France V Ireland – Stade de France, Paris. Sunday 4th March 15:00 RTE2 & BBC2

fitz

Kassandra Slimy Catfish wrote: »

ed7890 wrote: »

CatFromHue had a good post about EOM 2 pages back I thought. Did you see it, what do you think? The main points was that while EOM was part of the rotation, he was only played really in the easier games.

doesn't get much easier than Clermont away alright

This. And the point about him being poor defensively against Bath is nonsense too, based on one tackle, where he was left on his own last second when Jenno should have been tackling low.

Look, as I keep saying, selection isn't the real problem. It's what the players being selected are being told to do that's the main issue. Gameplan is wrong, selections in key areas are wrong, combine the two and you get the team playing poorly, as it has done for two years.

Anyone who thinks we're going to get anything more than the odd sporadic good performance under DK needs to reevaluate. You'll be less bothered when you realise that you should be setting your expectations based on Kidney, rather than the potential of the hugely talented pool of players he is squandering.

bamboozle

fitz wrote: »

This. And the point about him being poor defensively against Bath is nonsense too, based on one tackle, where he was left on his own last second when Jenno should have been tackling low.

Look, as I keep saying, selection isn't the real problem. It's what the players being selected are being told to do that's the main issue. Gameplan is wrong, selections in key areas are wrong, combine the two and you get the team playing poorly, as it has done for two years.

Anyone who thinks we're going to get anything more than the odd sporadic good performance under DK needs to reevaluate. You'll be less bothered when you realise that you should be setting your expectations based on Kidney, rather than the potential of the hugely talented pool of players he is squandering.

ah now in fairness, DK's tactics worked for Ireland U19's and munster, its not his fault the game of rugby is evolving beyond his limited tactics...

the stats after the welsh match said it all, Wales had 14 lineouts we had 5, starve ireland of a lineout platform and we'll struggle.

jm08

MungBean wrote: »

If Kidney was to start Marshall on Sunday it would be more warranted than his starting of Murray in the world cup. Thats how utterly stupid his selection was.

I dont think my issues with his world cup selection are clouding my judgement at all, its clear and has been since he was originally selected by Kidney that he's not capable of playing to an international level. He will be in future but he's not currently, I'm basing that on his entire international career to date. He has had an opportunity that virtually no other player has ever had. He was taken and started at the world cup on a whim and allowed remain as first choice since despite not stepping up and being out performed by his bench cover both at club level and international level.

Starting doesnt show his ability it only shows his lack of competition. Stringer going to england as a last resort makes that all the more impressive ? Despite him being shown up over there ? If anything it showed how little Murray had to do to get ahead at Munster, Stringer over the hill and TOL making a show of himself. Boss, Reddan and Marshall all have to compete with international standard SH's for position. Murray doesnt, he has had a clear path to the top and nobody within a hundred miles of taking that off him. The fact is he wouldnt be a starting SH for Ulster or Leinster and you know it so his starting at Munster isnt grounds to have him in the Irish squad at all let alone starting.

But uncle Deccie likes him and it seems thats worth more than ability or form.

You seem far more concerned with the process of selection than performance and you seem to find it weird that a coach selects a player he rates .

how do you know he wouldn't be a starting sh for leinster or ulster are you joe schmidt or mclaughlin?

JRant

jm08 wrote: »

JRant wrote: »

POM didn't even have to play in that game to be selected.
So you'll judge Henry's ability on one WH game then?
I'll tell you who has done more and can't get a sniff, Dan Touhy.

I'm not going to bad mouth tuohy or henry in that game. the way I'll put it the only one worth a shout for the first team from it was dave kearney who played in that game.

The wolfhounds lost to the Saxons. Scotland A destroyed them the following week.

I thought Touhy and EOM were decent as well as D Kearney (Rob's brother). However if we were to lose a winger this weekend there'd only be one player brought in and it wouldn't be D Kearney despite his excellent form. It would of course be Zebo.

BoardsMember

fitz wrote: »

Gameplan is wrong, selections in key areas are wrong

I hear a rumour there was one, but there has been no discernible evidence that I have been able to spot anyhow....

Anyone care to enlighten me & fellow boardies on that they believe has been our game plan recently under Kidney? Taking into account his selection policy.

jm08

Tox56 wrote: »

So neither are Reddan, Healy et al? This has been done to death, but it is rotation by Joe. If EOM isn't first choice, who is?

brian O'driscoll is definate first choice. with brian injured, he should be the starter, not rotating starts with an inside centre.

