Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

1159916001602160416051848

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 27,562 ✭✭✭✭phog


    Thanks, we both agree then that as a player gets older their performance will drop off



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,571 ✭✭✭OldRio


    Sorry if it's been posted before but I heard on the radio that Stuart McCloskey was training with the squad.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 597 ✭✭✭Tommybojangles


    it's fascinating how after every drop in form for national team in the last 20 odd years, places like this have been flooded with comments about how the coach is over conservative. My opinion is simply that we have a smaller pick than most of the other teams in the top 5-6 in the world and as a result see less turnover. This actually serves us well sometimes imo as when england or france are at lower ebbs they often chop and change to insane degrees, partly what lead imo to an awful decade for france by their standards a while back, while we generally stay relatively consistent. It's also a fact that this has bitten us in World Cups in various ways. 2015 for me was a total freak with injury. 2019 the team was definitely stale.

    But 2023, and Im sure I'll get destroyed for this, I don't agree we could have done much different. The team was the best in the world leading in and mostly in their prime. Certainly a high average age but we were aiming to win the tournament and had been buildign with that core of players who has had some once in a lifetime success. Beat the Springboks. and we had depth and viable options at every position bar 10 and 15. The idea that throwing in Ross Byrne or Crowley against New Zealand in those last 15 minutes and they somehow would have sparked us to get a try and get over the line is a bit rich. Byrne, Carbury and Crowley has all started games in the 12 months leading up to the tournament, none of them had done anything in that time to justify their coming on in that game. Sometimes the options are just not there and all you can do is give them the opportunity but if they dont' take it and you have sexton then you ride or die with sexton.

    Now, since the world cup there might be legitimate criticisms about the rate at which we have freshened up the team but they are overblown.

    Players who have had their first really significant involvement since the RWC (E.g not including crowley as he had a start against Australia in 2022):

    Prendergast,McCarthy, frawley, Nash, Osborne, Tommy O Brien, (Have all started major six nations games or games against SA/ NZ) Gus Mccarthy, Paddy Mccarthy, Thomas Clarkson, Jack Boyle, Izuchukwu.

    Not Counting the gerogia or Portugal games you'd have another 5 or 6 names minimum.

    There is the other side of it- Healy, POM, Murray, why were they allowed to hang on so long and in the case of Healy and Murray I think it was a mistake. POM was still contributing so hard to be too critical.

    tl:dr- The normal amount of turnover is happening in the squad, unfortunately we're coming from a very strong place where we were legit contenders. It didn't work out then and there's a difficult balance to strike between renewing the team and staying competititive. We are not getting the balance right atm in my opinion and that is a legit criticism of farrell. But saying that he might be under pressure for his job between now and the world cup is beyond nonsense unless we have a Wales like run.

    Gavin Coombes taking up 3 pages of this thread is equally nonsensical. He's behind Prendergast anyway. 8 is probably our strongest position. You could do the whataboutery of IF Conan hits a steep decline and IF Doris then got injured for any position on the field.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 42,981 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    For the Japan game I'd love to see us put out younger experienced players, for example Sheehan and Doris, with younger players who deserve a shot. I think Harry Byrne should get a run out in that game too. Fill the bench with youth as well.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 5,429 Mod ✭✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    I dont see why we should pick a Doris or Sheehan we should look at newer options. theyre so well established do we need to play them in whats the weakest of the full internationals we play this month?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭JeanRasczak


    Ireland has a pool of 160, that's really it.

    I see a lot of people compare Ireland to France, England, SA because of our World Ranking. But in reality we should not compare ourselves to those countries who have a huge pool of players. With both England and France having pro leagues, like France has two pro leagues.

    I dont often agree with Jackman but he did make a good point the other day, what player outside of the team in Chicago would have made a big difference to that result? do we have an exceptional player been ignored? honestly I dont think so



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 42,981 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    It's about having experience in the lineup.

    And Doris needs the game to be ready for the following week.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 42,981 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    You'll never know what you have if you don't give them the opportunity.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,965 ✭✭✭ionadnapóca


    Agree 'we are not getting the balance right' is the major bone of contention the majority have with Farrell's selections. Me Included.

