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 XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

Zzippy

Continued on from previous threads. Title can be decided if we get better suggestions than the placeholder. We may run a poll.

LRind2008: 6 month Threadban until 14/08/2023.

Fresh to Death Thread banned for 2 weeks, until 07/03/2023

Pickarooney thread banned for 2 weeks until 07/03/2023

Kuang1 Thread banned for 2 weeks until 12/03/2023.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

briandebum

molloyjh wrote: »

Right, I'm getting close to being fed up saying this on this forum, but here we go...

TEST RUGBY IS NOT ABOUT LETTING SUPPORTERS FIND OUT WHO IS GOOD AND WHO IS NOT.

What we learn is utterly, utterly, utterly irrelevant. And if the coaches need to see guys play in these games to get a sense of what they are capable of I'd seriously question what the f*** they are doing with these players in camp all this time. They should already pretty much know exactly what each of their players are capable of.

It's almost as if people believe that what they see is all there is. That nothing exists outside of what they know. That there is no knowledge or experience beyond what they are able to glean from a couple of hours a week watching rugby. What exactly is it that you think teams do with the rest of their time!?

We have seen plenty of guys get debuts and young guys get game time. Ed Byrne, O'Sullivan, Kelleher, Baird, Doris, Deegan, Connors, Casey, JGP, R Byrne, Lowe, Keenan and Daly. That's in 14 games, 10 of which are 6Ns. We now have Coombes about to add to that list with almost certainly a few more next week. We've seen Doris displace POM, Connors displace VDF, Keenan displace Larmour and may be now looking at Kelleher displacing Herring.

We have not been hugely conservative. And that's just a lazy accusation thrown at Ireland set-ups that don't pick every single young lad people want to see.

I think you are drastically overstating how much can be learned at training. Do you seriously believe that there's nothing to be learned from capping a player against a good team? That players can be standouts in training, yet struggle in actual matches? There's loads to be learned from playing a young lad at international level. Why do we even bother playing matches, sure all the coaches know what all the players are capable of, they can have a debate on boards and decide who'll win.

I'd question your all caps shout of TEST RUGBY also, this is a friendly against Japan, not a crunch match in the 6 nations. Undoubtedly a step up but a lower pressure environment for young players to come into.

The question of calling Ireland conservative is not simply about blooding new players, I would say it also refers to persisting with players when it's apparent they're pretty mediocre at TEST LEVEL. Or even if they are test quality, perhaps they'll be past their sell-by date when the world cup comes around. Do you honestly believe Farrell can start in a side that can win a world cup quarter final? Do you think 35 year old John Ryan is the answer come the world cup?

While this might be his best team for this match, I don't think this match matters all that much. Maybe as this is a MASSIVE TEST RUGBY MATCH you think differently on this.

shootermacg

Squidge Rugby saying Ireland should be worried playing this Japan team. I don't see how a hammering to a bunch of youths would be a great experience for them.

DonVito

molloyjh wrote: »

I'd say Hume is well aware of why he isn't involved. Japan are a good side who are good at getting width onto the ball. They will test our ability to shut that off, which would be a big ask for Hume to do on his debut. That one makes sense to me.

And Farrell is the man to shut off the wide attack? Farrell is running in mud. He got embarrassed by Jonny May.

sprucemoose wrote: »

.....wind it in a bit here

hume was decent against munster but i wouldnt say he 'smoked' any of the munster team in either game and since farrell didnt play in either, he cant have 'smoked' him.

hume and balacoune are both great players but to act like they are infinitely better than farrell and daly is a joke

only due to injuries

Didn't say or didn't mean to say they smoked them in games against them. I mean in the course of the season both of them have absolutely outperformed them. Put what Chris Farrell and Shane Daly have done this season on tape and compare it. Never mind comparing them, any tape you make of Farrell and Daly this season would put you to sleep. They are not going to progress Ireland's offence.

