Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread IV

padser · 30-08-2015 01:09PM

Buer wrote: »

Not sure if there'll be an official announcement, per se. The squad needs to be submitted to the IRB by 5pm tomorrow. It may not be announced publicly until Tuesday morning.

However, the squad will more than likely be decided on today with meetings with those omitted taking place today/tomorrow morning so I suspect we'll have some concrete rumours by the end of the day.

Thanks, thought it was being announced officially today. As you say, should start to leak today so....

salmocab · 30-08-2015 01:15PM

The rugby are clever enough to make most announcements during the week as there is no other sport on and that makes the rugby headline sports news.

awec · 30-08-2015 01:16PM

salmocab wrote: »

The rugby are clever enough to make most announcements during the week as there is no other sport on and that makes the rugby headline sports news.

I doubt that's the reason.

I honestly don't know what the reason is though, it's bound to leak out.

Zzippy · 30-08-2015 01:18PM

salmocab wrote: »

The rugby are clever enough to make most announcements during the week as there is no other sport on and that makes the rugby headline sports news.

"The rugby" ?

salmocab · 30-08-2015 01:20PM

Zzippy wrote: »

"The rugby" ?

Yeah its common usage around our way, a perfectly cromulent phrase

salmocab · 30-08-2015 01:21PM

awec wrote: »

I doubt that's the reason.

I honestly don't know what the reason is though, it's bound to leak out.

I was joking but it does work regardless

aimee1 · 30-08-2015 01:56PM

total former wrote: »

Healy McGrath Bent Ross White
Best Cronin Strauss
POC Toner Ryan Henderson
SOB POM Heaslip Henry Murphy
Murray Reddan Boss
Sexton Madigan Jackson
Payne Henshaw Fitz Earls
D Kearney Zebo R Kearney Bowe

Healy, McGrath, Bent, Ross, Moore*

Best, Cronin, Strauss

POC, Toner, Ryan, Henderson

SOB, POM, Heaslip, Henry, Murphy

Murray, Reddan, Boss, Sexton, Madigan, Jackson

Payne, Henshaw, Trimble, D Kearney, Zebo, R Kearney, Bowe, Earls/Fitz**

* White if Moore doesnt make it
** Injuries yesterday will determine this spot.

dub_skav · 30-08-2015 05:24PM

salmocab wrote: »

Yeah its common usage around our way, a perfectly cromulent phrase

It's a way to embiggen their press coverage

30-08-2015 05:30PM

Murray Kinsella just tweeted the video of POC's clearout. He doesn't have Tipuric by the neck. It's a bad call.

irishbucsfan · 30-08-2015 05:37PM

Tara Small Yawn wrote: »

Murray Kinsella just tweeted the video of POC's clearout. He doesn't have Tipuric by the neck. It's a bad call.

That video just confirms it was the correct call. He had his arms around his shoulders at first and then they slide up and he pulls Tipuric to the ground by his neck. Which is exactly what refs have been asked to watch out for:

In terms of ruck clearouts using “head rolls” and “body rolls”, this is not specifically referenced in Law. However, Law 10.4 (e) regarding dangerous play and misconduct should be applied to both the tackle and clear out:

“Dangerous tackling. A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. A player must not tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. A tackle around the neck or head is dangerous play. Sanction: Penalty kick”

Therefore body rolls are permissible but head rolls should be penalised.

aimee1 · 30-08-2015 05:38PM

Tara Small Yawn wrote: »

Murray Kinsella just tweeted the video of POC's clearout. He doesn't have Tipuric by the neck. It's a bad call.

doesnt say much for barnesy. he was 1 metre from a ball "definitely held up" and CJ went upstairs. But he trusted his other TJ on a call from 40 metres away

irishbucsfan · 30-08-2015 05:41PM

aimee1 wrote: »

doesnt say much for barnesy. he was 1 metre from a ball "definitely held up" and CJ went upstairs. But he trusted his other TJ on a call from 40 metres away

Yeah that aspect of it was really bizarre. He asked Barnes and then completely ignored his response!

Maybe he misheard him with in all the commotion and thought he was less sure. Frustrating given it lead to the bizarre decision by the TMO to call a knock on.

The Lost Sheep · 30-08-2015 05:57PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yeah that aspect of it was really bizarre. He asked Barnes and then completely ignored his response!

Maybe he misheard him with in all the commotion and thought he was less sure. Frustrating given it lead to the bizarre decision by the TMO to call a knock on.

