Gerry Thornley article from this morning says:
Stuart McCloskey’s performance was a positive – “he was a handful, wasn’t he?” agreed Farrell – but the Ulster centre will probably be ruled out of next week’s game against Japan, and perhaps for even longer, with a groin injury. The trip home effectively makes it a six-day turnaround, which will probably lead to fresh legs being brought in.
I don't see how you you could have more Irish in a combined xv. Yes I think England are probably a better team now. They definitely have way more depth. That is borne out by the bookies odds too. I know its not what we want to hear but it's the truth objectively.
I am not saying we can never beat these teams if we get things right and there always improvements to be made. We don't have the depth of talent of some of our closest competitors.
Is McClosskey injury confirmed?
Moving on to next week; the McCloskey injury is really frustrating. I had hoped for four big weeks from him, and maybe he grabs that jersey.
I think, frustratingly, he's going to keep a lot of the same players in the saddle for this one, but hope we'll see some changes.
This is the 23 I'd like to see:
(15-9,1-8):
Jimmy O'Brien, Tommy O'Brien, Tom Farrell, Jamie Osborne, Jacob Stockdale, Jack Crowley, Craig Casey, Paddy McCarthy, Ronan Kelleher, Tom Clarkson, James Ryan, Tadhg Beirne (assuming no suspension), Ryan Baird, Nick Timoney, Caelan Doris
Reps: Gus McCarthy, Jack Boyle, Finlay Bealham, Tom Ahern, Jack Conan, Caolin Blade, Sam Prendergast, Garry Ringrose
Assuming McCloskey is injured
With the following side facing Spain:
Michael Lowry, Robert Baloucoune, Jude Postlethwaite, Dan Kelly, Shayne Bolton, Harry Byrne, Ben Murphy, Michael Milne, Tom Stewart, Tom O'Toole, Evan O'Connell, Darragh Murray, Alex Soroka, Ruadhan Quinn, David McCann
Reps: Lee Barron, Alex Usanov, Scott Wilson, Diarmuid Mangan, Sean Jansen, Fintan Gunne, Jack Murphy, Zac Ward
Assuming James Culhane is injured
think crowley wasn't that bad.
Big limitation is personnel in the team. We were absolutely beasted at the breakdown and we don't have athletes in the backs to punish mistakes like NZ do. Player for player there is a big gulf and we are lying to ourselves if we can't see that. It's not a selection thing either. There are no glaring omissions that would instantly improve the team. I think this is just where we are now for the next few years. 3rd in northern hemisphere and 5th /6th in world. Adjust expectations please.
MOD EDIT
Warning issued
Whatever about the rules, I admired Barrett saying he was gutted for Beirne and he didn't believe there was any intention to harm him. Also said he'd try to advocate for Beirne in the disciplinary hearing this week.
That's my biggest problem with Kiwis. They're just so bloody sound, you can't even hate them. It's maddening!
All of which overlooks the fact that, as a team, we kicked significantly more frequently when Crowley was on the pitch as it coincided with Marcus Smith moving to full back. You can ignore that if you want but that is all part of the context. And that tactic worked really well, fwiw.
But ultimately this…
Respectfully
…is all I was asking for.
I was surprised how much of a different impression I got of the Beirne incident between the two camera angles. In the side-on shot it looks as if Barrett just runs into him and I was thinking does Beirne actually have to get out of the way or what? But then in the other angle it looks as if Beirne steps into it enough to look as if he's at least deliberately blocking him. And it's direct to the head and his arm is in a braced position and there's enough force to see Barrett thrown to the ground.
Overall a poor performance, did well to manage the red card but losing Beirne was costly and having to bring in henderson earlier than planned didnt help. Set piece is becoming a joke now a days, teams are happy to give us lineouts and wait for us to balls it up or compete against us. A lot of the players looked underplayed, because they have been this season, appreciate the lions tour but other countries have had lions back playing for weeks now. 12 day jolly in the USA didnt prepare the team for this game. Personally I hate these "glamour" games away during the autumn series, both unions must have been well paid for it.
I salute you Sir for trying to move the conversation on. Alas..................
Oh it's all Garry Ringrose's, a player who plays 2 positions outside Crowley, fault of course. You know how this works right? The 10 serves the players outside him, not the other way around. Maybe Ringrose didn't pass because of the garbage being served up to him?
He was rubbish. His kicking from hand was straight up 0/10 and he created absolutely nothing.
Except he wasn't 'that poor'. He was average. Considering we had poor set piece with a malfunctioning lineout, scrum not in great shape, pedestrian backs and a 13 who passed once, average wasn't 'that poor' a performance all things considered.
