Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

1145914601462146414651512

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 314 ✭✭Billy_the_Kid
    Master


    Crowley shafted by playing in every match...ffs. I can see why Irish rugby supporters are getting a bad name. Crying cause they lost a match or their favourite player doesnt get to start every match.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,975 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    No. Again. Don't drop McCarthy because he had a bad game. Drop him because he had a bad game AND an absolutely braindead yellow card.

    Again no, rotating 10s isn't a bad idea. But this isn't rotating 10s. This is starting Crowley in a dead rubber game after Prendergast started 4 games. I don't think game time last year was rotated between Casey and jgp because Casey started against Italy.

    I don't think starting Crowley in this game has huge benefits. You appear to be punishing Prendergast for a bad game, or rewarding Crowley for maybe leaving.

    I think Crowley should have started more games in the six nations. I think he should have got more time at 10. Rotating your tens and giving both time is a good idea. I think Crowley should have started against France based on his defence.

    I just don't understand the benefit now of starting him. The six nations is lost. Starting Crowley looks like a reaction to the rumours of him leaving. I don't think there is a benefit for Crowley or Prendergast.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,865 ✭✭✭✭phog


    There is space for some middle ground here, so far, Crowley got 20 mins at outhalf, as the outhalf who helped Ireland to a 6Ns championship win last year most fans would say he deserved better.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,975 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    He hasn't really had a chance to win back the 10 jersey. He played badly against NZ and got dropped. Has had 20 minutes at 10 in this six nations (and was the 10 of that round according to a few pundits) yet hasn't got a game at 10 since.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,410 ✭✭✭almostover


    I haven't contributed much on the Prendergast vs. Crowley debate but this is my 2 cents.

    The selection so far has been completely backwards. And IMO this weekend Prendergast should have been started again, given what's gone before and given, we are most likely to finish 3rd now even if we hammer Italy.

    Everyone needs to remember that Jack Crowley is only 25, not 35. Yes we need 2 quality OH's for RWC 2027, but we have 1 in Crowley, and the other has 2 full seasons to develop. What has been done is a rushed and botched effort to propel Prendergast into the 10 jersey when he's only in his first full senior season. This all seems to be a knee-jerk reaction by the management team to the fact that in the NZ game in RWC 2023 they hadn't blooded Jack Crowley and therefore had to leave a crippled Johnny Sexton on the pitch for the final 10 mins with the game in the melting pot.

    What should have been done is start Crowley for the England and Scotland games and have Prendergast come in after 60mins. All going well, the team and Crowley sets up the win both times and Prendergast gets the experience of guiding the ship home. Then we had a rest week, perfect chance to change tack and give Prendergast the start vs. a sub-par Welsh side. You still have Crowley on the bench as cover if it's going awry, but Sam get's the experience of leading the back-line in an away 6N fixture. Then another rest week, switch back to Jack for the big championship game vs. France. Again, Sam is there to steer the ship home and gain more vital experience. If we win, go for the same selection in the GS game against Italy. If we lose to France, give Prendergast the 10 shirt in another away game. That would have been the ideal approach. If Crowley played well in that selection, he goes on the Lions tour. Also, you get the added benefit of approx. 160 mins of 6N test rugby for Prendergast to take back to Leinster where he will also be starting no.10 for their CC and URC title challenges. And Prendergast would then get the starting 10 shirt in the summer tour.

    Now what we have is a complete mess. A guy in his first season has shown he capable at this level and some lovely play but has had some glaring weaknesses exposed on the biggest stage including an embarrassing intercept in the GS crunch game. And a guy who guided his club to a URC title and his country to a 6N title in the last 2 seasons has been relegated to cameo appearances off the bench, most of which are not in his favoured position. Crowley also now has zero chance of going on the Lions tour. And because we at Munster are in a sorry state he also won't see much top level action to put himself in the frame for the Lions over the coming weeks. We will almost certainly lose to La Rochelle and will struggle to make the URC playoffs. None of which is on Jack Crowley, the overall squad just isn't good enough.

    So now we face an issue where 1 of the no.10s is sitting on a 2-year contract offer from the IRFU and contemplating a big contract from an English club. And the player we have blooded has been benched after his first bad performance. What a complete and utter mess.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29 shimmieandshake


    McCarthy deserves to be dropped. That yellow wasn't an aberration, something like that had been brewing for a while. He'll come back stronger for it.

    Equally, Ryan is class and deserves a chance to re-assert himself. If it were me, I'd have been tempted to drop McCarthy from the 23 and include Baird, who was excellent against Wales.

    And for 10, I think it's about Crowley deserving a start as much as it is about Prendergast being dropped.

