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

Options
1175717581760176217631860

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 43,030 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Agree about McCarthy and Ringrose.

    I don't think Conan should be starting though. I feel at this stage of his career he's a better man who'll give it all over the last 20 minutes. I'm a long time Conan fan but I feel age is starting to catch-up with him.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,062 ✭✭✭johnh6767


    ..TOB has a lot to offer off the bench and could well be a game changer as he will be up to prove his talent. Frawley is hit & miss, injury & confidence dependent , but he is extremely capable as we see from time to time . I’m not feeling confident about the outcome at all, but… Scotland has shown a route and hopefully has introduced some doubt



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 27,615 ✭✭✭✭phog


    TOB has a lot to offer off the bench

    Here's hoping but I don't see it happening, the one thing he will bring is a but of speed so maybe against a tired England pack he might add something there

    Frawley is hit & miss, injury & confidence dependent , but he is extremely capable

    As the reserve OH and from what I saw from him recently in Thomond Park I wouldn't have too much confidence that he can influence the game.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,655 ✭✭✭OldRio


    Mod Edit

    Warning issued.

    Post edited by ShamoBuc on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 6,034 ✭✭✭ionadnapóca


    Made me chuckle

    Sir, – May I strongly suggest that your Rugby Correspondent, Gerry Thornley, retitles his advance selection of the Irish XV from “Possible” to “Probable” or indeed to “Actual”. I say this as his predicted Irish teams for the French and Italian matches were totally in agreement with Andy Farrell’s final selections – including replacements.

    However, in his advance selection (Sport, February 19th) for the English match he omitted Tommy O’Brien from the replacement bench so perhaps “Probable” for future predictions? – Yours etc

    Sir, – Whilst scanning Gerry Thornley’s almost always accurate Ireland team prediction (February 19th) I was struck by the number of players who’s first name begin with the letter J, eight out of 15.

    Is this a record? – Yours etc.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/2026/02/20/thornleys-ireland-team-prediction-almost-always-accurate/

    'almost always accurate'!!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,215 ✭✭✭typhoony


    The sports journos in ireland are lame. They should be asking hard questions of Farrell instead of letting him get away with classic deflection methods



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,124 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Considering Eddie O'Sullivan's native tongue is 90s management clichés, Farrell speaking candidly about anything is never going to sit well with him.

    I know which approach I prefer.

    On the keyboard warrior thing, a guy who last coached professional rugby more than ten years ago cannot have any insight into the mind of a young player in 2026 and what impact social media abuse would have on him.

    Funnily enough, here's an interview with Eddie from TWO WEEKS AGO in which he talks about the effect that personal criticism had on him and his family:

    The Eddie O’Sullivan interview: ‘Some journalists did cross the line, they went personal. And I resented that’ | Irish Independent



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 906 ✭✭✭darkened_scrum


    I have often wondered how Eddie managed to fashion a career in the media for himself, he is a complete dinosaur, but when you look at the folks in this thread lapping up his nonsense I guess it's clear enough (and a bit depressing too).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,566 ✭✭✭clsmooth


    EOS has made his career in the media through turn of phrase. ‘Players literally screaming out of the line with their hair on fire’ is a favourite on mine. But once you’ve heard them a few times, the novelty wears off. Don’t think he analyses particularly well, or at least he doesn’t get it across all that well.

    Post edited by clsmooth on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,036 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    It can be both.

    Farrell can have a point about the "keyboards warriors" going overboard AND it can have been a way for him deflect attention from how he has handled the 10 situation.

    Eddie O'Sullivan is far from the only journalist this week who has - not unreasonably - criticised how Farrell has handled the 10 situation.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,682 ✭✭✭budhabob


    In Loughmans defense, scrum was a non-issue against France, and Furlong also was made look very poor against a strong italy scrum. Statistically, England have the best scrum in the 6nations, and loughman is probably the strongest scrummaging LH left - but is a little lacking elsewhere.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 154 ✭✭rudiger2.0


    Maybe if more people were on the pro-Ireland side, the debate would be a healtier/better. Not a go at you in particular but some people can't think rationally when it's not "their" guy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 848 ✭✭✭MangleBadger


    I think the France game gave us a false sense of confidence in the scrum. They basically selected 5 back rows. Their intention was never to target our scrum. And we were still happy to survive.