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Did you see the Wolfhounds game? Have you seen Henry play H Cup rugby this season?

I have seen Henry play and he has been excellent. and no I didn't see the wolfhounds game, but I read some reports from people who were at the match and everyone of them said that dave Kearney was the only standout player and the rest were just poor.

the fact that the scots beat the saxons out the door the following week says something as well.

jm08

JRant wrote: »

I thought Touhy and EOM were decent as well as D Kearney (Rob's brother). However if we were to lose a winger this weekend there'd only be one player brought in and it wouldn't be D Kearney despite his excellent form. It would of course be Zebo.

it was d kearney on the bench not zebo for the welsh game

Flincher

BoardsMember wrote: »

I'm bemused by posts informing that due to the fact that the France game will be really physical, CM was always going to be selected for it. Newsflash - rugby is a physical game. Show be one international game of rugby that is not physical. Wales have a big srum half, massivee centres & wing, and a very mobile and strong running pack. We put in CM. Where did that get us?

In fairness to Murray, his defence was outstanding in that first half against Wales. Certainly saved us on a couple of occasions.

At that stage, I thought Reddan v Murray was a 50/50 call, and it made sense to go with the guy who could make an impact in defence, given the advantage they had over us in size and power across the backline. I don't think picking Murray to play Wales was a bad decision, and he didn't play as badly then as people have made out.

That said, I'd have picked Reddan for Sunday. Scotland had both Cusiter and Blair at 9, hardly animals in defence, but they helped get at the French with their quick distribution.

marco_polo

JRant wrote: »

I thought Touhy and EOM were decent as well as D Kearney (Rob's brother). However if we were to lose a winger this weekend there'd only be one player brought in and it wouldn't be D Kearney despite his excellent form. It would of course be Zebo.

I think we have enough real complaints to make about team selection without having to resort to imaginary ones, which of the above was on the Bench against Wales in the opening game?

JRant

jm08 wrote: »

MungBean wrote: »

If Kidney was to start Marshall on Sunday it would be more warranted than his starting of Murray in the world cup. Thats how utterly stupid his selection was.

I dont think my issues with his world cup selection are clouding my judgement at all, its clear and has been since he was originally selected by Kidney that he's not capable of playing to an international level. He will be in future but he's not currently, I'm basing that on his entire international career to date. He has had an opportunity that virtually no other player has ever had. He was taken and started at the world cup on a whim and allowed remain as first choice since despite not stepping up and being out performed by his bench cover both at club level and international level.

Starting doesnt show his ability it only shows his lack of competition. Stringer going to england as a last resort makes that all the more impressive ? Despite him being shown up over there ? If anything it showed how little Murray had to do to get ahead at Munster, Stringer over the hill and TOL making a show of himself. Boss, Reddan and Marshall all have to compete with international standard SH's for position. Murray doesnt, he has had a clear path to the top and nobody within a hundred miles of taking that off him. The fact is he wouldnt be a starting SH for Ulster or Leinster and you know it so his starting at Munster isnt grounds to have him in the Irish squad at all let alone starting.

But uncle Deccie likes him and it seems thats worth more than ability or form.

You seem far more concerned with the process of selection than performance and you seem to find it weird that a coach selects a player he rates .

how do you know he wouldn't be a starting sh for leinster or ulster are you joe schmidt or mclaughlin?

There is a big problem with the selection criteria though. Thornley stated that EOM wasn't in the Irish squad because he lacked experience and we all know he's just a conduit for DK at this stage. Yet Murray had/has very little but is starting.

He wouldn't be first choice for either Leinster or Ulster because there are better players available.

jm08

Deleted User wrote: »

How many Heineken Cup games had Murray played before togging out for Ireland at the WC?

It's such a ridiculously bad metric to base player choice on, and one that people like to use when suggesting X over Y but pretend/forget/don't know that there's players who have had no exposure before selection.

the world cup is over. we're now at the 6ns, you need to move on. murray has 6 starts (and 6 wins) in the heineken cup this season. even got one man of the match performance (against the scarlets).

jm08

JRant wrote: »

There is a big problem with the selection criteria though. Thornley stated that EOM wasn't in the Irish squad because he lacked experience and we all know he's just a conduit for DK at this stage. Yet Murray had/has very little but is starting.

