Irish Rugby

davyjose

Call it a knee-jerk reaction if you want, but is Irish Rugby rubbish? I mean, two teams we considered to be amongst the best in Europe, got absolutely hammered by two teams which I personally wouldn't consider to be anything special (Imagine a Super 14 team such as Crusaders against us .... :eek: )
Our National side is consistently under-achieving, to the point where you have to ask, are we underachieving, or just second best???

Maybe I'll feel different in a few weeks (I'm stuck in work and in the last hour the Soccer results were heart-breaking too, so I'm fairly dejected right now), but I really can't see us do anything at all in the World Cup - and our chances of a 6N/HEC etc don't look to great next year. The ML just doesn't seem like much consolation!!!!

Sangre

a rolleyes for you....

Funkstard

Pendulum supporting at it's finest

EdgarAllenPoo

We do seem to be fairly cream crackered going on recent form but as I said in the Munster thread it could work to the national side's advantage. The Irish players are centrally contracted so if O'Sullivan wants them rested they get rested and since they only have a few Magners League games to play it gives key players more resting time for the summer tour(if it happens) and the world cup.

copacetic

davyjose wrote:

Call it a knee-jerk reaction if you want, but is Irish Rugby rubbish? I mean, two teams we considered to be amongst the best in Europe, got absolutely hammered by two teams which I personally wouldn't consider to be anything special (Imagine a Super 14 team such as Crusaders against us .... :eek: )
Our National side is consistently under-achieving, to the point where you have to ask, are we underachieving, or just second best???

Maybe I'll feel different in a few weeks (I'm stuck in work and in the last hour the Soccer results were heart-breaking too, so I'm fairly dejected right now), but I really can't see us do anything at all in the World Cup - and our chances of a 6N/HEC etc don't look to great next year. The ML just doesn't seem like much consolation!!!!

hope we aren't now inundated with crap threads like this. both teams had bad days with poor individual performances, simple as that.

damnyanks

Should be good for Ireland overall perhaps. Hayes needs a rest!

davyjose

P!ss off guys - it's a valid question, and one that was asked repeatedly after the 6N, (when I said give it a rest). But it's a very simple question: Is Irish Rugby good or is it bad???

For the person that said pendulum supporting. Could you show me where I said my support was wavering?

Sangre

Didn't Reddan score 2 tries for Wasps?

funky penguin

I don't think its fair to say Ireland did poorly in the 6N. Sure we choked against France, but equally, they choked against England. We did the best we could against Italy, and the fashion in which France beat Scotland proves how close it was. We now have a World cup to look forward to with one of the best Irish teams ever.

As for the clubs, it was said already: Bad days, bad individual performances. Also, we shouldn't take away from Wasps and the Scarlets. Both played very well. Personally, I'll be cheering on the latter for the championship.

keystone

If the question is "Is Irish Rugby good or bad?", I think the answer is that it is good...very good. Currently we have the best crop of players we have ever had and the structure is envied across Europe.

I think the more pertinent question is whether O'Sullivan is selecting the strongest Irish squad he can. Look at Bob Casey and Leo Cullen as two prime examples of players that are easily better that our current replacements.

As for our performance in the 6N, we were seconds away from winning the championship and only some unprofessionalism in the Scotland game early on and more obviously in the Italy game at the end, we would have had it more or less tied up going into the final day. I'm sure that mistakes like that won't happen in the world cup and next years 6N. I'd quite fancy the grand slam next year as it will probably be the last chance for a number of the players at their peak to do it.

The performances from the big 2 in the HEC left a lot to be desired. The Fly-Halves didn't turn up for large periods of both games and both packs were not up to it.

