Ireland Tour to New Zealand 2012 Discussion thread

Cpt_Blackbeard · 17-06-2012 12:32pm

Hagz wrote: »

O'Brien to 8 so. Unless. Unless. No. Surely not. He won't pick POM at 8 will he? Please god no!!!.

Seriously though

6. McLaughlin
7. Henry / O'Mahony
8. O'Brien

Why wouldn't he pick POM? It'd be the obvious choice with Heaslip out.

Hagz · 17-06-2012 12:34pm

d-gal wrote: »

Being honest anytime anytime I have seen POM play at 8 he has done very well. I wouldn't put SOB in at 8 purely coz he is playing so well at 7. Don't think POM is the answer as back up at 8 but we don't have much options

I would agree in the sense that POM was great for Munster at 8, but my thinking is that O'Brien was magnificent at 8 last season, and when he played against Italy he was equally impressive.
I'd just prefer to have someone with a little more experience at the base of the scrum.

Fishooks12 · 17-06-2012 12:41pm

I'd have POM at 8 Locky at 6 and SOB kept at 7

DDC1990 · 17-06-2012 1:08pm

I'd go with:

6. Locky
7. SOB
8. POM
9. Murray
10. ROG
11. Earls (if fit) or Trimble
12. Sexton
13. BOD
14. Trimble/McFadden(if Earls isn't fit)
15. RK

I wouldn't mind seeing Reddan at 9 either. Murray has been good at 9 despite what the nay-sayers say, and used his physicality well in the series. Now I think Kidney owes it to Reddan to make a play for the Number 9 Jersey, and prove that he is the better scrum half. I don't doubt Reddan's physicality, I just think he isn't as physically imposing as Murray. Where he has an edge on Murray is not, as many people are saying Speed of Delivery (both can get the ball to the 10's hand as quick as each other), but decision making at the base of the ruck and also working with shít ball from rucks. This is all down to experience IMO, Reddan has been around the block, and has more confidence in himself to put hands in when the ball isn't clean and get it out of there.

If he is picked, then this decisiveness could be vital towards getting our backs into play quickly.

On the otherhand, O'Gara's defensive weakness leaves little option but to play Murray beside him to cover the 9-10 channel. O'Gara is masterful on the front foot, and I fully believe that his Pro's outweigh his Con's in this case. That extra physicality from Murray could help to keep New Zealand from steamrolling through us in Defense.

If you think that O'Gara shouldn't be there and Sexton (who has played fine this series) should carry on, and get the chance of quicker more decisive ball from Reddan. You're looking at a team of:

9. Reddan
10. Sexton
11. Trimble
12. McFadden/Earls
13. BOD
14. McFadden/Earls(/Zebo?)
15. RK

If Earls starts at 12, then you can rule out any ball making it past the 13 channel. Im a huge fan of Earls, even at 12, but he is not a passing center. He will not have the natural instinct for passing at 12, which will slow down our attacks in the backs. This is one advantage of having a guy like Sexton at 12.
If McFadden starts at 12, i'd be worried. I think he's a hugely suspect tackler on the wing not to mention in the Center. I think he's a good talent, has lots of pace, and an abilty to break the gainline with the right ball from 10. I just don't think he's ready yet defensivly to play Center vs the AB's.

Unfortunatly with our injuries, there isn't really a watertight solution or a quick fix in the backline. I think all the options have serious holes in them, either Attacking or Defensive.
It depends on our mindset. If we really want to go attack the AB's and play an expasive game like we did in the last 25mins vs the AB's, then Murray+ROG+Sexton. If we want a safer solution and plan on keeping it tight then: Reddan+Sexton+Earls.

(Apologies for the Ramble)

Teferi · 17-06-2012 1:10pm

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

The people have gotten what they want. We're fielding a team of Leinster HEC winners. If we don't win the game, Murray will be singled out for being the reason why Leinster's HEC form hasn't tranlated to a first win against the All Blacks.

Hey blackbeard, any opinions on how that Leinster team nearly beat the All Blacks? I'd say you are sick.

Scioch · 17-06-2012 1:13pm

I'd leave SOB at 7, Locky at 6 and stick POM in at 8 with Henry on bench.

I'd stick Wallace right in at 12, he should have been there anyway imo. Start Reddan and have Earls and Trimble on wings. McFadden/Trimble if Earls isnt fit.