Robert Baloucoune and James Hume ARE infinitely better than Shane Daly and Chris Farrell. It's a joke to even put them in the same conversation. Can you imagine if you told Ulster fans they have to do a straight swap? I'd be sickened. Like getting Alan O'Connor for Ryan Baird. No thanks.

sydthebeat

shootermacg wrote: »

Was James Lowe in the squad? Or is he injured?

Not on the squad as recovering from a back injury

the baby bull elephant

shootermacg wrote: »

I don't think these are updated regularly. Wasn't killcoyne saying GC could be around 119kg depending on his breakfast

“We have had these great backrows in Munster over the years, James Coughlan, CJ, they all bring different things. Gav is naturally the biggest I have seen. He can be anywhere from 114 to 119kg depending on what breakfast he has in the morning."

Being generous and assuming he's 119 more often than not, 10kg of good weight for a 23 year old who's been in a professional system for a few years already would be absolutely insane without PEDs. If he can get to around the 120kg consistently mark nand keep his current mobility that will already be very impressive for any backrower, even if he was South African. PSdT is listed as 2cm taller and is 115 on the Stormers website and 120 on wiki.

starkid

shootermacg wrote: »

Squidge Rugby saying Ireland should be worried playing this Japan team. I don't see how a hammering to a bunch of youths would be a great experience for them.

who's saying to play a bunch of youths? people are saying to play the form player, the guy who deserves the place. his place in a nothing match with nothing at stake, but against a very decent side who are match hardened.

Coombes is the form number 8 in Ireland and older than the incumbent. RB was also worth a shot.

It will be far worse if we lose to Japan playing this team.

Farrell again wasting freeshots at development. A theme as old as IRish rugby itself. when it comes to play the USA we'll smash them, but people will say ah but shure it was only the USA, we can't judge them on that and then there won't be another opprtunity for some time. We're crying out for a powerful carrier. I'd hope to see LC get a good solid half hour. shocking he couldn't find space for RB on the bench. Why waste a spot with Daly, who as a coach you're clearly not wanting to play. Madness

sprucemoose

DonVito wrote: »

I mean in the course of the season both of them have absolutely outperformed them. Put what Chris Farrell and Shane Daly have done this season on tape and compare it. Never mind comparing them, any tape you make of Farrell and Daly this season would put you to sleep. They are not going to progress Ireland's offence.

simply bollox of the highest order. farrell was outstanding against clermont and toulouse. daly was also very good away to CA after a very poor start. farrell has at the very least been solid all season and has held his own alongside one of the best centres in the world

DonVito wrote: »

Robert Baloucoune and James Hume ARE infinitely better than Shane Daly and Chris Farrell. It's a joke to even say put them in the same conversation.

to put it simply, if that were actually true then both would be starting on saturday..........

briandebum wrote: »

this is a friendly against Japan,

no such thing as a friendly in rugby

awec

Hume I am indifferent about, I am not sure he's really ready yet and wouldn't make an Ireland squad for tier 1 tests.

Baloucoune though is miles better than Shane Daly and should be getting selected for Ireland proper.

aloooof

DonVito wrote: »

Robert Baloucoune and James Hume ARE infinitely better than Shane Daly and Chris Farrell. It's a joke to even put them in the same conversation.

I wonder how many arguments on here could be summed up as someone declaring themselves correct with the likes of "A and B ARE infinitely better than X and Y".?

shootermacg

awec wrote: »

Hume I am indifferent about, I am not sure he's really ready yet and wouldn't make an Ireland squad for tier 1 tests.

Baloucoune though is miles better than Shane Daly and should be getting selected for Ireland proper.

You might have made a case for Baloucoune over Stockdale. But Daly, provides a lot of cover off the bench and his defense is probably better than both.

aloooof

As an aside to all of this, I thought this was an interesting post about selection from awhile back:

https://twitter.com/rugby_ap/status/1403984323980795904

shootermacg

aloooof wrote: »

As an aside to all of this, I thought this was an interesting post about selection from awhile back:

https://twitter.com/rugby_ap/status/1403984323980795904

Exactly, the coaches may have access to footage, GPS etc etc, but I doubt they have access to fanovision and/or a sense of entitlement.

starkid

And its no surprise then that they are way less conservative.

awec

shootermacg wrote: »

You might have made a case for Baloucoune over Stockdale. But Daly, provides a lot of cover off the bench and his defense is probably better than both.

