Ireland Vs Italy *mod warning post 320*

LostPassword

MungBean wrote: »

He doesnt need to be starting wing, but if you start Trimble who do you put on the bench as centre/wing cover ? Earls or McFadden ? If Earls doesnt start on the wing he doesnt make the 22.

Aside from the absence of discernible logic in your post, in fairness to McFadden, he did himself no favours as a prospective centre against Russia, especially when compared to Earls who was great.

MungBean

LostPassword wrote: »

If Earls isn't on form at the moment, he must be some sort of super-hero when on form. He was very good against Australia and was brilliant against Russia (one world-class finish, one try from nothing, one great offload that led to a try, made loads of hard-yards in midfield, excellent decision making, etc). It was telling that immediately after he went off, our midfield disintegrated markedly.

Everyone did well against Russia, Russia were terrible, he played a position he;s known to be poor in and still looked good. He played well against Australia but it was a forward arm wrestle with little back movement. He didnt perform in the warm ups, he didnt perform against USA.

You cant honestly say that in the last 6-7 games he is a better winger than Trimble. You just cant.

MungBean

Fishooks12 wrote: »

He's been a regular for Ireland for the last year, people forget how good he was in the six nations against England. He deserves to be starting, Tribmle is playing well but overall Earls is more of a threat and offers more pace.

Fitz was also a regular and now isnt in the 30. You lose form you lose your place its as simple as that. I dont understand why Earls is persisted with despite a better option available.

JustinDee

Trimble and Sexton have hardly been axed. They're still part of the 22 and are thus vital parts of the gameplan. They're not there 'in case' either.
People should relax. The team have been doing their homework, are in an excellent frame of mind and will hit Italy with everything from the off.

Cpt_Blackbeard

MungBean wrote: »

JustinDee wrote: »

Earls had an huge all-round game against Australia. They are not weak opposition.

He had a good game in defence but I dont recall him doing much of note in attack. Trimble on the other hand has stood out in every game he's started. Earls came into the tournament as the set 11 despite form and despite being out performed by Trimble. I dont think thats right and dont think his Russia and Australia performance outweighs all that Trimble has done.

I completely agree (as expected). Earls didn't deserve the wing spot ahead of Trimble for the USA game but, he can't be fairly dropped after his recent performances - He scored 2 brilliant individual tries against Russia and has done everything asked of him.

MungBean

LostPassword wrote: »

Aside from the absence of discernible logic in your post, in fairness to McFadden, he did himself no favours as a prospective centre against Russia, especially when compared to Earls who was great.

Picking Earls over Trimble based on their current ability on the wing is absent of discernible logic. Earls also had a number of shockers in defence in the centre in the warm ups. McFadden is a better 13 by a long way. As I said Russia are terrible, you cant gauge much by that match other than basics.

MungBean

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

I completely agree (as expected). Earls didn't deserve the wing spot ahead of Trimble for the USA game but, he can't be fairly dropped after his recent performances - He scored 2 brilliant individual tries against Russia and has done everything asked of him.

Look at those tries again, the tackles fell off him. He did well but any team worth their salt would have defended better. He did play great against Australia but it was a forward battle and he seen little ball to show anything. That doesnt put him ahead of Trimble who has actually shown what he can do against good opposition.

marco_polo

MungBean wrote: »

He doesnt need to be starting wing, but if you start Trimble who do you put on the bench as centre/wing cover ? Earls or McFadden ? If Earls doesnt start on the wing he doesnt make the 22.

I could be wrong (and probably am) but I dont see any other reason to have Earls ahead of Trimble if not for his centre cover (which I'm attempting to work out). I like Earls, he's a fantastic player but at the moment Trimble is better and has stood up and performed whenever asked of him. Earls hasnt (good against Aussies when Backs had virtually no ball and Russia which doesnt show anything) but people seem to think he will change at some stage and play better than Trimble is capable of. So no matter what Trimble does, he cannot make the 15 because Earls may be better.

I would imagine Earls would simply swap places with Trimble on the bench if that happened, as he is also the full back cover in the matchday 22.

I would a mild preference for Trimble starting based on current form but it is hardly the sort of decision to get too worked up over.

MungBean

JustinDee wrote: »

Trimble and Sexton have hardly been axed. They're still part of the 22 and are thus vital parts of the gameplan. They're not there 'in case' either.
People should relax. The team have been doing their homework, are in an excellent frame of mind and will hit Italy with everything from the off.

