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; } } }

Child Item

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

stephen_n

Nobody is going to remember in ten years time, we were 2nd in the world but they'd sure as hell remember if we won the RWC!

.ak

stephen_n wrote: »

Nobody is going to remember in ten years time, we were 2nd in the world but they'd sure as hell remember if we won the RWC!

Really? Check out the first thread on the forum.

bilston

stephen_n wrote: »

Nobody is going to remember in ten years time, we were 2nd in the world but they'd sure as hell remember if we won the RWC!

I think you'd be surprised!

stephen_n

Jesus

rankings are such a non event, I suppose there will always be some but most wouldn't really pay that much attention? Surely!

aimee1

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/six-nations/clubs-and-provinces-to-receive-4m-from-irelands-six-nations-success-31452140.html

total former

stephen_n wrote: »

Jesus rankings are such a non event, I suppose there will always be some but most wouldn't really pay that much attention? Surely!

If we're still top 4 when the next RWC seedings are decided, then we'll all be paying very close attention.

stephen_n

total former wrote: »

If we're still top 4 when the next RWC seedings are decided, then we'll all be paying very close attention.

Well yes there is that alright! Mind you it's rare that the top 8 seeds change, so we aren't likely to get that much of an easier group one way or the other. Though avoiding SH opposition would improve our chances of topping the group.

total former

So, one of the main criticisms of the 2007 world cup preparation was that the starting XV was cast in stone and that the remaining players were disillusioned and unhappy.

Is it any different this time? With the exception of left wing (maybe), no one has any realistic prospect of breaking into the first team.

I know Eddie took it too far with separate training schedules etc, but it would be interesting to know how guys feel knowing they're traveling purely to make up the numbers.

clsmooth

total former wrote: »

So, one of the main criticisms of the 2007 world cup preparation was that the starting XV was cast in stone and that the remaining players were disillusioned and unhappy.

Is it any different this time? With the exception of left wing (maybe), no one has any realistic prospect of breaking into the first team.

I know Eddie took it too far with separate training schedules etc, but it would be interesting to know how guys feel knowing they're traveling purely to make up the numbers.

Much different in my opinion. The main thing is players who are on the bench will get decent game time off the bench, not just 5-10 minutes at the end of a game which has already been won. Squad players will start against Romania and Canada and have a chance to push for the bench. Every team should know the majority of their first team by now. The alternative is to be like England, where not even Lancaster seems to know his best 15.

bilston

total former wrote: »

So, one of the main criticisms of the 2007 world cup preparation was that the starting XV was cast in stone and that the remaining players were disillusioned and unhappy.

Is it any different this time? With the exception of left wing (maybe), no one has any realistic prospect of breaking into the first team.

I know Eddie took it too far with separate training schedules etc, but it would be interesting to know how guys feel knowing they're traveling purely to make up the numbers.

Bench players probably feel they have more chance of impacting the game under Joe. There seems to be complete trust in the wider squad now than there was eight (8!!!) years ago. It does help that Joe has a lot more depth to work with but it has to be said he has has nurtured a lot of that depth over the last two years.

One other point in terms of the inclusivity of the squad, in 2007 Eddie literally kept the 1st XV and the rest of the squad half a world apart! I couldn't see Schmidt doing that.

total former

clsmooth wrote: »

Much different in my opinion. The main thing is players who are on the bench will get decent game time off the bench, not just 5-10 minutes at the end of a game which has already been won. Squad players will start against Romania and Canada and have a chance to push for the bench. Every team should know the majority of their first team by now. The alternative is to be like England, where not even Lancaster seems to know his best 15.

Perhaps, although I'd expect the first XV to start as a unit in either the Romania or Canada game, and bench players got very little game time in the 6N apart from the front row.

I suppose it will all depend on how the results go.

stephen_n

I think we all know what the best 15 is, but we haven't seen any player under perform yet and hold their place. I don't think Joe would pick on sentiment, if a player wasn't performing in training, they'd do well to hold their place, regardless of hierarchy. We have seen the bench options rotate to suit games in the 6N, the likes of TOD and Murphy swapping in and out, I
Think it's considerably different than the Eddie scenario, which is probably what's driving the consistent level of performance, there are no free rides.

jm08

clsmooth wrote: »

Much different in my opinion. The main thing is players who are on the bench will get decent game time off the bench, not just 5-10 minutes at the end of a game which has already been won. Squad players will start against Romania and Canada and have a chance to push for the bench. Every team should know the majority of their first team by now. The alternative is to be like England, where not even Lancaster seems to know his best 15.

Felix Jones would not agree with you - 23 minutes of playing time in the 6Ns, the only unused sub v. Scotland (Eoin Reddan got 1minute) and even less time than Felix Jones overall (19 mins). Iain Henderson usually got about 10-15 minutes when Toner was completely wrecked.

jm08

stephen_n wrote: »

I think we all know what the best 15 is, but we haven't seen any player under perform yet and hold their place. I don't think Joe would pick on sentiment, if a player wasn't performing in training, they'd do well to hold their place, regardless of hierarchy. We have seen the bench options rotate to suit games in the 6N, the likes of TOD and Murphy swapping in and out, I
Think it's considerably different than the Eddie scenario, which is probably what's driving the consistent level of performance, there are no free rides.

The under performance of the whole team wasn't due to the players getting an easy ride - it was down to their conditioning and lack of match day practice. I'd imagine any of the subs or squad would have similar issues as the starters.

