Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread IV

errlloyd · 08-02-2015 12:22PM

I think a year ago Jared Payne was one of the most naturally creative footballers on this island. What he offered ulster was the option of an attacking fullback who could move the ball. He has the skills for centre, he's just a little undercooked, Joe having some faith isn't all bad.

phog · 08-02-2015 12:27PM

errlloyd wrote: »

I think a year ago Jared Payne was one of the most naturally creative footballers on this island. What he offered ulster was the option of an attacking fullback who could move the ball. He has the skills for centre, he's just a little undercooked, Joe having some faith isn't all bad.

I've no issue with Joe having faith in Payne but what he doesn't have is time, if Payne isn't getting enough gametime at centre for Ulster can Joe continue to select him there. He dropped Madigan for the same reason, just wasn't getting enough gametime at outhalf.

thomond2006 · 08-02-2015 12:30PM

Hard for me to have a balanced view on Jared Payne since I can't stand the idea of project players. He probably needs more time and space on the ball to work his magic which is why fullback is more suitable for him. I expect him to still be there for the French match at least, when Earls and Fitzgerald play in the Pro12 on the break weekend then there might be a change.

I think Payne is still first choice 13 at Ulster, he has just been injured since November?

CIARAN_BOYLE · 08-02-2015 12:33PM

thomond2006 wrote: »

I think Payne is still first choice 13 at Ulster, he has just been injured since November?

He has played fifteen since he came back from injury (mainly due to other injuries mind you)

George Hook · 08-02-2015 12:34PM

He has no loyalty to D'arcy.

I am pleased with yesterdays performance, though conservative it all seemed to be part of the plan and I don't think we showed the other teams any of our plays.

rrpc · 08-02-2015 01:16PM

phog wrote: »

I've no issue with Joe having faith in Payne but what he doesn't have is time, if Payne isn't getting enough gametime at centre for Ulster can Joe continue to select him there. He dropped Madigan for the same reason, just wasn't getting enough gametime at outhalf.

To be fair, he gave Madigan a chance to prove himself in the Wolfhounds game, a chance that Madigan didn't really grasp. Nobody was terribly surprised when Keatley got the spot.

UnitedWeStand · 08-02-2015 02:31PM

Do You Even Squat wrote: »

Did anyone get a shiver down their spine when George Hook mentioned "loyalty" today with regards to Schmidt's selection of the centres? It just echoed the Kidney era. God knows we dont want to go down that road again. Payne gets little game time in the 13 jersey after the AIs and looked pretty average in the games he has played at 13 but somehow gets back in the starting lineup. Fitzgerald rips teams apart in a poorly coached team with disillusioned players inside and outside of him and doesn't even get a look in for the 13 shirt, let alone the match day 23. I know this has been debated to death but what use is Jones in the 23 jersey? He's an average Champions Cup player and is a specialist full back. It's pretty obvious Joe likes him, for whatever bizarre reason which frightens me. Now it's pretty obvious Payne is a top class 15, no point in arguing about it, but he hasnt set the world alight at 13. The sensible thing is to have him, Earls or Zeebs at 23 (with either of Earls or Zeebs starting, until Trimble returns). Payne>Earls>Zeebs in terms of quality imo. If the centre combo still stands by the Wales game, I wouldnt be too optimistic about our chances at the RWC and beyond.

If JS was about loyalty D'Arcy would be there. Payne ' s had only two games at 13 for Ireland. How that can be seen as loyalty is beyond me

bilston · 08-02-2015 03:05PM

thomond2006 wrote: »

I think Payne is still first choice 13 at Ulster, he has just been injured since November?

He played FB against Toulon but then we rested Bowe and Gilroy for that match so Ludik had to play on the wing. Then Ludik got injured so Payne really had to play 15 against Leicester, as it turned out both he and Cave were excellent in that particular match! It would have been interesting if Ludik had been available for Leicester.

We won't really know who is first choice now until the end of March!

Quint2010 · 08-02-2015 03:53PM

Anyone think we could see a backrow of Henderson, POM and Heaslip next weekend?

CIARAN_BOYLE · 08-02-2015 03:56PM

Quint2010 wrote: »

Anyone think we could see a backrow of Henderson, POM and Heaslip next weekend?

Its a possibility but I have my doubts due to the injuries at lock (foley, mccarthy, tuohy, ryan) we don't want to see our three best locks on the field at the same time.