Hagz · 17-06-2012 1:14pm

Starting O'Gara is literally poison to the international set up at this stage. Nothing to gain from it. It's like playing Leo Cullen instead of Dan Tuohy. Or Geordan Murphy ahead of Rob Kearney. Absolutely no valid reason to start the 35 year old man ahead of Jonathan Sexton.

Scioch · 17-06-2012 1:16pm

Hagz wrote: »

Starting O'Gara is literally poison to the international set up at this stage. Nothing to gain from it. It's like playing Leo Cullen instead of Dan Tuohy. Or Geordan Murphy ahead of Rob Kearney. Absolutely no valid reason to start the 35 year old man ahead of Jonathan Sexton.

Well if you were moving Sexton to 12 you'd have to start him. Question is why move Sexton to 12.

Cpt_Blackbeard · 17-06-2012 1:17pm

Teferi wrote: »

Hey blackbeard, any opinions on how that Leinster team nearly beat the All Blacks? I'd say you are sick.

Fishooks12 · 17-06-2012 1:18pm

Teferi wrote: »

Hey blackbeard, any opinions on how that Leinster team nearly beat the All Blacks? I'd say you are sick.

He seemed pretty happy that we nearly won judging by his comments after the game. I reckon a certain extreme Leinster supporter is a bit peeved about Murray scoring and playing well though

irishbucsfan · 17-06-2012 1:19pm

LordSmeg wrote: »

Well if you were moving Sexton to 12 you'd have to start him. Question is why move Sexton to 12.

Precisely. Just kicking the can down the road. We need to sort out a long term solution at 12 to replace D'Arcy. And the Sexton at 12 switch was useless every other time we tried it, so we should not be relying on it working again.

I'd prefer Wallace, Earls, McFadden or Cave over Sexton at 12... in that order probably.

Fishooks12 · 17-06-2012 1:20pm

I have a feeling Wallace will start at 12.

Cpt_Blackbeard · 17-06-2012 1:31pm

Hagz wrote: »

Starting O'Gara is literally poison to the international set up at this stage. Nothing to gain from it. It's like playing Leo Cullen instead of Dan Tuohy. Or Geordan Murphy ahead of Rob Kearney. Absolutely no valid reason to start the 35 year old man ahead of Jonathan Sexton.

If he is the best choice, he should start. Simple as.

All this talk of building a squad and players deserving a game, should be effectively thrown out the window. We have a great chance getting our first ever win against the All Blacks. If bringing players out of retirement for a one-off game was the best option, I wouldn't care if Kidney went out and gave Quinnie a ring in the SkySports studio. We won't get another shot like this for 12 years.

The pros of getting that first win against the Kiwis outweigh the cons of any retrograde step taken to get there.

irishbucsfan · 17-06-2012 1:38pm

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

If he is the best choice, he should start. Simple as.

All this talk of building a squad and players deserving a game, should be effectively thrown out the window. We have a great chance getting our first ever win against the All Blacks. If bringing players out of retirement for a one-off game was the best option, I wouldn't care if Kidney went out and gave Quinnie a ring in the SkySports studio. We won't get another shot like this for 12 years.

The pros of getting that first win against the Kiwis outweigh the cons of any retrograde step taken to get there.

I don't think we should show anything out the window. The best teams find the right balance.

However, if there was a case where John Hayes was sitting there as the only tighthead apart from, say, Jamie Hagan or Tadhg Furlon, then obvioulsy we should go with the older fellow and go for the win.

However in this case, I don't see how we benefit from starting ROG at 10 in the short term OR long term? What would you say?

Hagz · 17-06-2012 1:49pm

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

If he is the best choice, he should start. Simple as.

All this talk of building a squad and players deserving a game, should be effectively thrown out the window. We have a great chance getting our first ever win against the All Blacks. If bringing players out of retirement for a one-off game was the best option, I wouldn't care if Kidney went out and gave Quinnie a ring in the SkySports studio. We won't get another shot like this for 12 years.

The pros of getting that first win against the Kiwis outweigh the cons of any retrograde step taken to get there.

He's not the best choice, so I guess that settles that.

Unfortunately your way of thinking matches the management, and most people on here, and I'm sure the players also. I can think of another team who held onto your mindset of playing the best players regardless of age. Taking each game at a time and ignoring the future consequences. I don't want the international team to suffer the same outcome, though they pretty much have at this point.

DDC1990 · 17-06-2012 2:03pm

Hagz wrote: »

He's not the best choice, so I guess that settles that.

