Will Joe Schmidt take the Ireland job?

jm08

JRant wrote: »

Agree 100%. With Paulie looking doubtful only Ryan should be making the team as it stands (maybe Earls on the bench to cover the back line). The real worry is we could have 5/6/7 Munster lads in the team to play the AB's. Thats frightening stuff altogether.

Only 3 Munster starters in the game against England in the 6ns, so its highly unlikely that there will be any more than that against the ABs.

Starting against England in 6Ns.
Leinster - 8
ulster - 4
Munster - 3

That didn't go very well, now did it?

jm08

JRant wrote: »

Most goid coaches would sort that out easy enough

1: Don't have your 2nd rowers at first reciever every single play. Get them away from the wings anc have them clearing out rucks like they're supposed to.

2: Leave Best where he is but a little rotation and competition can only be good for both.

3: Get a SH on the pitch who knows how to free up the backrow and any sort of attacking nous from the coach will get the best out of Ferris and SOB.

But isn't the thing about Leinster that the forwards can pass as well as the backs and it doesn't matter where the forwards appear in the line?

By the way, D'Arcy & BOD clear out as many rucks as any Leinster forward.

PhatPiggins

Fireball07 wrote: »

With Bowe and Fitz out, I would definitely have Earls as a starter, no doubt in my mind.

Earls is reallistically never not a starter(is that a double negative?). Fitzgerald is a fair way behing him in the international pecking order at this stage. He's probably behind Trimble as well.

Tox56

jm08 wrote: »

Schmidt would need to get POC/Ryan/Tuohy/DOC playing like a leinster 2nd row in 1-2 weeks - do you think he could do it?

Would you drop Rory Best for Cronin? (cronin is far more dynamic in the loose than Best, but Best is the better player now).

What about Ferris - I don't think the Ireland backrow functions as well as the Leinster one - would you drop him or would he learn how to play like Leinster in 1-2 weeks?

How do you suggest Ferris, Best and the 2nd Rows would need to adapt if we started to play a more expansive passing game?

Podge_irl

DOC and POC's biggest issue is their hands. I wouldn't trust either to execute a 2 on 1 which is a bit criminal. Ryan is better in that respect.

JRant

jm08 wrote: »

JRant wrote: »

Agree 100%. With Paulie looking doubtful only Ryan should be making the team as it stands (maybe Earls on the bench to cover the back line). The real worry is we could have 5/6/7 Munster lads in the team to play the AB's. Thats frightening stuff altogether.

Only 3 Munster starters in the game against England in the 6ns, so its highly unlikely that there will be any more than that against the ABs.

Starting against England in 6Ns.
Leinster - 8
ulster - 4
Munster - 3

That didn't go very well, now did it?

Sure didn't, we got mullered in the scrum and that was that
Murray, ROG, Ryan, POM, Earls, DOC could all realistically start under Kidney, maybe even Zebo.
On current form only Ryan should be making the team as players from other provinces are playing better rugby.
Wrt secondrowers passing etc, sure Joe has them offloading but they also hit an awful lot of rucks as well. Darce and BOD usual attack rucks succesfully near the wings.

Tox56

As was said above, Earls simply has to start in our current situation, whether than be on wing or fullback.

It would require BOD, Trimble, Fitz and Bowe all to be fit and available (and in good form) for Earls to be dropped. Especially when you consider how little time Earls has had on the wing, it would be very hard to play him under those circumstances.

Right now, he has to start, probably on the wing.

jm08

Tox56 wrote: »

How do you suggest Ferris, Best and the 2nd Rows would need to adapt if we started to play a more expansive passing game?

Move to Leinster where they can train the leinster way every day of the year!
(You won't achieve anything in 2 weeks pre-competition/tour camp).

And thats the challege of the international coach - getting the players to adopt to a style that they can all play.

Podge_irl

It would be easier to adapt to a style if some of their basic skills weren't so poor. Even at Leinster Schmidt commented on the poor passing skills in the squad. I wouldn't trust DOC to execute a simple 2 on 1 which is fairly bad.

Tox56

I'm sure 3 players can be taught a different style of rugby (particularly when one of them is Earls)..

