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

Richie_Rich89

Neil3030 wrote: »

For me, it'd all depend on the rest of the selection. If you put Hume at 13, an experienced wing makes sense. If you have more experience at 13, you gain more from looking at a new winger. You want to blood as many players as you can into a team that plays as similarly as possible to the first team. It's a balancing act.

Or maybe playing a 13-14 combo that know each other from provincial rugby makes sense?

bilston

Neil3030 wrote: »

For me, it'd all depend on the rest of the selection. If you put Hume at 13, an experienced wing makes sense. If you have more experience at 13, you gain more from looking at a new winger. You want to blood as many players as you can into a team that plays as similarly as possible to the first team. It's a balancing act.

Fast forward 12 months and Baloucoune is more likely to be in the Irish 23 than James Hume as Ringrose, Henshaw and Aki will be hard to shift. Given Earls's age there is going to be a gap on the right wing sooner rather than later, so I'd say getting Baloucoune exposure is more important. But ideally the two of them will get a run on Saturday.

stephen_n

With Farrell gone, no matter who starts in the center it will be a first cap. Or certainly a first cap in the center if they start Daly there. That might influence the decision of wether Baloucoune starts or benches.

Neil3030

Isn't Addison available?

Neil3030

bilston wrote: »

Fast forward 12 months and Baloucoune is more likely to be in the Irish 23 than James Hume as Ringrose, Henshaw and Aki will be hard to shift. Given Earls's age there is going to be a gap on the right wing sooner rather than later, so I'd say getting Baloucoune exposure is more important. But ideally the two of them will get a run on Saturday.

Since Earls is aging in reverse, we have a good 14 or so years to replace him.

Former Former Former

Neil3030 wrote: »

Isn't Addison available?

Yeah, think he was suspended for Japan?

Will be interesting to see if he's viewed as a centre or a full back.

Neil3030

Stockdale, JGP, Joey, Stu, Addison, Baloucone, Deegan for me anyway.

bilston

Neil3030 wrote: »

Stockdale, JGP, Joey, Stu, Addison, Baloucone, Deegan for me anyway.

Is this a backline? I'm confused, but particularly thrown by Deegan's inclusion!

Neil3030

bilston wrote: »

Is this a backline? I'm confused, but particularly thrown by Deegan's inclusion!

Apologies. I conflate all these Leinster boys with preposterous Christian names.

Keenan.

stephen_n

Neil3030 wrote: »

Isn't Addison available?

Completely forgot about him.

Jump_In_Jack

My selection below but expecting that’s way too many changes to be close, Farrell will probably not make nearly as many changes.

Byrne, Heffernan, O’Toole,
Baird, Ryan,
Wycherley, Coombes, Boyle,
Gibson-Park, H. Byrne,
Stockdale, Daly, Addison, Baloucoune,
Keenan.

Herring, Dooley, Ryan, Moloney, Timoney, Blade, Carbery, Hume.

sprucemoose

TRC10 wrote: »

You just know Conway will start on the right wing...

This thread could be ugly this time on Thursday

explain why that is a problem?

Former Former Former

sprucemoose wrote: »

explain why that is a problem?

Because people would be unhappy if Baloucoune doesn't feature

sprucemoose

Former Former Former wrote: »

Because people would be unhappy if Baloucoune doesn't feature

theres another wing and a bench spot though

and up until his recent drop in form, conway was probably irelands best winger for the last few years

he wasnt great this season at all but he deserves another go

TRC10

sprucemoose wrote: »

explain why that is a problem?

Because Conway is 30 and has been off form since October 2020 and Baloucoune has been in great form, scored 3 tries in 7 starts for Ulster when Conway has scored 1 I think all season, is great in defense and in the air and is 23 with heaps of potential and these summer games are for blooding new players who will be part of the team at the World Cup and we're learning nothing by starting Conway in a one off summer test at home to the USA. It would be a huge opportunity missed if Baloucoune doesn't start. He'd be there on merit too. He's been electric for Ulster. His 2 finishes vs Leinster in February were world class.