He wouldn't be first choice for either Leinster or Ulster because there are better players available.

with 6 starts in the heineken cup (and 6 wins) he has more starts in the heineken cup this season than paul marshall has in his entire career.

Joe schmidt gives everyone a go . if murray was at ulster, he'd be starting and pienaar would be outhalf (mainly down to humphreys being so flaky). and for the record, pienaar has said he doesn't mind if he plays 9 or 10, he just does not want to play 15.

Cpt_Blackbeard

Lets call a spade a spade here. There is a clear jealousy/bitterness here because the youngsters from Ulster/Connacht/Leinster are unable to climb the ranks as quickly as the Munster lads.

For the province with the most derided youth/academy setup, its quite impressive that Munster lads are able to make the step up so effortlessly.

JRant

marco_polo wrote: »

JRant wrote: »

I thought Touhy and EOM were decent as well as D Kearney (Rob's brother). However if we were to lose a winger this weekend there'd only be one player brought in and it wouldn't be D Kearney despite his excellent form. It would of course be Zebo.

I think we have enough real complaints to make about team selection without having to resort to imaginary ones, which of the above was on the Bench against Wales in the opening game?

Fair enough so

fitz

jm08 wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

How many Heineken Cup games had Murray played before togging out for Ireland at the WC?

It's such a ridiculously bad metric to base player choice on, and one that people like to use when suggesting X over Y but pretend/forget/don't know that there's players who have had no exposure before selection.

the world cup is over. we're now at the 6ns, you need to move on. murray has 6 starts (and 6 wins) in the heineken cup this season. even got one man of the match performance (against the scarlets).

Doesn't change the fact that Kidney applies experience criteria for selection for one player and not another. He's completely inconsistent in his selection standards, which must have an effect on the squad.

leftleg

Kidneys team selection is not going down well in Germany

jm08

jm08 wrote: »

the world cup is over. we're now at the 6ns, you need to move on. murray has 6 starts (and 6 wins) in the heineken cup this season. even got one man of the match performance (against the scarlets).

cool beans.

Another poster without an ounce of logic for the list.

Otacon

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

Lets call a spade a spade here. There is a clear jealousy/bitterness here because the youngsters from Ulster/Connacht/Leinster are unable to climb the ranks as quickly as the Munster lads.

For the province with the most derided youth/academy setup, its quite impressive that Munster lads are able to make the step up so effortlessly.

fitz

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

Lets call a spade a spade here. There is a clear jealousy/bitterness here because the youngsters from Ulster/Connacht/Leinster are unable to climb the ranks as quickly as the Munster lads.

For the province with the most derided youth/academy setup, its quite impressive that Munster lads are able to make the step up so effortlessly.

The real question is why are they progressing quicker? It doesn't seem to be based on form/experience or any of the other criteria players from other provinces are measured against. I'm not being bitter, I just don't get it. POM ahead of Henry is the best example. It's ridiculous.

jm08

Foxtrol wrote: »

Leamy benched ahead of SOB for the last set of AI’s despite SOB being in far better form.

don't think obrien was able to cover 8 at that stage and if anything happened to heislip it would have meant too much moving around the backrow whereas leamy has 30 or 40 internat. caps at 8.

irishbucsfan

jm08 wrote: »

Foxtrol wrote: »

Leamy benched ahead of SOB for the last set of AI’s despite SOB being in far better form.

don't think obrien was able to cover 8 at that stage and if anything happened to heislip it would have meant too much moving around the backrow whereas leamy has 30 or 40 internat. caps at 8.

O'Brien was able to cover 8. It was just a typically munstercentric selection that like many of the others was eventually proven to be the wrong choice.

Hayes over Ross and TOL over Reddan as well. Jokeshop selections.

leftleg

jm08 wrote: »

don't think obrien was able to cover 8 at that stage and if anything happened to heislip it would have meant too much moving around the backrow whereas leamy has 30 or 40 internat. caps at 8.

yes just a few weeks later he picked up MOM against Italy at 8; of course he wasnt up to it.

Cpt_Blackbeard

fitz wrote: »

The real question is why are they progressing quicker? It doesn't seem to be based on form/experience or any of the other criteria players from other provinces are measured against. I'm not being bitter, I just don't get it. POM ahead of Henry is the best example. It's ridiculous.

If I had to put my finger on it, I'd say its all down to superior genetics and the grace of god.

POM is a similar case to Murray. Standout performances for their province gets them selected in the squad. Application and performance in training is probably what allowed them to progress to the front of the queue.