    All the chat is that Loughman is the better scrummager. But the feeling is still that we are going to get minced in the scrum. If we are going to get minced whoever we pick maybe the right call would be to select a player who offers more elsewhere.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,682 ✭✭✭budhabob


    I dont disagree, I would fully suspect England are targeting the scrum and will dominate. But that is not solely a Loughman problem, Sheehan is not a strong scrummager placing more pressure on both props and for all the talk of McCarthys power, it is not evident in the scrum. Ireland (and the provinces) have not put enough effort / investment in the scrum over the last number of years and it is now being felt.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,036 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    I genuinely think most (rational) people are on the pro-Ireland side.

    But when this conversation kicks off with some of the silly stuff being posted on here (from either side) those rational people just keep out of the discussion (which, while it isn't my style, I don't blame them it either….)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,062 ✭✭✭johnh6767


    in fairness that team was a shambles they looked like they hadn’t played together which was true. They had 2 training sessions and Frawley was injured so he didn’t even participate. Shambles and not good for player development as it was so haphazard. Needs to be done properly or not at all. Individual talent doesn’t translate to a cohesive team without time together



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,215 ✭✭✭typhoony


    France picked a more mobile pack italy and england totally different



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,036 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    Lot of good stuff here, almostover.

    I think you're spot on that England will kick contestables all day, so we have to see a better performance there than vs France, but with the added element that they'll likely go after our scrum much more than France did.

    We need our contestables to be better for their own sake, but also to avoid knock-ons leading to scrums.

    With regards kicking for territory, it's a big test for Crowley's kicking from hand. It's been mixed this season (to say the least), and if Prendergast's biggest defenicency vs Crowley is his tackling, then Crowley's kicking from hand is his.

    The worry is, I don't see our back-row getting on top of the English back-row. They are capable, but it needs massive up-tick in performance from what we've seen from them of late.

    Think Lawrence is a huge addition for them, expect his carrying to cause us trouble, and we need a good defensive performance from Ringrose here.

    And we'll absolutely need more defensively from Joe McCarthy here too.

    We'll need a lot to go right and we're up against it, but I think we're capable of a win here.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,065 ✭✭✭almostover


    Thanks! The week has been dominated by the no.10 discussion and while it is relevant the larger issues exist in the tight 5.

    We've a golden opportunity IMO to mess up England's lineout ball and instead we've come up with a selection that puts us 1 injury away from only having 1 recognised lineout forward in the matchday 23. It's a huge gamble IMO, and I can't see a coherent strategy in the alternative selection we have gone with.

    Also, we're persisting with an out of form Sheehan and Joe Mc instead of in form players like Kelleher and Izuchukwu.

    My big worry is that both set pieces go to pot tomorrow and we don't have the replacements to change that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 6,034 ✭✭✭ionadnapóca


    Just to say, I do like EOS!!

    Not having a go at you lads here. I see and hear lots of people dismiss him. I would say thats because he dares to question things and probably because he doesn't fit "The narrative". Or maybe they are holding some grudge (see little Jamie H!) about 2007?

    You have to laugh when the same people who dismiss Eddie (or Birch!) NEVER offer up an opinion on who they like. Why is that? Its easy to sit in the background nitpicking at a word or a mistake or a single flaw and deride that person. Its so very easy to label and dismiss people and twist it all in a effort to debase the person, the topic and shut off the conversations and any criticisms.

    When Im on it….I will also say I do like the Terenure lads on the molecast. They're just rugby lads chatting and putting it out there. Its can be an entertaining listen. Fair play to them.

    Once again you'll get the usual snipers taking pot shots at them, or at those that may refer to something they said.

    When it comes to TV or Podcasts I do prefer the likes of Eddie, who is not a populist, he can critique (he doesn't get personal, yes I read the indo article) and also be sensible, over the ramblings of the copious amounts of ex-players were are inundated with.