I'd like to pose two questions to anyone who'd like to answer them

1. Is O'Sullivan picking the strongest squad?
2. We need some decent front rows to start comming through. Any thoughts?

RuggieBear

Let's be nice, people. I'm not in a good mood.:(

Snickers Man

davyjose wrote:

P!ss off guys - it's a valid question, and one that was asked repeatedly after the 6N,

if you think it's bad now, give it a few years. We have probably the best crop of players we have ever had, most of their careers are coming to an end, and the peaks and troughs inherent in Irish rugby traditionally mean that after every good period there is a bleak period which lasts twice as long.

If you want to check the statistics here's one for you (i've done it already). Traditionally, over the 130 years or so that Ireland has been playing international rugby, our internnational win rate is about 40%. In the Six Nations since 2000 (when it started and when coincidentally the bulk of our current team started their international careers) we have played 40 6N matches and won 29 of them with no draws. Thats a record of 72.5%, way ahead of trend and bettered only by France so far this decade.

In the 1990s in the five nations we played 40 games, won eight drew two and lost 30. That's a rate of 22.5%.

Enjoy the good times while they last. I think this team may have a big world cup in it if they all stay healthy. it will be the last hurrah for many of them.

Sangre

Hayes and Hickie are the only 2 players who would possibly be finished after this world cup.

Funkstard

davyjose wrote:

P!ss off guys - it's a valid question, and one that was asked repeatedly after the 6N, (when I said give it a rest). But it's a very simple question: Is Irish Rugby good or is it bad???

For the person that said pendulum supporting. Could you show me where I said my support was wavering?

It wasn't really a personal remark - it's just the Irish public expresses an almost rhythmic pattern of highs and lows after rugby is played. We can be world cup contenders after one match, then after another there is widespread despair at the problems facing the team. We've had a few bad matches; nothing bigger than that.

keystone

Well, O'Kelly is more or less finished now and a lot of guys are hitting 30 or so.

They will be competitive for a few more years.

davyjose

Snickers Man wrote:

if you think it's bad now, give it a few years.

That's my point Snickers man. I can see how I got some backs up with how I posed the question (worst mood EVER!!! ) To be honest, I think Irish Rugby is very good, but I'm starting to have doubts about our level. A mediocre performance in last years 6Nations (given the quality that's there), was covered up by awesome qualifying performances in the HEC, awesome QF's and an amazing win by Munster. We have absolutely capitulated in so many ways this year, that it begs the question.

Sorry if I came across as a fecker earlier

Sangre

Regarding are future potential, we did just win the u21s 6N grandslam.

Snickers Man

Sangre wrote:

Hayes and Hickie are the only 2 players who would possibly be finished after this world cup.

Guys who will be the wrong side of 30 after the world cup will include
Dempsey 32
Hickie 31
O'Gara 30
Stringer 30
Horan 30
Hayes 34
Easterby 32
Wallace 31
O'Kelly 33

and they;ll all be four years older at the next WC so there will be the desire to start phasing n anew team pretty quickly

zAbbo

Sangre wrote:

Regarding are future potential, we did just win the u21s 6N grandslam.

And we might unearth a few gems at the u19 RWC in Belfast next week.

Benedict XVI

Irish rugby is poor at best and their 'achivements' are constantly overreated by all in this country.
What havew they ever won, triple crowns which are the equilivent on the Carling Cup in soccer or the National Laegue in GA.
This year again they conspired to f**k up when it came to it. Lost in last minute to France, did not beat a poor scotland team by enough and alow Italy to score a late try.
Each year there is a majot F**k up whne it comes to betting the main job done, but what the hell they won the triple crown.
And what about there WC performances, nothing better than a QF each time.
As for the clubs, well it's a good thing that Munster won something last year, it was good to win something after decades of hearing about their friendly win over a hungover NZ back in the 70s
Irish rugby will never win anything, get used of it

Laslo

Irish rugby is good. Not great though. You get some great performances now and again but they're too inconsistent to be considered world beaters... or even 6 Nations winners. Irish rugby will never be great until they learn to play at 100% for 80 minutes. If they can't do it now with the squad they have, well... they probably never will.