WeleaseWoderick

jm08 wrote: »

don't think obrien was able to cover 8 at that stage and if anything happened to heislip it would have meant too much moving around the backrow whereas leamy has 30 or 40 internat. caps at 8.

Amazing logic there. So what if Wallace was injured?

leftleg

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

If I had to put my finger on it, I'd say its all down to superior genetics and the grace of god.

POM is a similar case to Murray. Standout performances for their province gets them selected in the squad. Application and performance in training is probably what allowed them to progress to the front of the queue.

And an injury to Niall Ronan plus disintegration of form of TOL

irishbucsfan

leftleg wrote: »

jm08 wrote: »

don't think obrien was able to cover 8 at that stage and if anything happened to heislip it would have meant too much moving around the backrow whereas leamy has 30 or 40 internat. caps at 8.

yes just a few weeks later he picked up MOM against Italy at 8; of course he wasnt up to it.

He had been MOTM there for Leinster as well against Ulster but where he had plenty if "ability" he was very lacking in "beingfromthesouthofirelandicity.". Impossible to pick a guy like that.

Of course, similarly, its O'Mahoneys wealth of experience that has him in the same spot now.

jm08

fitz wrote: »

Doesn't change the fact that Kidney applies experience criteria for selection for one player and not another. He's completely inconsistent in his selection standards, which must have an effect on the squad.

where does it say that he must have a rigid plan on how players are selected. cian healy didn't have much experience when he got selected first of all but he was given the chance and even though it wasn't pretty at times, kidney stuck with him and healy is now turning into one of the best loose heads around even though he is very young to be playing in that position internationally (kidney could have used court)

leftleg

jm08 wrote: »

where does it say that he must have a rigid plan on how players are selected. cian healy didn't have much experience when he got selected first of all but he was given the chance and even though it wasn't pretty at times, kidney stuck with him and healy is now turning into one of the best loose heads around even though he is very young to be playing in that position internationally (kidney could have used court)

Horan is ancient ; thats why

Cpt_Blackbeard

leftleg wrote: »

Horan is ancient ; thats why

That doesn't explain why Healy was selected ahead of Court though.

Despite the popular opinion, Court is a pretty good LH and was definitely a better scrummager than Healy when Healy first came on the scene.

irishbucsfan

leftleg wrote: »

jm08 wrote: »

where does it say that he must have a rigid plan on how players are selected. cian healy didn't have much experience when he got selected first of all but he was given the chance and even though it wasn't pretty at times, kidney stuck with him and healy is now turning into one of the best loose heads around even though he is very young to be playing in that position internationally (kidney could have used court)

Horan is ancient ; thats why

Well Horan was out with his health issues.

It was a straight shootout between Healy and Court, both of whom had been playing rugby for about the same amount of time! Interestingly there was no Munster prop in competition or who knows what would have happened. We saw Kidney somehow manage to select Archer over Hagan recently!

fitz

jm08 wrote: »

fitz wrote: »

Doesn't change the fact that Kidney applies experience criteria for selection for one player and not another. He's completely inconsistent in his selection standards, which must have an effect on the squad.

where does it say that he must have a rigid plan on how players are selected. cian healy didn't have much experience when he got selected first of all but he was given the chance and even though it wasn't pretty at times, kidney stuck with him and healy is now turning into one of the best loose heads around even though he is very young to be playing in that position internationally (kidney could have used court)

It becomes an issue when experience is the reason an inferior choice is made for a certain position. Earls is not a better 13 than EOM. But hey, he's got experience...

leftleg

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

That doesn't explain why Healy was selected ahead of Court though.

Despite the popular opinion, Court is a pretty good LH and was definitely a better scrummager than Healy when Healy first came on the scene.

Healy was younger; far more dynamic and showed buckets more potential than Court has or did back then.

irishbucsfan

fitz wrote: »

jm08 wrote: »

fitz wrote: »

Doesn't change the fact that Kidney applies experience criteria for selection for one player and not another. He's completely inconsistent in his selection standards, which must have an effect on the squad.

where does it say that he must have a rigid plan on how players are selected. cian healy didn't have much experience when he got selected first of all but he was given the chance and even though it wasn't pretty at times, kidney stuck with him and healy is now turning into one of the best loose heads around even though he is very young to be playing in that position internationally (kidney could have used court)

It becomes an issue when experience is the reason an inferior choice is made for a certain position. Earls is not a better 13 than EOM. But hey, he's got experience...