More likely to see Ruddock or SOB risked or Murphy or TOD retained at 7

aimee1 · 08-02-2015 04:02PM

Quint2010 wrote: »

Anyone think we could see a backrow of Henderson, POM and Heaslip next weekend?

i dont see too many changes

McGrath, Best, Ross
Toner, POC
POM, Jordi, Heaslip
Murray, Sexton
Zebo, Henshaw, Payne, Bowe, Kearney

We are missing 4 locks, so Henderson will cover there. I think Jordi brings a bit more physically then TOD so Jordi to start with TOD on bench.

Quint2010 · 08-02-2015 04:06PM

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Its a possibility but I have my doubts due to the injuries at lock (foley, mccarthy, tuohy, ryan) we don't want to see our three best locks on the field at the same time.

More likely to see Ruddock or SOB risked or Murphy or TOD retained at 7

Just think we need Hendersons physicality. He is such an abrasive player. Hear what you are saying about the second rows though. SOB won't be fit so maybe Ruddock will start in place of TOD and go with the back row that started against Aus/SA.

vienne86 · 08-02-2015 04:10PM

I wonder how Mike McCarthy is. I think he was staying in camp even with his concussion. We're a bit short on locks.

aimee1 · 08-02-2015 04:13PM

Quint2010 wrote: »

Just think we need Hendersons physicality. He is such an abrasive player. Hear what you are saying about the second rows though. SOB won't be fit so maybe Ruddock will start in place of TOD and go with the back row that started against Aus/SA.

can see what you are saying, but we need some cover on the bench. McCarthy might be available, not sure on what his situation is after the wolfhounds game

CIARAN_BOYLE · 08-02-2015 04:15PM

Quint2010 wrote: »

Just think we need Hendersons physicality. He is such an abrasive player. Hear what you are saying about the second rows though. SOB won't be fit so maybe Ruddock will start in place of TOD and go with the back row that started against Aus/SA.

If Ruddock starts it would be a risk

vienne86 wrote: »

I wonder how Mike McCarthy is. I think he was staying in camp even with his concussion. We're a bit short on locks.

I agree, three of our top seven locks are fit imo.

In order POC Toner Ryan (inj) Henderson Foley (inj) McCarthy(inj) Tuohy(inj)

salmocab · 08-02-2015 06:26PM

next week should see Heaslip and Sexton back with probably Keatly and Diack dropping out of the 23. I would like to see moore start but reckon Ross will stay, I just think Moore offers a bit more about the pitch. Really think we missed a first up runner in the SOB/Healy mould but still don't think that SOB should be in yet. Cant see any change in the back line bar Sexton, I would also like to see Fitz come in but don't think that will happen.

LorMal · 08-02-2015 06:44PM

George Hook wrote: »

He has no loyalty to D'arcy.

I am pleased with yesterdays performance, though conservative it all seemed to be part of the plan and I don't think we showed the other teams any of our plays.

I know what you mean - kind of - many others have said the same - but it does sound like an excuse for a poxy boring old lump of crap of a performance.
'Phew, I'm glad we didn't play well - the other teams might have found out how great we are'.

Hagz · 08-02-2015 06:47PM

I don't think Ireland were holding something back for later on in the competition. Other than Jamie Heaslip and Jonathan Sexton.

Tox56 · 08-02-2015 06:52PM

Hagz wrote: »

I don't think Ireland were holding something back for later on in the competition. Other than Jamie Heaslip and Jonathan Sexton.

I don't know, there were a lot of moves that got their first run out vs England in the six nations last year for example. There will be a good few moves used against France/England that we haven't seen before, I'd be fairly certain of it

vienne86 · 08-02-2015 06:59PM

LorMal wrote: »

I know what you mean - kind of - many others have said the same - but it does sound like an excuse for a poxy boring old lump of crap of a performance.
'Phew, I'm glad we didn't play well - the other teams might have found out how great we are'.

Italy is the sort opposition that just requires you to grind it out and they don't really give you much opportunity to do much in the way of cute moves......which probably suited us well enough for the first match of the tournament. I would expect more moves on show next week, but that is partly becuause I expect Sexton to be pulling the strings.

aimee1 · 08-02-2015 07:10PM

LorMal wrote: »

I know what you mean - kind of - many others have said the same - but it does sound like an excuse for a poxy boring old lump of crap of a performance.
'Phew, I'm glad we didn't play well - the other teams might have found out how great we are'.

