Ireland Tour to New Zealand 2012 Discussion thread

Murray is nowhere near as bad as some people are making him out to be.

Absolutely nowhere near as bad.

But that doesn't make him the right choice. I wish people would argue "for" the "against" instead of arguing "against" the "for". Would make for constructive instead of destructive debate.

eg
Sexton plays a faster running game than ROG, I'd prefer him to start
instead of
ROG is slow as ****.

See how much easier this place would be?

Otacon

TonyTonga wrote: »

Does it matter whose to blame? The fact is, as you have admitted, hes now slow. It doesnt matter a jot what his performances were like a year ago.

He wasn't slow in his last game in the Six Nations, nor since he came back from injury at Munster.

TonyTonga

Otacon wrote: »

He wasn't slow in his last game in the Six Nations, nor since he came back from injury at Munster.

When Tomas O'Leary comes on for Munster the game speeds up. Tomas O'Leary.

Fishooks12

Deleted User wrote: »

Murray is nowhere near as bad as some people are making him out to be.

Absolutely nowhere near as bad.

But that doesn't make him the right choice. I wish people would argue "for" the "against" instead of arguing "against" the "for". Would make for constructive instead of destructive debate.

eg
Sexton plays a faster running game than ROG, I'd prefer him to start
instead of
ROG is slow as ****.

See how much easier this place would be?

+1

People seemed obsessed with the negative rather than the positive

TonyTonga

What is the positive? Physicality? the ability to make a break? the box kicks?

Its Tomas O'Leary all over again.

irishbucsfan

TonyTonga wrote: »

What is the positive? Physicality? the ability to make a break? the box kicks?

Its Tomas O'Leary all over again.

He's a far better passer of the ball than O'Leary ever was

TonyTonga

Hes never there to pass the ball!

Otacon

TonyTonga wrote: »

When Tomas O'Leary comes on for Munster the game speeds up. Tomas O'Leary.

You mean to say that a player who:

• missed out on a RWC spot due to poor form
• has been criticised for slow play for years
• and who rightfully lost his place to a 23 year old

attempts to play much faster ball when he comes off the bench against tired teams and legs, in an attempt to gain his starting spot back? Well I never!

TonyTonga

TonyTonga wrote: »

What is the positive? Physicality? the ability to make a break? the box kicks?

Its Tomas O'Leary all over again.

no.

Argue the positive of a replacement as opposed to belittling a player's abilities.

again, an example

"Reddan is undoubtedly our quickest scrum half, I think that we'll need massive pace on the ball against New Zealand if we're to unleash our speed out wide. We'll need a top performance from the back row to give Reddan ball that he can keep pace on."

TonyTonga

Deleted User wrote: »

no.

Argue the positive of a replacement as opposed to belittling a player's abilities.

again, an example

"Reddan is undoubtedly our quickest scrum half, I think that we'll need massive pace on the ball against New Zealand if we're to unleash our speed out wide. We'll need a top performance from the back row to give Reddan ball that he can keep pace on."

Don't dictate to me how I'll post unless your a moderator. I am not talking about Reddan. I am talking about Murray. I am arguing against him on the basis of his weak points which I am perfectly entitled to point out.

TonyTonga

Otacon wrote: »

You mean to say that a player who:

• missed out on a RWC spot due to poor form
• has been criticised for slow play for years
• and who rightfully lost his place to a 23 year old

attempts to play much faster ball when he comes off the bench against tired teams and legs, in an attempt to gain his starting spot back? Well I never!

Yes O'Leary is a poor player, but hes been quicker this season. Time a fresh Murray and a fresh O'Leary and see who gets the ball out quicker. You might be amazed

Otacon

Not really. After the Six Nations, Murray gets the ball out quicker.

gotapaininmy

Deleted User wrote: »

no.

Argue the positive of a replacement as opposed to belittling a player's abilities.

again, an example

"Reddan is undoubtedly our quickest scrum half, I think that we'll need massive pace on the ball against New Zealand if we're to unleash our speed out wide. We'll need a top performance from the back row to give Reddan ball that he can keep pace on."

We're discussing the team selection for the first test that Murray is in, so how do you discuss that selection without talking about the 'controversial' selections in it? Is it not inferred from our criticism of Murray that we may think Reddan would have been a better selection? Therefore if we're positive about Reddan that reflects negatively on Murray and so you're back where you started.

TonyTonga

Otacon wrote: »

Not really. After the Six Nations, Murray gets the ball out quicker.

have you timed it? I have. Get back to me when you have.

