i think the other poster's idea of 'bias' is a bit much, especially given the importance of the game in question
however, i do think there is a perception of a growing trend in selection where the thought is that playing/being involved with one of the provinces matters more than (again, perceived) performances
Anc who exactly is not being picked on that bias basis
if nash is indeed available, then there is an argument that there is an element of this with osbourne is being picked ahead of him. same with osbourne starting the SA games over the summer at 15 when he had barely played there for leinster
could argue it with harry b being involved in squads when he was barely playing with leinster
Nash is injured.
Harry Byrne has 4 caps in 4 years. Who exactly has he been getting picked ahead of ?
Easterby says otherwise re Nash, no?
Rib injury according to the RTE website report today.
Well Ringrose would be available. Perhaps Hansen. James Ryan, Furlong if fit.
hence why i said 'if nash is indeed available' - i had heard that he was both available and unavailable from different sources so it seemed up in the air
harry byrne has so few caps because of his unfortunate injury record, he was somewhat consistently getting picked in ireland squads though despite being 3rd choice at best for leinster at the time. he was getting picked ahead of ross (2nd choice/starter due to sextons limited availability), carty (starter) and ben healy (2nd choice/ starter since carbery was generally injured). to be fair, crowley was in a similar position when first picked in the squad but he ended up as first choice munster 10 fairly quickly after that
Ireland highest missed tackle count for 6N at 91 v France at 61. That needs to be fixed, urgent.
I don’t think that is the case here. Osbourne can cover centres and full back. Ireland have gone 6-2 so need more cover. If it was a 5-3 split on the bench I would imagine Nash starts. No idea if injured or not but Nash was holding his rips after every tackle for 15 minutes before he was taken off for Munster last week. Thought it was bonkers he wasn’t taken off before half time watching it. It may also have been taken into consideration.
Ringrose is a big loss for this type of game,
We've handled Furlongs absence really well, heading towards 10 Test games without him.
I'd prefer Ryan at lock to start, big big Test for Sam
Not a fan of 6-2 we didn't do it v SA on summer tour
While I don't think anybody can argue against the bias the IRFU usually show to Leinster players, I think on this occasion it's not the case
Let's be kind and say Munster played like a junior schools team in both games against Leinster this season. Nash and Osborne started both games for their respective teams.
Put yourself in the shoes of the coach. If you were Simon Easterby watching those games, your first time in charge of a national team and there's a chance of a Grand Slam, who do you select? I think Easterby has it right
I suspect Nash is available now, but was not able to train fully. Osborne also has a better boot on him if that is a road they are looking to go down.
Anyway, specific French match chat to the match thread please.
Nash doesn't make anything happen for you at this level imo. Compare his influence on the game to Lowe for example. He's a solid, honest player but he's just outclassed by the 3 other wingers on the field if he starts against France. Osborne is a better overall rugby player, better boot, better under the high ball, correct call imo.
Strongly agree with this. Wouldn’t be surprised if Nash is soon over taken in Irish squads by the likes of Bolton and TOB. Kilgallen too if he can get an injury free run.
I'm not getting involved in the bias debate.
How Munster played against Leinster is irrelevant. It's the individual players you are looking at not the team performance.
The second half Osbourne may be better but the first half one was dreadful.
We need some more talent to come through on the wing for sure, we're very bare there. Lowe is still great but he's into his 30s and can't keep going for too much longer. Hansen I hope can get back to his pre-injury sort of level. JOB looked to have made the step up, he was benching in the RWC as far as I remember, think he came on and played really well against NZ, but again after some injuries he doesn't quite look the same player.
we haven’t produced a real quality winger since Earls and not an absolute flyer since probably Hickey. Genetically we seem to produce backrows in an amount that’s astonishing. (I’m probably forgetting a couple and there have been good wingers but when I try to think of them I can’t get further than Bowe)
We didn't produce him, but I do quite like the look of Bolton.
Balacoune is a big "what could have been" but its not going to happen now. It's a massive black spot in production.
All our speedy wingers get injured. Geoghan, Hickie, Fitzgerald, Bryne, Baloucoune, TOB. Cursed position in a way
Zebo
Actually yeah knew I’d missed some but point in general stands we just have an odd hole in our production.
Yeah it's slightly bizarre.
We've had a few guys who looked like they could become world beaters - Larmour and Stockdale being the ones that spring to mind most - but they can never seem to get to that real top level. Any guys with real pace always seem to be very incomplete players, e.g. Larmour again, Baloucoune.
The way Ire play now where the wingers comes in as a first receiver off 10 at times shows that the old school speedster of a Hickie,Simon G Tommy Bowe in his prime is no longer the top priority.
I think it was Catt that said pre world cup that its non negotiable that all players will be involved in all plays & it has to work for us
Baloucoune in particular suffered for playing with Ulster. They just didn't play the style that Catt liked.
Which I don't really mind, but it doesn't seem like we have found much of anyone to fit that mould behind Hansen and Lowe either.
Agree completely & therefore they are certs to start regardless of form...Hansen in the AI case in point.
A bit like the cover for 7, let's move our best 8 out of position if Vdf gets injured.
The emergence of back rows, I think, is an over concentration of playing the 'big fellas' at younger ages in club/schools rugby.
Young lads who haven't had their growth spurt until late into their teens are long since on the scrap heap. The rush to win trophies at u13 level seems to take precedence. All the big lads get game time while the smaller lads lose interest as their talents get overlooked.
In general I’d agree with your second paragraph not sure it creates top quality back rows though, I think some of it is down to simply we don’t get a pile of lads who are really tall beyond say 6.4 and v et athletic so physically they are built more for back row than second. It helps that backrow is 3 positions so there’s plenty of room for 4 backrows in underage squads which other positions won’t have.