It's just they aren't playing that kind of rugby, and Kidney doesn't appear to know how to coach it.

jm08

JRant wrote: »

Sure didn't, we got mullered in the scrum and that was that
Murray, ROG, Ryan, POM, Earls, DOC could all realistically start under Kidney, maybe even Zebo.
On current form only Ryan should be making the team as players from other provinces are playing better rugby.
Wrt secondrowers passing etc, sure Joe has them offloading but they also hit an awful lot of rucks as well. Darce and BOD usual attack rucks succesfully near the wings.

You avoiding the question as to how do you get the provincial styles x 3 to gel internationally? (it shouldn't matter which province they are from, its more the style that is played).

irishbucsfan

I agree, Kidney does not have the ability as a coach to get the moat out of our players. As jm08 says.

JRant

jm08 wrote: »

JRant wrote: »

Sure didn't, we got mullered in the scrum and that was that
Murray, ROG, Ryan, POM, Earls, DOC could all realistically start under Kidney, maybe even Zebo.
On current form only Ryan should be making the team as players from other provinces are playing better rugby.
Wrt secondrowers passing etc, sure Joe has them offloading but they also hit an awful lot of rucks as well. Darce and BOD usual attack rucks succesfully near the wings.

You avoiding the question as to how do you get the provincial styles x 3 to gel internationally? (it shouldn't matter which province they are from, its more the style that is played).

Give Kidney his P45, simples.

WeeBushy

I don't see how our situation is much different to the French or English. They are picking their players from different teams with different styles as well, and can get them all playing the same way for the national side. It reflects poorly on Kidney imo, but it doesn't mean that the Ireland job is harder than the English or French as a result.

In fact it must be harder for them to get players from so many different teams playing together. At least we only have 3/4 teams to intigrate.

Podge_irl

WeeBushy wrote: »

I don't see how our situation is much different to the French or English.

It isn't. But people are looking for excuses for Ireland's inexplicably poor performances and have mystically all overlooked the most obvious one.

JRant

Podge_irl wrote: »

WeeBushy wrote: »

I don't see how our situation is much different to the French or English.

It isn't. But people are looking for excuses for Ireland's inexplicably poor performances and have mystically all overlooked the most obvious one.

Plus the fact we have centrally contracted players should make the job slightly easier considering the numerous 'camps' the team has during the year.

jm08

jm08 wrote: »

Wouldn't make any difference which Munster lock was played - both play Munster style which seems to be incompatible to the way Ulster & Leinster play.

If anything it argues for DOC's inclusion - he has more of experience playing with U&L players when with Ireland.

winning rugby?

Kayless

The national team should play to its strengths. Our backrow and halfback combination is a good example of where we go wrong...

Instead of picking a balanced backrow, we pick the top 3 best backrow players we can find. Now, that's all well and good when you watch each player at provisional level but at international level balance counts for more! just look at how well the team play with Reddan and Sexton.

This is why Leinster still do well with Darcy at 12 when BOD plays. The national team needs better combinations based on balance rather than the best player we can find for that spot and Schmidts the man to do this.

our backrow is absolutely awesome tbh. There's at least 8 other areas I'd like to improve on before we started nit picking Ferris' lineout lifting, or Heaslip's warm up routine, or SOB's weakness at kicking >50yard penalties.

Kayless

Deleted User wrote: »

our backrow is absolutely awesome tbh. There's at least 8 other areas I'd like to improve on before we started nit picking Ferris' lineout lifting, or Heaslip's warm up routine, or SOB's weakness at kicking >50yard penalties.

I agree.

Still I think if Schmidt was given the job tomorrow he would make these kind of changes. Tbh its a much better use of our resources can you imagine a fresh stephen ferris coming on in the second half? This also lets other players play in their best position.. just a thought

CIARAN_BOYLE

Kayless wrote: »

I agree.

Still I think if Schmidt was given the job tomorrow he would make these kind of changes. Tbh its a much better use of our resources can you imagine a fresh stephen ferris coming on in the second half? This also lets other players play in their best position.. just a thought

Joe plays SOB at 7 a lot for Leinster so don't count on it.

That said given Ferris fragility I would use him in an impact role off the bench often.

Fireball07

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Joe plays SOB at 7 a lot for Leinster so don't count on it.

That said given Ferris fragility I would use him in an impact role off the bench often.

Meh, Ferris is just so good, I don't think you could put him on the bench.

leftleg

jm08 wrote: »

And thats the challege of the international coach - getting the players to adopt to a style that they can all play.

