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

Tox56

smiley_face wrote: »

Fitzgerald isn't that great and I like McFadden more. Also think D Kearney probably is a better winger.

Sure if you think it's nonsense feel free to post your pick...

DK is underrated, but so is Fitzgerald if you really think DK and McFadden are better players, Fitz was pretty frequently a one man backline for Leinster last season, imo he's the best winger or centre in Leinster by a comfortable distance

bilston

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

I agree with you. But the idea that DK and Fadser are ahead of him. Nein.

Agree.

The Rape of Lucretia

bilston wrote: »

I assume Geraldsie is Fitzgerald.

I don't think he is any more a certainty for the squad than Zebo, Earls or Trimble (injury permitting obviously). It's very close between them and Fitzgerald could potentially miss out as could any of them.

For all the criticism of Bowe in the Scotland game, Fitzgerald was just as disapointing.

I agree with you. But the idea that DK and Fadser are ahead of him. Nein.

irishbucsfan

bilston wrote: »

I assume Geraldsie is Fitzgerald.

I don't think he is any more a certainty for the squad than Zebo, Earls or Trimble (injury permitting obviously). It's very close between them and Fitzgerald could potentially miss out as could any of them.

For all the criticism of Bowe in the Scotland game, Fitzgerald was just as disapointing.

I agree with that. However I don't think you read the post he's responding to.

The Rape of Lucretia

smiley_face wrote: »

Fitzgerald isn't that great and I like McFadden more. Also think D Kearney probably is a better winger.

Sure if you think it's nonsense feel free to post your pick...

Well unless you are Joe, or Joe calls you and takes your advice, there is zero evidence that :

"Also an outside chance that D Kearney could go ahead of Fitzgerald, and even McFadden ahead of Fitzgerald too.".

whatever your own view of the players.

bilston

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Is there a fitness concern with Geraldsie ?

If not, then the above is utter nonsense. Have you seen him play before ?

I assume Geraldsie is Fitzgerald.

I don't think he is any more a certainty for the squad than Zebo, Earls or Trimble (injury permitting obviously). It's very close between them and Fitzgerald could potentially miss out as could any of them.

For all the criticism of Bowe in the Scotland game, Fitzgerald was just as disapointing.

smiley_face

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Is there a fitness concern with Geraldsie ?

If not, then the above is utter nonsense. Have you seen him play before ?

Fitzgerald isn't that great and I like McFadden more. Also think D Kearney probably is a better winger.

Sure if you think it's nonsense feel free to post your pick...

The Rape of Lucretia

smiley_face wrote: »

Also an outside chance that D Kearney could go ahead of Fitzgerald, and even McFadden ahead of Fitzgerald too.

Personally I would take the 6 props and cut McFadden and Fitzgerald.

If Trimble wasn't fit I'd take McFadden ahead of Fitzgerald.

Is there a fitness concern with Geraldsie ?

If not, then the above is utter nonsense. Have you seen him play before ?

.ak

McFadden ahead of fitz... I've heard it all now!

smiley_face

kingtiger wrote: »

Right lads, I have this from a very reliable source that has never steered me wrong

Healy is out of the WC!!!

Here is all the players cut from the provisional squad

Healy / Tuohy / Conan

Boss / Marmion / Gilroy / Reid / Felix Jones / Darcy / Cave

only bringing two Scrum Halves (Madigan in as cover)

Ok, assuming this is true, leaves us with 33 (18 forwards, 15 backs)
That leaves,
Props LH: McGrath, Kilcoyne
Props TH: Ross, Moore, White
Prop Utility: Bent
Hookers: Best, Cronin, Strauss
Locks: POC, Toner, Henderson, Ryan
Back Row: Heaslip, SOB, POM, Henry, Murphy
SH: Murray Reddan
OH: Sexton, Jackson
SH/OH/IC Utility: Madigan
IC: Henshaw
OC: Payne
Centre/Wing Utility: Earls, McFadden (McF possibly only a wing now?)
Wing: Fitz, Bowe, Trimble (all 3 have played centre, but believe they are now only seen as wings?)
Wing/FB Utility: Zebo, D Kearney
FB: R Kearney

I'd say it is down to White or Moore,
And Trimble if fit will go ahead of McFadden and D Kearney, D Kearney is probably ahead of McFadden.
Also an outside chance that D Kearney could go ahead of Fitzgerald, and even McFadden ahead of Fitzgerald too.

Personally I would take the 6 props and cut McFadden and Fitzgerald.

So the backline would be:
Starting: Murray, Sexton, Zebo, Henshaw, Payne, Trimble, R Kearney,
Subs: Reddan, Madigan, Earls,
Back-up: Jackson, Bowe, D Kearney

If Trimble wasn't fit I'd take McFadden ahead of Fitzgerald.

Zzippy

Teferi wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm simply laying out where the logic may be coming from.

But my point is there's no logic to it, all it takes is one injury to Murray and we either have Madigan covering 9 against a serious opponent or call up Boss/Marmion and lose Murray for a possible crunch game later on when he would have been fit. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It's a specialist position where we have to have 3 players who can realistically play it, not 2 plus 1 who has a few minutes emergency experience at Pro12 level.

thomond2006

All this discussion about props and not one mention of Hayes.

Buer

Wang King wrote:

That's better!!!

It's about as realistic!

Wang King

connachta wrote: »

France will overwhelm us at scrumtime:mad:
Please Joe, bring back Tony Buckley

That's better!!!

Teferi

Zzippy wrote: »

Nope, I'm not having it. If Murray gets injured v Italy, for instance, we either have Madigan on the bench covering 9 vs France ( :eek: ) or we call up Boss/Marmion, which means Murray is gone for the rest of the tournament.