Nobody is saying anyone has been axed. We're discussing the starting picks.

MungBean

marco_polo wrote: »

I would imagine Earls would simply swap places with Trimble on the bench if that happened, as he is also the full back cover in the matchday 22.

I would a mild preference for Trimble starting based on current form but it is hardly the sort of decision to get too worked up over.

I'm not getting worked up over it but its hard not to feel for Trimble who has done everything humanly possible to make this squad while Earls has taken the spot based on what ifs and maybes.

Fullback might be a more logical reason than centre cover now that ya mention it.

Cpt_Blackbeard

MungBean wrote: »

LostPassword wrote: »

Aside from the absence of discernible logic in your post, in fairness to McFadden, he did himself no favours as a prospective centre against Russia, especially when compared to Earls who was great.

Picking Earls over Trimble based on their current ability on the wing is absent of discernible logic. Earls also had a number of shockers in defence in the centre in the warm ups. McFadden is a better 13 by a long way. As I said Russia are terrible, you cant gauge much by that match other than basics.

Rubbish. If the Russia match only shows us the basics then McFadden doesn't have the defense to be a centre at any level above Pro12 - He was 90/95% responsible for the second Russian try. As noted, our whole backline structure fell apart when he moved to 13 also.

CWone

TheHighRoad wrote: »

Game over. Sorry the "CMON IRELAND" in threads is a pet hate of mine. Its not they actually can see the encouragement.

Know where you are coming from but in fairness the cmon Ireland is really for ourselves and not for them - they don't hear it on the telly either but that doesn't stop me from shouting it at the top of my voice - to the bemusement of the neighbours. Cmoooooooooooooooone IIIIIIIIIreland!!!!!!!:D:D

keane2097

MungBean wrote: »

Picking Earls over Trimble based on their current ability on the wing is absent of discernible logic. Earls also had a number of shockers in defence in the centre in the warm ups. McFadden is a better 13 by a long way. As I said Russia are terrible, you cant gauge much by that match other than basics.

It's kind of bizarre how you're writing off Earls' performance against Russia because their so bad on one hand, while ignoring the fact that McFadden was dreadful against them on the other.

I shudder to think what you'd be saying about Fergus if he was from Limerick.

MungBean

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

Rubbish. If the Russia match only shows us the basics then McFadden doesn't have the defense to be a centre at any level above Pro12 - He was 90/95% responsible for the second Russian try. As noted, our whole backline structure fell apart when he moved to 13 also.

If letting in one try disqualifies you from pro12 the teams would be fairly bare. He's was 95% responsible, just as O'Brien was 90% responsible for the first. Doesnt mean he doesnt know basics, doesnt mean he's crap just means a mistake was made in a game where it wasnt crucial. It happens.

That Russia game isnt a gauge of much. We got the job done and some players got match time, thats all that was.

dfkorg

I think it's neck and neck with the two of them, with Earls being selected for his pace going forward. His form hasn't disappeared, and anyone asked to play 15, 11, 13, 11, 13 is going to find it hard to play consistently as all 3 positions have different demands.

Andrew Trimble is unlucky, but will get game time I'm sure. We have potent scoring threats on both wings, and off the bench. I'm celebrating, not complaining.

Maybe the answer for 6n is BOD at inside centre with Bowe, Earls and Trimble making up the other 3 positions??

MungBean

keane2097 wrote: »

It's kind of bizarre how you're writing off Earls' performance against Russia because their so bad on one hand, while ignoring the fact that McFadden was dreadful against them on the other.

I shudder to think what you'd be saying about Fergus if he was from Limerick.

I'm not writing off anyone and keep your ignorant accusations of bias to yourself.

keane2097

MungBean wrote: »

I'm not writing off anyone and keep your ignorant accusations of bias to yourself.

[X] Reading comprehension fail

I said you're writing off his performance against Russia, which you've explicitly done a bunch of times.

Toss the "ignorant" line around all you want, everybody reading the thread knows I'm right.

Leslie91

I reckon Trimble has the right to feel aggrieved. In my opinion he has been playing the wing position better than Earls. In terms of how Dec is picking the team, this means Earls has started every game right?. There's not a whole lot between them but on balance I would have picked Trimble for sunday.

justsomebloke

Ok can people please be civil, stop trolling and stop reacting to trolls

Leslie91

dfkorg wrote: »

I think it's neck and neck with the two of them, with Earls being selected for his pace going forward. His form hasn't disappeared, and anyone asked to play 15, 11, 13, 11, 13 is going to find it hard to play consistently as all 3 positions have different demands.

