Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

The Casey thing echoes Crowley and the 1/4 final. Would anyone trust Casey to win a 1/4 or semi against NZ if he was asked to play a half or to start? That doesn't really matter if he is the guy subbing behind JGP. In that case the coaches job is to get him to his performance pinnacle because he may have to play. I can't imagine Casey learns nothing from getting more minutes in big games, as Crowley would have done in the run up ot the WC. Farrell made a mistake not getting Crowley to where he needed to be, I hope he doesn't do the same with Casey.

Farrell made a mistake not getting Crowley to where he needed to be 

I don't think there's any scenario in which any 10 would have replaced Sexton in that endgame, but let's look at the above statement and assume Crowley was not "where he needed to be" on 14 Oct 2023.

A year prior to that date, Crowley had started a grand total of five games at 10 for his province where he was third choice. Five. Nevertheless, Farrell gave him his test debut and a week later, his first test start, against a Tier 1 country.

Fast forward to the start of the RWC. Crowley has now started 12 games at 10 for his province in his whole career, but has 4 starts for his country, with two of those coming against Tier 1 countries. Add to that the 2 starts for Emerging Ireland and Crowley played precisely one more game at 10 in a red jersey than he did in green in the 12 months prior to the RWC.

I'm sorry to be harping on about perspective but he's been absolutley hammered about this for two years, but someone more positively disposed to Farrell might look at the same set of facts and say that the only reason Crowley was in the frame at all was because of Farrell.

Well, it’s fair to say I entirely disagree with that then.

In fairness JGP improved a lot after he turned 26. He never made the NZ U20s, he couldn't nail down a starting spot in a pretty average Blus team, went to the Canes as a back up but had a highly rated TTT breathing down his neck and was never in the conversation as a potential AB. When he left for Lienster at 24 or 25, no one in NZ was wailing about it. Maybe they thought its a bit young to go North to collect his pension. No one thought he would become the player he did. Pretty much everyone viewed him as a solid SR back up.

All the game time in the world wouldn’t have changed anything in the QF and we’ve seen nothing in the last two years to suggest Crowley would have won it for us.

I mean, literally the next game after the RWC, 3 months later, Crowley was very good away in France in what was Ireland's biggest ever win over France…

Where did I say he’s poor? I think he’s a very decent player, just not nearly as good as our best ever 10.

Why would I be uncomfortable that he’s still being capped? He’s obviously either our best or second best 10. Why would I object to that? I love the current battle between Crowley and Prendergast, but I don’t think either of them are really test level 10s

Yeah I generally do align with Farrell because I think he’s doing a good job and I’m an Ireland fan first and foremost. It’s not like there’s any shortage of people with the opposite take on here.

Did Crowley not get clutch dropgoals and win the league just before the World Cup? He was relatively new on the scene but it's not as if he hadn't delivered the goods just before the WC. He showed plenty of cojones to warrant replacing a geriatrically paced outhalf at that stage of the game.

And then went on to be part of a Six Nations winning team.

But he's "not test level". Ah c'mon now.

I didn't mention Farrell at all, I don't have it in for him at all other than hoping he shakes up the squad a bit.

Honestly - a young 10, who just won the URC in a series of games away from home including Glasgow, South Africa and kicking the winning drop goal against Leinster, comes in to a Six Nations after Sexton retires, helps guide the team to the title… and he's not test level, that's quite the take. Hard to know what else he could have done other than win the Heineken.

I mean, you can argue the toss about form at any stage (and I dare say there'll be plenty of that before the first Six Nations game and I'm not setting out a stall for Crowley here at all, I'm looking back to the period we're talking about) but I don't think Crowley's body of work at 10 is comparable with Frawley at all who has 19 starts in his career at 10. He's patently not a 10, he's started at fullback and centre more than he's started at 10. You're comparing an apple and a potato there.

My take is Farrell decided to blood Prendergast. In a way I agreed, we needed more depth at 10, I just wouldn't have done it the way Farrell did with pretty much making SP #1 from the off after something like 4 Heineken starts. I thought Crowley had credit in the bank from the previous season to keep the jersey, needed more exposure himself, and let Sam get his gametime bit by bit. Instead I think both players suffered a bit. SP in the deep end a bit too soon and Crowley gets sidelined and development stifled a bit. Maybe the approach will work out in the end for both, we'll see.

Given the way France and England are going I feel like it's going to be hard for either of them to stand out, Crowley does better behind a pack not on top for me.

blaming Farrell for not developing Crowley fast enough....what are you on about?

That was quite literally the assertion that kicked all this off.

"Farrell made a mistake not getting Crowley to where he needed to be"

I made the point that another perspective would be that Crowley only got where he was in October 2023 through the interventions of Farrell. Maybe JVG would have seen the light eventually, maybe not, but I think we can all agree it should have happened sooner. As someone who spends a lot of time watching and cheering for Munster, I certainly wish it had.

All this is reminding me that some posters, active in the current discussion, were calling for Healy to be capped in the 2023 6N. Funny how things look with the benefit of hindsight.

Its ok if we have a difference of opinion but at least stick to the point

Isn't that the whole point of a discussion, that it can go in different directions?

I mean, we can go back to infinite rounds of "Farrell is conservative", "No he's not", "Yes he is", but isn't the current discussion a bit more interesting?

None of this is remotely relevant. Crowley was his sub ten, that’s the situation the coach was in, end of story. He proceeds with those facts. Assuming Sexton can play 80 and back to back games for 4 or 5 weeks isn’t realistic, inevitably he’ll have to use Crowley. Anyway, all of this has been rehearsed over and over, no one is changing their minds. If Casey is JGPs backup the situation is similar, old incumbent who may not be able for the requirements of the tournament, no matter how good his backup is.

Couldn't agree more.Same crap been repeated.Farrell will probably go after the WC and whoever replaces him will have a big rebuilding job.Pisses me off no one in the media criticises him.Almost cultish.