was 2017.....most people thought it was a stinger and he would be ok in a minute....

He was subbed soon after, so a small bit over dramatic....

Ex pro talking about it: https://www.sportsjoe.ie/rugby/conor-murray-didnt-come-off-earlier-wales-friday-night-116606

awec

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I agree. More or less the answer was to drop XYZ from the team. The problem was the replacement player wasn't good enough...

Take Sexton for example who is the prime target for all this. They did drop him, for the Japan match and it was a disaster.

They did take him off at half time in Russia match, again it was a disaster. Murray didn't start and this forum was full of how s**t McGrath was.

Anytime McGrath came on for last 20 mins or so, again forum full of how s**t McGrath was.

Then comes the NZ match and everyone wants both Sexton and Murray dropped, but for who?

I am not saying Joe was 100% right either.....

Nonsense.

The problem is not that Murray and Sexton were picked against New Zealand, the problem is that the problem was simply allowed to fester all year.

Your logic is flawed here. Reality is, Sexton got loads of opportunities and wasn't good enough. The backup 10s got no real exposure, no real development time. When it comes to them not excelling, at least they have a valid excuse. You cannot write any of them off as "not good enough" based on the limited time they've had so far.

awec

Was it this year that Schmidt played on with Conor Murray against Wales, after he had clearly injured his arm to the point where he could barely use it?

Schmidt's attempt at building depth at half back was half-hearted and poor at best, and he paid a heavy price for that this year.