So that's been Kidneys challenge for the last 4 years; they've been playing a brand of puke rugby for about 3 of those 4 years under him. Its been a dismal failure.

molloyjh

The big issue is that for a couple of months from November 2010 to February 2011 there was an effort made to play a more expansive game. And because it wasn't working out immediately (be that through a lack of time together in that period to get it to stick or coaches not being able to successfully implement it or whatever) it was dropped like a hot snot and there's been no real direction since that I can see. We've heard a lot about figuring out an "Irish" style of play, whatever that means, which to me suggests that 12 months on from dropping the more expansive game the Irish camp still have no idea what kind of game plan they want to employ. Surely that is far more worrying than any selection issues.....

chancer12

Tox56 wrote: »

As was said above, Earls simply has to start in our current situation, whether than be on wing or fullback.

It would require BOD, Trimble, Fitz and Bowe all to be fit and available (and in good form) for Earls to be dropped. Especially when you consider how little time Earls has had on the wing, it would be very hard to play him under those circumstances.

Right now, he has to start, probably on the wing.

You'd select Earls ahead of Kearney for f/back?!!! He's a winger and with Fitz and Bowe injured of course he'll be on the wing, presumably with Trimble

Tox56

chancer12 wrote: »

Tox56 wrote: »

As was said above, Earls simply has to start in our current situation, whether than be on wing or fullback.

It would require BOD, Trimble, Fitz and Bowe all to be fit and available (and in good form) for Earls to be dropped. Especially when you consider how little time Earls has had on the wing, it would be very hard to play him under those circumstances.

Right now, he has to start, probably on the wing.

You'd select Earls ahead of Kearney for f/back?!!! He's a winger and with Fitz and Bowe injured of course he'll be on the wing, presumably with Trimble

Sorry I meant centre.

jm08

Podge_irl wrote: »

It isn't. But people are looking for excuses for Ireland's inexplicably poor performances and have mystically all overlooked the most obvious one.

Stuart Barnes isn't the only one to make comments about the incompatability of the styles. Matt Williams also did a few weeks ago. (Anyway, why would Barnes want to make excuses for Ireland?).

The difference of style (and how long it can take to get used to it) might be better explained by looking at Leinster's recruitment from outside the province. Nacewa took a while to establish himself. Mike Ross - from making the dream team in the English premiership to bit part in Leinster for over a year. Starters from Connacht now 2nd/3rd choice for Leinster. Even Straus took his time to integrate.

Most recent signings have fitted in straight away - Hines & Brad Thorn - both kiwis.

The difference with international rugby though, is that you don't have 30 games to integrate players into a system to play together.

Fishooks12

jm08 wrote: »

Stuart Barnes isn't the only one to make comments about the incompatability of the styles. Matt Williams also did a few weeks ago. (Anyway, why would Barnes want to make excuses for Ireland?).

The difference of style (and how long it can take to get used to it) might be better explained by looking at Leinster's recruitment from outside the province. Nacewa took a while to establish himself. Mike Ross - from making the dream team in the English premiership to bit part in Leinster for over a year. Starters from Connacht now 2nd/3rd choice for Leinster. Even Straus took his time to integrate.

Most recent signings have fitted in straight away - Hines & Brad Thorn - both kiwis.

The difference with international rugby though, is that you don't have 30 games to integrate players into a system to play together.

It took Joe Schmidt all of about a month to get Leinster playing his game plan

Is this really still being used as an excuse for Kidney who has been in the job 4 years?!

Seph503

Doesn't really change Podge's point.

The French and English do it fine, with a wider selection of different teams and players.

Also the fact that Ireland seem to play most of the time devoid of any gameplan entirely doesn't help either with integration of "styles". If we were going to try and play "The Leinster Way" for example, we wouldn't have Sexton and Murray kicking the ball to the Welsh back three all day.

jm08

jm08 wrote: »

Stuart Barnes isn't the only one to make comments about the incompatability of the styles. Matt Williams also did a few weeks ago. (Anyway, why would Barnes want to make excuses for Ireland?).

The difference of style (and how long it can take to get used to it) might be better explained by looking at Leinster's recruitment from outside the province. Nacewa took a while to establish himself. Mike Ross - from making the dream team in the English premiership to bit part in Leinster for over a year. Starters from Connacht now 2nd/3rd choice for Leinster. Even Straus took his time to integrate.