Overrated, over-hyped and underachieving. But the potential is there - whether it's realised or not is another question.

crybaby

Irish rugby is in a great state at the moment however there are a couple of key problems in it and one of the major ones seems to be how reliant we are on Paul O'Connell and Brian O'Driscoll and that was highlighted this weekend

Super 14s is a good competition but its a bit sad to see it be hyped up as if there a bunch of supermen I thought we had gotten past that nonsense

and it is very much a valid question your posing but i think we just havent reached our potential yet as a rugby team we should have won the grandslam but we bottled it and so it is up to the team to make up for that in the world cup

Laslo

crybaby wrote:

we should have won the grandslam

I honestly don't know why everyone keeps saying this. It's like there was this automatic assumption before the tournament that we were expected to beat a superior French team.

davyjose

Laslo wrote:

this automatic assumption before the tournament that we were expected to beat a superior French team.

It's after the tournament now, and we should have beaten them. We should have at least won the 6 Nations. Hands up who didn't feel like we'd blown it against Italy.
I'm more worried about Club level though. What looked very bright and promising last year, is starting to look very dull and unpromising. And I don't just make that assessment after today: Gloucester & Leicester, were screaming alarm bells!!!

Laslo

davyjose wrote:

It's after the tournament now, and we should have beaten them. We should have at least won the 6 Nations.

I'd have to disagree with you there. I'm amazed we did as well as we did in The 6 Nations. We came within a score of winning the tournament... but based on what?

• Poor performance against Wales - lack poor refereeing decisions might not have cost us that match but it would have been very, very tight.
• Dire first half against France - we were lucky to still be in the game by half time. A pathetic last minute choke that cost us both the game and the tournament.
• The best performance was against England.
• Shocking game against the wooden spooners - beating them by only 1 point.
• Poor first half against Italy, followed by a string of scores, followed by what was, quite frankly, a baffling concession of two scores to an exhausted and ragged Italian side.

Not only should we not have won the tournament - we probably should have come 3rd or 4th. It's just a good thing that the other teams were even more inconsistent than we were.

Hopefully it'll be a wakeup call to the Irish squad ahead of the World Cup.

davyjose

Laslo wrote:

I'd have to disagree with you there. I'm amazed we did as well as we did in The 6 Nations. We came within a score of winning the tournament... but based on what?

• Poor performance against Wales - lack poor refereeing decisions might not have cost us that match but it would have been very, very tight.
• Dire first half against France - we were lucky to still be in the game by half time. A pathetic last minute choke that cost us both the game and the tournament.
• The best performance was against England.
• Shocking game against the wooden spooners - beating them by only 1 point.
• Poor first half against Italy, followed by a string of scores, followed by what was, quite frankly, a baffling concession of two scores to an exhausted and ragged Italian side.

Not only should we not have won the tournament - we probably should have come 3rd or 4th. It's just a good thing that the other teams were even more inconsistent than we were.

Hopefully it'll be a wakeup call to the Irish squad ahead of the World Cup.

I agree with everything your saying and you could nearly write the very same about last years tournament too.
But in terms of not conceding tries at the very end of matches, if you're gonna do it once (and lose the GS), at least don't do it twice (and lose the 6N too). In that regard we blew it.

funky penguin

davyjose wrote:

Hands up who didn't feel like we'd blown it against Italy.

/me raises hand.

I agree that letting that last try in was painful, but who's to say France still wouldn't have pushed harder knowing they needed 30 points or so? Its impossible to tell, and I think its unfair to blame them for trying to score as many points as possible.

nacho libre

Underachieving not overrated in my opinion.
There can be no excuses next September if Ireland(barring injuries to key players) don't get to the semi-final of the World Cup.
That is the least we should be expecting, anything less is a failure, in my opinion. This team, after what happened in the Six Nations, should be more determined than ever to teach France a lesson in their own backyard.

Laslo

nacho libre wrote:

Underachieving not overrated in my opinion.

