Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

Barronesque shoulder chip. I hope it helps the team develop a siege mentality and deliver a few big performances in the next few weeks. That will make the crying worthwhile. But deep down everyone knows Munster’s problems are self inflicted and are more likely than not to continue until there’s an executive clear out. It’s really not a player issue, if Munster got their house in order as both Connacht and Ulster seem to have done recently, several of those same players would be in the frame for Ireland. Less than the sum of its parts currently.

I don't think anyone - Munster fans least of all - is denying that, particularly in this season of all seasons.

But I do think there is something to what Tom is saying too. It's been a sh*tshow of a season, and there's been a "walls are falling in" narrative about Munster. You mention Connacht and Ulster both getting their houses in order. And yet Munster have finished ahead of them in the table this season.

Imo, there are a (vocal) minority on here who like to have a pop off Munster. And to be fair, this season, it's been pretty easy to do so. But when Brian Gleeson can have an excellent game, and that seemingly becomes a gleeful post about Coombes not featuring for Ireland? It's weird….

The point being, I think we still have more to offer towards Ireland selection than is occasionally acknowledged here.

With regards Ireland selection, I'm hopeful for Alex Kendellen tbh. I think he's had an excellent, under-the-radar (tho injury hit) season. Josh van der Flier is getting on, and Timoney has had a brilliant season in green (and Farrell isn't opposed to selecting Doris at 7 either) but I think in the medium term, Kendellen could emerge as an option, tho I don't expect it to happen this side of the RWC.

Praising Crowley would be tantamount to admitting being wrong for a lot of posters. As soon as Prendergast's flaws became too obvious to skirt around the narrative changed from him having a "high ceiling" to Ireland having two average options at fly half. It couldn't be that Prendergast had been elevated far too soon and Crowley was the better option, no, it was clearly a case of Prendergast might not be the guy but Crowley definitely isn't either. Even after Crowley put in some very fine performances.

If you look back to the threads there are a number of posters who were so reluctant to acknowledge his contribution that they attributed every positive piece of play to Gibson Park (who had a good tournament) while still being hyper critical of every piece of Crowley's game.

The funniest thing for me is that Crowley's trajectory, prior to being sidelined for Prendergast, was slightly ahead of Sexton's at the same age. Sexton wasn't the finished article at 26, having being dropped for an ageing O'Gara in the RWC due to poor goal kicking stats but he was persisted with and it bore fruit, and whilst Crowley also has some wrinkles to iron out there have been enough examples of his skill and temperment to warrant continued investment in him. However, he's been written off by a decent portion of the fanbase because their ego's won't allow them to admit they're wrong and because of who he plays for, in the same way O'Mahony, Murray, Earls, Stander and Zebo were written off for large portions of their careers.

Mod Edit

Warning issued.

I mean, you mentioned "constructive criticism" while also only posting about Casey's poor performances… What reaction do you expect?

Yes, his poor performances are relevant. But so are …. y'know… his good ones….? Like yesterday? No matter how much you wish it wasn't.

But blaming selection bias as a reason for the decline is just not on.

To be fair, has anyone made this argument? That Farrell's selection bias has been the reason for the decline in Munster??

I really don't think they have, John.

Agree with a lot of this, there clearly was an element of arguing "they are both flawed". As if their flaws were equivalent.

From very early on, I always made the argument that I thought Crowley was much closer to Prendergast in the things Prendergast was good at than Prendergast was to Crowley in the things Crowley was good at.

And we keep hearing that Prengergast's defence is improving. I just don't see it tbh.

Indeed, but I would always rather come to my own conclusions than buy into any "narrative".

I disagree with the argument that Prendergast was selected too soon. Got his chance in November 24 and did ok. It was his form for Leinster between December and January that got him the Ireland starting jersey for that Six Nations . He was the best performing 10 in the country. Yes it was at a time when Crowley was struggling for form, but his selection was merit based as well as based on the desire of Farrell to have more than one option at 10 going into the World Cup.

Prendergast wasn't perfect but was rated highly enough by his peers to be voted Ireland's best young player, as well as the best young player/breakthrough player in the 2025 Six Nations. He was Ireland's starting 10 on merit. Whatever has happened to his game this season (seems to be a mental/confidence thing especially right now) doesn't discredit the decision to elevate him last year.

This is just his second season of test rugby. His peers clearly thought he was ready last season and were impressed by him.

Picking SP in November 2024 was a ballsy move to give a young, talented guy a chance, two years out from the RWC.

The incumbent and his back-up were both in poor form, the new guy got a shot and he performed well.

Then he went off track, the previous incumbent hit a vein of form and got the jersey back.

The whole saga contradicts all the ultra-conservative, anti-Munster, doesn't pick on form criticisms that Farrell's opponents have been spouting for years, and still the complaints are rolling in.

SP might get his form back, he might not. His defence probably will never be really good enough and so he needs to be stellar in other areas, and right now that is a way off. But if he doesn't improve again, we need someone else to step up. Jury is still out for me on Harry Byrne, and after that, not sure where we go as back-up? Murphy, Frawley - not seeing that either.

The whole saga contradicts all the ultra-conservative, anti-Munster, doesn't pick on form criticisms that Farrell's opponents have been spouting for years, and still the complaints are rolling in.

…because - as has been explained on here countless times - one example in isolation does not mean Farrell wasn't more conservative more broadly across the whole squad.

There is no contradiction here.

You'll also notice, when he did become less conservative 1) the performances / results didn't fall off a cliff and 2) there have been fewer complaints about his conservatism.

I think some people will feel vindicated in their arguments over the last number of years tbh.

A fair point.