Unfortunately your way of thinking matches the management, and most people on here, and I'm sure the players also. I can think of another team who held onto your mindset of playing the best players regardless of age. Taking each game at a time and ignoring the future consequences. I don't want the international team to suffer the same outcome, though they pretty much have at this point.

In my opinion we have a better chance of winning with ROG at 10, then we do with Earls/McFadden/Wallace at 12.

I don't think he has many games left in the tank, but he showed for 25 minutes that he still can get a backline moving if your pack gets him good ball. Unless we want to go down the route of sticking the ball up the jumper for the game and hoping we don't make mistakes, then O'Gara is the best option.

Fishooks12 · 17-06-2012 2:07pm

DDC1990 wrote: »

In my opinion we have a better chance of winning with ROG at 10, then we do with Earls/McFadden/Wallace at 12.

I don't think he has many games left in the tank, but he showed for 25 minutes that he still can get a backline moving if your pack gets him good ball. Unless we want to go down the route of sticking the ball up the jumper for the game and hoping we don't make mistakes, then O'Gara is the best option.

ROG starting weakens our defensive line and pushes our best outhalf to 12 where he's not as effective. It worked yday because the game had opened up and we were in the accession, not to mention the AB's didn't have that much ball. It's not a model suitable for starting a game

Sexton Wallace BOD offers much more in terms of security and IMO the distribution will be just as good because as we all know Wallace is a fantastic passer of a ball

irishbucsfan · 17-06-2012 2:09pm

Wallace is a better 12 than Sexton... because he IS a 12.

Sexton is a better 10 than O'Gara.

So how is it not our best possible combination?

Tox56 · 17-06-2012 2:11pm

How would ROG at 10 get a backline moving more than Sexton at 10 and Wallace at 12??

ROG at 10 also means Sexton won't be at 10, he should be getting all the gametime he can. It's just wrong on so many levels

Scioch · 17-06-2012 2:14pm

DDC1990 wrote: »

In my opinion we have a better chance of winning with ROG at 10, then we do with Earls/McFadden/Wallace at 12.

I don't think he has many games left in the tank, but he showed for 25 minutes that he still can get a backline moving if your pack gets him good ball. Unless we want to go down the route of sticking the ball up the jumper for the game and hoping we don't make mistakes, then O'Gara is the best option.

Wallace is on great form, I'd have started him at 12 ahead of anyone tbh. Sexton does cover 12 reasonably well when needed but he not a valid option onyl emergency cover. And given that he's by far the best 10 we have its crazy to move him. If territory is whats needed Sexton can get it. ROG did play well when he came on but we have much better options.

Hagz · 17-06-2012 2:23pm

DDC1990 wrote: »

In my opinion we have a better chance of winning with ROG at 10, then we do with Earls/McFadden/Wallace at 12.

I don't think he has many games left in the tank, but he showed for 25 minutes that he still can get a backline moving if your pack gets him good ball. Unless we want to go down the route of sticking the ball up the jumper for the game and hoping we don't make mistakes, then O'Gara is the best option.

It's hard not to get over emotional when I read that comment.

Look, age is of no matter when the player in question is in-form and delivering performances well out of the range of the potential of a younger option.

This is not the case for Ronan O'Gara. He is out of form (we do not have time to waste helping him find it), he is not delivering performances out of Madigan's potential range. O'Gara should not have been on the bench for the past two games. To say otherwise is to remain conservative.

What use will it have been to us, in a season (or two depending on how longer O'Gara decides to stay an option for Ireland), to have played O'Gara in this match?? No. We should have brought Madigan, so that he may have had a taste of international rugby. So that in a season or two, we have a young out-half who is familiar with international rugby. Instead we will have to familiarise him to international rugby in the future, when we have no option.

But forgetting Madigan and focusing on what we can do about the now, O'Gara is in no way a better 10 than Wallace is a better 12 right now. Wallace is the clear choice to play. Wallace unlike O'Gara, is in form, and is playing at a level that no younger player has yet shown potential to match.

People are so concerned about picking up a win against the All Blacks, that they are willing to ignore development. That's the problem with the whole Irish set-up, we keep prolonging development. Because 'we must win the 6 nations', or 'it's important for us to beat SA/AUS/NZ in the the AI", or "we won't be playing against NZ for another 12 years, this is out best shot". So when?? Will we only develop when we play the Barbarians once a year, or wait till injury leaves us with no option.

