TRC10 wrote: » I don't know how you figure he's never looked like he'll be good enough. He was absolutely on fire for Munster before he got his injury issues. To the point where there was genuine debate over who would start 10 in 2019. If Carbery gets a solid pre season and a good run of games early next season and can find form again, there's not a lot between him and the current Sexton IMO. In other words, I don't think he is a blatantly worse player. I also don't believe playing Carbery for the rest of the year would lead to worse results. Have you seen our fixture list? USAx2 Japan, Moana Pasifica and NZ.
TRC10 wrote: » I don't know how you figure he's never looked like he'll be good enough. He was absolutely on fire for Munster before he got his injury issues. To the point where there was genuine debate over who would start 10 in 2019.
Dave_The_Sheep wrote: » It wasn't a debate. It was a conversation about who might take Sexton's spot after he stops playing. As it happens that conversation has gone on far too long to be comfortable, because a) Sexton is still the best fly half in the country and b) none of the potentials have come close to declaring themselves the heir-in-waiting. We've two years left til 2023 and nobody has their hand up. From the provinces: a) Connacht - Jack Carty, has had a good few chances now and doesn't appear to have impressed the coaching staff. Hit and miss, probably has the highest potential to play well, but equally has a bad floor for making gaffes. The Finn Russell of Ireland fly halfs, and I don't want Finn Russell as my fly half if I expect to win consistently. Feel bad for him though. b) Leinster - Ross Byrne has had a few caps and has had a rough time of with some very rough starts against England in Twickenham and a start against a far superior France where he did OK, but I think it's fair to say he's a very good Heineken Cup player, but perhaps international games might be a step too far if we're to have serious aspirations. Nevertheless, probably the most solid option, bar maybe option d1) - Harry Byrne, far too green. He's not in the picture for 2023. It's just not happening. c) Munster -Joey Carbery. I'm not convinced at him at 10, never have been. He was anointed the heir apparent, but was a far better 15 at Leinster prior to his (totally voluntary) move to Munster. He's been scuppered by injury but even in his regular periods he's not excelled or even been solid. Today against Japan was really not his best game by a long shot. He's going to need a lot of gametime at 10 to get up to speed, and even then I'm not sure it'll work out. d) Ulster - Madigan, it's not happening. Love the man, but it's not a thing. - Billy Burns, a good player, but not without his faults. Like Ross B, he's solid without being spectacular. More flashy, better passer than Ross B, better runner, worse kicker generally (tactically solid though). It's between Ross B and Billy B for 2023 for me. I don't see Joey panning out, but I would be f*cking delighted to be proven wrong. If Sexton is still playing internationally in 2023, it's a bad indictment of Irish rugby. I wouldn't put it past him trying though, the mad bast*rd.
Dave_The_Sheep wrote: » If we had a world class 9, I think we could live with Billy or Ross B, but we don't.
Richie_Rich89 wrote: » Why? He's not some 16 year old who has never played professionally. And the World Cup is more than two years away.
Richie_Rich89 wrote: » Conor looks set to start for the Lions in South Africa. What more do you want?
AbusesToilets wrote: » The next best Flyhalf is stuck in exile for dubious reasons, while the team struggles. Carberry is wasted at 10.
aloooof wrote: » You might have a point with durability but I disagree entirely in terms of performance. When fit, Sexton is still producing at a much higher level than we’ve seen from any of replacements, imo.
Bazzo wrote: » At this stage I'm not sure if it matters if Sexton is the better player, if one of the other players will actually benefit from the game time then we need to be selecting them.
molloyjh wrote: » What does that mean though? Does that mean that of the games they play sees them improve? How could anyone possibly know if that game time would make them better or not? And what if it doesn't? Are we sacrificing short term results in vain? How is that good for anyone then? And how would it impact everyone else in thr set-up?
aloooof wrote: » Which is exactly what we did yesterday, to be fair.
Downlinz wrote: » I don't think you can judge a player's capability from a game here and there, someone needs to be backed for a run of games as the starting 10 and take it from there. It appears to be Carberry now and I hope that continues into the autumn and next 6 nations. I don't believe any of the options could be worse than a 36 year old Sexton and the kind of performances and durability he has been putting in lately so we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
shootermacg wrote: » You have a lot of moving parts that haven't played together before and haven't played for a while either. I think you have to:
TRC10 wrote: » I don't buy this. Every one of the starting XV had played 6 Nations rugby and have been in pretty much every training camp since Farrell took over (bar Carbery) and many have been involved with Ireland for 5 years or more. People here are talking like it was a Baa Baas or Lions team who met up a week ago. It wasn't. It was a team of experienced international rugby players with 30 or more caps (Kilcoyne, Ryan, O'Mahony, VDF, Carbery, Stockdale, Larmour), and few guys with less experience, but who have played 6 Nations rugby (Kelleher, Bealham, Dillane, Doris, JGP, Stu, Farrell, Keenan). Some of whom were potential Lions (Kelleher, Doris, Keenan) These guys have all been in camp and training/playing together for nearly 2 years. Many for much longer. England have 8 new caps in their starting XV today, and I guarantee they won't look as disjointed, unfamiliar and poor as we were yesterday.
molloyjh wrote: » It's easier to not look disjointed against weaker opposition though.
TRC10 wrote: » England have 8 new caps in their starting XV today, and I guarantee they won't look as disjointed, unfamiliar and poor as we were yesterday.
TRC10 wrote: » What tier one nations have they beaten in the last 6 years? .
TRC10 wrote: » Japan are good, but I think we might be hyping them up a bit too much. Aside from their World Cup on home soil, for which they had 200 days of preparation for. What tier one nations have they beaten in the last 6 years? If they're a tier 1 nation, they're the weakest tier 1 nation. They're exceptionally coached, well drilled and have a game plan that works for them. But apart from Matsushima, they don't have any players who get in another tier 1 nation's team.
theVersatile wrote: » South Africa, Ireland, and Scotland.
TRC10 wrote: » If they're a tier 1 nation, they're the weakest tier 1 nation. They're exceptionally coached, well drilled and have a game plan that works for them. But apart from Matsushima and maybe Himeno, they don't have any players who get in another tier 1 nation's team.
TRC10 wrote: » They haven't beaten SA in the last 6 years. They were comprehensively beat by them at home twice in 2019. and you ignored the part where I said I said "Aside from their Home World Cup for which they had 200 day's preparation for
molloyjh wrote: » You realise that we won, right? And in the last 6 years they have beaten us, Scotland, Italy and South Africa. They've also come within 3 points of Wales in Cardiff and drawn with France in Paris. They are a steadily improving side and deserve credit for that.
molloyjh wrote: » They beat SA in September 2015, which is less than 6 years ago.
TRC10 wrote: » I've got a feeling you know I meant the 6 years since RWC 2015.
shootermacg wrote: » Japan are a great team. The game against the Lions took a lot out of their legs in the second half and we capitalized on it.
