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

ionadnapóca

And if I hear another player about how much “fun” they are having I’m going to scream!
When did they turn into Americans?
I suppose it will be “super fun” if we win the Triple Crown.
Rant over. I’m just getting old.

Panda Killa

Hahahaha.... oh the short memories of some people in here...
why not raise it with Joe ..sure ...it was...by one individual ..and look how well it worked out for his international career....
Joe was a very vindictive individual, no doubt about that. If you spoke out, that was your Ireland career over ....when you see one of the good guys of the Irish squad telling you how he felt, you should take note ..

stephen_n

ionadnapokot wrote: »

The new 13 is also having “fun” with teacher and having class outside.
https://www.the42.ie/keith-earls-andy-farrrell-chilled-classroom-5007917-Feb2020/

This is the same fella telling us all how relaxed he was before the NZ game!
But is now also talking about the huddle before that game?
Because that’s what made him drop those passes! Or throw idiotic offloads v Japan after HT when just 3 points ahead and under pressure?

I really would prefer if Earls and the other Irish players just took ownership of their own mistakes and STFU.

The reference to the huddle in that article was from Best, not Earls. Thought the article and the interview was quite balanced. Acknowledging the success of Joe’s way, while also accepting change is needed and being enjoyed by the team. Everyone’s calling for a more expansive game and more offloads, we can’t start crucifying players for mistakes if they happen. That’s the trade off with that type of game.

stephen_n

Panda Killa wrote: »

Hahahaha.... oh the short memories of some people in here...
why not raise it with Joe ..sure ...it was...by one individual ..and look how well it worked out for his international career....
Joe was a very vindictive individual, no doubt about that. If you spoke out, that was your Ireland career over ....when you see one of the good guys of the Irish squad telling you how he felt, you should take note ..

Really? I think you need a mirror there.

aloooof

Shefwedfan wrote: »

To be honest if I was Farrell and I seen this carry on I would drop them out of the squad.

Drop him out of the squad?? Ah c’mon...

Shefwedfan

Panda Killa wrote: »

Hahahaha.... oh the short memories of some people in here...
why not raise it with Joe ..sure ...it was...by one individual ..and look how well it worked out for his international career....
Joe was a very vindictive individual, no doubt about that. If you spoke out, that was your Ireland career over ....when you see one of the good guys of the Irish squad telling you how he felt, you should take note ..

One of the good guys? based on what? Im not saying he is or isnt but I didnt ever see a good and bad list of the squad

Some of the player worked with Joe from 2010 right to 2019 and had no issue with them. Anyone with any knowledge of rugby seen he was one of the best coachs in the World and still is....

I know the standard Irish fan like to always blame the old coach(happened to Kidney and EOS as well) but the players need to take blame. The display against Japan was all down to the players on the pitch.....the game plan in the first 20 mins was working and then the players crapped it on the pitch

Yes Joe did make mistakes but these bulls**t "it was all joe fault" articles should be thrown in the bin

Shefwedfan

aloooof wrote: »

Drop him out of the squad?? Ah c’mon...

Two games in and he is questioning the old management team which Farrell was part of, what happens if they lose v England and Frace????

The "good guy" Earls in the press saying how terrible it is?

Why not admit as players they all underperformed?

P.S. maybe dropping out of squad a bit too far :-)

ionadnapóca

stephen_n wrote: »

The reference to the huddle in that article was from Best, not Earls. Thought the article and the interview was quite balanced. Acknowledging the success of Joe’s way, while also accepting change is needed and being enjoyed by the team. Everyone’s calling for a more expansive game and more offloads, we can’t start crucifying players for mistakes if they happen. That’s the trade off with that type of game.

Ah! My mistake.
I’m glad Earls wasn’t going down that road. Particularly after Sexton said last week that he thinks comments on Joe or the new setup are been picked up wrong!
i.e. camp fun v camp stress

Jump_In_Jack

aloooof wrote: »

Some interesting stats RE: ruck arrivals from Round 1, for those that like that sort of thing:

https://twitter.com/SamLStandsUp/status/1228130803898626048

Thanks for that chart, very interesting to see what type of stats are available.