Most recent signings have fitted in straight away - Hines & Brad Thorn - both kiwis.

The difference with international rugby though, is that you don't have 30 games to integrate players into a system to play together.

Look. You are circling the drainhole with great aplomb, and well done to you for that.

Here are some quick points that should clarify most's positions on the problems at International Level.

1 - We are losing, and playing badly
2 - Our individual teams are not
3 - Our players are being lauded with individual awards left right and centre - There is buckets of talent available to us.
4 - We did start playing a 'post 2009 law interpretation' game. See the start of the 2011 6N. Passes were dropped, things didn't come off, but we did start. Compare that to the September of Schmidt's first season at Leinster and you will see massive similarities. However, whereas Leinster continued with a gameplan that they managed to finally crack, we reverted to pre-2009 style rugby when ROG started v Wales in that same 6N, and we tried to pin a dynamic team into the corners and handed them the ball back on several occasions. Results aside, we took a massive, massive step back.
5 - Every national side in the world has the problems that people are identifying as excuses as to why we aren't transferring our club/provinces success into national success. There is nothing that separates us to the extent that we can have 5 Irish HEC champions in 6 years, yet have a terrible run of 6Ns. In October, "An Irish Winner" of the HEC was as low as 4/6 with the bookmakers. Ireland to win the 6N was 13/2. That speaks volumes.

6 - We have stagnated beyond belief. D'Arcy, though an incredible servant to the team over the last decade, DOC and Leamy should never have been awarded central contracts. We are hamstrung by these contracts, and I believe that they should be 1year long rolling contracts for the main. These players are then selected ahead of development players, better players, players who are actually playing regular rugby and at a high level etc. The central contract system has been a mess tbh, and the Head Coach surely has a massive say in whom he wants a central contract offered to.

These are all issues that people have with the management team (both coaching and management) of the national squad. They aren't going away fast.

WeleaseWoderick

jm08 wrote: »

Most recent signings have fitted in straight away - Hines & Brad Thorn - both kiwis.

That'll be news to Nathan so!

jm08

You are all missing the point of what Barnes (& Matt Williams) was making.

Leinster has a style.
Ulster has a style
Munster has a style

They are all different.

Clermont & Toulouse play a similar style of rugby, just like Quins is probably the only English club that plays a bit differently to the rest of the premiership teams.

Mike Ross played for Quins and it took him over a year to play like the way Leinster play.

Joe Schmidt took the way Leinster play and added more to it. Leinster always played a fast, high tempo game (Toulouse 2006). That was never Ulster or Munster's game. It took years for Leinster to develop that way - it didn't happen overnight.

Look at it this way - Ireland's most successful period are usually dominated by players from one of the provinces (so one style predominates). In the '80s, Ulster, '90 terrible, '00s Munster.

It took Schmidt 4 games (plus preseason of settled squad) to get Leinster playing like they are now (which was based on working to Leinster's strengths). But both Munster & Ulster don't have similar strengths to Leinster and Schmidt (as Ireland coach) can't rectify that by bringing in a Nathan Hines or Brad Thorn. The question is, can he get Rory Best, Paul O'Connell, D Ryan, Ferris, Murray & Earls playing like a Leinster player in a couple of weeks (interpersed with going back to their clubs which play differently)?

*Sincere apologies to Nathan Hines - I should have had SH player rather than kiwi.

leftleg

jm08 wrote: »

Leinster always played a fast, high tempo game

No they didnt; under Cheika Leinster had the best defence and scored the least amount of tries in the Magners League, especially in 2009.

Next please

jm08

jm08 wrote: »

You are all missing the point of what Barnes (& Matt Williams) was making.

Leinster has a style.
Ulster has a style
Munster has a style

They are all different.

Clermont & Toulouse play a similar style of rugby, just like Quins is probably the only English club that plays a bit differently to the rest of the premiership teams.

Mike Ross played for Quins and it took him over a year to play like the way Leinster play.

Joe Schmidt took the way Leinster play and added more to it. Leinster always played a fast, high tempo game (Toulouse 2006). That was never Ulster or Munster's game. It took years for Leinster to develop that way - it didn't happen overnight.

Look at it this way - Ireland's most successful period are usually dominated by players from one of the provinces (so one style predominates). In the '80s, Ulster, '90 terrible, '00s Munster.

