Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

This is what I'd do too (Crowley start, Prendergast on the bench).

Murray Kinsella said Tadhg Beirne called the lineouts. Amongst the reasons he put down for our poor line outs of late is the changing between callers - mentioned how Ryan called in SA, but Beirne called v NZ.

He discussed on a podcast earlier this season (during Munster's tour to SA) that he felt Beirne was struggling calling the lineouts slightly for Munster too, and felt he might have a bit too much on his shoulders.

Of course it does - you won’t entertain any suggestion he had a poor game.

Why was he taken off after 57 mins so with the game in the balance if he was playing well and doing what was expected of him?

Joe McCarthy wouldn’t do anything like that 😒

While I wouldn’t play Frawley myself, if that was Farrell’s plan then he should back himself and stick with it. We shouldn’t put a lot of time and effort into a player only to junk that on the basis of 20 minutes, as bad as they were.

Crowley might even use it as a spur to up his own game.

We just disagree, FTD. And I’m just not a fan of the “appeal to authority” argument.

But yet again, that’s being met with accusations of “utter defensiveness”… Like, I literally remember having an argument with you when you defended Porter’s disciple despite him conceding 6 penalties in a game. I didn’t accuse you over utter defensiveness… I just thought you were wrong

I agree entirely it’s tiresome. In an effort to movethe conversation along, here’s 6 things I think were way bigger issues:

• Missed tackles
• Handling errors
• Lineout
• Breakdown
• Penalty count
• Scrum 

I’m curious if you have any sources for detailed stats? ESPN doesn’t seem to be updating things this season and IrishRugby.ie hasn’t updated.

There’s a massive surprise - you agree with Aloof in the defence of Munster players.

It’s basic English comprehension ffs: the whole topic he’s discussing is the performance of the two 10s.

He starts off (when discussing their poor performances) by offering some mitigation (saying game management is not just down to THEM), and then, crucially, says: BUT, and goes on to point out a negative about our ability to go through the phases.

It’s absolutely clear he’s talking about the out halves here and his evaluation of their performances.

I would have suggested a pre-planned substitution to give Frawley time at 10. Crowley didn’t have a poor game and I’ll die on that hill. Also, If you think Farrell is going to throw his two young outhalfs under the bus then you don’t think very highly of him. ‘We’ meant team, not one position.

It’s, at a minimum, ambiguous, imo. (You now have 3 people interpreting it differently to you).

Here’s the larger point. It’s an appeal to authority; Farrell said he was poor, therefore it must be true.

Even if we grant you that this is what Farrell meant, I think he’s wrong. You can’t expect game management from the 10’s when the entire team is struggling to get it beyond a couple of phases.

He’s not throwing them under the bus. They’re professionals, both of whom had poor outings, he’s not going to mollycoddle them either.
Die on all the hills you want - maybe start suggesting some of the things he supposedly did well in the game first though?

I think he objectively had a poor game, and plenty of others on this thread thought likewise.