What would be the consensus taken from that chart, Ireland doing well compared to other teams at ruck arrivals?
O'Mahony most frequent at ruck arrivals?

I think our back row has been acquitting themselves very well so far, do these stats back that up and suggest we are deploying them differently, or is it just an uptick in form all round?

arsebiscuits1

ionadnapokot wrote: »

Ah! My mistake.
I’m glad Earls wasn’t going down that road. Particularly after Sexton said last week that he thinks comments on Joe or the new setup are been picked up wrong!
i.e. camp fun v camp stress

A lot of the stuff that's come out is very one sided which is clearly the medias narrative.

The questions have been phrased in certain ways and only the relevant parts to the narrative of the players answers have been printed.

It's why I really don't trust print media. If you listen to the players in the pressers or in podcasts or read the same interview in another print to get the full quote you get a bit of a clearer picture.

I don't think any of the players are circumventing their own short comings. Nor are any of them throwing Joe under the bus. By and large the players narrative is Farrell has made changes and his approach is different to Joe. The media can get a host of quotes from this based on how they phrase those questions.

[Deleted User]

Listened to Stuart Lancaster's interview on off the ball over the weekend and it had a lot of insightful stuff.

He was asked about Ireland's form last year and made an interesting remark. Said he felt the fault lay in the six nations review and that the loss to England was a big warning sign. Reading between the lines of what he said suggests that either Ireland had been found out during the six nations or we had lost the mentality collectively that had delivered the previous years results. He specifically said some of the Leinster players looked under cooked.

He had spoken to Eddie Jones about England before the World Cup and said to get extra warm up games in as he felt that England lacked that in 2015. He felt Ireland needed more games also and that the Scotland result set them up for a fall against Japan (intimating that Scotland were plain bad as opposed to Ireland excelling).

He hasn't spoken to Joe in detail since but plans too.

Not much more to it than that, but interesting that he saw problems in the 6N and they persisted through to Ireland's poor campaign. I think we all did but the way he talks suggests that there were some obvious flaws that really should have been addressed.

salmocab

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Listened to Stuart Lancaster's interview on off the ball over the weekend and it had a lot of insightful stuff.

He was asked about Ireland's form last year and made an interesting remark. Said he felt the fault lay in the six nations review and that the loss to England was a big warning sign. Reading between the lines of what he said suggests that either Ireland had been found out during the six nations or we had lost the mentality collectively that had delivered the previous years results. He specifically said some of the Leinster players looked under cooked.

He had spoken to Eddie Jones about England before the World Cup and said to get extra warm up games in as he felt that England lacked that in 2015. He felt Ireland needed more games also and that the Scotland result set them up for a fall against Japan (intimating that Scotland were plain bad as opposed to Ireland excelling).

He hasn't spoken to Joe in detail since but plans too.

Not much more to it than that, but interesting that he saw problems in the 6N and they persisted through to Ireland's poor campaign. I think we all did but the way he talks suggests that there were some obvious flaws that really should have been addressed.

Heard a good bit of the interview, he really is an intelligent and very interesting man. Leinster extremely lucky to have him I would say.

[Deleted User]

I find it crazy to think that Lancaster was the same man who tried to move Sam Burgess into center

arsebiscuits1

Deleted User wrote: »

I find it crazy to think that Lancaster was the same man who tried to move Sam Burgess into center

There was definitely more to that Sam Burgess than was publicised.

I am adamant that Burgess was a blazer decision from up high in the RFU. They brought in a poster boy for the RWC.

I think Lancaster was under significant pressure to have him in the squad.

Given Burgess openly admitted in an interview that he "didn't really understand lineouts" I can see why he'd have been tried out in the centre.

Obviously it didn't work out for him. But the blueprint for Rugby League converts playing 12 to a reasonable level was there

ionadnapóca

arsebiscuits1 wrote: »

A lot of the stuff that's come out is very one sided which is clearly the medias narrative.

The questions have been phrased in certain ways and only the relevant parts to the narrative of the players answers have been printed.