    Untitled Image

    ——————————————————THE NARRATIVE———————————————————

    My TOP5 'pundits'

    1. Murray Kinsella - Detailed, Considered and on point. Very nice person also.
    2. Eddie - Big Picture, Entertaining, Not afraid to call it.
    3. Madigan - Excellent at analysing and explaining why play is working/not working.
    4. Johnny Watterson, - One of the very few 'journos' in the printed press.
    5. Birch (Yes. I also like him!) Can be Insightful, Entertaining (storys, rumours!!).

    Good article by Watterson in todays paper.

    re: "sports journos in Ireland are lame"

    Again not having a go at you. Allot of them definitely are not up to scratch at all.

    - - - - ————————————————————————————————————-

    https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/2026/02/20/more-questions-than-answers-as-ireland-squad-struggle-to-pinpoint-the-malaise/

    When assistant coach Johnny Sexton and four Irish players came out on Tuesday to talk on their pre-England match media day, the questions asked of them were sometimes as telling as their answers.

    The questions were loaded with inherent criticisms, ones which players usually ignore but sometimes bridle against and move to point out that they have a different view.

    It can leave you thinking the opposite of what you first thought. For instance, it wasn’t difficult to come away from the High Performance Centre in Dublin this week believing that Sam Prendergast had a good game against Italy, the scrum can be strengthened with easy fixes and Ireland do not have a hangover from the Lions Tour to Australia.

    Tadhg Furlong acknowledged that some players were involved in eight games during the Lions tour, but that it shouldn’t be an excuse for not performing in the Six Nations.

    How might Ireland pull off a Twickenham upset?

    “Some lads play eight games on them tours, so it’s a lot of strain on them,” said the Irish tighthead prop. “Does that [leave] a hangover? I’m not sure. I think the Irish system would get a good preseason, etc ... Granted, it was short this year and straight into rugby.”

    Sexton was asked the same question and highlighted Ireland’s head of athletic performance, Aled Walters, who would have known the exact number of minutes the Irish players had been on the pitch during the Lions’ trip and taken that into account.

    “We did it in November, knowing that it was going to be like this in the Six Nations,” said Sexton.

    Furlong was also asked about the scrum review they underwent after the Italy match and whether it was a tough watch. Again, the implicit criticism – that the scrum was in big trouble against Italy – was in the question.

    “We were negative there in the penalty count, so it was four penalties to them, one to us, a free kick each,” explained Furlong. “Obviously, it was a disappointing result. Italy do have a very good scrum, to be fair to them. We saw what they did to South Africa in November, I thought they put them under large pressure.”

    That was the third time the Italian scrum performance against the Springboks had been raised since last weekend’s match, with coach Andy Farrell also emphasising the point. The message was the strength of the Italy set piece, not a weakness in the Irish scrum.

    The outhalf issue arose, as it always does, and Sexton was reminded that he had jetted off in 2013 to play club rugby with Racing 92 in the Top 14 without sanction from the IRFU, and whether other Irish players should be allowed to do so to improve their game.

    The case of Harry Byrne, who went to Bristol Bears on loan, and came back to Leinster a better player, was offered as evidence.

    The question was framed around Matthieu Jalibert, the French 10, who plays and competes more frequently in Top 14 games with Bordeaux Bègles each season than players in Ireland would in the United Rugby Championship.

    Cognisant of the fact that he is currently employed by the IRFU, Sexton offered little to counter the current policy of keeping players at home.

    “In terms of encouraging players to go, I don’t think I’d be too popular in the IRFU if I said yes,” he said. “So, you’ve got to understand that I’m not going to win out of this question.”

    The mood of the session was one of the media trying to divine the thinking in camp, what was going wrong and how they might improve as the team’s struggle to find consistent form continues.

    There was no outward sign of urgency, although the symptoms are showing with Ireland dropping to fifth in the world rankings and out of the top four for the first time since 2022.

    Perhaps the players and coaches preferred not to directly answer questions on form as they were also struggling for explanations.