You've never seen Baloucoune play so. His defence is excellent. His attack is excellent.

You're right, I would have Baloucoune ahead of Stockdale too. But he's miles better than Shane Daly.

shootermacg

awec wrote: »

You've never seen Baloucoune play so. His defence is excellent. His attack is excellent.

You're right, I would have Baloucoune ahead of Stockdale too. But he's miles better than Shane Daly.

Again, Daly is worth his spot because he's able to cover more positions. I doubt who is the better winger came into the conversation.

TRC10

shootermacg wrote: »

Exactly, the coaches may have access to footage, GPS etc etc, but I doubt they have access to fanovision and/or a sense of entitlement.

Right then I expect to never see you in here making a case for a player to be selected.

shootermacg

TRC10 wrote: »

Right then I expect to never see you in here making a case for a player to be selected.

Unfortunately, I have full access to fanovision and a pair of red specs.

TRC10

shootermacg wrote: »

Again, Daly is worth his spot because he's able to cover more positions. I doubt who is the better winger came into the conversation.

Well that shouldn't be the criteria. Pick the best players who can make an impact. Not inferior players because they cover more positions. No other nation seems to do it.

If you get injuries, you get injuries. We have enough versatile players to manage

shootermacg

TRC10 wrote: »

Well that shouldn't be the criteria. Pick the best players who can make an impact. Not inferior players because they cover more positions. No other nation seems to do it.

Pick the best players..... for this game! Daly isn't starting, he's covering a lot of positions and is a good enough footballer to manage that. He's literally the best man for the job, given the bench split.

TRC10

shootermacg wrote: »

Pick the best players..... for this game! Daly isn't starting, he's covering a lot of positions and is a good enough footballer to manage that. He's literally the best man for the job, given the bench split.

If you want somebody who provides injury cover in multiple positions, yeah he's the best man for the job. It's a mentality I disagree with personally.

If you wan't a player who can come on tactically and impact the game positively, I don't think he is the best man. I think Baloucoune is a better player. Since he came back in February he's been in electric form and scoring tries. Daly has scored 1 try and done very little all season.

aloooof

TRC10 wrote: »

Well that shouldn't be the criteria. Pick the best players who can make an impact. Not inferior players because they cover more positions. No other nation seems to do it.

If you get injuries, you get injuries. We have enough versatile players to manage

Ah c'mon, that's just not true. It's completely reasonable that cover comes into selection decisions. It's often the case that the player in the 23 jersey is among the most versatile in the squad, but it also largely depends on the make-up of the 15/23 elsewhere. Some coaches go against it (e.g. SA's 6-2 split) but a lot of others don't.

theVersatile

I'm not having any of this Shane Daly slander. Laughable stuff from some.

Balacoune vs Daly and Farrell v Hume are the new ROG v Sexton.

And then not a word mentioned about poor Tom Daly either. Connacht boards members clearly need to raise their provincial bashing game.

TRC10

aloooof wrote: »

Ah c'mon, that's just not true. It's completely reasonable that cover comes into selection decisions. It's often the case that the player in the 23 jersey is among the most versatile in the squad, but it also largely depends on the make-up of the 15/23 elsewhere. Some coaches go against it (e.g. SA's 6-2 split) but a lot of others don't.

Englands 2 backs on the bench at the WC were Slade and Joseph, no natural cover at 15. But those 2 were the best impact players

SA had no recognised 10 on the bench. Steyn was their best impact player, he was covering 10 in case of emergency.

My point is, you shouldn't pick a less impactful player because he covers more positions. Its a 23 man game. Pick the bench that offers the most impact and if you get injuries you get injuries. You don't need a player to cover 13, wing and 15 when you have Larmour on the pitch

DonVito

The bottom line, Daly isn't gonna come on and provide an attacking impact that will change the game. If we are struggling to penetrate, he's not going to be a solution. Baloucoune on the other hand can change the game. He has the pace and footwork to create a moment of magic.