It's why I really don't trust print media. If you listen to the players in the pressers or in podcasts or read the same interview in another print to get the full quote you get a bit of a clearer picture.

I don't think any of the players are circumventing their own short comings. Nor are any of them throwing Joe under the bus. By and large the players narrative is Farrell has made changes and his approach is different to Joe. The media can get a host of quotes from this based on how they phrase those questions.

Media always looking for a quote. Completely. And how they insert said quote can put a different slant on things.
However, a number of the senior players - Best, Murray, Henderson and now Earls have all spoken about the "pressure" they were under. Didn't and dont hear any of those lads say "i did not play well today"
Reading the ITimes article with Earls and it's even less flattering than the The42 piece.
Looking very relaxed, Earls is also enjoying the more easy-going environment at both Munster and Ireland, whereas before, he admits: “There were times when we were scared to laugh. If you were laughing you weren’t switched on or you weren’t concentrating or you weren’t being professional.”

“Last week after we did the Captain’s Run we didn’t meet again until we were getting on the bus going to the game. Usually you’d have a couple of meetings beforehand and you might have a meeting at 10 in the morning and the anxiety starts coming in from there whereas it’s completely chilled.”

“We are trying to enjoy ourselves but once you walk out in the four lines you have to be switched on. It’s being able to switch on for the hour or so rather than wasting energy all morning or two days or a day out, wasting energy on thinking about plays or stuff like that. Yeah, it’s definitely a lot more relaxed in Munster and Ireland as well.”

Why he feels the need to compare and contrast is beyond me.

Neil3030

arsebiscuits1 wrote: »

There was definitely more to that Sam Burgess than was publicised.

I am adamant that Burgess was a blazer decision from up high in the RFU. They brought in a poster boy for the RWC.

I think Lancaster was under significant pressure to have him in the squad.

Given Burgess openly admitted in an interview that he "didn't really understand lineouts" I can see why he'd have been tried out in the centre.

Obviously it didn't work out for him. But the blueprint for Rugby League converts playing 12 to a reasonable level was there

Bringing in a player from Rugby League goes against everything I think I know about blazers in Unions.

arsebiscuits1

ionadnapokot wrote: »

Media always looking for a quote. Completely. And how they insert said quote can put a different slant on things.
However, a number of the senior players - Best, Murray, Henderson and now Earls have all spoken about the "pressure" they were under. Didn't and dont hear any of those lads say "i did not play well today"
Reading the ITimes article with Earls and it's even less flattering than the The42 piece.
Looking very relaxed, Earls is also enjoying the more easy-going environment at both Munster and Ireland, whereas before, he admits: “There were times when we were scared to laugh. If you were laughing you weren’t switched on or you weren’t concentrating or you weren’t being professional.”

“Last week after we did the Captain’s Run we didn’t meet again until we were getting on the bus going to the game. Usually you’d have a couple of meetings beforehand and you might have a meeting at 10 in the morning and the anxiety starts coming in from there whereas it’s completely chilled.”

“We are trying to enjoy ourselves but once you walk out in the four lines you have to be switched on. It’s being able to switch on for the hour or so rather than wasting energy all morning or two days or a day out, wasting energy on thinking about plays or stuff like that. Yeah, it’s definitely a lot more relaxed in Munster and Ireland as well.”

Why he feels the need to compare and contrast is beyond me.

I'd be frankly shocked if the questions posed to him weren't along the lines of "can you compare and contrast the old system with the new system"

arsebiscuits1

Neil3030 wrote: »

Bringing in a player from Rugby League goes against everything I think I know about blazers in Unions.

Goes against a lot of what Lancaster was about too.

Keep in mind Bath paid nearly 300k for Burgess (transfer fee. Not salary)

I can't imagine they were so hard up for a grizzled hard running, tackling player that they were willing to spend that much money on one.

It is possible that this was all Lancasters gamble and it spectacularly backfired on him.

