The 2 games on the first weekend on Friday and saturday night..
Will a squad of around 45 be needed?
Not enough turn around time for someone to bench Friday and bench again Saturday.
Must need a min of 4 players for each front row position
6 for second row
8 for 2nd row.
4 scrum halves/ outhalves etc etc..
Or is it a case of a smaller squad initially and then rounding up a few players for the A match the week of the game..
I'm glad we've decided that Doris is no longer a fraud. Only took three years of excellence and motm awards against New Zealand to do so.
I'll repeat this to you again since you seem to have trouble reading.
Why would anyone bother continue to read a post that started with that as an opening line.
It goes into planning in-as-much-as it gives Farrell slightly more leeway picking a centre at 23, where you can't really cover all possibilities so any extra flexibility is useful. (And likely goes hand-in-hand with Carbery at 22).
The gas thing is, I didn't even suggest that Ringrose should be dropped. I might just go straight to responding with meme's in the future.
Ringrose's ability to cover wing is like Healy's ability to cover tighthead or Carbery at full-back; nice to know it's there in an emergency but should never factor into national team planning. Farrell is absolutely clear that his first-choice pairing is Henshaw-Ringrose so probably not worth the row tbh.
He's already given solid reasons for each if his suggestions, with examples. You may not agree with him but there's no need to be a prick about it.
Using your best players for impact and picking a team to get your best players on the pitch are both valid strategies; neither is an insult, 'shïtting on' a player not an act of lunacy.
Bundee Aki isn't the ''latest flavour of the month''. He's one of Ireland's best, most reliable performers over the last 5 years.
And whether you agree or not, a strong argument can be made that Aki/Henshaw is Ireland's best centre pairing. I find the idea that Henshaw/Ringrose is unequivocally Ireland's de facto centre pairing and that's not allowed to be questioned a bit odd, despite the fact that all of Ireland's big wins since 2017 have had Aki at 12. (England 2018, NZ 2018, England 2021, NZ 2021, NZ 2022 x2)
But you'll probably interpret that as me sh*tting on Ringrose.
I said as much in the Munster thread, but I'm not sure there's another player in Irish rugby I'd want getting the ball from 5m out. He's a brilliant offloader as well as his carrying, and a really good jackal threat, so I'd love to see him getting an opportunity in the AI's.
This nonsense about how Garry Ringrose should be dropped has been happening for years when there has been little to suggest that it should happen. First it was McCloskey, then it was Aki, move Henshaw to 13 and now move Ringrose to the wing to play James Hume. It's been a consistent pattern since 2018 when Munster fans clamoured for Farrell to play 13 and it stops during the international windows when Ringrose plays well, but holy sh*t the first sign of a rocky performance and the knives are out again. Or he plays well, things go quiet for a while and the conversation starts again as we approach the next international window.
That's a pattern, and it's a pattern of pure disrespect to a top quality international who has been out injured enough times for others to put up their hands, yet when he comes back into the fold he shows just how good he is.
When a group of fans consistently look for a player to be dropped for no reason whatsoever, then yes I would class that as completely sh*tting on that player. You disagree. That's whatever. Don't tell me I'm over-reacting when I have plenty of reason to believe this as we saw the same nonsense about Johnny Sexton for years. We saw this nonsense with Rob Kearney for years. A large portion of posters wanted the IRFU to open the floodgates of loads of players leaving the provinces just because they wanted Kearney dropped. That is what's happening now with Ringrose and just wait and see for the knives to come out if he misplaces a pass by half a millimetre in the November series. It's so predictable and it's true to form for a lot of so-called 'fans' here. They deserve nothing.
It's the same pattern over, and over, and over again. Not only that, but anytime it's pointed out there's always someone to say it's 'an over-reaction'. Funny how you have decided to take on this mantle now while pretending to play devil's advocate.
FWIW I heard Andrew Dunne suggest this a few years ago, when Henshaw, Aki and Ringrose were all fit and in great form. Very much a "get your best players on the field, figure it out later" kind of vibe.
Worth also noting that under Farrell, wingers spend a lot of time infield, in a first or second receiver role, with duties to pass and distribute. So it's not exactly preposterous to consider Ringrose as a wing option IF all options at centre are fit and in form.
Coombes is surely banging on the door for a place in the 23 now? We have very few players with his raw power. Reminds me of Ferris
There's your bad faith again.
You claimed certain players are "completely sh*t on". I'm merely asking you to point to the posts where that happened. (If you think that's "bad faith", I'm not sure you understand what "bad faith" means).
... it's outright disrespect. You can dress it up whatever way you want but you and I have had this conversation more than once and everytime you try to gaslight me on it.
I said something as mild as suggesting Ringrose as a wing option giving us greater flexibility around the 23 jersey, and admitted it was:
That's in the context of:
From there, you've come back with "completely sh*tting on players", "outright disrespect", "bad faith" and "gaslighting".
So with the greatest of respect, I think I'll stick to my conclusion of it being a massive overreaction.