In games like this you just need to grind it out. Keith Wood on BBC said he hated playing Italy because even after a 30 point win, you felt crap afterwards because of the type of game Italy play.

We won, the forwards had a good performance, always bits to work on, but in general they did a good job. We also improved some areas compared to AIs like ball protection was much better, scrum went well etc. If we went to Rome, tried to be expansive and lost our 6n is effectively over [look at france 2 years ago].

Hagz · 08-02-2015 07:52PM

Tox56 wrote: »

I don't know, there were a lot of moves that got their first run out vs England in the six nations last year for example. There will be a good few moves used against France/England that we haven't seen before, I'd be fairly certain of it

I'm absolutely positive there'll be some things we haven't seen before used against France. I don't think that's holding back though, I think that's different tactics for different opposition.

damianmcr · 08-02-2015 08:00PM

thomond2006 wrote: »

Hard for me to have a balanced view on Jared Payne since I can't stand the idea of project players. He probably needs more time and space on the ball to work his magic which is why fullback is more suitable for him. I expect him to still be there for the French match at least, when Earls and Fitzgerald play in the Pro12 on the break weekend then there might be a change.

I think Payne is still first choice 13 at Ulster, he has just been injured since November?

Cave is by far the best 13 at Ulster. You wont find one Ulster fan who thinks otherwise. When Payne plays for us we play ****e. Him being injured recently has been great since Cave has been able to play. It sounds harsh but its true.

bilston · 08-02-2015 09:14PM

damianmcr wrote: »

Cave is by far the best 13 at Ulster. You wont find one Ulster fan who thinks otherwise. When Payne plays for us we play ****e. Him being injured recently has been great since Cave has been able to play. It sounds harsh but its true.

I don't think Payne playing at 13 for us is the sole reason for us being s***e this season. I think you need to look at the pack and the half backs when Pienaar and Jackson have been missing for the reasons behind that.

I think Cave is clearly our best 13, and when I say 'our' I mean BOTH Ulster AND Ireland, however the crap that comes out on UAFC about Payne usually stems from about three or four posters (who for all I know are the same person) who say something and are then blindly followed by everyone else. It's embarrassing.

lucky_luke · 08-02-2015 09:40PM

Hagz wrote: »

I'm absolutely positive there'll be some things we haven't seen before used against France. I don't think that's holding back though, I think that's different tactics for different opposition.

I agree, I think knowing the traditional game, Joe wanted to play a close in game. Also I think the fact that we had a centre pairing that have played one match before and an outhalf who's never played in the 6N the plan was to keep it simple.

My impression of the 6N last year was similar that we employed different tactics in each game nearly.

LorMal · 08-02-2015 10:05PM

aimee1 wrote: »

In games like this you just need to grind it out. Keith Wood on BBC said he hated playing Italy because even after a 30 point win, you felt crap afterwards because of the type of game Italy play.

We won, the forwards had a good performance, always bits to work on, but in general they did a good job. We also improved some areas compared to AIs like ball protection was much better, scrum went well etc. If we went to Rome, tried to be expansive and lost our 6n is effectively over [look at france 2 years ago].

I'm not convinced. It's interesting reading the Team of Round One on various forums. No Irish player mentioned (except Murray on one).
We were poor, one dimensional, predicable. Italy are useless. We did not perform well.
On your points above- ball protection was poor, lots of errors and we kicked away a lot of possession; scrum was only okay - won some, lost some.
Maybe I am being harsh but I am judging us as a team that is Number 3 in the world.
Don't think we scared anyone with that performance. In terms of Round 1, I would rate performances (in order of merit) - England, France, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Italy.

aimee1 · 08-02-2015 10:26PM

LorMal wrote: »

I'm not convinced. It's interesting reading the Team of Round One on various forums. No Irish player mentioned (except Murray on one).
We were poor, one dimensional, predicable. Italy are useless. We did not perform well.
On your points above- ball protection was poor, lots of errors and we kicked away a lot of possession; scrum was only okay - won some, lost some.
Maybe I am being harsh but I am judging us as a team that is Number 3 in the world.
Don't think we scared anyone with that performance. In terms of Round 1, I would rate performances (in order of merit) - England, France, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Italy.

our ranking of 3 or 6 is irrelevant really. Would the team be any better or worse if the aussies has nicked a last minute try? We played well in patches with a team with so many new combinations and missing 4 of our best players. Sure there was errors, but we gave away only 7 penalties i believe. Another big plus is good discipline, we had the fewest against us last year too IIRC.

