Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

Not really a surprise either though really. We know what the score is at this stage.

As noted above, everyone is happy

Some are happy that a promising young player is getting a great opportunity and experience early in his career

Others are happy to have more reasons to hate Farrell

Win-win

To be extremely clear on this, I posted during the week that I would have called up a Welsh player - pretty much any Welsh player - sfahead of Osborne, even if only for the optics of it. Likewise I would much rather have seen someone else get called up ahead of Clarkson. But with these two and with Owen Farrell, the list of alternatives who are hard done by is massively conspicuous by its complete absence.

Is it a facile point? Maybe. But if you want to think this is a genuine opinion that isn’t driven by a long-festering dislike of Farrell, then you knock yourself out.

Should Irish rugby fans be taking any opportunity to dump all over our own (very successful) coach? “That’s fine but I think I’ll stick to my principles thanks”

this kind of on the fly calll ups and preference for one home squad is how the Lions has gone and it will continue if home coaches are selected. It’s probably the best model to exploit the fact that there are so many pros who could hold their own these days.

We've done something similar to that in the past. However I think we need to separate Georgia from the rest. If a Welsh team drops out of the URC I would like to see a Georgian team replace them. You could have 80% of the Georgian national squad playing URC week in week out (players in France and England can stay there) with a smattering of overseas players to help lift standards. Four or five years of that could help bridge the gap between where Georgia are now and where they want to go. It would expose these players to a higher level of rugby, but not so high that they'd get hammered every week. In fact they'd probably win a solid number of matches at home.

While there's a limited amount that can be learned from the last 2 weeks realistically the lads could only play what was in front of them.

To that end though Darragh Murray did his future international aspirations no favours. At no point did he stand out for me and the stats show a bit why.

Naturally in such a one sided scoreline players are going to absolutely rack up the attacking stats. Murray finished the Portugal game with zero carries over 60 minutes (4 passes - less than the starting second and back rows and less than Izzy). The only Irish player not to carry. Izzy replaced him and managed 8 carries in his time.

As ever, one sided attacking stats don't paint the full picture. Someone like Murray especially would have set piece as his USP. Indeed I believe he was calling the LO. At least he did against Georgia. He's down for no line outs won and none stolen. Ahern, Baird, Kendellen and Prendergast were the starters who claimed ball. Again Izzy off the bench won 2 and stole 1.

And crucially, you couldn't even argue he was in the tenches because his tackle count was also just ordinary. 4 completed and 2 missed places him solidly in the middle of the road. Izzy made 3 of his own off the bench.

More evidence of his lack of pace tbh….

I think it might be more relevant that Murray got two starts on tour whereas Izuchukwu and Ahern got one each. That might indicate that the coaches see something there that is worth looking at further. Only Murray and Baird started two games in the back five forwards.

My take on this tour is that the real value for Ireland was the time that the fringe players got on centre stage in training camp, the matches themselves are less important (Portugal especially).

I would be pretty confident that the pecking order of second and third choices will have shifted a fair bit when they reassemble for the November tests.

It's a shame coombes and ahern haven't seen a bit more international exposure each could really add something a bit different to the lions I think. maby next tour good target for them

..

or at least thats what it can look like

That's the key thing. Perspective is (obviously) very subjective. What it looks like to you might be very different to how it looks to me, and some other guy might see it completely differently.

Like, there's been absolutely no suggestion from anyone, anywhere that Clarkson was brought in to train with the Lions because of "systems", but that's how it is seen by some posters here, because that's how some posters see every selection.

Maybe if people took a minute to think a bit more about it, they wouldn't be so frustrated. But unfortunately people have made up their minds and they're not for turning.

You're making broad generalisations here.

Like, there's been absolutely no suggestion from anyone, anywhere that Clarkson was brought in to train with the Lions because of "systems", but that's how it is seen by some posters here, because that's how some posters see every selection.

What do you expect the coaches to say? They're never going to say "yes it was a cohesion / systems selection decision" for very obvious reasons, even if it was part of the selection decision.

But I'm pretty sure there's been plenty in the media that have suggested the systems element is part of it.

Maybe if people took a minute to think a bit more about it, they wouldn't be so frustrated. But unfortunately people have made up their minds and they're not for turning.

Condescension aside, maybe if you took a minute to think a bit more about it, you would recognise that whatever way you want to slice it, systems, cohesion, partnerships - however you want to phrase it - literally are a selection consideration. Especially so when it comes to a player who is most likely not going to feature in a Test, and will largely feature for training reps.

Not the only selection consideration. But they literally are a selection consideration, however much you want to dismiss it. But unfortunately you seem to have your mind made up on that and are not for turning…

I have no great issue with the Clarkson call up as there were a lack of alternatives (how's that for "not for turning"? Nuance, neat!).

Here's a larger point. In an Irish context, there absolutely have been times when there have been quality alternatives available and the cohesion / systems selection has been favoured. I think that's completely fair to say. But you won't hear of that either.