When a conversation about dropping/moving a player to accommodate another flavour of the month consistently happens, it's outright disrespect. You can dress it up whatever way you want but you and I have had this conversation more than once and everytime you try to gaslight me on it. So with the greatest of respect, either debate properly or don't debate at all.
What's wrong with trying out a new combination for the sake of it? We know the quality of Henshaw and Ringrose, might be good to see how Hume, Frawley, or even someone like Osbourne do in an otherwise full strength team.
Can you point me to a post over the last few pages where anyone has "completely sh*t on" Ringrose?
Jesus calm yourself. Its not outrageous to claim Henshaw is a better 13 than Ringrose. As for the rest of your post...yeah maybe take a break
When this conversation about dropping/moving Ringrose happens nearly every international window since 2018, it goes from being 'inconsequential' to being completely disrespectful. I stand by that.
Don't tell me this is anything else. It's been going on for far too long when there is nothing to show for it other than an odd dislike for the man.
You literally said I was over-reacting, so don't get personal with me if you don't want it to be dished back at you.
This conversation about dropping/moving Ringrose has been happening for years. Every time someone else pops up onto the scene, Ringrose has to make way.
Don't tell me I'm over-reacting when I'm constantly making this same point at every international window. How is it an over-reaction when this is not the first time this conversation has been had?
It's not gaslighting. Your posts are a super intense reaction to what is, at the end of the day, a forum where people discuss their (let's be honest - inconsequential) thoughts and ideas about a sport they enjoy. Nobody is ******** on Ringrose. It's because we have such a pool of talent at centre that people are talking about different ways of getting exciting players on the field. Relax - as I said, it's inconsequential.... it's just chat.
Could we go easy on the personal stuff there, chief, and just stick to the rugby.
true too. i suppose having a relatively versatile backline means whatever combination of bench/starters should cover most bases
id be more concerned about the lack of a standout back up at 15. lowry and o brien are fairly decent but i cant see either being in the rwc squad to be honest. id like to see carbery and conway getting some gametime there even if they arent playing there for munster. both are likely to be in the squad and both have been pretty good there in the past
I can see that logic, and it’d still leave you space for a centre at 23 in case of an injury there.
It's not a massive over-reaction. Everytime we get close to international windows and talking about potential, Ringrose has to make way either for the latest flavour of the month or people just outright lie about perceived 'average form' from him to make some weird excuse around why he should be dropped.
You could go all the way back to 2018, when so many here were saying Chris f*cking Farrell should have the 13 jersey because he played well in one game while Ringrose was out injured and Ringrose came back into the side against Scotland and put all of those nay-sayers back in their box. Ever since then there has been a weird idea that Ringrose isn't good enough and that Aki/McCloskey/Hume/whoever would be a better option alongside Henshaw when there is zero evidence to back up the idea that there is a better pairing than the Henshaw/Ringrose tandem.
You can gaslight me all you want (like you tend to do) by saying I'm over-reacting or pretending that these conversations never happen here, but they do. Moving Ringrose out to the wing to accommodate someone else has been suggested more than once now.
agreed, although im not against trying hume out against strong opposition either, ideally from the bench imo
I’m not saying start him there, but it opens the door for 12. Henshaw 13. Ringrose and 23. Aki.
We know Farrell seems comfortable with a centre in the 23 jersey.
Right, and Ringrose just blew the lights out on the wing for Leinster, it's not unreasonable to consider whether he might show up on the wing for Ireland if circumstances force Farrel's hand for whatever reason.
You're not even thinking outside of the box though, you're making absolute rubbish suggestions
Why should one of POM or VDF be dropped to accommodate Beirne in the back row? What's the actual purpose of it? Only a mad man would drop one of the best players in World Rugby this year for the sake of playing somebody else. It's sheer lunacy and it seems you're suggesting it for no other reason other than the pre-conceived notion that we have to do something outside the box.
Your excuse for Cooney coming back into the side was that he has perhaps 'matured' a bit in the last two years. He's 32. If he was of any use to the coaching ticket he'd be one of the leaders right now but, he's not. And those petulant remarks he made as a 30 year old suggest that there is a bigger attitude problem at play here. Good riddance.
Now the entire second/back row needs a shake up. Why? Also, why can't Beirne be the one to come off the bench and make an impact? Why should it be the best player we have had in the last 12 months to play the last 20 minutes?
There's a bang of that video of the bloke in Dublin who claimed he was a big Pats fan talking about 'keeping the good men on the bench and then bam, Bob's your uncle, Mary's your aunty', from that suggestion. It isn't backed up by anything and is purely kite-flying.
Nobody has “completely sh*t on” anybody here. That’s a massive overreaction.
It's mad that every single year this rubbish conversation around Garry Ringrose takes place despite the fact he is the best in his position.
It's genuinely mad. It was suggested he would be dropped to move Henshaw to 13 and play Aki at 12, then McCloskey, and now all of a sudden Robbie Henshaw is best at 12 and James Hume should play at 13 instead and Ringrose should probably make way, again.
We don't deserve any of the talent we have at our disposal. There's always a handful of players that are completely sh*t on for no reason whatsoever.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/8a022abb175d445f2b5b8a1c545f3d3f.svg)