It took Schmidt 4 games (plus preseason of settled squad) to get Leinster playing like they are now (which was based on working to Leinster's strengths). But both Munster & Ulster don't have similar strengths to Leinster and Schmidt (as Ireland coach) can't rectify that by bringing in a Nathan Hines or Brad Thorn. The question is, can he get Rory Best, Paul O'Connell, D Ryan, Ferris, Murray & Earls playing like a Leinster player in a couple of weeks (interpersed with going back to their clubs which play differently)?

*Sincere apologies to Nathan Hines - I should have had SH player rather than kiwi.

lol

Re: the entire rest of your post, see point 4 in my last post. We gave up on the development of "modern rugby".

Podge_irl

Ross didn't take a year to play the Leinster style he took a year to stop being a fat ass.

Also the difference in style between Leinster in Cheika's last year and Schmidt first was pretty huge.

ray jay

jm08 wrote: »

The question is, can he get Rory Best, Paul O'Connell, D Ryan, Ferris, Murray & Earls playing like a Leinster player in a couple of weeks (interpersed with going back to their clubs which play differently)?

It's not like Kidney just started coaching Ireland now, he's had years to create an Irish style and to drill it into his players. The returning players should just need a refresher to get them back in the swing of things. All your examples are based on when a player joins a team for the first time rather than players returning to a squad and style they're familiar with.

jm08

Deleted User wrote: »

lol

Re: the entire rest of your post, see point 4 in my last post. We gave up on the development of "modern rugby".

Maybe the reason "we gave up" was because it wasn't working out with the players & time that was available.

Its not about players and their abilities. Its about the different styles that they play.

leftleg

jm08 wrote: »

Maybe the reason "we gave up" was because it wasn't working out with the players & time that was available.

Its not about players and their abilities. Its about the different styles that they play.

I often chat with walls, and strangely they never answer back

Fishooks12

jm08 wrote: »

Maybe the reason "we gave up" was because it wasn't working out with the players & time that was available.

Its not about players and their abilities. Its about the different styles that they play.

Come off it will you

We have some of the best players in the NH and not getting them to perform cohesively as a unit is not down to "different styles in the provinces" rather than Kidney's tactical ineptitude

jm08

jm08 wrote: »

Maybe the reason "we gave up" was because it wasn't working out with the players & time that was available.

Its not about players and their abilities. Its about the different styles that they play.

The exact same players who play that style week in week out?

You're head wrecking enough when you're trying to make sense.

Blured

jm08 wrote: »

Clermont & Toulouse play a similar style of rugby.

Some have said that Leinster and Ulster also play a similar style of rugby. With that in mind

Taken from current squad from here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_national_rugby_union_team

Toulouse Players in the squad - 12
Clermont Players in the squad - 8
Total Players - 32 (62.5% from Toulouse & Clermont)

Taken from current squad from here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland_national_rugby_union_team

Leinster Players in the squad - 13
Ulster Players in the squad - 8
Total Players - 32 (65.6% from Leinster & Ulster)

Also it should be noted that the rest of the French squad is made up of players from 7 other teams whereas Ireland only has 2. Surely that would make the job of marrying styles harder for the French team?

jm08

Podge_irl wrote: »

Ross didn't take a year to play the Leinster style he took a year to stop being a fat ass.

Also the difference in style between Leinster in Cheika's last year and Schmidt first was pretty huge.

A perfect illustration about different styles. A fat ass suited the English premiership. Ross (english premiership style) didn't suit Leinster's style.

Tox56

You could realistically have an Irish team where you basically play the Leinster team, but then replace Strauss with Best, Nacewa with Bowe, McLaughlin with Ferris, Cullen with POC, and Thorn with Ryan.

With the exception of the last one, you could easily argue the Irish alternatives are superior players.

Clearlier

jm08 wrote: »

Stuart Barnes isn't the only one to make comments about the incompatability of the styles. Matt Williams also did a few weeks ago. (Anyway, why would Barnes want to make excuses for Ireland?).

The difference of style (and how long it can take to get used to it) might be better explained by looking at Leinster's recruitment from outside the province. Nacewa took a while to establish himself. Mike Ross - from making the dream team in the English premiership to bit part in Leinster for over a year. Starters from Connacht now 2nd/3rd choice for Leinster. Even Straus took his time to integrate.

Most recent signings have fitted in straight away - Hines & Brad Thorn - both kiwis.