Andrew Trimble is unlucky, but will get game time I'm sure. We have potent scoring threats on both wings, and off the bench. I'm celebrating, not complaining.

Maybe the answer for 6n is BOD at inside centre with Bowe, Earls and Trimble making up the other 3 positions??

I'd love to see some 'outside the box' thinking like this. If you look at the likes of Bod, Darce, Earls, Trimble, Bowe and McFadden. For me it's a case of trying to get the best 4 on the field at the same time.

The best 4 right now are Bod, Bowe, Trimble and Earls. Darce has not covered himself in glory and might not even be 100%. McFadden has not overly impressed and he has been given the chance to.

TheHighRoad

Leslie91 wrote: »

I reckon Trimble has the right to feel aggrieved. In my opinion he has been playing the wing position better than Earls. In terms of how Dec is picking the team, this means Earls has started every game right?. There's not a whole lot between them but on balance I would have picked Trimble for sunday.

It's strange but Earls, O'Callaghan, Leamy and Ryan seem to always in the squad no matter what. Surely if Kidney is willing to rotate Reddan and Sexton then Trimble, Cullen, and Jennings should be getting a go. I mean Trimble is better than Earls, Cullen is an excellent player and Jennings is much better in the backrow than Leamy or Ryan.

Its very odd in my opinion. Is Kidney too close to certain players to drop them? I mean over the years hes dropped D'arcy, Heaslip, Reddan, Sexton, Kearney, Fitzgerald, O'Brien and Cullen - all players hes unfamiliar with. He refused to drop Horan and Hayes+Buckley for Healy and Ross until injury forced him too and ditto for O'Brien over Leamy. The only player who he would be familiar with and dropped was ROG (and ROG ended up going to the media crying about retiring as a result) and TOL (who was playing awful stuff)

Is Kidney's familiarity with certain players affecting his selections?

Typh

...Hmmm.

While I find most posters here actually have an interesting, more often than not impartial, posting agenda I have to question whether or not you actually want the place to implode into a flame-war due to your inability to at least feign objectivity.

It's not so much asinine posting as it is back-handed. I just think you may be blinded by your... Connacht bias...

justsomebloke

Typh wrote: »

...Hmmm.

While I find most posters here actually have an interesting, more often than not impartial, posting agenda I have to question whether or not you actually want the place to implode into a flame-war due to your inability to at least feign objectivity.

It's not so much asinine posting as it is back-handed. I just think you may be blinded by your... Connacht bias...

no back seat modding please.

Podge_irl

I don't think Earls deserved to start the world cup as first choice. He was dreadful in the warm-ups and Trimble was our best back. It was exceptionally harsh to drop him. That said Earls has performed well at the RWC itself and that is what matters now. There is an argument to be made for Trimble but I don't think anyone can be too annoyed by Earls' inclusion now.

AtItAllDayRef

TheHighRoad wrote: »

It's strange but Earls, O'Callaghan, Leamy and Ryan seem to always in the squad no matter what. Surely if Kidney is willing to rotate Reddan and Sexton then Trimble, Cullen, and Jennings should be getting a go. I mean Trimble is better than Earls, Cullen is an excellent player and Jennings is much better in the backrow than Leamy or Ryan.

Its very odd in my opinion. Is Kidney too close to certain players to drop them? I mean over the years hes dropped D'arcy, Heaslip, Reddan, Sexton, Kearney, Fitzgerald, O'Brien and Cullen - all players hes unfamiliar with. He refused to drop Horan and Hayes+Buckley for Healy and Ross until injury forced him too and ditto for O'Brien over Leamy. The only player who he would be familiar with and dropped was ROG (and ROG ended up going to the media crying about retiring as a result) and TOL (who was playing awful stuff)

Is Kidney's familiarity with certain players affecting his selections?

A lot of people tend to forget it was Kidney who was picking Sexton for Ireland A games when he wasn't even making the Leinster team and that Sexton's break only came from an injury to Felipe. Jennings is a completely different type of openside compared to either Wally or SOB never mind that Leamy plays different positions in the backrow anyway. Cullen is a great leader and runs the lineout but offers little around the park and has never really put in a performance at international level to mark himself out ahead of two seasoned internationals and Lions. Kidney has never rated Reddan even from his time at Munster. Ryan is choosen ahead of others because of versatility in covering blindside and lock something only McLaughlin and McCarthy really offer.