TRC10

sprucemoose wrote: »

theres another wing and a bench spot though

and up until his recent drop in form, conway was probably irelands best winger for the last few years

he wasnt great this season at all but he deserves another go

What Conway deserves doesn't supersede what Ireland need.

I'm a huge Conway fan, always have been. He should have been starting at the World Cup as he was the best winger. But the reality is his form fell off a cliff and Baloucoune has been much better.

Let Conway play his way back to form for Munster. But in the meantime, Ireland have a world cup to plan for and this USA game is the perfect opportunity for Baloucoune to get a start.

sprucemoose

TRC10 wrote: »

What Conway deserves doesn't supersede what Ireland need.

stockdale and larmour got starts last week despite not being in great form, if they started then conway deserves a start

TRC10 wrote: »

But the reality is his form fell off a cliff and Baloucoune has been much better.

hyperbole. the reality is he got injured and probably came back much too early. he was average at best for a while and was getting back into good form towards the end of the season. not amazing form, but good enough for someone with the credit in the bank that he has to deserve another shot

TRC10 wrote: »

Let Conway play his way back to form for Munster. But in the meantime, Ireland have a world cup to plan for and this USA game is the perfect opportunity for Baloucoune to get a start.

then why single out conway in the post (i cant remember if it was yours originally or if it was another poster)? why not just say i hope RB gets to start next week rather than dragging down a player who has largely been fantastic in every opportunity hes been given?

Podge_irl

There is zero point in playing Conway against the USA, what he "deserves" is irrelevant.

aloooof

TRC10 wrote: »

What Conway deserves doesn't supersede what Ireland need.

And what Ireland need is ultimately up to Farrell. Maybe that'll be Conway.

In any case, I think Balacoune will start (and fwiw, would also prefer him to start). But getting annoyed about a single selection before the squad is even announced isn't really worth it, imo.

TRC10

sprucemoose wrote: »

stockdale and larmour got starts last week despite not being in great form, if they started then conway deserves a start

Because last week we were playing a far better team than the USA and Farrell clearly deliberately only selected already established players. Larmour has been in very good form, soring braces against the European champions. And Stockdale has been playing out of position at 15 for Ulster but is one of our most prolific try scorers ever.

sprucemoose wrote: »

hyperbole. the reality is he got injured and probably came back much too early. he was average at best for a while and was getting back into good form towards the end of the season. not amazing form, but good enough for someone with the credit in the bank that he has to deserve another shot

Again, he might deserve a shot, but Ireland would benefit far more from starting RB against the States.

sprucemoose wrote: »

then why single out conway in the post

Because it's either Conway or Baloucoune who'll be starting at 14 this week.

TRC10

aloooof wrote: »

And what Ireland need is ultimately up to Farrell.

Ok but isn't the whole point of the thread for everyone to have opinions and discuss them?

If the response is always "well ultimately everything is up to Farrell" what's the point in discussing anything?

sprucemoose

aloooof wrote: »

And what Ireland need is ultimately up to Farrell. Maybe that'll be Conway.

In any case, I think Balacoune will start (and fwiw, would also prefer him to start). But getting annoyed about a single selection before the squad is even announced isn't really worth it, imo.

nail on the head here

TRC10 wrote: »

And Stockdale has been playing out of position at 15 for Ulster but is one of our most prolific try scorers ever.

and conway is one of munsters top try scorers....... (arguably playing out of position too but at this stage not really)

TRC10 wrote: »

Again, he might deserve a shot, but Ireland would benefit far more from starting RB against the States.

that depends on what the pecking order actually is going forward

TRC10 wrote: »

Because it's either Conway or Baloucoune who'll be starting at 14 this week.

that wasnt my point, im saying why drag another player down rather than just say you want RB to start

Mimon

sprucemoose wrote: »

theres another wing and a bench spot though

and up until his recent drop in form, conway was probably irelands best winger for the last few years

he wasnt great this season at all but he deserves another go

Recipe for improving a squad - Pick on form and if a decision is in the balance pick the younger player.

aloooof

TRC10 wrote: »

Ok but isn't the whole point of the thread for everyone to have opinions and discuss them?