Absolutely crazy to take that risk, can't see Joe doing it tbh.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm simply laying out where the logic may be coming from.

smiley_face

total former wrote: »

I know what was meant, I just can't see any logic behind it.

Six props is a total waste of seats on the plane, but if six were to go, it's a certainty that one of them will be Michael Bent.

I don't think it's a waste of space to bring 6 props, considering Italy and France are strong in that department, not to mind Argentina and New Zealand.

My preference, assuming Healy is out,
would be McGrath, Kilcoyne, Buckley
and Ross, Moore, White.

But to be fair there are better people to judge props that I, so perhaps Bent is better than Buckley, or indeed White, I couldn't say.
Also Furlong was injured and got cut early on, so can't see him making a come-back before squad selection.

My guess is there will be surprises, so will just have to watch the Wales match and wait and see for the announcement next Monday.
Also James Cronin was unlucky to be injured and couldn't get a chance to impress, but maybe if there were an injury he could be in line for a call-up also.

total former

connachta wrote: »

No, you will never know what would have happened. But enough of that, it's pointless.

Well, we know Furlong was in the squad and Buckley wasn't so we could guess at what would have happened.

But yes, pointless.

Zzippy

Teferi wrote: »

Ah, he could cover 9 against the likes of Canada no problem. Obviously I wouldn't want to see him playing 9 in the crunch games but it kind of makes sense if we're only bringing two 9's and trying to save space. Boss or Marmion are only a puddle jump away if one of the actual 9's gets injured heading into the knockouts or big pool games.

Nope, I'm not having it. If Murray gets injured v Italy, for instance, we either have Madigan on the bench covering 9 vs France ( :eek: ) or we call up Boss/Marmion, which means Murray is gone for the rest of the tournament.

Absolutely crazy to take that risk, can't see Joe doing it tbh.

connachta

No, you will never know what would have happened. But enough of that, it's pointless.

total former

connachta wrote: »

That's clarify nothing, a fit Furlong could have disappointed Schmidt more than Buckley

WTF?

Genuinely baffled.

connachta

That's clarifying nothing, a fit Furlong could have disappointed Schmidt more than Buckley

connachta

total former wrote: »

Furlong is injured and has not been considered at all. Buckley is just not picked.

Yaeh that's why I said approximately. Both have 1-2% chance to go

total former

connachta wrote: »

He should but that's clear he (highly probably) won't and I'm pleased with that. So Killer and Bent BUT the latter must absolutely focus on playing LH 100%, trainnig sessions, Wales, England, Canadoumania (:P). That's the best way to put pressure on Killcoyne and have a really contested spot behind McGrath.
Then 3 specialist props on the other side, Furlong is approximately in the same position than Buckley, so I guess White is the logical call (even if, once more, I would not be delighted in a Connacht perspective)

Furlong is injured and has not been considered at all. Buckley is just not picked. He absolutely will not be called up.

Teferi

Zzippy wrote: »

Why would it put pressure on Sexton when we have Jackson too? Jackson starts against Canada/Romania and benches in the other game, Sexton only has to play a few minutes in one and 60 mins in the other. He starts our big games anyway, so it's not a lot of rugby for him...

Are people seriously considering going to the WC with a 10/12 who's never played 9 at senior level bar a few minutes cover, covering 9 in an international WC game??!!! There are curveballs, and curveballs, and this is out of the park...

Ah, he could cover 9 against the likes of Canada no problem. Obviously I wouldn't want to see him playing 9 in the crunch games but it kind of makes sense if we're only bringing two 9's and trying to save space. Boss or Marmion are only a puddle jump away if one of the actual 9's gets injured heading into the knockouts or big pool games.

connachta

irishbucsfan wrote: »

So if we took 6 props then but you don't think Buckley should travel who should the props be?

He should but that's clear he (highly probably) won't and I'm pleased with that. So Killer and Bent BUT the latter must absolutely focus on playing LH 100%, trainnig sessions, Wales, England, Canadoumania (:P). That's the best way to put pressure on Killcoyne and have a really contested spot behind McGrath.
Then 3 specialist props on the other side, Furlong is approximately in the same position than Buckley, so I guess White is the logical call (even if, once more, I would not be delighted in a Connacht perspective)

irishbucsfan

connachta wrote: »

No, as I said, I'd really wants Buckley in the West we need him despertatly

So if we took 6 props then but you don't think Buckley should travel who should the props be?

connachta

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Ah right I see. So you've no faith in Kilcoyne or Bent, so I suppose that leaves us with Denis Buckley. I sense a pattern here...

No, as I said, I'd really want Buckley in the West we need him despertatly

total former

smiley_face wrote: »

I think what was meant was that Bent is first choice backup if 5 props, as he covers two positions,
But if 6 props are taken we will just take the best 3 props in each position, and Bent may not be in the top 3 in either position,
despite being the top choice that can cover both.

I know what was meant, I just can't see any logic behind it.

Six props is a total waste of seats on the plane, but if six were to go, it's a certainty that one of them will be Michael Bent.

irishbucsfan

connachta wrote: »

Ok, but I've no faith at all in Bent and Killcoyne, above all if Bent is also occupied to prepare for TH. That's why I'd prefer 6 props instead of Darren Cave (assuming two SH are going)

Ah right I see. So you've no faith in Kilcoyne or Bent, so I suppose that leaves us with Denis Buckley. I sense a pattern here...

connachta

smiley_face wrote: »

I think what was meant was that Bent is first choice backup if 5 props, as he covers two positions,
But if 6 props are taken we will just take the best 3 props in each position, and Bent may not be in the top 3 in either position,
despite being the top choice that can cover both.

EX-AC-TLY:)