It seems Kidney could win the world cup and still some people would find something to bitch about - he didn't choose player x because of provincial bias etc.

MLC61

In all the conversations about current form and how important it is to select on that basis and how Earls shouldn't be there and Trimble should be etc there is no mention of Tommy Bowe.

I thought he was average against Australia - seemed a little dopey at times and not on the pace of the game. Certainly Earls did as much right as Bowe and yet there is no mention of dropping Bowe. Why is that?

bamboozle

MLC61 wrote: »

In all the conversations about current form and how important it is to select on that basis and how Earls shouldn't be there and Trimble should be etc there is no mention of Tommy Bowe.

I thought he was average against Australia - seemed a little dopey at times and not on the pace of the game. Certainly Earls did as much right as Bowe and yet there is no mention of dropping Bowe. Why is that?

No he didnt, just watch Bowe, he doesnt score many blistering try's where he runs through opposing backlines at will, he's a really smart player who runs excellent support lines when we're in attack, look at his 2 trys v's the Eagles.

Remember Bowe's only just back from injury, i expect a big game from him tomorrow. Earls has most of the ingredients to be a top class player, he just needs to up his workrate around the pitch, go looking for the ball and learn to offload.

Kidney will have a big decision on his mind if we face Wales, if he selects Earls he'd be up against North who's half a foot taller and probably 2-3 stones heavier than Earls, given Kidney seems to make some decisions based on nullifying the opposition i wouldnt be suprised to see trimble and bowe as the wingers v's wales.

robd

This thread has descended into too much debate on individual form of players, particularly Earls.

If you stand back for a second and look at the whole 22, it's a very strong team.

Most of the players picked for start that are being debated about are unlikely to play full 80 mins and if they do they'll probably be shifted positionally. Most of the bench warmers being debated about will get 20-30 mins game time.

There's a great bench there waiting to come on and impact the game.

An.Duine.Eile

Great post. The game is no longer a 15 man game, it is the full 22. The best teams have great benches and used them effectively.

Whether Kidney uses the bench effectively has been questionable, esp in the 6N. But I believe the use of player in this tournment has been very good. Whether one player should start or not, it is how to get the best team on the pitch at key times.

It is easy to imagine Trimble coming on with 20 minutes to go and injecting more urgency in the team. Which might be a bigger benefit to the team than if he had started the match.

Ireland to win because we out number the Italian. We have 22 strong players, italy have less than 15.

ucd.1985

robd wrote: »

Most of the players picked for start that are being debated about are unlikely to play full 90 mins.

Soccer forum is ----> way

robd

ucd.1985 wrote: »

Soccer forum is ----> way

Easy mistake which has now been corrected.

Sport101

An.Duine.Eile wrote: »

Great post. The game is no longer a 15 man game, it is the full 22. The best teams have great benches and used them effectively.

It is easy to imagine Trimble coming on with 20 minutes to go and injecting more urgency in the team. Which might be a bigger benefit to the team than if he had started the match.

In terms of the Italian match, I would have thought that Trimble's very direct style of hard running and hard tackling would be far more suited to the first half of the game, whereas Earls sidestep etc. would be more suited to the latter stages.

JRant

Just a few thoughts to mull over;
If this is going to be the armwrestle/trench warfare we all expect,
Why is Jennings not on the bench?
Whats happens if we lose POC early?
Who plays centre when Darcy comes off? He's just can't have recovered feom a hamstring in 2 weeks.
Why is a rookie playing 9?

Hopefully we can get through this game. Not as confident about this as I was after the Aussie game. Paddypower giving evens on Italy +12, might have a piece of that action.

Sport101

Who plays centre when Darcy comes off?

Sexton.

TheHighRoad

AtItAllDayRef wrote: »

A lot of people tend to forget it was Kidney who was picking Sexton for Ireland A games when he wasn't even making the Leinster team and that Sexton's break only came from an injury to Felipe.

Firstly, Sexton even when not playing was a better option than Humphreys and Keatley. Secondly, theres nothing wrong with your break only coming from injury, just look at Healy, Ross and O'Brien in the Irish team.

Jennings is a completely different type of openside compared to either Wally or SOB never mind that Leamy plays different positions in the backrow anyway.