I think that's far more debatable. I want to see Earls given his chance. I think he could be a better test 13 than EOM.

.ak

Reddan > Murray.

Simples. So why not use Reddan to win some games?

To be honest, if I was coach, I'd be looking to develop Murray as well, and I'd be giving him starts. But that's not what Declan Kidney is about - when has he EVER looked towards the development of a player so early without any experience? And why is he doing it with just ONE player now?

My reasoning would probably be there is a definite riff between DK and Reddan. You wonder if those rumors are true now.

Also, I'm interested in reading Kurt McQuilkin's analysis this week. As a defense coach it'd be interesting to read his opinion on the matter, which no doubt he will look into - Do you go to France with a defensively sound SH but that also is impotent in attack? Or do you go for the lighter, defensively unsound SH that is renowned for his speed and link play with the backs for attack?

Also, why is there this obsession for defensive SHs? If they have an all round game, ala Phillips or Boss, then okay I can see the point. France get on fine with tiny Parra, and Australia with Genia.

Cpt_Blackbeard

leftleg wrote: »

Healy was younger; far more dynamic and showed buckets more potential than Court has or did back then.

So...basically the same case as Murray and POM then?

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

He had been MOTM there for Leinster as well against Ulster but where he had plenty if "ability" he was very lacking in "beingfromthesouthofirelandicity.". Impossible to pick a guy like that.

Of course, similarly, its O'Mahoneys wealth of experience that has him in the same spot now.

since when did Ulster challenge Leinster in the magners ? have Ulster beaten Leinster in the last 10 years home or away ? Ulster usually put out a weakened side from what I can see .

unlike sob, O'mahoney has played a fair bit at no 8 (as well as 6 & 7) . munster seem to like their players to play several positions (or at least be able to do a job there).

irishbucsfan

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

leftleg wrote: »

Healy was younger; far more dynamic and showed buckets more potential than Court has or did back then.

So...basically the same case as Murray and POM then?

Not even close

leftleg

jm08 wrote: »

since when did Ulster challenge Leinster in the magners ? have Ulster beaten Leinster in the last 10 years home or away ? Ulster usually put out a weakened side from what I can see .

unlike sob, O'mahoney has played a fair bit at no 8 (as well as 6 & 7) . munster seem to like their players to play several positions (or at least be able to do a job there).

Yes SOB has never ever played 8 and also he cant play 6 or 7 either; just ask Kidney

MrDerp

fitz wrote: »

POM ahead of Henry is the best example. It's ridiculous.

Perversely, this is actually the Irish approach to player development. It's not something I agree with, but policy seems to be along the lines of:

1. Player A is first choice
2. Players B and C are next on form and demonstrated ability
3. Player D is young, and is showing potential so might be better than B and C in years to come.
4. Always Always Always start player A
5. Give time to player D

Chris Henry is 27, and has been skipped over, regardless of form because someone younger is starting to put their hand up.

There's nothing wrong with making an international out of someone for 3-4 years during a transition, but our management doesn't seem to get that. It's only when our hand is forced, like when we couldn't compete in a single scrum a few years back, that an older player without international experience gets a look in.

This is why we have no depth in our squad - we keep experienced older players until they're **** and everyone resents them, and we pick flash youth over the seasoned campaigners with 6 Heineken cup campaigns behind them.

People complain about a lack of consistency in decisions regarding young players, but I think it's glaringly consistent. When oldie not available, pick youngest available option with 3 good HC caps under their belt.

.ak

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I think that's far more debatable. I want to see Earls given his chance. I think he could be a better test 13 than EOM.

You raise a good point. i.e; We don't actually know do we? As far as H-Cup performances go it's hard to convince anyone that Earls has played better at 13 than EOM.

However, converting those performances to international test games is a different kettle of fish. Which brings up the unfortunate point that this debate will probably ALWAYS be hypothetical, as we'll never see EOM in a green shirt at 13 now. Earls may well do well against France, but even if he had a mare and got steamrolled all day and let in 15 tries Kidney will still start him the following week, and the following...

So, based on that, I hope Earls has a great game.

fitz

irishbucsfan wrote: »

[
I think that's far more debatable. I want to see Earls given his chance. I think he could be a better test 13 than EOM.

He's had plenty of chances and still looks flakey defensively. You rarely see him organising things on the field.