    An overlying aspect coming from the squad was the theme of trust, the quality Irish players who will come good, the urging of patience, especially around the 10 position and the belief that the answer will reveal itself in the next game.

    But after Thursday’s team announcement, it seemed clear Ireland are still in the investigation stage of what is causing the malaise. The selection answer from Farrell was to faithfully go back to the same well of players.

    He knows he has an underwhelming Ireland barely treading water, showing just flashes of the old character with frontline players such as Dan Sheehan, Josh van der Flier and Joe McCarthy strangely, inexplicably mute on the pitch, but who he has selected for this weekend.

    After the week’s probing of players and coaching staff, there should have been some answers. Instead, the sense was that more questions have piled up beside this Irish squad.

    The outcome against England in Twickenham may answer some of them. Defeat would add to the heap, and confirm an Irish team on a downward spiral.

    ——————————————————————————————————————————————-

    NOTE: If some think that the €£$Summer Tour€£$ doesn't impact on players. Read Tommy Freeman. Who is a winger!!

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/feb/16/tommy-freeman-british-irish-lions-australia-tour-welfare-limits-england-ireland-six-nations-2026

    ———————————————————————————————————————————————-

    Also in the today paper on the "negativity" theme.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/2026/02/20/stephen-collins-andy-farrell-had-a-point-the-way-we-talk-about-ireland-is-way-too-negative/

    The reaction of Irish rugby coach Andy Farrell to criticism of his team’s performance last weekend is worth pondering for its implications which go far wider than sport. “I think people need to ask themselves, really, sometimes, ‘Are we Irish?’ Do we want people to do well or not?”

    Ireland had just beaten Italy in a ferociously fought contest but much of the commentary focused on the weak aspects of the Irish performance. Considering that Italy had beaten Scotland and the Scots went on to thrash England, why was it assumed we could stroll past Italy?

    Farrell’s remark has a relevance to the negative narrative on almost every aspect of Irish life that dominates so much commentary, which has been infected by the vile standards of social media.

    Fortunately, the public is not as deluded about the state of the country – or the merits of the Irish rugby team for that matter – as so many of the critics who go out of their way to accentuate the negative and downplay the positive.

    ———————————————————————————————————————————————

    Context is everything: I believe Farrell was specifically referring to JC-SP social media ridiculousness in this quote. Now I could be wrong but I heard GT and MurrayK say that they questioned Farrell about a loud cheer that greeted the SP-JC substitution and he got visibly angry at the suggestion that it was a cheer for SP coming off and it was nothing but a cheer for JC.

    I hope that was the case, but I have my doubts. I think thats actually what really annoyed Farrell (Rightly), plus the obvious point that his starting pick didn't necessarily go to plan. However, like everything nowadays if you speak out about anything you will invariably get someone rushing to label you. e.g. 'too negative' or 'entitled'!!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,491 ✭✭✭✭bilston


    Starting XV for tomorrow is fine, but I'd query the bench.

    No second row cover, yes Beirne covers the row, but if he is to do that he will need to play 80 minutes, and various people keep telling us he is knackered. The solution here was Izzy on the bench rather than Timoney. No sleight on Nick who frankly is unlucky not to be starting, but strategically picking Izzy would have made more sense to me. He covers 6 and the row, Doris covers 7 and Coman covers 6 and 8.

    Regards the backs, Frawley has very little rugby at 10 this season, he started for the As two weeks ago and to be blunt was poor, not helped by Gunne who in turn wasn't helped by the pack. The strongest argument for Frawley is that he is covering 15. There are clearly concerns around Ringrose otherwise I expect we'd have gone 6/2, so there is a chance Osborne ends up at 13 at some stage. But I'm more concerned that Frawley could end up playing 75 minutes at 10 tomorrow. There was another solution. Jacob Stockdale at No.23. He covers FB and wing, he's been playing FB all season and playing very well, this would have allowed an out and out 10 on the bench in either Sam or Harry. Maybe Paris put Farrell off this option, but then he hooked O'Brien in Paris so I'm sure that is a factor.