Exactly, he offers something completely different. Considering how good Italy are at slowing down ball and being a nuisance at ruck time, he is the logical choice. He can play 6 or 7 and is in better form than Leamy. I mean Leamy looked out of place against Russia if were honest.

Cullen is a great leader and runs the lineout but offers little around the park and has never really put in a performance at international level to mark himself out ahead of two seasoned internationals and Lions.

Really? What about his MOTM performance against France and his performance against Italy? He stole more lineout ball in 2 games than either POC or DOC combined in the remaining games. Anyway I'm not asking for him to start ahead of POC or DOC, I want him ahead of Ryan, especially considering POC isnt fully fit and neither DOC or Ryan are as good as POC or Cullen in the air! I do think Cullen should have got a run out against a top team though considering players like Murray did.

Kidney has never rated Reddan even from his time at Munster.

Doesn't make the decision any less wrong.

Ryan is choosen ahead of others because of versatility in covering blindside and lock something only McLaughlin and McCarthy really offer.

So why is Leamy there? If there is an injury to Ferris then SOB to 6, Jennings to 7, Heaslip 8. If theres an injury to Heaslip then SOB to 8, Jennings to 7, if theres an injury to SOB then straight swap.

It seems Kidney could win the world cup and still some people would find something to bitch about - he didn't choose player x because of provincial bias etc.

I'm not saying provincial bias, I am arguing familiarity bias....though Murray seems to stand in the way of that theory....

JRant

Sport101 wrote: »

Who plays centre when Darcy comes off?

Sexton.

It's one option alright and Kidney tried it twice before(if I'm not mistaken) but it could just as easily be Earls judging by the game time he's played at centre recently for us.

marco_polo

JRant wrote: »

It's one option alright and Kidney tried it twice before(if I'm not mistaken) but it could just as easily be Earls judging by the game time he's played at centre recently for us.

I can't recall Earls ever playing at 12 for Ireland at any stage during a game, and all we really have to go on is the Australia game when it was Sexton who went to 12.

GerM

JRant wrote: »

Just a few thoughts to mull over;
If this is going to be the armwrestle/trench warfare we all expect,
Why is Jennings not on the bench?
Whats happens if we lose POC early?
Who plays centre when Darcy comes off? He's just can't have recovered feom a hamstring in 2 weeks.
Why is a rookie playing 9?

1. Jennings hasn't done enough to show that he is worth a place in the 22. He covers one position very well but has failed to deliver at international level. I don't think he's not up to it, I just think he hasn't done it yet and, as such, doesn't deserve a spot.

2. We're in trouble. I don't see the logic. Ryan is there as he covers 6 and lock. If we lose any back row player, Leamy will surely come into the side. If we lose POC we have nobody to call the line out ball and it's one decision I can't make an argument for. DOC and Ryan cannot call a line out. Zanni will be all over our ball quicker than Buckley can eat a family bucket.

3. If D'Arcy comes off we've several options the most likely of which is Sexton to 12. Last season he came off and BOD moved to 12 with Earls at 13. It's not ideal by a long shot but we have options. We also have Trimble if push comes to shove.

4. He should have been given more time, no doubt. Not giving him a run last week was nutty. But, if we're going to play the game I suspect whereby we look to get ROG clean ball, smoothly and quickly without looking to involve our heavy hitters too much, then Murray makes sense. Italy don't commit numbers to rucks and play a blanket defence where they fan out and smother anything that moves. ROG will try to use his kicking to get in behind them, turn them inside out and play territory. If Murray is on his game, he has the best attributes to accommodate this.

Cpt_Blackbeard

JRant wrote: »

Just a few thoughts to mull over;
If this is going to be the armwrestle/trench warfare we all expect,
Why is Jennings not on the bench? Because he isn't physical enough for a test level armwrestle
Whats happens if we lose POC early? Ryan will replace him and we hope one of the locks can run a lineout. Ryan is still the best option as he will have a bigger impact from the bench and his ability to cover 6 is vital due to our backrow's injury troubles. Losing Best would affect our lineout much more.
Who plays centre when Darcy comes off? He's just can't have recovered feom a hamstring in 2 weeks. It was a minor injury and Bowe/POC are/were bigger doubts. Sexton will likely be the 12 cover or, BOD will go to 12 and Earls to 13 (BOD will still defend at 13) with Trimble coming off the bench. Both options are much more dangerous going forward than the current pairing.
Why is a rookie playing 9? Because he is the best option. His physicality might be needed at rucktime and with ROG at 10, and his breaking threat will keep the Italian fringe defense honest and hopefully create more space in the wider channels.