If we continue to play who is 'perceived best', instead of who has the potential to be better, this Irish team will remain a core of 18 or so players, facing little to no outside competition for places. It's sad really.

Fishooks12 · 17-06-2012 2:24pm

Hagz wrote: »

It's hard not to get over emotional when I read that comment.

Look, age is of no matter when the player in question is in-form and delivering performances well out of the range of the potential of a younger option.

This is not the case for Ronan O'Gara. He is out of form (we do not have time to waste helping him find it), he is not delivering performances out of Madigan's potential range. O'Gara should not have been on the bench for the past two games. To say otherwise is to remain conservative.

What use will it have been to us, in a season (or two depending on how longer O'Gara decides to stay an option for Ireland), to have played O'Gara in this match?? No. We should have brought Madigan, so that he may have had a taste of international rugby. So that in a season or two, we have a young out-half who is familiar with international rugby. Instead we will have to familiarise him to international rugby in the future, when we have no option.

But forgetting Madigan and focusing on what we can do about the now, O'Gara is in no way a better 10 than Wallace is a better 12 right now. Wallace is the clear choice to play. Wallace unlike O'Gara, is in form, and is playing at a level that no younger player has yet shown potential to match.

People are so concerned about picking up a win against the All Blacks, that hey are willing to ignore development. That's the problem with the whole Irish set-up, we keep prolonging development. Because 'we must win the 6 nations', or 'it's important for us to beat SA/AUS/NZ in the the AI", or "we won't be playing against NZ for another 12 years, this is out best shot". So when?? Will we only develop when we play the Barbarians once a year, or wait till injury leaves us with no option.

If we continue to play who is 'perceived best', instead of who has the potential to be better, this Irish team will remain a core of 18 or so players, facing little to no outside competition for places. It's sad really.

One thing I will say. Playing Wallace at 12 isn't exactly having an eye on development either.

Cave or McFadden should be the call if that's the case

danthefan · 17-06-2012 2:29pm

I really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really hope we don't go back to BOD/Earls in the centre. It does not work.

DDC1990 · 17-06-2012 2:30pm

LordSmeg wrote: »

Wallace is on great form, I'd have started him at 12 ahead of anyone tbh. Sexton does cover 12 reasonably well when needed but he not a valid option onyl emergency cover. And given that he's by far the best 10 we have its crazy to move him. If territory is whats needed Sexton can get it. ROG did play well when he came on but we have much better options.

I admit I haven't seen much of Paddy Wallace this season (bar the HC final, where aside from one decent offload he was muck). Maybe im letting his past cloud my judgement, but I was never a fan. I could say the same for ROG, im letting his past endevours cloud my judgement.

I think you are better off having a defensive weak link at 10, closer to the pack and Murray as a physical SH, then at 12, where if they cut through you, you're done for.
Anyway, no matter what happens ROG will be in off the bench at 55mins i'd imagine.

And yes, I believe that ROG at 10 and Sexton at 12 will get a backine moving better then any other combo. I'd just fear for O'Gara defensivly.

Hagz · 17-06-2012 2:33pm

Fishooks12 wrote: »

One thing I will say. Playing Wallace at 12 isn't exactly having an eye on development either.

Cave or McFadden should be the call if that's the case

Ah yes, but that's when I made the point - if an older player is playing better than a younger player's potential has shown, than development is not an issue. The older player plays.

This is the case for Wallace. There is not a young 12 in the country who has suggested that they have the potential to reach heights above Wallace's standard.

With O'Gara this is not the case.

liammur · 17-06-2012 2:35pm

DDC1990 wrote: »

I admit I haven't seen much of Paddy Wallace this season (bar the HC final, where aside from one decent offload he was muck). Maybe im letting his past cloud my judgement, but I was never a fan. I could say the same for ROG, im letting his past endevours cloud my judgement.

I think you are better off having a defensive weak link at 10, closer to the pack and Murray as a physical SH, then at 12, where if they cut through you, you're done for.
Anyway, no matter what happens ROG will be in off the bench at 55mins i'd imagine.

And yes, I believe that ROG at 10 and Sexton at 12 will get a backine moving better then any other combo. I'd just fear for O'Gara defensivly.

I'm not a huge fan of Wallace either, but maybe give him his chance now and see is he up to.

yimrsg · 17-06-2012 2:38pm

McFadden is fine in defence at 12, just not so good on the wings or filling in for BOD at 13, no shame in that. Earls got plenty of leeway when he was placed in the centres and mistakes were made. If he's fit, I'd have Earls on the wings with license to roam like Bowe does. Wallace should have been out there from the start, but I don't want him at 12. I'd have Cave in there ahead of him as he'd have more training with the team and familiarity.