Whats bizarre? He asked what his AR saw. He doesn't have to use that view if he doesn't want/need to. Ref only has to take AR viewpoint if they feel they have to

30-08-2015 06:00PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That video just confirms it was the correct call. He had his arms around his shoulders at first and then they slide up and he pulls Tipuric to the ground by his neck. Which is exactly what refs have been asked to watch out for:

No he quite clearly doesn't. He has Tipuric about the shoulders.

aimee1 · 30-08-2015 06:00PM

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Whats bizarre? He asked what his AR saw. He doesn't have to use that view if he doesn't want/need to. Ref only has to take AR viewpoint if they feel they have to

yeah but barnes was 1 metre away and was clear in what he saw. the other TJ was about 40 metres away and CJ didnt go upstairs

irishbucsfan · 30-08-2015 06:00PM

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Whats bizarre? He asked what his AR saw. He doesn't have to use that view if he doesn't want/need to. Ref only has to take AR viewpoint if they feel they have to

He certainly wasn't incorrect, but if you're a referee and you ask your AR and the AR said he was certain of what happeend, and the AR was standing right on the spot, you'd want a pretty good reason not to accept that opinion.

irishbucsfan · 30-08-2015 06:19PM

Tara Small Yawn wrote: »

No he quite clearly doesn't. He has Tipuric about the shoulders.

Starts at the shoulders and then moves up as he twists him and brings him to ground. That's not the only angle, Pearce was on the other side which was a better angle.

molloyjh · 30-08-2015 06:29PM

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Whats bizarre? He asked what his AR saw. He doesn't have to use that view if he doesn't want/need to. Ref only has to take AR viewpoint if they feel they have to

I think whats bizarre is that he was happy to take the viewpoint of a touch judge who was a good distance away from an incident but when Barnes made a very definitive call (and he repeated it, being very specific that he was sure about his call) he ignored it. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of both decisions he listened to one TJ and didn't listen to another despite the latter being a lot closer to the particular incident.

Yeah_Right · 30-08-2015 06:45PM

Barnes said it finished held up. Not that it never got to ground.

awec · 30-08-2015 06:54PM

I'm pretty sure Barnes said it was "definitely held up".

Yeah_Right · 30-08-2015 07:15PM

Just checked it there. Barnes says it was definitely held up but wasn't sure how it got there. CJ says shall we check and Barnes says sure. CJ says to the TMO that they are pretty sure that it was held up but could he double check. The TMO makes a bad call saying it was knocked on but CJ was right to check.

Flipper22 · 30-08-2015 07:28PM

Yeah the bizarre bit was the TMO calling a knock on. There was another much less obvious strip that CJ did call as a strip.

.ak · 30-08-2015 07:30PM

Yeah. Massive difference between going with the AR for an open play foul and a potential try. The ref will always go with the tmo if there's even a shred of doubt.

30-08-2015 08:34PM

So apparently the players now know who is and isn't going but a few from outside 31 are playing next week.

Can't state as to reliability of above as completely second hand.

bilston · 30-08-2015 08:35PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So apparently the players now know who is and isn't going but a few from outside 31 are playing next week.

Can't state as to reliability of above as completely second hand.

What would the point be of players from outside the squad playing next week?

aimee1 · 30-08-2015 08:41PM

bilston wrote: »

What would the point be of players from outside the squad playing next week?

injuries at prop, earls, fitz, trimble

vienne86 · 30-08-2015 08:44PM

Deleted User wrote: »

So apparently the players now know who is and isn't going but a few from outside 31 are playing next week.

Can't state as to reliability of above as completely second hand.

Surely there will be a leak sometime soon so.....

awec · 30-08-2015 08:51PM

aimee1 wrote: »

injuries at prop, earls, fitz, trimble

If Trimble is going he must surely be in the squad for England.

Rigor Mortis · 30-08-2015 09:18PM

total former wrote: »

No. Maul defence is a strong point of Toner however.

aimee1 wrote: »

injuries at prop, earls, fitz, trimble

That seems like a reason to instruct the provinces to keep them match fit, not to put them on the pitch next week. Except for the props, there we may well need one to bolster the walking wounded

Buer · 30-08-2015 09:33PM

Unless there are multiple players that cannot play next week, the notion of giving players outside the 31 game time seems completely bizarre and wasteful to me.

Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread IV

Comments