The Rape of Lucretia

jm08 wrote: »

Felix Jones would not agree with you - 23 minutes of playing time in the 6Ns, the only unused sub v. Scotland (Eoin Reddan got 1minute) and even less time than Felix Jones overall (19 mins). Iain Henderson usually got about 10-15 minutes when Toner was completely wrecked.

Jones is break-glass-in-case-of-emergency only sub for Joe.
He is not part of any proactive strategy for use as an impact sub, x factor game changer, exploiter of tired defences late in a game, etc.

total former

stephen_n wrote: »

I think we all know what the best 15 is, but we haven't seen any player under perform yet and hold their place. I don't think Joe would pick on sentiment, if a player wasn't performing in training, they'd do well to hold their place, regardless of hierarchy. We have seen the bench options rotate to suit games in the 6N, the likes of TOD and Murphy swapping in and out, I
Think it's considerably different than the Eddie scenario, which is probably what's driving the consistent level of performance, there are no free rides.

We didn't see any rotation of the bench options, TOD only came in because of injury to Heaslip. There were no changes made in the 6N that weren't injury-related.

Clearlier

total former wrote: »

We didn't see any rotation of the bench options, TOD only came in because of injury to Heaslip. There were no changes made in the 6N that weren't injury-related.

Didn't Fitz come in for Zebo?

[Deleted User]

Clearlier wrote: »

Didn't Fitz come in for Zebo?

Yes, plus the poster didn't specify the most recent 6N, Murphy did replace TOD on the bench in 2014 to much howling and outrage and Denis Leamy articles in the paper and all sorts.

total former

Clearlier wrote: »

Didn't Fitz come in for Zebo?

Doh!

total former

Interested Observer wrote: »

Yes, plus the poster didn't specify the most recent 6N, Murphy did replace TOD on the bench in 2014 to much howling and outrage and Denis Leamy articles in the paper and all sorts.

The 2014 6N isn't really relevant. Just ask Fergus McFadden and Gordon D'arcy.

Wang King

Didn't Joe say at the time that Zebo was carrying an injury?

Buer

Wang King wrote: »

Didn't Joe say at the time that Zebo was carrying an injury?

Don't think he said he was injured but had some "wear and tear" and then brought him as the 24th man....was all a little peculiar.

sydthebeat

aimee1 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/six-nations/clubs-and-provinces-to-receive-4m-from-irelands-six-nations-success-31452140.html

hopefully that gets filtered down to teh clubs....

leinsters semi final appearance might hahelped, but the big christmas aviva game against bath wasnt a success

[Deleted User]

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Jones is break-glass-in-case-of-emergency only sub for Joe.
He is not part of any proactive strategy for use as an impact sub, x factor game changer, exploiter of tired defences late in a game, etc.

Which is the exact opposite of how it was suggested that Schmidt uses subs.

The Rape of Lucretia

Deleted User wrote: »

Which is the exact opposite of how it was suggested that Schmidt uses subs.

He may be testing out Zebo today. But with no contender or alternative style player up to R Kearney's level, a tactical sub at full back has not been an interesting substitution for Ireland to consider.
Too late for them now but had Earls or Fitz proven to be capable of playing international level fullback, then they would have been an option as better strike runners or counterattackers from 15 than Rob and so an interesting change of tactic if game circumstance needed with 20-30 minutes to go. But they arent.
Zebo may well still have the possibility to develop into that role.

Without one of the above, Joe is choosing the safe defender who plays full back most naturally. So a stop gap to hold the fort if RK is injured rather than be a strength in his own right.

I think all here would agree that Jones is the weakest player, furthest from international standard, that we had in our 23 last year.

smiley_face

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

He may be testing out Zebo today.
...
I think all here would agree that Jones is the weakest player, furthest from international standard, that we had in our 23 last year.

Speak for your self, I disagree for one anyway.

Anyone think Zebo could actually take Kearney's heretofore unchallenged No. 15 Jersey with a good performance?

Buer

smiley_face wrote: »

Speak for your self, I disagree for one anyway.

Anyone think Zebo could actually take Kearney's Jersey with a good performance?

Don't think there's any chance whatsoever of that. RK is one of those players that Schmidt has marked as central to how he plays the game, retains possession and governs the backfield.

clsmooth

smiley_face wrote: »

Speak for your self, I disagree for one anyway.

Anyone think Zebo could actually take Kearney's Jersey with a good performance?

Not a chance. He needs a good performance to seal his place in the squad. Kearney is treated like Heaslip on here. Many will only miss them when they're gone.

Buer

clsmooth wrote: »

Not a chance. He needs a good performance to seal his place in the squad. Kearney is treated like Heaslip on here. Many will only miss them when they're gone.

I can see where you're coming from but I think even his detractors know how good Heaslip is and simply don't like the guy too much; you're not the test Lion two tours in a row and an IRB nominee without being undeniably world class.

RK is someone his detractors don't see what he brings to the table or don't like the type of player he is. Plus, he's not at the level that Heaslip is overall, I reckon.

clsmooth

smiley_face wrote: »

Speak for your self, I disagree for one anyway.

Anyone think Zebo could actually take Kearney's heretofore unchallenged No. 15 Jersey with a good performance?

Why do you say 'unchallenged' when you just disagreed with a previous posters opinion of Jones being the weakest player in the match day 23? Jones is his competition, and if you feel he doesn't challenge Keanrey for the 15 jersey, then you're agreeing with the fact that Jones must be the weakest member in the 23.