    I'm baffled that people think Prendergast's confidence will be wrecked by a benching. He's no shrinking violet. He actually seems exactly the kind of guy who will understand why he's been dropped, will work on his game, and come back stronger for it.

    Good selection.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,515 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Indeed I don't remember too many of the posters insinuating it would be a slight on his character to leave doing the same to Sexton, indeed I remember an awful lot of digs and whinging about Ireland and the IRFU back then


    I can’t argue against what may or may not have been said by unnamed posters 12 years ago, but would point out that at that time players were not giving up their Ireland career by moving abroad. As soon as Sexton was told he would no longer be eligible, he came home. You can tell me how any of that is relevant because I haven’t a clue nor have I any clue why you brought it up.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,667 ✭✭✭Downlinz


    He was given a 3 year central contract just a few weeks ago. There's no sense threatening to drop a player or doing it for a token game when even the dogs on the street know a centrally contracted player will be persisted with regardless of how many silly penalties he gives away.

    Ideally we shouldn't be handing out big central deals to players who are still works in progress with significant issues to improve on.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,956 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    image.png

    Team as expected, bar McCarthy on the bench. Disappointing to see POM and Aki named. Pointless.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭TomsOnTheRoof


    1.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭TomsOnTheRoof




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 714 ✭✭✭MangleBadger


    Has everybody forgotten the Argentina game? Crowley was not dropped after a poor game against NZ. He started the following week.

    If anybody was dropped it was Frawley.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,367 ✭✭✭SaoPaulo41


    Strong Italian team, with best centre partnership in the championship . Very strong front and back row. Won't be easy at all.

    ITALY: Tommaso Allan; Ange Capuozzo, Juan Ignacio Brex (capt), Tommaso Menoncello, Monty Ioane; Paolo Garbisi, Martin Page-Relo, Danilo Fischetti, Gianmarco Lucchesi; Dino Lamb, Fedrico Ruzza; Sebastian Negri, Manuel Zuliani, Lorenze Cannone.

    Replacements: Giacomo Nicotera, Mirco Spagnolo, Giosue Zilocchi, Niccolo Cannone, Michele Lamaro, Ross Vintcent, Stephen Varney, Leonado Marin.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,740 ✭✭✭typhoony


    I don't remember him having a particularly poor game. We shipped a lot of penalties I think he went off when we were 13-12 up, then new zealand scored a soft try from a break from Jordie Barrret



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,637 ✭✭✭Packrat


    This. Exactly. It's what I was trying (less eloquently) to say this morning.

    They've made a total balls of it from a management pov.

    Unfortunately, all the Sam fans will hear is "Sam bad" and then stuck their fingers in their ears whilst muttering about ceilings...

    “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command”



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,637 ✭✭✭Packrat


    While I'm at it, giving "Big Joe" any sort of jersey this week is a travesty, but unavoidable without huge loss of face for whatever fanboi decided to give him a central contract.

    His Sunday stroll around the park last week whilst his team were getting dismembered wasn't out of character, just the latest in a string of similar performances.

    That's before we even get to the yellow card which also wasn't an aberration or any sort of surprise either.

    “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command”



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,404 ✭✭✭P.Walnuts


    How do you expect to be taken seriously when you think " fanboys" are handing out central contracts?

    Honestly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29 shimmieandshake


    I agree that the contract was too much, too soon, but I think dropping him will still have an impact. They don't just play for contracts, they play for joy/pride/status amongst their teammates. Being benched should be enough to make him more keenly address the discipline issue.



  • Administrators Posts: 55,046 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    They had pretty much 3 options for how to approach the 10 situation this 6N:

    1. Back the Prendergast horse
    2. Back the Crowley horse
    3. Switch them out based on need and performance week-to-week.

    Quite clearly, they went for option 1. Prendergast was backed, even after some iffy performances. I agreed with this approach, I think the idea that you can somehow share the position and grow two players simultaneously is nice and all but very difficult to do in reality.

    However they have now decided, after 4 games, to switch it around. There is no chance whatsoever this is pre-meditated, the idea that they agreed in advance that Crowley would get the last game is obvious nonsense.

    It is absolutely reactionary, the only real discussion is what triggered this reaction. If the trigger is the form of Prendergast then I am concerned, because it would imply that our coaching team are slow learners. If they were worried about protecting Prendergast or worried about his abilities then the time to drop him was after Wales.

    If the trigger for the change was something else, say for example an indirect nudge to Crowley that this is what he'd be giving up if he takes the cash, that also concerns me.

    Ireland could put on an exhibition this weekend, Crowley could lead us to a big win. But what will Crowley gain from that? It's pretty much a dead rubber game against the worst team in the competition, the amount of influence this game can have in moving the needle on the situation at 10 is very minimal.