But all the evidence to how he coached that England team and how he has coached Leinster since don't really point to a fella who would try and put a peg that square into a hole that round

ionadnapóca

re:
I'd be frankly shocked if the questions posed to him weren't along the lines of "can you compare and contrast the old system with the new system"

Maybe!
But why answer?
Even if he felt the need just say. "Very difficult to compare. Some tweaks in analysis and on the training pitch. But thats normal. Every coach has their own way"

arsebiscuits1

ionadnapokot wrote: »

re:
I'd be frankly shocked if the questions posed to him weren't along the lines of "can you compare and contrast the old system with the new system"

Maybe!
But why answer?
Even if he felt the need just say. "Very difficult to compare. Some tweaks in analysis and on the training pitch. But thats normal. Every coach has their own way"

There's loads of reasons that none of us will know unless you're Keith Earls.

Possibly he could have chosen his words more carefully. But I like that he gave some substance to an answer.

Many players choose to give generic answers to questions like this because they tend to get reactions similar to what you've displayed.

Keith has an opinion and gave it. I think it's a real stretch to say he's throwing Joe under the bus or that he's shirking his own shortcomings recently.

Ultimately it comes down to who the hell cares?

Earls played well against Wales and hopefully will play well if required against England. Any media fluff doesn't matter

ionadnapóca

i feel its any easy cop out not substance.
i agree re: who really cares. but then he should shut up about it what went before!
move on and man up Earls

aloooof

ionadnapokot wrote: »

re:
I'd be frankly shocked if the questions posed to him weren't along the lines of "can you compare and contrast the old system with the new system"

Maybe!
But why answer?
Even if he felt the need just say. "Very difficult to compare. Some tweaks in analysis and on the training pitch. But thats normal. Every coach has their own way"

To be fair to Earls, he did add the following:

“We’re barely in the classroom as well. We see our classroom as being on the field. Faz brings down a TV to the side of the field at the HPC (high performance centre) and we’ll look at a play and then we’ll go out and rep it. It’s just coaches are different.”

ionadnapóca

aloooof wrote: »

To be fair to Earls, he did add the following:

that part is fair. what went before it isnt. & is of no benefit to anybody. Except the player!

molloyjh

ionadnapokot wrote: »

that part is fair. what went before it isnt. & is of no benefit to anybody. Except the player!

Taken in isolation maybe. But we also need to remember that the players and coaches have talked a lot about the new facilities that allow some of the things Earls mentioned actually happen, specifically the screens beside the training pitch. They didnt have those facilities under Joe, so Farrell is doing things that Joe could never have done. It isnt like Earls is saying that Joe wouldnt do these really great things that Farrell has decided to do. Hes just identifying differences between then and now. And we've been told a good few times that one major difference is the facilities. On that basis I dont see much to what Earls said at all tbh.

ionadnapóca

its nothing to do about the facilities or the tv's!!

Shefwedfan

The problem I have with this, and not just this coach but every coach, if they had an issue then speak up at the time. These are grown men, not a group of children in primary school.

No-one mentioned any problems all last year with Joe. Even before the NZ game we had "Good guy" Earls speaking: https://www.munsterrugby.ie/2019/10/18/its-another-game-isnt-it/

Take some responsibility.

In terms of barely in classroom, well Joe never had the facility they are in now. So the video room is beside the training pitch, they can watch part of game and then go out onto pitch and review on the pitch. Are we saying if Joe wasn't coach now he wouldn't use this facility? seeing as he probably was the person they discussed the design with while building?

Paul Smeenus

I really don't get the hysteria about Earls' comments. He's not the editor of IRFU Pravda. If he prefers how things are being run now, he's well within his rights to say. Joe's a grown man, he can deal with it.

aloooof

Shefwedfan wrote: »

The problem I have with this, and not just this coach but every coach, if they had an issue then speak up at the time. These are grown men, not a group of children in primary school.

No-one mentioned any problems all last year with Joe.

How do you know they didn't? No player is going to come out and publicly criticise or question their coach for obvious reasons. But you've no idea what was said privately.

Really think this is making a mountain out of a molehill stuff.

ionadnapóca

I have cultivated my "hysteria" with pleasure and terror

Paul Smeenus

ionadnapokot wrote: »

I have cultivated my "hysteria" with pleasure and terror

Also, Monday, pre-lunchtime Baudelaire? What's happening to this place?