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

Awesomeness

RoundBox11 wrote: »

How useful will an extra 12 be if the day before we play France Reddan or Murray get a vomiting bug or the flu?

As unlikely as it is, the potential risk far outweighs the benefit of bringing an extra centre. As other posters have said, id be very surprised if Joe hadn't decided this weeks ago.

I agree he will bring 3. But with murray and reddan only 1 of them will be starters. What if henshaw gets the same illness? Do you wanna start madigan at 12 or risk your other scrummy making it though without injury?

It all depends on how you feel about the cover that would come in

awec

IMO the risk of having someone who isn't a 9 playing at 9 for us is too big. Sexton is our most potent weapon and if he's getting crap, slow ball from some centre trying to play at scrum half then his impact on the game is going to be reduced. Even if it's not Sexton and it's Jackson in one of the lesser games the risk is too great, it would bollocks up our entire back setup. We can't be having that.

I'd play Paul Marshall at 9 for Ireland before I'd go near anyone who isn't actually a 9. And I think Paul Marshall is brutal.

Awesomeness

molloyjh wrote: »

Yeah I reckon it's total bs too. Slow news day otherwise though.

That said it isn't the daftest thing I've heard. Someone told my oh that they are close to someone in camp and was told that Healy will announce his retirement immediately after the 31 man squad has been announced this week. There's so much wrong with that I can't understand how anyone believed it (he did, my oh didn't).

You have your own out half?

RoundBox11

How useful will an extra 12 be if the day before we play France Reddan or Murray get a vomiting bug or the flu?

As unlikely as it is, the potential risk far outweighs the benefit of bringing an extra centre. As other posters have said, id be very surprised if Joe hadn't decided this weeks ago.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well the bonus points won't make a difference at all to the way our pool turns out unless Italy beat ourselves or France, which is pretty unlikely.

However there's no way we won't bring 3 9s, it would be very surprising.

What if we draw against France?

[Deleted User]

connachta wrote: »

But has Joe ever done intox before? (real question here not rethorical one)

No, Joe's baby face is completely natural. No wrinkles when you're constantly happy.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

I don't see how we could possibly operate without three 9s.

That would mean either the two that go are involved in every single game, or we play someone out of position. I don't think option 2 is viable in a World Cup. Not when there are bonus points at stake in the pool games.

Yeah I reckon it's total bs too. Slow news day otherwise though.

That said it isn't the daftest thing I've heard. Someone told my oh that they are close to someone in camp and was told that Healy will announce his retirement immediately after the 31 man squad has been announced this week. There's so much wrong with that I can't understand how anyone believed it (he did, my oh didn't).

irishbucsfan

Well the bonus points won't make a difference at all to the way our pool turns out unless Italy beat ourselves or France, which is pretty unlikely.

However there's no way we won't bring 3 9s, it would be very surprising.

awec

I don't see how we could possibly operate without three 9s.

That would mean either the two that go are involved in every single game, or we play someone out of position. I don't think option 2 is viable in a World Cup. Not when there are bonus points at stake in the pool games.

connachta

Awesomeness wrote: »

Nobody will get injured the day before a game. Their not gonna be doing contact sessions then so somebody can always be called up.

The real question is if someone picks up an injury are you willing to sit him out for a week or 2 and have him back or just call up a replacement and not be able to bring him back

That's indeed a good point...

Awesomeness

Nobody will get injured the day before a game. Their not gonna be doing contact sessions then so somebody can always be called up.

The real question is if someone picks up an injury are you willing to sit him out for a week or 2 and have him back or just call up a replacement and not be able to bring him back

aimee1

connachta wrote: »

I do, it's a waste of talent to bring a 3rd SH, far behind the 2 first, just in case both of them gets injured between the day before the eve of a game, and the 60th minute of that game. The chances are close to none.
But a 6th prop more than another centre would be better

If murray or reddan gets injured in training or even gets ill (poc before Scotland 2014 6n or Henry last november) then it is a huge risk to take.

I would be very surprised if we didnt bring 3 scrum halfs.

With his decision to play zebo at fb last week, i would have thought that means Jones doesnt go to allow a more versatile back to travel.

connachta

But has Joe ever done intox before? (real question here not rethorical one)

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

Joe told me that he reads these threads for ****s and giggles.

He consults with the mods before making a squad announcement to warn us of any potential problematic selections and asks for our input.

We have a list ready for him right now of selections that he absolutely cannot make to save this place from implosion.