An opinion you're entitled to, of course. But I would say they are overrated myself. Underachieving in the sense that we're not winning any silverware. Overrated in the sense that we're simply not putting in the performances that the hype might suggest.

I'm (deeply) sorry to say it... Ireland just aren't as good as everyone seems to think. We'll see at the WC.

Chucky the tree

We are an average side with a few excellent players. What have this irish side done to be considered very good? A couple of triple crowns? Wow.

Losing to NZ by a few points is still losing, i dont understand why people mention that as a positive. We beat a second string SA side, and a terrible Aussie side.

They are definitly overrated.

copacetic

Chucky the tree wrote:

We are an average side with a few excellent players. What have this irish side done to be considered very good? A couple of triple crowns? Wow.

for people who are, ahem, slightly more mature in age (like myself) there is much less of a tendency to be so blasé about actually winning things. I think this thread illustrates how good the current side is when people are so critical of achievments that are up there with the best ever by any Irish team.

Chucky the tree

copacetic wrote:

for people who are, ahem, slightly more mature in age (like myself) there is much less of a tendency to be so blasé about actually winning things. I think this thread illustrates how good the current side is when people are so critical of achievments that are up there with the best ever by any Irish team.

So because we had a **** irish rugby team for years before, we should celebrate a triple crown like its a Grand slam?

EdgarAllenPoo

I'm guessing that even though the French teams have pulled out and a lot of the GP teams have pulled out of the European Cup there still isn't a place for Connacht next year, that's a shame.

copacetic

Chucky the tree wrote:

So because we had a **** irish rugby team for years before, we should celebrate a triple crown like its a Grand slam?

What are you on about? I didn't say anything like that.

This is arguably the best Irish team ever. Yet for some reason people want to debate whether they are rubbish or not? It's ridiculous.

Chucky the tree

copacetic wrote:

I didn't say that did I? pull your head in.

So what are you saying then?

copacetic

Chucky the tree wrote:

So what are you saying then?

apologies, I edited above post. What I am trying to say is that we are a very small country with very small rugby playing numbers. It's a miracle we are up there anywhere near the best teams in the world. We clearly aren't 'rubbish'.

(and please no-one bring up New Zealand being small, their rugby playing numbers are massive and they get players from all the islands too)

Sangre

Comparisons to NZ are only valid if rugby was our national sport.

copacetic

Sangre wrote:

Comparisons to NZ are only valid if rugby was our national sport.

exactly, but whenever you point out what a small country we are rugby wise someone always says "New Zealand" are too, when they have a much larger player pool to choose from.

Chucky the tree

copacetic wrote:

apologies, I edited above post. What I am trying to say is that we are a very small country with very small rugby playing numbers. It's a miracle we are up there anywhere near the best teams in the world. We clearly aren't 'rubbish'.

(and please no-one bring up New Zealand being small, their rugby playing numbers are massive and they get players from all the islands too)

Wales. An even smaller playing pool yet they have managed to win a GS in the last few years. And we probaly have better players then them but we just cant seem to do it when it matters.

RuggieBear

Chucky the tree wrote:

Wales. An even smaller playing pool yet they have managed to win a GS in the last few years. And we probaly have better players then them but we just cant seem to do it when it matters.

larger playing pool. and also their national sport.

copacetic

Chucky the tree wrote:

Wales. An even smaller playing pool yet they have managed to win a GS in the last few years. And we probaly have better players then them but we just cant seem to do it when it matters.

I should have added Wales to New Zealand. Rugby is the national game in wales also and although they have less playing numbers they have more clubs. Besides they only have 1000 or so less senior players than us. As a % of population their playing numbers are much higher so they are much more likely to have the better sportsmen in the country play rugby than we are.

