Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

Aside from everything else…

He's also seen Munster go to the Sharks with Crowley at ten, be absolutely rudderless and get hammered. 

Which was entirely because of the issues at the breakdown. It’s extremely harsh to see that as a negative on Crowley. 

He saw Munster go back to the same venue a few weeks later and be in deep trouble until Crowley was replaced by Healy and the game turned. 

You have a point here. But it was 22-10 when Crowley went off. A deficit sure, but not insurmountable. 

He saw Crowley play against Glasgow who had 14 men and no outhalf for 55 minutes - and saw Munster fail to score for 50 of those minutes. 

And then Crowley moved to 12. That versatility is part of the reason he’s a better fit for the 12 jersey, imo. 

He saw Crowley play well against the Leinster second string, I think that will cut less ice than you think.

“Play well”. Exactly. Yet you’re using it as a stick to beat him here.

“Play well”. Exactly. Yet you’re using it as a stick to beat him here.

NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT. NO, I'M NOT.

You were claiming that his performances in the run-in should mean he gets the 22 jersey. I'm just suggesting that they'll carry less weight with the coaches than you think. As has been widely discussed here, even the Leinster seconds didn't play to their own potential. I'm not using it as a stick to beat Crowley, I'm trying to frame these displays in how i think they might influence Irish selection decisions.

You're deliberately trying to frame me as attacking the Munster player. I'm not. I've gone out of my way to repeat that over and over.

You had a go at me, I explained my perspective in great detail, you could have just let it go or -gasp- admit you were wrong but you had a go at me again.

That's misreprenting what I said tho. That quote was included in a post which included this.

He plays flatter and offers a stronger running threat than Ross Byrne, he's more versatile enabling Farrell to get a centre into the 23 jersey which we know he likes, and he's brought real direction to Munster's attack.

So be no means was I suggesting we pick Crowley just for his performances in the biggest game.

And another dig at me.

Yeah, I got it wrong on Carbery. Pretty sure we all did. Show me the post where you said back in January that Carbery would be ditched and Ross Byrne would leapfrog everyone into second place.

I'm happy to debate selections. I'd be less inclined to do so if I'll be called out for not being interesting enough, or everything I say being dug up six months later if things change.

I presume he's talking about the 6 Nations, where Byrne was noticeably burnt on the outside.

But on this:

After Sexton Byrne is by far the best 10 defensively.

From what we've seen from Crowley, I honestly don't think there's much between them defensively, if at all. (With the pace element, there's a credible argument Crowley is better). But "by far" isn't accurate at all, imo.

We have a very small sample size of Crowley playing 10 to measure that on. Yes though, he certainly seems to be no shrinking violet in defense. If anything I would say he needs to temper his physicality at times.

Crowley is the future, I’ve been saying that since the under 20’s. However I don’t think the last 3-4 games is enough to say he’s the finished product yet.

Farrell hasn’t been shy of throwing players with a small sample size in tho, as TRC points out.

And I don’t think he needs to be the finished article in time for the RWC to justify selection in the 22 jersey.

He's been a very naughty boy according to some quarters. It's great stuff!

The man was clearly trolling. Couldn't be trusting him with the big Cork grin on his face.

Reading between the lines (and I appreciate this is the Ireland thread, so I'll spin it in that direction): There's a style of attacking play employed by both Ireland and Leinster, with a heavy emphasis on forward pods and how they move the point of attack and generate space for the backs. Tire out those forwards with a lot of mauls, and the evidence (from the Heino final) is that forward dynamism greatly reduces, and likewise did Leinster's back play. So even though different reasons have been highlighted for Leinster losing, you can tie them all together, i.e., the reduced passing and poor exits. They can all be traced back to the damage done by the LaR maul. Leinster did really well to stop the maul on most occasions without conceding penalties, but I think that won them battles at the expense of the war. The ensuing fatigue hurt them elsewhere a lot more.

Ireland may have different ways of coping with such an approach, for e.g., we'll definitely compete at lineout.

one of his big, momentum changing moments

Euphemism of the century! 😂

EDIT: also to add to that list - Murray's box kicking.

Tbf, I think Aloooof's post had an implicit caveat that Sexton was injured for Leinster in the final, and would therefore be injured in the hypothetical setting where a similar maul-heavy strategy were used against Ireland. In that case, we would have a lot more options than Leinster did.