If he's 'that poor' with a decent platform then it's a whole other conversation, I'd agree.
When the starting 10 was that poor it's hard not to talk about it TBF.
people talking about Ireland doing very well for 60 minutes and being ahead are tripping. We were defensively very good in the first half when NZ were shambolic. I dont think I’ve ever seen NZ crumble and make so many mistakes before, granted Ireland disrupted their game very well. 13 points from that is a very, very poor return. Yes, it’s the first game, and we missed Beirne enormously. But I couldn’t see what our strategy was to score, no out the back passes, brief periods of a short passing game (worked ok) and then a lot of incoherent, inaccurate and aimless kicking, box kicks, grubbers, chips, etc. so lots of tactics but it wasn’t clear to me that their was a gameplan that the team were playing to. A lot of poor decisions and execution flowed from that. mcCloskey was great but what is the point in bringing in. a 32 year old now? Problems all over the field Lineout shambles, scrum penalties go lór. Bad start and definitely going backwards.
Respectfully, there was no comparison to the contributions between Prendergast and Crowley in attack. Prendergast was a key contributor to multiple attacks, Crowley just wasn't. Both tries after he came on, happened without his input. Things flowed through Prendergast in a way they haven't to date with Crowley. You can't claim he made significant contributions, when nothing he did lead to anything. Neither his passes,nor his break produced any extended attacking sequences. We saw him struggle again vs Italy when he was given the start, and yesterday.
Whether it's a function of our poor attack, or something in himself, Crowley has struggled to lead the offense. For all his issues, Prendergast was better as a fulcrum.
Fair point, and I don’t need reminding of the 90s, I lived every mediocre moment of it.
I celebrated the Triple Crown of 2004 like it was the birth of my first child, but the 2025 version barely registered with me (like the birth of my last child). Our expectations have moved on massively and let’s be honest, the last 18 months haven’t blown us away. I’m not blaming either Crowley or Prendergast for that but if we want a ten who can drive a team on to victory, I’m not seeing it from either one yet. SP is still only 22 and JC only 25 so its not time to panic yet.
In fairness we've already won a 6Ns title with Crowley at 10 and a Triple Crown with Prendergast at 10 so if that is what a few lean years look like then as someone who remembers the bad old days in the 90s only too well I'd suggest that isn't too bad at all.
I think the whole Jack vs. Sam thing is a natural reaction to the fact that neither are Sexton
I think this is right. We also went from Humphreys to ROG to Sexton so we had quality options at 10 for over 20 years and maybe subconsciously we assume that, well, we must have one now, and so if it’s not Prendergast it must be Crowley or vice versa. As of now, that doesn’t look a great bet We might be in for a lean few years if one of these guys can’t improve significantly.
I did exactly all of this, in reply to yourself at the time, AT - see below - so I don't suppose another 9 months is gonna chance your opinion.
Here's 2 broader points
I don’t think I am. But ok. I treat concussions seriously. I didn’t say you didn’t know of, or about concussion. I wish you and your wife well.
Sincerely
It’s like a stage of grief. Somewhere between denial and anger the provincial rivalries creep in.
After yesterday I’d have concerns way beyond 10. Even Sheehan has work to do (with the other forwards) to sort out the lineout immediately and JGP had a mediocre performance by his own lofty standards.
Did I miss where Prendergast started yesterday? He has been dropped because he's not playing well. I've not been happy that Farrell has picked lads out of form, perhaps you missed that in your wild leap to conclusions there.
And you agree that Sam's attack scored zero points against the Stormers? And that some players from that team are capped? I feel like I need to use baby steps..
What metric did Andy use to justify picking these guys?
Their personalities?
The Force?
I think Andy needs to read this, it's nice and short with no big words.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese%3F
If he wasn't involved in creating the tries, what exactly did he do of significance then? He made one nice break down the left wing that came to nothing, from memory. I suppose he kicked the conversions. Back up your assertion with some evidence.
Didnt take long for chatter to spin back around to the 10 debate....it'll never end until Harry Byrne takes the top spot😁
All of which is predicated on the notion that unless a 10 has a direct involvement in a try, he can’t have played well…
Plenty of pundits had him in their team of the week, from his cameo. Presumably they’re all in on the “lie” as well? It’s rubbish.
If you're saying he made a meaningful contribution to the winning of that match, by all means, provide evidence. It's been done to death. He played no part in the tries after he came on, didn't make any significant number of passes. Saying he did otherwise, in the face of amply supplied proof to contrary, is pushing a false narrative.
Dan Sheehan had more impact at 10 than Crowley did. The most bizarre case of reflected glory.