We were never going to go out and be expansive against Italy. It was always going to be how it was. Scotland first up last year finished with a similar scoreline and a similar performance and we got better as the tournament progressed.

I thought our ball protection was much better, our forwards were driving past the ball to make Murray's job easier. The team of the week is not really an indicator of who did what. Am ok team performance and a comfortable win is better then losing with some players putting in top class displays. Of course it would be great if we could have it all but thats not how this Irish team operates.

In the modern game there will be penalties at the scrum, some go for you, others against. But we certainly werent pushed around. We will always kick a lot, its part of our game really. We beat SA with a good kicking game. I think we will see improvements as combinations gel and we get some of those missing players back, as we also had 5 or 6 debuts on saturday too. There is huge room for improvement but its much better to have that after grinding out a win.

Wales and France have struggled badly when playing Italy first up in the last few years, France lost in Rome and Wales won at home by 9 points i think.
Go back a further 2 years and ROG bailed us out with a drop goal in the last minute.

George Hook · 08-02-2015 10:28PM

LorMal wrote: »

I know what you mean - kind of - many others have said the same - but it does sound like an excuse for a poxy boring old lump of crap of a performance.
'Phew, I'm glad we didn't play well - the other teams might have found out how great we are'.

Not an excuse really. Just playing it safe for the first match with nothing too complicated. One element and it's a very small one but it will have been on Joe's mind that Italy score a lot of their tries from intercept passes the game plan on show vastly limited their chances for that to happen. A try early on from them would really have done wonders for their overall performance and dragged us into a dogfight.

It's basically the same game plan the Boks did to Aus in the 2014 rugby championship match in SA. Just one up rugby for 70mins until Aus was out on their feet from the energy used up tackling all the SA forwards and in the last 10mins SA scored 3 tries.(if I remember correctly)

LorMal · 08-02-2015 10:56PM

aimee1 wrote: »

our ranking of 3 or 6 is irrelevant really. Would the team be any better or worse if the aussies has nicked a last minute try? We played well in patches with a team with so many new combinations and missing 4 of our best players. Sure there was errors, but we gave away only 7 penalties i believe. Another big plus is good discipline, we had the fewest against us last year too IIRC.

We were never going to go out and be expansive against Italy. It was always going to be how it was. Scotland first up last year finished with a similar scoreline and a similar performance and we got better as the tournament progressed.

I thought our ball protection was much better, our forwards were driving past the ball to make Murray's job easier. The team of the week is not really an indicator of who did what. Am ok team performance and a comfortable win is better then losing with some players putting in top class displays. Of course it would be great if we could have it all but thats not how this Irish team operates.

In the modern game there will be penalties at the scrum, some go for you, others against. But we certainly werent pushed around. We will always kick a lot, its part of our game really. We beat SA with a good kicking game. I think we will see improvements as combinations gel and we get some of those missing players back, as we also had 5 or 6 debuts on saturday too. There is huge room for improvement but its much better to have that after grinding out a win.

Wales and France have struggled badly when playing Italy first up in the last few years, France lost in Rome and Wales won at home by 9 points i think.
Go back a further 2 years and ROG bailed us out with a drop goal in the last minute.

If it was the ABs who put up that performance, would they be happy? Would we be saying 'well, they were missing 4 players'?
Anyway, I am sure most teams will always have 3 or 4 potential first team players missing - that's the nature of the modern game.
Keith Wood really drove change in Irish Rugby. He was the first I can remember saying 'not good enough' when we had a brave loss or a facile victory. Saturday was a very poor performance.
Sadly, I fully expect England to beat us and I think we may end up being third of fourth.

Tox56 · 08-02-2015 11:00PM

LorMal wrote: »

If it was the ABs who put up that performance, would they be happy? Would we be saying 'well, they were missing 4 players'?
Anyway, I am sure most teams will always have 3 or 4 potential first team players missing - that's the nature of the modern game.
Keith Wood really drove change in Irish Rugby. He was the first I can remember saying 'not good enough' when we had a brave loss or a facile victory. Saturday was a very poor performance.
Sadly, I fully expect England to beat us and I think we may end up being third of fourth.

New Zealand's first game of 2014 was a seriously underwhelming win at home against an England B team. I'm sure they weren't happy but when you have your first game in a long time with different combinations you'll take the win and look to improve in the next games, which is exactly what we'll be thinking

Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread IV

Comments