Having Sexton and ROG start is pointless, our defence is weakened from the loss of D'arcy and ROG getting the nod exacerbates it. Also we'd lose the potential to change our approach to upset NZ also. The one change I want to see is for Sexton and Reddan to start. Murray and ROG will work fine together if we get into a lead, Rodge can kick for touch testing their winger's defensive positioning, and Sexton can move to 12 it's no real loss.

SOB is going to play 7, whatever number he's got on his jersey. He's outperformed McCaw in that role for 2 weeks. Henry deserves a start if he's fit but since he hasn't figured on the bench thus far, so I reckon he's possibly out of contention. It's nearly a moot point what backrow we play if Heaslip's out as most are interchangeable and there's very little in them.

liammur · 17-06-2012 2:40pm

yimrsg wrote: »

Wallace should have been out there from the start, but I don't want him at 12. I'd have Cave in there ahead of him as he'd have more training with the team and familiarity.

V good point, he can be little more than back up really. It wouldn't be fair to throw him in at the deep end.

Scioch · 17-06-2012 2:44pm

DDC1990 wrote: »

I admit I haven't seen much of Paddy Wallace this season (bar the HC final, where aside from one decent offload he was muck). Maybe im letting his past cloud my judgement, but I was never a fan. I could say the same for ROG, im letting his past endevours cloud my judgement.

I think you are better off having a defensive weak link at 10, closer to the pack and Murray as a physical SH, then at 12, where if they cut through you, you're done for.
Anyway, no matter what happens ROG will be in off the bench at 55mins i'd imagine.

And yes, I believe that ROG at 10 and Sexton at 12 will get a backine moving better then any other combo. I'd just fear for O'Gara defensivly.

Wallace had a pretty good season all in all I think. They were all a bit rattled in the HC final and completely outplayed so I wouldnt judge him based on that one game.

I wouldnt see Wallace as a weak defensive link either. So I wouldnt be keen on creating one at 10 bringing ROG on unless it was absolutely necessary.

DDC1990 · 17-06-2012 2:49pm

yimrsg wrote: »

McFadden is fine in defence at 12, just not so good on the wings or filling in for BOD at 13, no shame in that. Earls got plenty of leeway when he was placed in the centres and mistakes were made. If he's fit, I'd have Earls on the wings with license to roam like Bowe does. Wallace should have been out there from the start, but I don't want him at 12. I'd have Cave in there ahead of him as he'd have more training with the team and familiarity.

Having Sexton and ROG start is pointless, our defence is weakened from the loss of D'arcy and ROG getting the nod exacerbates it. Also we'd lose the potential to change our approach to upset NZ also. The one change I want to see is for Sexton and Reddan to start. Murray and ROG will work fine together if we get into a lead, Rodge can kick for touch testing their winger's defensive positioning, and Sexton can move to 12 it's no real loss.

SOB is going to play 7, whatever number he's got on his jersey. He's outperformed McCaw in that role for 2 weeks. Henry deserves a start if he's fit but since he hasn't figured on the bench thus far, so I reckon he's possibly out of contention. It's nearly a moot point what backrow we play if Heaslip's out as most are interchangeable and there's very little in them.

I McFadden at 12 is fine vs Aeroni and Glasgow but the AB's are a different kettle of fish.

SBW and Conrad Smith are 2 of the most dangerous and abrasive centers in the world.

McFadden has looked shaky in tackles in almost every Ireland game i've seen. Im not saying he can't be a good center (just look at the abuse Earls was getting pre-6N and he turned out pretty good), I just havn't seen anything yet to fill me with confidence.
I know the tackle McFadden missed on North is always brought up to show he's a weak tackler, but it has to be highlighted. SBW would take one look at that clip and lick his lips at the thought of facing McFadden.

Having said that Carter would be doing cartwheels if ROG's name turns up on the teamsheet.

One thing we should target, no matter who's playing at 10 is Savea under the high ball. Looked like a rabbit in the headlights yesterday, and if we get good ball over him and a decent chase, we could make nice ground through the air on them.

Kicking to Dagg is suicide though, so I would employ an all out kicking game.

Ireland Tour to New Zealand 2012 Discussion thread

Comments