If the response is always "well ultimately everything is up to Farrell" what's the point in discussing anything?

Ah look, I just don't see much point in getting annoyed about a selection decision that hasn't even happened yet.

Particularly when Farrell, more than any of his predecessors, seems willing to give inexperienced and young lads a go.

salmocab

aloooof wrote: »

Ah look, I just don't see much point in getting annoyed about a selection decision that hasn't even happened yet.

Particularly when Farrell, more than any of his predecessors, seems willing to give inexperienced and young lads a go.

Before the last WC there was a rumour Aki wasn’t getting picked and we had someone jumping up and down claiming they weren’t going to watch the the matches. This nonsense keeps happening, people decide who should be in a team, talk it up for weeks to the point where they’ve basically decided it’s a sure thing, then when it doesn’t happen they are going on like shiny new toy has been dropped. Every year against Italy we get a list of who should play then when it’s only a couple of changes it’s outrage.

Richie_Rich89

I think I would go with:

1. Peter Dooley
2. Ronan Kelleher
3. Finlay Bealham
4. Quinn Roux/Jean Kleyn
5. James Ryan
6. Fineen Wycherley
7. Josh van der Flier
8. Caelan Doris
9. Jamison Gibson-Park
10. Joey Carbery
11. Jacob Stockdale
12. Stuart McCloskey
13. James Hume
14. Robert Baloucoune
15. Hugo Keenan

16. Rob Herring
17. Edward Byrne
18. Tom O'Toole
19. Ryan Baird
20. Gavin Coombes
21. Craig Casey
22. Harry Byrne
23. Tom Daly

Daly covering the centres. Wing covered by Hume or Gibson-Park switching there. And fullback covered by Carbery.

I think they should switch Ryan to loosehead lock and call in Kleyn or preferably Roux to play tighthead lock.

TRC10

sprucemoose wrote: »

nail on the head here

Forgive me if the "In Farrell we trust" mantra has yet to be instilled in me

sprucemoose wrote: »

that wasnt my point, im saying why drag another player down rather than just say you want RB to start

Dragging him down? By pointing out he's been off form, seriously?

errlloyd

I am almost certain I am being baited here.

But Roux has signed for Toulon, so should not be picked.

TRC10

salmocab wrote: »

Before the last WC there was a rumour Aki wasn’t getting picked and we had someone jumping up and down claiming they weren’t going to watch the the matches. This nonsense keeps happening, people decide who should be in a team, talk it up for weeks to the point where they’ve basically decided it’s a sure thing, then when it doesn’t happen they are going on like shiny new toy has been dropped. Every year against Italy we get a list of who should play then when it’s only a couple of changes it’s outrage.

Ah here, nobody is deciding who should be in the team or claiming they won't watch games, and I can't help but sense an heir of superiority in this post.

All I'm saying is, starting Conway over RB would be a huge missed opportunity given it's a one off summer test at home in a Lions year vs a T2 nation.

That's it, there's no outrage and I'll still be watching the game.

It's a rugby thread, it's for discussing these things.

sprucemoose

TRC10 wrote: »

Forgive me if the "In Farrell we trust" mantra has yet to be instilled in me

not really what was meant but okay

TRC10 wrote: »

Dragging him down? By pointing out he's been off form, seriously?

yet again, not the point i was making. your original post was 'You just know Conway will start on the right wing...This thread could be ugly this time on Thursday', my question (which ive explained already) was as to why you would bring conway into it rather than just stating you wanted RB to start