EOM is consistently solid, and is always pushing players around and communicating, organising the defense.
If he was given the same opportunities as Earls, I think we'd be better off for it.

Foxtrol

jm08 wrote: »

don't think obrien was able to cover 8 at that stage and if anything happened to heislip it would have meant too much moving around the backrow whereas leamy has 30 or 40 internat. caps at 8.

I'm glad to see this post has been laughed out the door already. On top of what has been posted already to refute this he had also played a lot of his underage rugby at 8.

I look forward to you once again trying to make up another reason why Murray and POM deserve to be fast tracked when other stand out performers aren't/haven't been.

leftleg

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

So...basically the same case as Murray and POM then?

jm08

.ak wrote: »

Reddan > Murray.

Simples. So why not use Reddan to win some games?

To be honest, if I was coach, I'd be looking to develop Murray as well, and I'd be giving him starts. But that's not what Declan Kidney is about - when has he EVER looked towards the development of a player so early without any experience? And why is he doing it with just ONE player now?

My reasoning would probably be there is a definite riff between DK and Reddan. You wonder if those rumors are true now.

Also, I'm interested in reading Kurt McQuilkin's analysis this week. As a defense coach it'd be interesting to read his opinion on the matter, which no doubt he will look into - Do you go to France with a defensively sound SH but that also is impotent in attack? Or do you go for the lighter, defensively unsound SH that is renowned for his speed and link play with the backs for attack?

Also, why is there this obsession for defensive SHs? If they have an all round game, ala Phillips or Boss, then okay I can see the point. France get on fine with tiny Parra, and Australia with Genia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQp-7fHbxb4

Reddan can be very loose with his passes. not a good thing with vincent clerc hanging around. Doesn't he have a couple of international intercept tries to his name.

.ak

jm08 wrote: »

sean o'brien was capped when he was also about 22 and behind jennings for leinster - he then got injured in feb 2009 (missing the heineken cup final) and was out for most the season . he got capped the following nov.

Are you saying that SOB or Jennings missed the H-Cup final in '09? If so another incorrect fact from yourself. Jennings started in that final and SOB played off the bench.

Match-Day Report

.ak

jm08 wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQp-7fHbxb4

Reddan can be very loose with his passes. not a good thing with vincent clerc hanging around. Doesn't he have a couple of international intercept tries to his name.

Doesn't Quade Cooper? What's your point? You keep banging that drum. Point is he's delivered Ireland their two best performances in over two years. I'll take that over a couple of intercept tries.

EDIT: By couple of intercept tries I presume you meant Reddan conceding some intercepts. If you meant Clerc, well my point still stands.

irishbucsfan

jm08 wrote: »

irishbucsfan wrote: »

He had been MOTM there for Leinster as well against Ulster but where he had plenty if "ability" he was very lacking in "beingfromthesouthofirelandicity.". Impossible to pick a guy like that.

Of course, similarly, its O'Mahoneys wealth of experience that has him in the same spot now.

since when did Ulster challenge Leinster in the magners ? have Ulster beaten Leinster in the last 10 years home or away ? Ulster usually put out a weakened side from what I can see .

unlike sob, O'mahoney has played a fair bit at no 8 (as well as 6 & 7) . munster seem to like their players to play several positions (or at least be able to do a job there).

You obviously haven't the foggiest clue about what you're talking about! Haha

MrDerp

MrDerp wrote: »

This is why we have no depth in our squad - we keep experienced older players until they're **** and everyone resents them, and we pick flash youth over the seasoned campaigners with 6 Heineken cup campaigns behind them.

Current squad, with cap numbers included, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland_national_rugby_union_team#Current_squad

We have 5 out and out wingers in the 30-man squad. 2 are starting on Sunday, 1 is starting at 13, and 2 are uncapped and outside the 22.

Poor McFadden has to provide cover as utility back. I'm not a particular fan, but while the first 15 are practicing drills in a single position, he has to know the moves and positioning from 3? Anyone in that situation is likely to have mistakes that taint their international career. Utility backs should be experienced internationals who are no longer up for consideration as no.1, not guys fighting for any ould place that becomes free.

We have 6 backrow players in the squad. The three replacements have three caps between them. O'Mahoney is number 1 replacement because he's supposedly on a hot streak from HC, and is younger than Henry.

Our squad development stinks.

leftleg

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You obviously haven't the foggiest clue about what you're talking about! Haha

Its brilliant entertainment though