Bazzo wrote: » Well not really, you said that the coaches know what they're doing therefore "that suggests" Marmion and Cooney aren't good enough for international rugby. In Marmion's case there is very compelling stone cold evidence that he's "good enough" for international rugby. Schmidt also went through a fair patch of putting a lot of trust in him around the same time when he filled in on the wing a couple of times and did very well defensively.
WhoamI2022 wrote: » If they are good enough then why are they dropped? Schmidt played Marmion on the wing because he had no other option, hardly a glowing recommendation. During that period when did Marmoin start instead of Murray in any international? when Murray was fit
Bazzo wrote: » Ok so "not starting ahead of Murray" is the same as "not good enough for international rugby" now, is it? Schmidt actually did literally give a glowing review of Marmion in one of the post match press conferences if you care to watch it back. He was dropped... And now he's back in the squad, the coach just thinks JGP is a better bench option at the moment, which is fine. But statements that he's "not good enough" for international rugby are nonsense. We know he is, we have irrefutable proof. And the conversation is going round in circles so I'll leave it at that, there's only so many ways you can phrase the same thing.
Buer wrote: » Ah. I see Ouncer is back!
Skeetur wrote: » JGP didn't get much attention after the game given how well the starting debutants played. But he was impressively sharp and worked hard. He was hitting the breakdown to protect the ball when players were isolated, joining the maul for the try, increased the speed attack twofold, getting the ball wide fast without playing overly risky stuff. I know it was 10 mins against a defeated Italy but for a first international cap he was good. For a bench option at the moment he's the better option tbh and given Marmion, Cooney, JGP are all close enough age wise and Murray likely not budging from starter I wouldn't be surprised to see him quickly get established as the clear second choice SH going forward.
WhoamI2022 wrote: » JGP is very snappy and decent option off the bench but really is holding a space warm for Casey etc I would suggest. Question is does Murray see himsefl playing in next World Cup at 34/35? do the Irish management see him still playing?
mfceiling wrote: » This is the same Casey that has only played a handful of meaningful games for Munster and you want him straight into the Ireland squad? That makes perfect sense.
WhoamI2022 wrote: » Yes because it was a disaster when France done it How many times had Murray played for Munster prior to get the call up to Ireland?
thomond2006 wrote: » Antoine Dupont had played a lot prior to his first cap with France. It was his third season in the Top 14.http://www.itsrugby.fr/joueurs/antoine-dupont-32472.html Murray was fast-tracked because of TOL's freak injury on the sled and his loss of form. Plus it took Murray a while to really get going. I can remember various games in 2012 where his speed at the ruck was criticised. 2013 with the Lions was when he really blossomed. Casey will be making his fourth straight start for Munster tomorrow. He's developing just fine.
WhoamI2022 wrote: » I haven't said to replace Murray yet with Casey, but based on the other options he looks the most likely. Him and the ulster lad who I can never remember his name. Murray is not playing terrible, he is just not up to the 2018 standard but as I posted above if the management think Murray is not going to make the next WC then they should try get Casey some time in the lesser games with Sexton at 10, JGP came on massively after he got a run of games with Sexton.
thomond2006 wrote: » Casey might get a token appearance against Georgia but that might be the height of it with Ireland this season. If he can start 15 or so games for Munster I think he's going well. It's a shame there will likely be no summer tour. That would have been a perfect low pressure environment to get Casey meaningful minutes.
Dog Botherer wrote: » what if Marmion was just crap in training.
Dog Botherer wrote: » my granny’s hairdresser said that he heard from his cousin’s wife that joe schmidt thought that devin toner was too tall and dropped him
siltirocker wrote: » But ya, take what you want from it. Just trying to share a bit of insight. Hardly anything explicit or controversial there. Fair enough. But I don't think your granny's hairdresser's cousin's wife played for a province though. (Coincidentally, my cousin is actually married to a player in the 23 today. But he doesn't share ****, or even talk rugby outside of it).
Dog Botherer wrote: » yeah in fairness i have a second cousin in today’s 23 too, never met him or spoke to him.
siltirocker wrote: » Precisely. There is so much more to it than x is better than y. A friend of mine was contracted to one of the provinces last year and shared with a few of us some of the stuff he was hearing in the lead up to Ireland going to the world cup, and other type of scenarios. I obviously won't share details cause that'd be ****ty. But the sheer amount of things that come into play are massive. Two lads were sent away by Schmidt to work on particular parts of their game, styles not necessarily promoted in their province but something they needed for him. "You play game xyz at your province and do it well, but for Ireland we play abc. We are coordinating with your provincial coaching ticket to incorporate it more. Let's see how we do with that." One talked, not necessarily positively, about it in the media, and got a bollocking, never called up again. The other just simply didn't adapt or prove him self as competent at style abc. One lad was essentially a dick in camp, and senior players and coaches didn't like him. One lad had a crazy virus he was trying to play through, but couldn't hid it. Another was absolutely mercurial, but was going off script far too often. He argued that it more often than not yielded positive results. It was explained to him that "if he stuck to the script there would be no need in the first place for mercurial gung ho stuff", but he didn't stop doing it. One lad simple couldn't open up to the crew beyond his limited provincial colleagues, this effected his confidence and he was muck in camp. Some players who may not seem near first choice were getting called up because they understood instruction and gameplan straight away. Some players opened up other players better than perceived better or more in form players. Then of course you have obvious ones like they didn't train well, or they had a provincial or experienced understanding of the players outside them.
realhorrorshow wrote: » My main takeaway from knowing lads that play professionally is that many of them don't watch or have much interest in rugby.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/ad289898c0c6dda7e667bf900ae26d0c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6081e4655739e0887aaf16222f88b015.svg)