Fishooks12

TonyTonga wrote: »

have you timed it? I have. Get back to me when you have.

what were your results so?

TonyTonga

Fishooks12 wrote: »

what were your results so?

That O'Leary is quicker than Murray.

Otacon

TonyTonga wrote: »

have you timed it? I have. Get back to me when you have.

No, I haven't timed it. And I won't be timing it.

I have simply noticed that from the beginning of the season to now, Murray's speed to the ruck and his passing has been quicker. While it is not as fast as Reddan, saying he is slow is simply out-of-date criticism.

Fishooks12

TonyTonga wrote: »

That O'Leary is quicker than Murray.

But if you timed it you surely have the actual time it took each player to get the ball away when presented

And in the interests of consistency I presume you eliminated variables by timing each player numerous times and under different situations?

Otacon

Fishooks12 wrote: »

But if you timed it you surely have the actual time it took each player to get the ball away when presented

And in the interests of consistency I presume you eliminated variables by timing each player numerous times and under different situations?

Don't ask him to provide proof. He doesn't like that.

WeeBushy

Fishooks12 wrote: »

But if you timed it you surely have the actual time it took each player to get the ball away when presented

And in the interests of consistency I presume you eliminated variables by timing each player numerous times and under different situations?

I'd love if he posted up these times that he recorded. Although it's probably too much to ask him to back up something he said...

TonyTonga

Fishooks12 wrote: »

But if you timed it you surely have the actual time it took each player to get the ball away when presented

And in the interests of consistency I presume you eliminated variables by timing each player numerous times and under different situations?

I've no idea off hand what the exact times were. And no I didn't but then again I didn't factor in how many times Murray was at the bottom of the ruck when the ball needed to be passed either.

gotapaininmy

gotapaininmy wrote: »

We're discussing the team selection for the first test that Murray is in, so how do you discuss that selection without talking about the 'controversial' selections in it? Is it not inferred from our criticism of Murray that we may think Reddan would have been a better selection? Therefore if we're positive about Reddan that reflects negatively on Murray and so you're back where you started.

by suggesting an alternative.

I've a couple of thousand too many posts on here. I've seen plenty of times how quickly the conversation breaks down to two drunkards punching each other's idols and then forgetting what they're supposed to be talking about.

On a team selection, a relative strength of one player is a relative weakness of the other. However, when people get ranty, they only ever look at the weakness. Doing the opposite, and talking about AN Other's relative strengths is at least a constructive way of talking about a team selection.

Of course, everyone is entitled to post as they wish within the charter, but I'd prefer if this place wasn't a cesspit of irrational abuse.

WeeBushy

TonyTonga wrote: »

I've no idea off hand what the exact times were. And no I didn't but then again I didn't factor in how many times Murray was at the bottom of the ruck when the ball needed to be passed either.

Not even a ball park figure? Surely if you went the the effort of getting out a stop watch a recorded how long it took both players to pass you can remember roughly what the times were like.

Edit: Ugh what am I thinking getting sucked in. I'm out.

TonyTonga

Whats really scary is this could be our backline at the end of the game

9.Murray
10.O'Gara
11.Zebo
12.Sexton
13.O'Driscoll
14.McFadden
15.Kearney

or maybe

9.Murray
10.O'Gara
11.Zebo
12.Earls
13.Cave
14.McFadden
15.Kearney

that is terrifying

Fishooks12

at least there's now a Leinster version of Jmo8

Tox56

Fishooks12 wrote: »

at least there's now a Leinster version of Jmo8

Jackass? Or do Jackass and Cpt. Blackbeard go together?

gotapaininmy

TonyTonga wrote: »

Does it matter whose to blame? The fact is, as you have admitted, hes now slow. It doesnt matter a jot what his performances were like a year ago.

With all due respect I think it does matter what his performances were like when he came on the scene first because they show how quick he can be. My question on who to blame was semi-rhetorical in that I blame someone in the Irish set-up who has got in his ear and told him he needs to do this and that at ruck time and has slowed him down.

TonyTonga

WeeBushy wrote: »

Not even a ball park figure? Surely if you went the the effort of getting out a stop watch a recorded how long it took both players to pass you can remember roughly what the times were like.

Edit: Ugh what am I thinking getting sucked in. I'm out.

Murray is just short of 2 seconds slower. When its messy hes 2 and above.

Fishooks12

Tox56 wrote: »

Jackass? Or do Jackass and Cpt. Blackbeard go together?

They genuinely follow the game though!

Fishooks12

TonyTonga wrote: »

Murray is just short of 2 seconds slower. When its messy hes 2 and above.

What games did you use to compare?