    I would also add that this was always going to be a particularly difficult AI and Im pretty sure that will carry over into the 6N. Ireland are suffering and will continue to suffer the consequences of the summer tour (Aus) and Farrells selections.

    I have confidence in Farrell, and on the whole he usually makes the right selections, but he has also clearly made mistakes.

    Post edited by ionadnapóca on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 42,981 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Also, these world rankings are a joke. Unless they are going to seed it where 1 and 8 go together, 2 and 7 and so on.

    The top four teams were in two pools in the last world cup. Australia and Wales together in a pool was ridiculous.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,021 ✭✭✭antfin


    There seems to be lots of comments about Farrell and selection for the last Six Nations and the Summer Tour when Farrell was on sabatical for the last year with Easterby acting as interim head coach and then Paul O'Connell running the summer tour. The Summer Tour was a good chance to see whether anybody could force their way into the AI squad and a few did.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 5,429 Mod ✭✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    MOD stop the Jack the Lion in every comment about him. Its totally unncessary,

    People are always going to compare ourselves to England, France etc when we're so competitive/beating them on a regular basis. would you rather Ireland compare themselves with Scotland, Wales instead? It doesnt always have to be about picking a player who is better right now but who could be better in a world cup in 2 years time or who needs game time so that if called up in a world cup theyre a genuine option and are up to playing at international level in big games and not going in straight from the cold



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭JeanRasczak


    I dont see why we need to compare ourselves to other countries when we dont have similar playing numbers. What they do is irrelevant to Ireland

    We dont need to compare ourselves to anyone to be honest. Just what works for Ireland. Not what someone else is doing

    I think, could be wrong, the premise here is that putting players into the international team will make them better? I dont think that happens. If it was the case then international coachs would just keep on firing in new players and have a squad full of stars.

    Also as we seen last year, fans don't want to see new players in if the team loses. Just look at the reaction to Prendergast going into the team, he was slaughtered when Ireland lost to France and in reality the issue was in the forward. No 10 was going to change that result

    People want new players into the team, then Ireland loses a game and they go after the player. Prendergast, P Jackson and many more have had the same happen to them.

    In terms of Farrell, if he done a France on it, dropped all the senior players, put in a load of young players, he would be sacked if Ireland has a terrible 6 nations and autumn



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭JeanRasczak


    Well the most recent was Prendergast, who was given the opportunity, didn't play too badly. Won a triple crown with Ireland and what was the reaction?

    It's an excellent example of what happens when young players are put into the team, given a shot, it kinda works out but the player is growing in the position but the public go after him.

    Similar happened to P Jackson and it set him back a few years. So I can see why coachs are reluctant to put in young player. Just looking at another forum on here and people are having a go at Paddy McCarthy for his cameo in the game. So another example

    I was at the Munster game v Argentina and you seen a couple of young player flourish in that game, I am a big fan of A games and Ireland should look at them more and if not then similar games to that with the provinces playing international teams with players just outside or nearly in the international squad. That was great experience for the likes of Evan etc



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 597 ✭✭✭Tommybojangles


    This is also a great point and part of the reason management (rightly) don't give a toss about what is said outside the camp. Lowe struggled a little in his first 6 Nations and there was a cohort who wanted him booted back to leinster. we're 2 Six Nations removed from the world cup and have had 2 different starting tens go through a full tournament (Bar the last italy game) and somehow that's wrong as well for some people.

    The team will be working on a wider plan for the world cup. (Maybe it's a sh!te plan, who knows) but we'll find out over the next 2 years. So far in the post world cup years we have a Six Nations title (with McCarthy/ Crowley being new starters) and a drawn series in SA (Casey and Crowley and Osborne starting, Frawley being the hero)- Then a really poor Six Nations and 2 bad losses to the All Blacks, so a very mixed bag of a 24 Months . At the moment it seems like the general trend of the team is downwards, but maybe this is the time for that?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭JeanRasczak


    Yes we should be aimming to have two quality players at 10 for the next World Cup

    For this series it looks like Crowley is number 1 so Prendergast should start v Japan with Crowley on bench, then swap for the other games. But if that happens just wait for the outcry



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 27,562 ✭✭✭✭phog


    This is exactly what most people wanted for the last year. Give both players decent game time



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭JeanRasczak


    But Crowley was in every squad, he played in every game and started a game in 6 nations

