Did I miss an injury crisis for JDF and Keenan? If that's the concern, then JOB will have plenty of time to get to to speed with the position
Exactly. My point was only that players can get injured at any time, and it's a gamble to presume that the likes of Keenan and JVDF will be fit come the start of the RWC in September when there are like for like replacements who could be brought in to become familiar with the system and the other players
A 45 man squad with an extra out half, extra specialist 7 and extra specialist 15 who won't make the 33 unless they either perform spectacularly in camp, or there's an injury to the incumbent player
All of that is preferable to relying on a utility back or forward, or even worse, Frawley bring the reserve 10 if something happens to sexton and Byrne/Crowley
Meh, people take this all far too personally.
The squad that won the six nations is proven and quite settled at this point. We had tough games but won all of them fairly convincingly in the end. The continuity from that is quite significant and making changes would be difficult as it trades the certain for the slightly uncertain. There may be instances where those trade offs are seen as worth it but it's not really all that surprising a 42. Do I think it's the best 42 players available? No. Is it the best squad to create a winning environment for the Rugby World Cup? Andy Farrell thinks so.
I'm fairly convinced there are players in that 42 that are there more for the benefit of the 33 that will go to France than because they are likely to get there themselves but that's speculation on my part. I see nothing so contentious as to generate any kind of heated debate, but make no mistake I am taking notes for the next interpro build up thread. 👀
It's a squad, you don't have to take anyone out at the moment.
It's all about learning the system.
I’d have Kleyn comfortably ahead of Treadwell.
Treadwell has credit in the bank from NZ but I think Kleyn has been in significantly better form.
(None of which is a conspiracy theory).
Also worth noting that lots of players impressed in the knockouts.
Connacht won at Ravenhill and gave a decent account of themselves in Cape Town. Leinster disposed of Ulster, Leicester, Toulouse and the Sharks.
Only Ulster really failed to do anything of note and you could say that's reflected in the squad.
And really, an honest appraisal of the knockouts would have to include Munster shipping 50 points to the Sharks. If Andy Farrell was watching that, as he definitely was, a fair few lads would been set back.
Ah nothing like a good World Cup squad selection to get all the conspiracy theorists out.
The big question about those advocating for certain players’ inclusions is who do you take out, and what will the benefit be of including said player and what will be the benefit of removing another.
The only argument I’ve seen so far that I think is legitimate is Dave Kilcoyne. I believe Loughman should be in the squad ahead of him but, if I’m honest, that’s the only one.
Fair enough, misunderstanding then.
I still stand by my point about the better alternatives tho.
They were establishing themselves as better alternatives and then Farrell selected them.
Your argument doesn’t give any room for discussion prior to that.
But happy to leave it at that… (and fwiw, I’d disagree with some of your points with regards Kleyn and Haley).
The chat a few weeks ago was that the knockout stages could be an opportunity for players to play themselves in/out of the squad. Not that those knockout games are over the mantra seems to be you can't change a settled squad.
It almost seems like the wrong players impressed
I didn’t say your judgement, I said ours collectively but if you want to try and lower the debate to that level, to seek offense. Then it’s probably best that you do.
I note though that you choose to ignore the substantive points.
I think his point is exactly the opposite, that his judgement could be just as clouded.
The only opinion that a) really matters and b) isn't clouded by provincial bias is that of the Ireland coach, so it's not really reductive to use it as a measure of where a player really stands.
Anyone who hadn't featured in squads up to the Six Nations was always going to struggle to force their way in. There just isn't enough time left to really assess the international prospects of a guy you're seeing for the first time.
Better alternatives have come along.
Well, exactly. But you could’ve applied your argument to anyone calling for their selection prior to it
And also… my judgement is clouded but yours is crystal clear? I think I’ll leave it at that…
No it’s not the same, dropping out of a squad is not the same as breaking into it. Better alternatives have come along.
The simple fact is Kleyn and Haley are too limited as players. That’s why they aren’t included. In different ways in both instances. They both play very well for Munster in ways that suits Munster but doesn’t suit Ireland.
