nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread IV

RoundBox11

Pairing Luke Marshall with Cave in the centre and Payne at fullback could be really good for the wolfhounds backline. They should know each other inside out. Then Gilroy could be on one wing.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Riskymove

I wouldn't be surprised to see SOB at 8

shuffol

matthew8 wrote: »

Given he gave Murphy a game against England last year and he's in good form I'd be surprised if Murphy doesn't start.

Henderson was the only player other than POM, Henry and Heaslip to start in the backrow last 6N.

bilston

It's tough, I'd be tempted to go with Henderson, SOB and POM, it would give us a better carrying option and also give us more options in our lineout, but there are three problems with that.

1) It probably won't happen as Joe has already picked a back row minus Heaslip and it had Murphy at 8 so there is nothing to suggest it will be any different against England.

2) By putting Henderson at 6 you are moving the excellent O'Mahony from his best position.

3) We'd need to find new second row cover.

phog

I was a bit underwhelmed with Murphy on Saturday but as Joe only gave Henderson 6 minutes I think it's fair to say Murphy is in pole position to start if Jamie is out.

.ak

Thought Murphy was very impressive when he came on.

total former

It will be Murphy at 8, O'Donnell back on the bench. Can't see anything else happening.

Tox56

.ak wrote: »

Thought Murphy was very impressive when he came on.

I don't know about very impressive but I thought he was good, he made as many tackles in 20 minutes as POM did all game and only 2 less than Heaslip did in his 60 mins

shuffol

bilston wrote: »

1) It probably won't happen as Joe has already picked a back row minus Heaslip and it had Murphy at 8 so there is nothing to suggest it will be any different against England.

2) By putting Henderson at 6 you are moving the excellent O'Mahony from his best position.

Given Henderson had just returned after a long layoff I wouldn't read too much into Murphys selection against Italy.

On the second point Ruddock featuring at 7 in the AI's would suggest that Schmidt isn't overly concerned with playing somebody out of position if the unit is right.

shuffol

.ak wrote: »

Thought Murphy was very impressive when he came on.

Agree, got himself into some good positions over the ball in defence.

Would be concerned that a backrow with Murphy and POM in it would be undersized against England.

.ak

Tox56 wrote: »

I don't know about very impressive but I thought he was good, he made as many tackles in 20 minutes as POM did all game and only 2 less than Heaslip did in his 60 mins

How does that not impress you?

Buer

Murphy was everywhere in his cameo and I'm fairly muted when it comes to him, generally, as I feel he needs to do more around the field rather than just his carrying which excites the crowd. On Saturday, he did exactly that. He must have been completely wound up going onto the field as he was buried into every second ruck and was making more than his share of tackles.

Given that Schmidt chose to bring him and not Henderson on when Heaslip went off, I think we've a good idea of what the plan will be come England. Henderson had a very good 7 minutes himself and there's a strong argument for him starting but I think Schmidt will want to continue with a specialist 8 without disrupting his first choice flankers.

total former

Murphy is a tackling machine. In fairness he was on the pitch during France's best (only?) spell of prolonged possession and pressure so there were a lot of tackles to be made, but he was everywhere during that period.

Murphy to start, O'Donnell to bench and a possible swap of the looseheads will be the only changes to the 23 I reckon. Reddan maybe. There will be plenty of talk about Earls/Fitzgerald again but I'd be surprised to see Jones dropped.

Sangre

shuffol wrote: »

Agree, got himself into some good positions over the ball in defence.

Would be concerned that a backrow with Murphy and POM in it would be undersized against England.

I would be too but I'd be surprised if Murphy doesn't start. I suspect that Schmidt will mitigate this by subbing his backrow earlier in the game than he usually would.

I think Schmidt will start McGrath again as well.

.ak

total former wrote: »

Murphy is a tackling machine. In fairness he was on the pitch during France's best (only?) spell of prolonged possession and pressure so there were a lot of tackles to be made, but he was everywhere during that period.

Murphy to start, O'Donnell to bench and a possible swap of the looseheads will be the only changes to the 23 I reckon. Reddan maybe. There will be plenty of talk about Earls/Fitzgerald again but I'd be surprised to see Jones dropped.

My issue is if Jones can't be used as an impact sub when we were 12 points up he's only there for injury cover... I'd like to see Joe use the bench a bit more positively like he has done in the past.

BoardsMember

Thought Murphy was brilliant when he came on too, he seemed to be in tune with what was going on immediately. Would have liked to have seen Henderson on a little earlier, love seeing him come on, he looks like a total headcase!! Thought the front row bench could have come in a little earlier too, particularly Ross who looked absolutely whacked coming off. Surely he could have "risked" Moore coming in earlier than the 64th minute? I wasn't at the game, but thought Best (for the second game in a row?) and POM were not that noticeable. I know suggesting anything derogatory about the latter is tantamount to treachery, but just my observation on a casual watch of the game, and no doubt he was doing loads of the hidden stuff, and lots of stuff I just missed.

total former

.ak wrote: »

My issue is if Jones can't be used as an impact sub when we were 12 points up he's only there for injury cover... I'd like to see Joe use the bench a bit more positively like he has done in the past.