    During the summer tour he started 1 game and Prendergast started 1

    In the last Nov he started 2, came off bench in two? could be wrong on that. Memory is fading

    If the games was the other way around would you have an issue? or just that it was Crowley starting on bench?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 27,562 ✭✭✭✭phog


    Add up their minutes at outhalf since this time last year.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭JeanRasczak


    One player has to be the starter and the other as a sub

    If Crowley was dropped out of squads, wasn't rotated in etc, you could say he was been frozen out but he wasn't. He was the clear number 2 and it seems the clear number 1 this season. Based on form and starting v NZ

    As I said if the role are reversed at the end of this season will you be complaining because Prendergast didn't get enough minutes?

    I am asking the question and I know the answer, I also know you won't admit it. :-)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 27,562 ✭✭✭✭phog


    One player doesn't have to be a starter and the other a sub. They can and should have been rotated, given equal opportunities. They weren't and that's the issue.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,385 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    It's almost an exact 60/40 split over the past 12 months in favour of Prendergast - the player who was demonstrating the better form for most of that period. It's pretty much exactly:

    This is exactly what most people wanted for the last year. Give both players decent game time



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭JeanRasczak


    I refer to this post which done the work for me

    The stats don't back up this so called "issue"

    Anyway it's been done to death

    The fact is "fans" don't want players or new players in the team, this has been proven with prendergast and others over the years. They want players from their province and then dress it up as wanting rotation.

    If the player rotated out of the team is from their province, even if not playing well, they want that player back in



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,990 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    I think, could be wrong, the premise here is that putting players into the international team will make them better? 

    I don't think that's what people are suggesting tho.

    At least, what I've been suggesting is that in the context of 1) a team with a lot of players pushing into the mid-30's bracket and 2) limited rotation in some positions, it leaves us vulnerable.

    We know that as players age, they can deteriorate more rapidly. We know that teams can age-out. We also don't know who are back-ups are in certain positions that leave us extremely vulnerable to injury.

    Like take Boyle vs Healy last season. People will suggest that Boyle wasn't ready. But we need to fill the 17 jersey regardless. So would Ireland now have been better off with Boyle getting more of Healy's minutes last season? And would Ireland last season have been appreciably worse off?

    There are fair questions to be asked here. I think, in the context of all of that, we should have seen more rotation during last years AI's. I hope we will see it in the next couple of weeks.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,642 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    The die was set in 24, when Farrell retained the same team post WC, instead of taking the opportunity to move on from a number of players. He's continuing to do so in positions where the incumbents have already aged out and are lacking form.

    The argument for me isn't just newness for newness sake. It's taking the harder option to move on from guys who are on the downward slope but still capable of delivering a performance on occasion. Irish coaches always go to the well far past the point of visibility, with predictable results.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 597 ✭✭✭Tommybojangles


    It's far more beneficial to ahve had both go through a full Six Nations as the main man rather than chopping and changing every game. that's for the Autumn and Summer and is what is no doubt going to happen over the next few weeks. The opportunities they've been given since the World Cup are as equal as you could possibly hope for



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,385 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    We can't live our life just constantly focusing on RWCs.

    There were Grand Slams and 6 Nations' Championships there to be won in both years, and we haven't won enough of them to turn our nose up at them now.

    This window now - 2 years out from the next RWC, is time enough IMO to start focusing on what the team will look like by then, and I'm hoping we'll see some options emerge over the next few weeks.

    I genuinely don't think we're overrun with excellent options though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,642 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    its not an either/ or situation though. We can compete for them, and bring in new blood. There was zero reason to have persisted with Healy, Murray, POM, Henderson et al post WC. We should've started moving on from Henshaw and Ako last season.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 460 ✭✭Bart97


    Ire

    Irrelevant, you can only pick 23 players er squad.


    It’s hard to tell what player has been ignored because how many have been given a chance?

    We whinge about “a lack of pace” yet select Lowe and Osborne in the back three and send someone like Baloucoune, who has insane wheels, with the A squad…and the likes of Stockdale in the stands…so maybe start there.


    Here’s a mad thought, if you want pace in the team…stop picking players that aren’t…you know…quick.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,311 ✭✭✭Brief_Lives




Advertisement
Advertisement