The cover reasoning is pure conservatism. Larmour can play wing, full-back and centre. Carbery can cover fullback. Stockdale can do a job at fullback too.

Ideally, Baloucoune would have started ahead of Larmour. Larmour is lucky to be getting this opportunity. He's been dirt for Ireland and Leinster.

sprucemoose

aloooof wrote: »

It's often the case that the player in the 23 jersey is among the most versatile in the squad, but it also largely depends on the make-up of the 15/23 elsewhere. Some coaches go against it (e.g. SA's 6-2 split) but a lot of others don't.

id argue SA are actually the most significant example of utilising a very versatile player in the 23 shirt - steyn was covering 10-15 which allowed them an extra forward sub. would steyn have started against most other squad members if there were an injury? probably not, but he was worth having on the bench. different situation i know, but still

TRC10

theVersatile wrote: »

I'm not having any of this Shane Daly slander. Laughable stuff from some.

Balacoune vs Daly and Farrell v Hume are the new ROG v Sexton.

And then not a word mentioned about poor Tom Daly either. Connacht boards members clearly need to raise their provincial bashing game.

I'm a fan of neither province and I think Baloucoune is miles better than Daly.

I don't think there's a lot between Farrell and Hume, but seen as Hume will complement McCloskey far better and is 5 years younger than Farrell I think Hume is a much better choice to play 13.

sprucemoose

DonVito wrote: »

The bottom line, Daly isn't gonna come on and provide an attacking impact that will change the game.

he actually would be very capable of that if it were at 15

TRC10 wrote: »

Englands 2 backs on the bench at the WC were Slade and Joseph, no natural cover at 15. But those 2 were the best impact players

SA had no recognised 10 on the bench. Steyn was their best impact player, he was covering 10 in case of emergency.

My point is, you shouldn't pick a less impactful player because he covers more positions. Its a 23 man game. Pick the bench that offers the most impact and if you get injuries you get injuries. You don't need a player to cover 13, wing and 15 when you have Larmour on the pitch

........those are too terrible examples in your argument. joseph was the 15 cover as watson would have moved there from the wing, slade is/was used as 15 cover a bit too, its been a while but im sure hes played there for exeter before.

as for SA, steyn was literally picked for his versatility which allowed them to only carry 2 backs subs. i wouldnt say he would be offer a huge amount of 'impact' as you put it (apart from his boot in fairness)

TRC10 wrote: »

I don't think there's a lot between Farrell and Hume, but seen as Hume will complement McCloskey far better and is 5 years younger than Farrell I think Hume is a much better choice to play 13.

to be honest, the best combination would have been hume and farrell

TRC10

sprucemoose wrote: »

he actually would be very capable of that if it were at 15

........those are too terrible examples in your argument. joseph was the 15 cover as watson would have moved there from the wing, slade is/was used as 15 cover a bit too, its been a while but im sure hes played there for exeter before.

as for SA, steyn was literally picked for his versatility which allowed them to only carry 2 backs subs. i wouldnt say he would be offer a huge amount of 'impact' as you put it (apart from his boot in fairness)

That's just my point. You don't need 15 cover on the bench when you have Larmour in the starting team.

Steyn was probably a poor example as they went 6/2, but the England example was literally the perfect example

[Deleted User]

Would have liked to have Balacoune in there but Coombes not starting is the real disappointment.

aloooof

TRC10 wrote: »

Englands 2 backs on the bench at the WC were Slade and Joseph, no natural cover at 15. But those 2 were the best impact players

I'd disagree with this; they had Daly playing 15 and Watson on the pitch. That was their 15 cover. It's akin to when they start Farrell and Ford at 10 and 12 and don't pick a fly-half on the bench. It doesn't mean they don't have cover for 10.

The larger point being that selections are often made with the whole make-up of the 23 in mind (amongst a myriad of other things, as my post with the tweet about Rassie alludes to) . In this case, it's likely made with an eye towards next week as well.

Imo, it can be reductive to compare 2 players and say "Balacoune should have been on the bench ahead of Daly", for example.