The difference with international rugby though, is that you don't have 30 games to integrate players into a system to play together.

Nacewa took no time at all to establish himself and not much longer to make it clear that he's a really good player. Mike Ross is a much better player now than he was when he came to Leinster - it's not that he has adapted his style more that he has developed other aspects of his game.

Being an international coach requires a peculiar skill set. It's different obviously to club/province coaching in that you spend relatively little time on a day to day basis with the players and when you are with them your focus is quite different. It's also different to one off A games or even Lions tours. If all the feeder teams are playing in the same way then it does provide an advantage to the national team in that they don't need to spend as much time practicing the basic skills required to execute the game plan. It means that they're further down the road of developing as a team. If you haven't got that then you need to start a bit further back and some of the skills won't come instinctively to some/all of the players. The concern with this Irish team is that it's difficult to discern any development in the team.

I honestly can't believe that the Irish coaching staff and Kidney in particular (given his history of big picture thinking) haven't got a strategy about how they want the team to play. It's not obvious to any of us though what that strategy is and that's a worry because the team has been together long enough under Kidney that they should have developed their unique style of play.

Should Joe Schmidt be offered the job? Not yet. I think that Ireland have actually been close enough under Kidney (notwithstanding the game plan concerns) that he deserves another year at it but I also think that Schmidt would benefit from another year or two's experience as head coach.

Outside of Schmidt there's Cheika who knows the Irish scene. McCall is doing well at Saracens, Bradley has brought Edinburgh to new heights and Elwood is doing a reasonable job at Connacht. The latter two are not near ready for international rugby though and I doubt the abilities of the former two. There might be an argument for Brian McLaughlin given the steady progress he has overseen at Ulster but you'd really like to see him in the head coaches position for another year.

leftleg

jm08 wrote: »

A perfect illustration about different styles. A fat ass suited the English premiership. Ross (english premiership style) didn't suit Leinster's style.

Ross is a tight head; his basics are to hold up and lock a scrum; lift in lineou'ts and if he can link up in open play and clear out rucks; he did that before and he still does that now; stop bringing him up; Cheika didn't really rate him over Stan Wright; that's why he didn't play;

Podge_irl

jm08 wrote: »

Maybe the reason "we gave up" was because it wasn't working out with the players & time that was available.

Its not about players and their abilities. Its about the different styles that they play.

It WAS working. We were clearly getting better at it. But we lost a close game to France and Kidney panicked and reverted to ROG and a style of game he is comfortable with. It was one of the worst things he has done as coach, the other being starting Murray and ROG in the QF. Both showed an awful preference for horribly limited rugby.

molloyjh

jm08 wrote: »

Maybe the reason "we gave up" was because it wasn't working out with the players & time that was available.

It wasn't working out in the short term. And what happened as a result is a clear example of exactly what is wrong with the national side from a coaching point of view.

When Schmidt arrived his style didn't work immediately either. Leinster had a terrible start to the 10/11 season and there were those (trolls) in the media calling for his head. However he and the team had the balls to stick to their guns and it came good.

Ireland had trouble adapting to a more modern game plan too. However instead of sticking to their guns they retreated into their shells and we went backwards. We haven't recovered from that yet and there's no sign of it happening.

As far as I'm concerned that backwards step, the way the coaches chickened out of standing their ground, is the single most damning part of the Kidney tenure. We could have developed into a decent side but were prevented from doing so. Now we hear this constant talk about "finding an Irish style" which to me clearly shows our coaches still have no idea where to take this team. After 4 years in charge. That is just not good enough.

ray jay

The argument that the players have such a hard time adapting to the Irish style is particularly laughable considering how conservative Kidney is with his selections. Most of the team that won our first 6 nations match under Kidney are still in the squad these days, and the majority of the remainder are absent through injury or retirement. These guys play 10+ matches per year for their country. Between that and training camps, it's not credible to say they don't have time to get their head around the Irish style.

leftleg

ray jay wrote: »

it's not credible to say they don't have time to get their head around the Irish style.

What style?

jm08

Deleted User wrote: »

The exact same players who play that style week in week out?

You're head wrecking enough when you're trying to make sense.

Didn't know Schmidt worked with Best, Flannery, POC, DOC, Ryan, Ferris, Leamy, Wallace, O'Leary, Murray, ROG, Bowe, Trimble & Earls, week in, week out!