Anyway, I wasn't looking to argue should we have won a grand slam. We should have this year, we were very close to it. However you need to be consistently good or come up against other teams on bad days to win grand slams and up until the last few years we have been nowhere near. At least now we are competing, no-one is happy that we threw it away but saying that that last couple of mins against france makes us a rubbish rugby side is laughable and that is my understanding of the OPs opinion.

nacho libre

Laslo wrote:

An opinion you're entitled to, of course. But I would say they are overrated myself. Underachieving in the sense that we're not winning any silverware. Overrated in the sense that we're simply not putting in the performances that the hype might suggest.

I'm (deeply) sorry to say it... Ireland just aren't as good as everyone seems to think. We'll see at the WC.

I have to disagree.. Ireland put in a good perfomance against France albeit for 39 minutes of the second half... They comprehensively beat England although people will remind me it was an average English side but to put 30 points on an English team is not something Ireland has done too often. I would like to view it as a poor English side being outclassed by a much superior Irish team. I'm not saying they are good enough to lift the trophy but if they perform to their full potential, and have the ability to see out games, this Irish team is capable of giving the All Blacks a very good game.
Well, as you said we'll see come September.

Chucky the tree

if all the other teams perform to their full potential they will have a good chance against NZ.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

randomname2005

keystone wrote:

I'd like to pose two questions to anyone who'd like to answer them

1. Is O'Sullivan picking the strongest squad?

I'm not sure if this answering the question but I think that O'Sullivan's hands are tied to some extent when it comes to selecting overseas players. If you look at the hassle the RFU has with getting the english players from their clubs to play for the English team, the IRFU will have even more hassle.
IF we had (for example) Leo Cullen, Eoin Reddin and Shane Jennings playing in the national team they would have had to go back to playing with their clubs on the off weekends of the 6 nations. Of course Jordan Murphy was selected but I think this policy allows our front line players to rest during the six nations when necessary, stay in training camp etc.
just my €.02
R

buck65

Lads I think we are playing to our potential. We are probably 5th or 6th best in the world. Realistically all this nonsense about the world cup is clouding the real issue - will we qualify from our group?
If we do (and its a big if) we will probably meet NZ in the quarter finals and then we are facing a massive test and will probably fall short IMo.
I think we are all hyping ourselves up too much and will be bitterly disappointed come Autumn.
In regards to the HEC Munster looked tired and spent but will be back, Leinster underachieved again (they really do frustrate).
Ok Im off to hide from the backlash.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

nacho libre

Chucky the tree wrote:

if all the other teams perform to their full potential they will have a good chance against NZ.

I don't think Argentina, Italy, Scotland, England and Wales playing to their full potential are as good as Ireland. I Can't see any of those teams troubling New Zealand. I think France, Australia and Ireland are the only teams that have the ability to run New Zealand close come in September.

Diamondmaker

nacho libre wrote:

I don't think Argentina, Italy, Scotland, England and Wales playing to their full potential are as good as Ireland. I Can't see any of those teams troubling New Zealand. I think France, Australia and Ireland are the only teams that have the ability to run New Zealand close come in September.

ageed but also ad SA to that list.

damnyanks

Argentina would have a shot as well. The fact that they dont take part in a serious competition each year makes them hard to predict.

We know they are good but its difficult to measure it against teams that take part in tri / 6 nations each year.

Getting out of the group is going to be hard for Ireland, France and Argentina.

Chucky the tree

nacho libre wrote:

I don't think Argentina, Italy, Scotland, England and Wales playing to their full potential are as good as Ireland. I Can't see any of those teams troubling New Zealand. I think France, Australia and Ireland are the only teams that have the ability to run New Zealand close come in September.

Argentina would have a very good chance. I wouldnt rule out wales or England either. Wales have showed that when they have a fully fit squad they are excellent. Although their coach is terrible, he really retricts there chances.

England got lucky in the 6 nations with injury. They stumbled on their best squad and have a nice draw in the WC. They wont beat SA but i would give them a decent chance against the aussies or Wales. Thats not a bad road to the semi finals. Against NZ i wouldnt rule them out at that stage.

South africa are the most likely team to trouble NZ.