    In fact, I would have said that given they've backed him for the first 4 games, that it would have been far more valuable to give Prendergast the opportunity against Italy to pick himself off the floor after France.

    Instead what it feels like is they're giving Crowley a token run out in a dead rubber to try keep him happy. Suddenly he can start now that Ireland are out of contention.

    The whole thing feels a bit messy now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 714 ✭✭✭MangleBadger


    Agree mostly with all of this. It's almost a no win situation.

    If Jack has a fantastic game it will for some support prove the point that Jack should be the starting 10. But that can be caveated with it is only Italy.

    This was probably also the game with the best chance for Sam to show his talents with what you hope is a dominant pack.

    If he has a shocker than it reinforces the choice to select Sam. But who wants Jack to have a shocker?

    Best case scenario is Jack has a great game. Sam is given 30 minutes and also has a fantastic game.

    I'm feeling a bit flat about this game. Even though Jack is starting I don't really think anybody is happy with how we got here.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,956 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    There's no objective evaluation that points to Prendergast being so poor as to warrant dropping. He functioned well as a cog in an underperforming attack. He wasn't at fault for scores against, despite what certain posters might claim.

    A knee jerk switch to Crowley to me shows that the management are focusing on the wrong issues. Continuing with the centres who haven't delivered indicates that. If we're talking about players who deserved to be dropped, Aki would be one of the first names in the list. Try aside, he was very poor against England, and hasn't done much of anything since. To not give McCloskey, Osborne, or Frawley any opportunities in the centres has been a massive missed opportunity.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,637 ✭✭✭Packrat


    Well yes, ordinarily it would be a pretty bombastic thing to say, but the alternative is that they looked at his previous form and performances and decided that he was worth one.

    That would actually be worse if true because it means that they haven't been paying attention for over 12 months.

    No, I'm afraid Occams razor applies here, and the simplest answer is that the deciders are blinded by size/potential over mettle, brains and workrate.

    “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command”



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,388 ✭✭✭JanuarySnowstor


    Quite a few would disagree that Prendegast should have been handed all games in the 6N. Crowley is a country mile the better player!! Unbelievable the way some on here back Prendegast time and time again when he played poorly throughout the 6Nations. Crowley not only would have played better he would have walked into the Lions team!!

    Folks it hard not to see a clear anti bias towards Crowley. Maybe it's a Munster thing not sure, either way Cork and Limerick folk won't listen to it



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 293 ✭✭redmca2


    Speaking of the OH debate, have either much chance of making the Lions squad?

    Doubtful in my opinion, barring injuries to other candidates.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 292 ✭✭CalmaftertheGav


    Sam Prendergast- definetly makes it

    Jack Crowley - Probably not



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭TomsOnTheRoof


    Our attacking stats are pretty awful going by the Provincial State of Mind podcast. Only 3% of our offloads lead to a try or a line break. That's the worst of any team in the tournament. Wales are the next worst and they are sitting on 13% leading to a try or linebreak. We have the second lowest numbers for tackle evasion (carriers getting around a tackler) with 18% and second lowest again for line breaks leading to a score with 30% (only Wales are worse).

    We also have the second lowest completion rate for lineouts despite throwing 15% more to the front than any other team (61% to the front overall). Our scrum too has the second lowest completion rate and we have the highest number of scrums lost by a penalty (8%) and the lowest number of scrums won resulting in a penalty for us (also 8%).

    I don't know about anyone else but to me we're starting to look like a poorly coached team. It's been widely acknowledged that we have been moving more towards an off the ball style which may explain our poor attacking stats but you'd have to question the rationale of any such move considering how poor our set piece is. Between this and the selection fiasco you'd really have to question what the management team are at.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,865 ✭✭✭✭phog


    I was just thinking had we any player that we could consider to be close to winning Player of the Tournament. No one has really stood out and maybe some of that is as mentioned above that we've moved to an off the ball type game but our discipline is gone to pot too. We just seem to be a bit below par that you'd expect from Ireland



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 285 ✭✭VayNiice


    Do you not realise the contradiction in what you're saying??



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,483 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    youre sort of both right and wrong in that though, its correct technically to say that players werent 'officially' giving up player for ireland if they moved abroad, as there has never been any sort of official policy around selection of overseas players. i would say by the time JS went to France it was somewhat of an unwritten rule (as it is now), but he was seen as seen as too important to the irish team to leave out. he was never 'told he would no longer be eligible' though, he just wanted out of racing according to his book - a player of his importance at the time would realistically have been allowed to keep playing wherever he wanted



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,410 ✭✭✭almostover


    Gibson-Park was in the running after the first 3 games, if he has a stormer vs. Italy he'll be back in the mix. Doris has been very good in all games without being in player to the tournament territory. After that it's slim pickings.



Advertisement