It was an odd one on Saturday; neither Boss nor Jones were used and if Sexton hadn't got a knock, then Madigan wouldn't have been used either. Henderson, the epitome of the impact sub, got 7 minutes and who knows if Murphy would have got on if Heaslip hadn't been injured.

So basically he used the front row as legitimate replacements and the rest as break-glass-in-emergency cover. I know it was tight and there's a risk with guys going in cold into an intense match, but France's subs made a difference, maybe ours could have done likewise.

First Up

BoardsMember wrote: »

Thought Murphy was brilliant when he came on too, he seemed to be in tune with what was going on immediately. Would have liked to have seen Henderson on a little earlier, love seeing him come on, he looks like a total headcase!! Thought the front row bench could have come in a little earlier too, particularly Ross who looked absolutely whacked coming off. Surely he could have "risked" Moore coming in earlier than the 64th minute? I wasn't at the game, but thought Best (for the second game in a row?) and POM were not that noticeable. I know suggesting anything derogatory about the latter is tantamount to treachery, but just my observation on a casual watch of the game, and no doubt he was doing loads of the hidden stuff, and lots of stuff I just missed.

I think Murphy at 8 is a foregone conclusion, with Henderson covering 2nd row and back row from the bench. Schmidt won't make any changes more than necessary.

BoardsMember

First Up wrote: »

I think Murphy at 8 is a foregone conclusion, with Henderson covering 2nd row and back row from the bench. Schmidt won't make any changes more than necessary.

Agreed. It's a pretty small back row compared to the English one. We could have used a fit & firing Ruddock in there in the form he showed in the AIs. I'm increasingly anxious about this one, could get murdered in the front row and the back row is going to be very tough too with us giving height and weight in each position.

shuffol

BoardsMember wrote: »

Thought Murphy was brilliant when he came on too, he seemed to be in tune with what was going on immediately. Would have liked to have seen Henderson on a little earlier, love seeing him come on, he looks like a total headcase!! Thought the front row bench could have come in a little earlier too, particularly Ross who looked absolutely whacked coming off. Surely he could have "risked" Moore coming in earlier than the 64th minute? I wasn't at the game, but thought Best (for the second game in a row?) and POM were not that noticeable. I know suggesting anything derogatory about the latter is tantamount to treachery, but just my observation on a casual watch of the game, and no doubt he was doing loads of the hidden stuff, and lots of stuff I just missed.

Best had a decent game before his moment of madness. Was responsible in a good turnover at a maul in the first half and was his usual busy self around the field.

POM was very quiet for the first 50 mins but had a few good moments after that most notably the turnover from the maul near our line. Would still like to see him with a higher tackle count particularly with O'Brien in the side.

sydthebeat

when are we getting the injury update? this afternoon??

.ak

Heaslip is out having coffee, a double espresso by the looks of it, no sugar. He says coffee makes things better. Textbook behaviour of an injured lesser spotted hipster.

sullivlo

.ak wrote: »

Heaslip is out having coffee, a double espresso by the looks of it, no sugar. He says coffee makes things better. Textbook behaviour of an injured lesser spotted hipster.

Coffee is good though - it means surgery unlikely, right?!

First Up

shuffol wrote: »

Best had a decent game before his moment of madness. Was responsible in a good turnover at a maul in the first half and was his usual busy self around the field.

POM was very quiet for the first 50 mins but had a few good moments after that most notably the turnover from the maul near our line. Would still like to see him with a higher tackle count particularly with O'Brien in the side.

He got more credit for that rip than he deserved - much of the work was done by others. However I thought he played OK and I would be confident that he will be well motivated against England. Fearless.

Quint2010

Backrow for England: Henderson, SOB, POM. That is all.

AbusesToilets

.ak wrote: »

My issue is if Jones can't be used as an impact sub when we were 12 points up he's only there for injury cover... I'd like to see Joe use the bench a bit more positively like he has done in the past.

There is no need for Jones on the bench, he adds very little impact value. How many of the starting backs can cover 15 already? Waste of a bench spot imo.

shuffol

I wonder is Schmidt developing a plan for this team of turning us into the best contestable kicking team in world rugby and using that as our primary means of beating our opposition. We've arguably the 2 best tactical kicking halfbacks in the game, every outside back we have is 6"1 plus, all with the ability to play 15, our no.23 is a 6"1 specialist fullback. Is it possible that he see's this as our best means of launching an assault on the WC and is running with it.

efb

I just look at our 9 & 10 and feel blessed.

bilston

phog wrote: »

I was a bit underwhelmed with Murphy on Saturday but as Joe only gave Henderson 6 minutes I think it's fair to say Murphy is in pole position to start if Jamie is out.

Will never know for sure but I would think Best's yellow card was the reason Henderson only got 6 mins.

I thought Henderson's 6 minutes was terrific stuff. He certainly got stuck in. Maybe I'm biased because I probably see him a lot more than many here but he'd always be in my team.

First Up

bilston wrote: »

Will never know for sure but I would think Best's yellow card was the reason Henderson only got 6 mins.

I thought Henderson's 6 minutes was terrific stuff. He certainly got stuck in. Maybe I'm biased because I probably see him a lot more than many here but he'd always be in my team.

I'd be happy with him too - great athlete. However he is a very tempting bench option as he covers so many spots (all of them well.)

thomond2006

Henderson is a cartoon character in possession, he should start for entertainment value if nothing else!