Kleyn has improved his ball handling but it’s still not anywhere near Irish standards and there are far better ball handling locks there. Thus why Moloney has been selected. The rest of his game will never make up for that it’s simply not that good. Haley is brilliant under the high ball and great at running it back. His kicking game isn’t good enough though compared to the other options. Also he is limited to one position which is a luxury option. Even before Keenan emerged, when we were really struggling, Haley wasn’t considered by Farrell and Catt as a live option.
We all see things as fans of our provinces but that inevitably clouds our judgements on players.
Do you think they haven’t watched Haley or Kleyn play in that time?
If you really think that’s the point I’m making, I don’t see much point in continuing this tbh.
But if you apply all of that to Joey Carbery, you could get an equally dismissive post circa January this year:
The facts are pretty plain. It’s not being reductive. Carbery has been continually selected under Farrell. There is a reason for that. Him being included in this squad shouldn’t be a surprise. It’s a continuation of 3 years of selection policy. Do you think they haven’t watched alternatives play in that time?
How is Haley undisputed 2nd choice? Is this your opinion?
Ah this is a horrible post. Genuinely awful.
I'd have been grand with Haley being called up and no one mentioned Prendergast at all.
Haley isn't hard done by. He's one of about 20 players who might have been in the mix but can't really complain about missing out. He's just not that good, so why are we discussing him at such great length?
The facts are pretty plain. It’s not being reductive. Kleyn and Haley got a look in under Joe. Neither have under Farrell. There is a reason for that. Them being left out for this squad shouldn’t be a surprise. It’s a continuation of 3 1/2 years of selection policy. Do you think they haven’t watched Haley or Kleyn play in that time?
The exact same argument had been made on here for starting 15 / 23 / squad tho, is my point.
I just think it’s too reductive. You’re right until you’re not. But it leaves no room for discussion prior to that.
Frawley and Osbourne ahead as 15s is puzzling.. come on.
Also, does Prendegast even have it athletically? Can i see him play some more games against full adults before we anoint him?
The only way I can make sense out of not including Haley is that they want to stress test the squad, and if for example Keenan broke his leg, they might actually bring Haley straight in at fullback.
Otherwise they really like O’Brien as a fullback and would be willing to use Crowley or Hansen instead if they needed.
I don’t think Frawley will make the 33 man squad, and I don’t think Osborne/Earls would be trusted.
you think he's the undisputed no.2, when A. clearly JOB is, and B. it's likely that Frawley and Osbourne are and will be ahead of him too. How many different ways can it be explained to you why Haley isn't included? Bizarre hill to die on.
Sam is behind
Sexton
Ross Byrne
Crowley
Harry Byrne
Frawley
Carty
Carbery
Billy Byrnes.......
Yet he is a legitimate squad inclusion
While Haley is the undisputed 2nd choice 15 in the country....
I knew it.
Prendergast has the potential to be a starting player for the national team, Haley doesn't.
So you're saying you'd be ok with Farrell bringing in Sam Prendergast, but not Mike Haley....
I disagree, because he did what he was asked his positioning was outstanding.
I also kinda agree with the fullback role. He was well capable of a break.
Luke...immense potential, but living off a few dance steps.
Rob organised the defence. I think he was overall an excellent player and finished his career very strongly.
Robert Kearney the perfect fullback?! I think his wingers would disagree. Fitzgerald said he liked Nacewa at fullback because he'd pass the ball to him often.
Kearney's tackling could be less than stellar sometimes too. Not Geordan Murphy bad but he was no Halfpenny or Felix Jones in this regard.
Its not the amount of kicking. Its the quality of the kicking thats a massive part of our game plan.
That's an interesting take, which I don't necessarily disagree with.
Handsome Rob was a perfect fullback, buy we have a gem now as well. Great kicking wingers especially 22 pressure release.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6081e4655739e0887aaf16222f88b015.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e7ef1946e92d84157dc464ad6c3ddaab.svg)