He usually listens to us, though he did ignore us that time he dropped Murray for Reddan. :mad:

total former

connachta wrote: »

I do, it's a waste of talent to bring a 3rd SH, far behind the 2 first, just in case both of them gets injured between the day before the eve of a game, and the 60th minute of that game. The chances are close to none.
But a 6th prop more than another centre would be better

For the last five years, all we've heard is how meticulous Joe is in every aspect of planning.

To suggest that, ten days before he announces his squad, he doesn't even know how many scrum-halves he'll bring, is ludicrous.

connachta

total former wrote: »

All three. Joe said something along these lines on Sunday, that he hadn't decided how many SHs to bring. I don't believe him, frankly.

I do, it's a waste of talent to bring a 3rd SH, far behind the first 2, just in case both of them gets injured between the day before the eve of a game, and the 60th minute of that game. The chances are close to none.
But a 6th prop more than another centre would be better

ionadnapóca

Witheringeye wrote: »

Rumour in the IT today that Schmidt may only bring 2 SHs in order to brink a back up 12 (cave or darcy)

No worries. Madser got u covered.:)

[Deleted User]

total former wrote: »

All three. Joe said something along these lines on Sunday, that he hadn't decided how many SHs to bring. I don't believe him, frankly.

Joe told me that he reads these threads for ****s and giggles.

Sent Marmion back to Connacht last weekend just to get a reaction.

Grade A troll our Joe is!

dub_skav

total former wrote: »

All three. Joe said something along these lines on Sunday, that he hadn't decided how many SHs to bring. I don't believe him, frankly.

You've often heard that X scrumhalf plays like an extra backrow (Phillips, O'Leary, insert other large scrum half here)?

Well, Joe is thinking the opposite, with his backrow playing like an extra scrum half.
He's considering bringing 6, with no sub backrows as a result. Cooney and McGrath on standby

Always thinking outside the box is Joe

total former

awec wrote: »

Rumour or just pure speculation because they're running out of interesting things to write?

All three. Joe said something along these lines on Sunday, that he hadn't decided how many SHs to bring. I don't believe him, frankly.

awec

flangemeistro wrote: »

Sounds very like what's going on here.

Getting tired of your sarky comments. This is a discussion forum, people are here to discuss even if you deem it uninteresting by your own stellar standard of posting.

If you don't like it you know where to go.

connachta

Anyway I'd like to see Madigan at 9, could do ok for just 10 minutes (It's the worst case IMO, very unlikely the 2 SHs get injured the one just before and and the other during the same game)

Witheringeye

.ak wrote: »

That's silly. Madigan should be backup 12. Why risk the scrumhalf situation?

Maybe it's because all it would take would be one injury to henshaw (assuming they wouldn't shift Payne to 12 and earls to 13) for mads to be starting at 12 but it would take both Murray and reddan getting injured for the scrum half risk to materialise.
This is all on the premise that joe would not want mads starting a game at 12 vs France etc, which is reasonable
Or perhaps joe is an avid reader of boards.ie and he's so sick of the marmion vs boss debate that he's not bringing either!

Witheringeye

awec wrote: »

Rumour or just pure speculation because they're running out of interesting things to write?

More than likely

.ak

Witheringeye wrote: »

Rumour in the IT today that Schmidt may only bring 2 SHs in order to brink a back up 12 (cave or darcy)

That's silly. Madigan should be backup 12. Why risk the scrumhalf situation?

flangemeistro

awec wrote: »

because they're running out of interesting things to write

Sounds very like what's going on here.

awec

Witheringeye wrote: »

Rumour in the IT today that Schmidt may only bring 2 SHs in order to brink a back up 12 (cave or darcy)

Rumour or just pure speculation because they're running out of interesting things to write?

Witheringeye

Rumour in the IT today that Schmidt may only bring 2 SHs in order to brink a back up 12 (cave or darcy)

[Deleted User]

smiley_face wrote: »

I'm plagued with the vision that they will turn up and we'll have a gut-wrenching opening half where they open us up.
Then they will get bored with the effort and our lads will dominate the 2nd half and roll them over. Just a thought. ðŸ˜°

Sounds a bit like our quarter final against them in 2003, except for the "and roll them over" part.

smiley_face

smiley_face wrote: »

I'm plagued with the vision that they will turn up and we'll have a gut-wrenching opening half where they open us up.
Then they will get bored with the effort and our lads will dominate the 2nd half and roll them over. Just a thought. ðŸ˜°

I've a vested couple of tickets that makes me worry though...