    Anyway there will be counter arguments to all of that and we don't know what is happening within camp, but on the face of it I'd question those bench selections.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3 startupfood


    I'm not as confused by the backs bench cover as others seem to be. Frawley probably only option as needed cover at 15 also (and 12). Fitness concerns to Ringrose then probably came into play so included TOB to cover that and also wing if needs be. So pretty well covered for every position now. If H Byrne was in instead of Frawley then we would have been caught at 15. If we had tried to cover 15 with the third sub then we'd be in trouble at centre. It all probably tell us that he's keen on giving Crowley 80 at 10, likes Osborne at 15 where he's been solid, and not overly keen on Stockdale playing there.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,886 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    Farrell could've picked backs in the 23 that would allow for much more seamless adjustment if needed or desired. Osborne at 13, Stockdale/ Frawley for FB, Doak and Bryne on the bench and them one of TOB/ Frawley/ Stockdale at 23. That would've had the advantage of playing lads who are in form, in their strongest positions.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 692 ✭✭✭CONSI


    Beirne is flogged by Ireland everytime he plays, nearly always plays the 80 minutes while the Leinster lads seem interchangeable at 50-55 minutes. Beirnes a great athlete but is definately starting to flag now a days at the 70 minute mark. Big Joe needs to be the 80 minute man at his age, you could excuse him if he was a dynamic ball carrier for the 50-55 minutes but he isnt.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,124 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    I presume Plan A is for Crowley to go 80 minutes, Frawley to cover 12, 13 and 15 and TOB to cover 11, 14 and 15. In that sense, it's not the worst plan. If Crowley goes down after 5 minutes, as you say, it's a different situation.

    I think Beirne is fine to go 80 minutes tbh. He's not as dynamic as he was a few years ago but can still do it. I think people complain that he gets "flogged" by Ireland but I don't have any concerns about any of the second-rows playing 80 mins. My bet is we see Timoney for VDF and Conan for McCarthy on 55-60 mins. I agree Izuchukwu is unlucky, and maybe he's suffering because Doris didn't exactly light the place up at 7 last week so they feel they need Timoney.

    Stockdale is unlucky, neither he nor TOB covered themselves in glory in Paris, but on the balance of the last few months TOB was always likely to come out ahead. He needs a good display tomorrow though.

    TBH the luckiest man to be on the bench might well be Casey.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,597 ✭✭✭FtD v2


    Why just claim things when the actual data exists?

    It's Munster who are far more guilty of flogging Beirne than Ireland are.

    Across his last four seasons for Munster, Beirne has averaged 75 mins, 77 mins, 79 mins and 78 mins respectively. The rare occasions he doesn't play 80 for Munster are more often because he picks up yellows etc than them taking him off early.

    Across the same four seasons for Ireland, he's averaged 50 mins, 79 mins, 73 mins and 60 mins.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 43,030 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I was just thinking about Leinster and Nienaber.

    McCarthy's tackling is worse than ever and Prendergast can't tackle to save his life. You'd expect improvement and not regression in that department under him.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,106 ✭✭✭shootermacg


    Heavier players should absolutely NOT do 80 minutes. If you're walking around north of 120 / 130 kg it's a different game. Now 80 minutes is also not 80 minutes, it can be over 100 minutes.

    Bigger guys are there for power and heft. Much like the front row, TH Locks need changing. They can do 80 on occasion, but they can't and shouldn't do 80 regularly. Ryan is a bit of an outlier in that regard.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,158 ✭✭✭Vinnie222


    If players can’t make one-on-one tackles, that’s not a system issue, that’s a player issue. Defensive coaches can sharpen spacing and decision-making, but they can’t teach lads to suddenly enjoy contact.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,932 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    He's averaged 58 minutes for Ireland this season because he got a red card after 2 minutes in one game and has only played 6 games total. He has had 31 test starts for Farrell since the summer of 2023 and has gone 80 minutes 27 times, don't think any other player has come close to that. Rowntree absolutely flogged him as well tbf, Costello wasn't much better but McMillian has been more judicious with his minutes.



Advertisement
Advertisement