Hopefully we can get through this game. Not as confident about this as I was after the Aussie game. Paddypower giving evens on Italy +12, might have a piece of that action.

See my answers above but, I do feel that Italy +12 could be a decent bet.

Otacon

JRant wrote: »

It's one option alright and Kidney tried it twice before(if I'm not mistaken) but it could just as easily be Earls judging by the game time he's played at centre recently for us.

Either Sexton slots in at 12 or BOD moves to 12, Earls to 13 and Trimble on at 11.

GerM

marco_polo wrote: »

I can't recall Earls ever playing at 12 for Ireland at any stage during a game, and all we really have to go on is the Australia game when it was Sexton who went to 12.

He played there in the Churchill Cup a couple of years back and, as you'd expect, looked threatening with the ball in hand but most of the opposition were weak. It's the one position in the three quarters I'd abhor to see him in.

TheHighRoad

Surely Trimble could go 12?

JRant

marco_polo wrote: »

I can't recall Earls ever playing at 12 for Ireland at any stage during a game, and all we really have to go on is the Australia game when it was Sexton who went to 12.

So realistically we've left ourselves without a 12 in the team if Darcy comes off. Would be nice if we had somebody like Downey in the panel to fill that hole, but that's just more wishful thinking on my behalf than anything else.

CatFromHue

Jennings has never fulfilled his provincial promise on the international stage. He has had chances and never taken them unfortunately.

GerM

CB, just hoping one of your locks can run a line out at this level in a winner takes all WC match is playing with fire to put it very mildly. I wonder will it fall on Heaslip to try and run the line out if POC comes off. Ryan and Leamy both in the 22 has been the only selection that I simply fail to see logic in.

TheHighRoad

marco_polo wrote: »

I can't recall Earls ever playing at 12 for Ireland at any stage during a game, and all we really have to go on is the Australia game when it was Sexton who went to 12.

Earls should never go 12. He is a poor distributor and rarely passes. It would be a disaster. Also he seems to get caught out positionally a lot and I don't think his tackling is good enough for 12 (see Tuilagi try)

MungBean

Otacon wrote: »

Either Sexton slots in at 12 or BOD moves to 12, Earls to 13 and Trimble on at 11.

Sexton I'd imagine, if they did it against Aussies I dont see why they would shift Drico vs Italy. Sexton to 12, play ROG for 80. Then sub Drico/Kearney for Trimble and move Earls to 13/15 with Trimble on wing.

JRant

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

See my answers above but, I do feel that Italy +12 could be a decent bet.

Did Darcy not have a grade 1 hammy? A lot of rejigging may be needed if he comes off early.
I just don't get the Ryan one though, he just doesn't look like a 2nd rower at all. Seems to lightweight for that position. Who will call the lineouts? Surely not DOC, who for all his attributes is not the best lineout operator.
Boss offers physicality as well and has the experience. Its not that I don't rate Murray but now is not the time to be trying untested players.

Cpt_Blackbeard

GerM wrote: »

CB, just hoping one of your locks can run a line out at this level in a winner takes all WC match is playing with fire to put it very mildly. I wonder will it fall on Heaslip to try and run the line out if POC comes off. Ryan and Leamy both in the 22 has been the only selection that I simply fail to see logic in.

The squad have been training together for what, 2/3 months now? I'm sure neither DOC or Ryan would have much trouble on our own ball. Its obviously been practised in training it the coaching staff are happy with Ryan on the bench. It would weaken our defensive lineout but we should be still guaranteed our own ball.

Having Cullen on the bench for a worst case scenario where POC goes off early is a very negative decision IMO. Having Ryan there for to just be a second backrow is also negative but, he is much more suited to the more open game in the last 30mins against a tiring side. He would be much more of an impact substitution wheras Cullen would just be a worst-case scenario introduction.

marco_polo

TheHighRoad wrote: »

Earls should never go 12. He is a poor distributor and rarely passes. It would be a disaster. Also he seems to get caught out positionally a lot and I don't think his tackling is good enough for 12 (see Tuilagi try)

Agree, I was saying that he is highly unlikely to be the cover for 12, not that he should play there.