Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Oh absolutely, it would take more than one or two good games to fully convince most of us - that kind of skepticism is normal. But I don't doubt that if he did perform to that standard, Munster fans would be delighted at the impact it would have on the national team. But take a look at, say, Joe McCarthy for example. This time last year, we would've been comparing him to Edwin Edogbo. Now, a year later, I don't think anyone but the most ardent and stubborn Munster supporter would have any issues with McCarthy being in the 23 and being rewarded with a CC (even in spite of his flaws, mainly his capacity to give away silly penalties). You'd be surprised how quickly fans would get on the bandwagon if the performances merited it.
Re: your second point, I'd say for each poster refusing to acknowledge Sam's good attributes, there's another poster who sweeps his deficiencies under the rug. You openly admit to his poor defence which is a fair admission but there's a lot of people who just go "look he's 22, he's 6'4, he has a big frame, he's grand". Obviously, there are other posters who overemphasise it slightly, and absolutely some posters are overly critical to the point of nonsense (I'd like to think the "Sam has no running game" thing has been put to bed at this stage). Like I said, the call to be honest and frank in assessing players goes to both sides.
In my opinion, I thought Sam could've done better to assert himself and play our shape when our forward were on top for the first half an hour of the game. After that, by all means, we were outplayed up front; but the first twenty five or so minutes we were getting plenty of front foot purchase from our forwards and then when we went wide we got swallowed up. Now, absolutely, some of that is just down to unbelievable French defence as much as us not taking our chances - I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't point that out. But there was a few moments of hesitancy from Sam in that first half which struck me (he almost walked into a French tackle at one stage while being unsure of which option to take - which didn't look great), especially given how cool he had been in some other games (e.g. the second quarter against England).
But overall I'd agree that acting like Sam was the sole issue is ridiculous. It's natural that he's going to come in for some flak as the outhalf, but it needs to be reasonable. I wouldn't be surprised if some posters were making a big deal out of SP's performance solely in response to some concentrated criticism on another player (i.e. Nash - but that's a whole other argument in itself); but two wrongs don't make a right.
(FFF and Foxy, I'll get to ye in a second. Going to split up these posts so I don't take up half a page with a 10,000 essay)
2 -
-
-
By all means, you may! I'd be a hypocrite to say otherwise.
Yeah, by all means, "world class standard" was probably a poor way of phrasing that and an overtly high bar to set. I had said world class due to the comparison with Doris, Sheahan, etc, but I suppose the better question would be to ask whether he was playing substantially better than Crowley (or even notably or slightly better than Crowley) at international level. I think that's a question where if you polled one hundred people, they could genuinely fall on one side of the argument or the other. There's a genuine argument which could be made that, in green, Crowley plays better at 10 than Sam does. Furthermore, I'd say that fans aren't exactly being delusional if they want one player to get a go when his competition is playing decently to a 6 or 7 out of 10 standard with some admitted "shocking moments". Absolutely I'd agree that neither have cemented "world class status" yet, but I understand the frustrations when one player (who had played well in green prior to the 6N) has seemingly very little opportunity to play in that position.
I think the discourse would be a lot quieter if Crowley had repeatedly replaced Prendergast with twenty or so minutes to go in any of the games this campaign, rather than being moved into 12 and 15. The lack of opportunity being allowed to play in that ten jersey is one of the main issues some pro-Crowley posters have, and I think I don't think many fans could argue that an opportunity for Crowley to play at outhalf would be unearned or unwarranted - or that it would be particularly unfair on Prendergast if Crowley had started against, say, Wales last week, or even against England the first week. At least if that did happen, we could have a more honest and informed head-to-head; but instead we're in this weird situation where the two can't really be compared like-for-like.
Re: the psychology argument; I sort of see where you are coming from - but like I said to the other poster above, I think most posters would look past it once a consistent trend of high quality performances was established. Joe McCarthy and Edwin Edogbo were in the same conversation a year ago; now Joe has a central contract and a regular place in the 23 and nobody could really argue that another player has been hard done by. Similarly, JGP in the last two or three years has been playing to such a standard that no Munster supporter would dream of saying "well, Casey and Murray should be there ahead of him".
No doubt having THE international ten play for your province is a nice bragging rights win, but if a player from another province asserts himself as a clear top dog, then I think you'd be surprised how quickly people would get on the bandwagon. Maybe I have too much faith in internet posters though.
I just think that high quality posting begets high quality discussion, and that if we can push three or four or five posters to engage, maybe six or seven or eight will join in. Perhaps that's a very idealised and utopian dream for Boards though :P
3 -
Last one for the night.
- See above my reply to FFF about how "world class" was admittedly the wrong phrase to use for the point I was making. To answer your question with sufficient depth would involve me watching back Crowley's games from last year, but off the top of my head, I feel he was more consistent overall but with lower highs and higher lows. The flashes weren't as flashy, but the baffling wasn't as bewildering. By all means if I did go back and re-watch those games I could change my mind, but I'd say the worst thing you could say about Crowley in any of those games was having one or two ropey kicks in them (a trend which, unfortunately, has remained constant with Crowley - a few bad goalkicks or a blockdown or kick on the full in most games; surrounded otherwise by coolness and confidence).
- Again, see above in my response to FFF that the proper standard would be "is one playing substantially or even slightly better than the other". I've always been of the opinion that he was subject to some unjust criticism from the New Zealand game, but he notably changed the game vs Australia and that was widely recognised. However, he hasn't seen enough game time in the ten jersey since to make a direct like-for-like comparison, which is where a lot of the frustration with some posters seems to stem. (I don't think club games are hugely relevant for this discussion, but like I said in para. 1, Crowley's general form prior to the 6N even this season has been "excellent ball in hand, good game control, but two or three dodgy kicks in more games than he'd like". That's an honest assessment, and I don't think anyone could accuse me of being particularly biased saying that)
- "When you're good enough you're old enough" would be my general approach. The Six Nations is an important tournament with actual prize money at stake, and besides Italy and Wales, I'd say your best players should play - use the Autumns and Summers for experimenting. There's nothing to be gained in my opinion by, say, playing Cian Prendergast ahead of POM against Scotland or playing Darragh Murray ahead of James Ryan against France. The better player plays. If those players give the indication that they might be better, then by all means let them show it off the bench and go from there. Applying that to SP, the whole crux of the debate is "is Prendergast good enough to start, repeatedly, ahead of Crowley, and keep him out of the ten jersey for entire games at a time" - and I don't think you could say either set of fans are being outrageous by falling on one side of the argument or another.
4 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
