Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread IV

Wang King

Murray at 10, Mads at 9....that'll throw the French off their game

Ceadog

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

No harm. Someone pointed out a while ago that we're fairly poor for goal kicking options outside Sexton/Madiagn/Jackson.

Give it a couple of years and McCloskey and Ringrose will be knocking over everything from 12 and 13

Buer

I'm enjoying reading the articles each morning on the Irish squad by the rugby luminaries such as Thornley, Francis and Ward.

Ward's article this morning is pretty agreeable overall without any real notes of sensationalism that he's prone to. I did enjoy his claim that Tommy Bowe is "much underrated" however. This is the two time Lions test winger and internationally recognised star?

Also thought him saying our more regular carrier and second highest tackler was "inconspicuous" on the field. SOB was a lot of things and not all of them were good by any stretch but he was very conspicuous!

errlloyd

Buer wrote: »

Ward's article this morning is pretty agreeable overall without any real notes of sensationalism that he's prone to. I did enjoy his claim that Tommy Bowe is "much underrated" however. This is the two time Lions test winger and internationally recognised star?

Same Tony Ward who once said Bowe would never be quick enough to be an international standard winger.

rrpc

errlloyd wrote: »

Same Tony Ward who once said Bowe would never be quick enough to be an international standard winger.

I think that was George Hook.

Tony is a gas man in fairness. I can't help but hope that he's doing most of it on purpose.

clsmooth

What's the chances of seeing a back row of Henderon/SOB/Heaslip with POM on the bench for France and Italy? After Henderson's recent eye catching performances, has he finally forced his way into the starting 15 at 6 or does he have to wait until POC hangs up his international boots after lifting the William Webb Ellis trophy? I know some will argue that it's Toner that could be dropped to fit Henderson in, but having Toner in the line out is a huge weapon for us. Has POM had any stand out performances in the last year since Wales in the 2014 6 Nations? Is Henderson now the better option from the start?

Buer

errlloyd wrote: »

Same Tony Ward who once said Bowe would never be quick enough to be an international standard winger.

As rrpc says, that was GH. Ward goes to bed each night with a photo of Tommy under his pillow.

rrpc

clsmooth wrote: »

What's the chances of seeing a back row of Henderon/SOB/Heaslip with POM on the bench for France and Italy? After Henderson's recent eye catching performances, has he finally forced his way into the starting 15 at 6 or does he have to wait until POC hangs up his international boots after lifting the William Webb Ellis trophy? I know some will argue that it's Toner that could be dropped to fit Henderson in, but having Toner in the line out is a huge weapon for us. Has POM had any stand out performances in the last year since Wales in the 2014 6 Nations? Is Henderson now the better option from the start?

I'm not sure Joe would want to use him in the back row. In the Wales game Henderson seemed to be positioned out towards the wing a lot and I would guess he's being used as primarily a ball carrier out wide rather than for grunt work in close. Granted he had a few high profile involvements in rucks but those seemed to be the exception rather than the rule.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Tony is a gas man in fairness. I can't help but hope that he's doing most of it on purpose.

Yup, stirring it is definitely a pastime of Tony's - you have to take some of the more exuberant comments he makes with a pinch of salt.

That said, he was completely serious in his criticism of *spoilt* Leinster fans last season and to my mind he has been proved wrong here.

wittycynic

clsmooth wrote: »

What's the chances of seeing a back row of Henderon/SOB/Heaslip with POM on the bench for France and Italy? After Henderson's recent eye catching performances, has he finally forced his way into the starting 15 at 6 or does he have to wait until POC hangs up his international boots after lifting the William Webb Ellis trophy? I know some will argue that it's Toner that could be dropped to fit Henderson in, but having Toner in the line out is a huge weapon for us. Has POM had any stand out performances in the last year since Wales in the 2014 6 Nations? Is Henderson now the better option from the start?

As I've said before, Henderson is a very gifted player and we should be looking to accommodate him in the team. To me, the best use of our resources is:

4. Toner
5. O'Connell
6. Henderson
7. O'Brien
8. Heaslip
19. Ryan
20. O'Mahony

That, I feel, is the strongest combination of forwards and replacements we can field.

vienne86

wittycynic wrote: »

As I've said before, Henderson is a very gifted player and we should be looking to accommodate him in the team. To me, the best use of our resources is:

4. Toner
5. O'Connell
6. Henderson
7. O'Brien
8. Heaslip
19. Ryan
20. O'Mahony

That, I feel, is the strongest combination of forwards and replacements we can field.

I'd like to see that, but I really think Joe sees Henderson in the second row.

.ak

vienne86 wrote: »

I'd like to see that, but I really think Joe sees Henderson in the second row.

I think he reckons he can do both. However, it's the nuances of flanker play Henderson lacks. I think those sort of things are less important at lock. In open play a lock is generally just hitting rucks and helping shore up the midfield in the tackle. A blindside has a lot more work to do and its one thing I notice hendo seems to get lax at when he tires, often joining the rucks from incorrect angles or forgetting to get back on side to be effective.

He's an absolute freak and is naturally a good rugby player tho! Can't have a side without him.

smiley_face

.ak wrote: »

I think he reckons he can do both. However, it's the nuances of flanker play Henderson lacks. I think those sort of things are less important at lock. In open play a lock is generally just hitting rucks and helping shore up the midfield in the tackle. A blindside has a lot more work to do and its one thing I notice hendo seems to get lax at when he tires, often joining the rucks from incorrect angles or forgetting to get back on side to be effective.

He's an absolute freak and is naturally a good rugby player tho! Can't have a side without him.

May sound a bit out there, but would anyone like to see Henderson at No. 8 and Heaslip at 6?
Henderson could carry the ball off the scrums and could generally offer himself to carry the ball more in open play, and have Heaslip concentrate more on rucking and tackling.

total former

smiley_face wrote: »

May sound a bit out there, but would anyone like to see Henderson at No. 8 and Heaslip at 6?
Henderson could carry the ball off the scrums and could generally offer himself to carry the ball more in open play, and have Heaslip concentrate more on rucking and tackling.

No, there are a million reasons why this is a bad idea. It will never, ever, ever happen, nor should it.

smiley_face

total former wrote: »

No, there are a million reasons why this is a bad idea. It will never, ever, ever happen, nor should it.

Just out of curiosity, are there a couple of main reasons why it's not a good idea?
Would appreciate if you could expand a bit, genuinely interested in hearing your reasons.
Thanks

clsmooth

smiley_face wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, are there a couple of main reasons why it's not a good idea?
Would appreciate if you could expand a bit, genuinely interested in hearing your reasons.
Thanks

Ball control at the base of the scrum is one that screams out at me. Heaslip is excellent at this.

Yeah_Right

I think Henderson should concentrate on lock. He could be a Rettallick or Whitelock for Ireland. There are enough quality loose forwards around to cover blindside.

awec

Talk of Payne as a centre last night and now talk of Henderson as a lock.

I'd swear you lot are just trying to wind me up now.

molloyjh

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I think Henderson should concentrate on lock. He could be a Rettallick or Whitelock for Ireland. There are enough quality loose forwards around to cover blindside.

This. Ireland's need is at lock and not blindside. We can debate the merits of a player and where they are playing (like the Payne debate) but it all ultimately comes down to what Ireland needs. POC retires from international rugby in 2 months. We need to replace him. We have POM and Ruddock already there at 6. We don't need Hendo there as well.

http://uk.reuters.com/sport/rugby/lacey-steps-up

John Lacey to become the head of the World Rugby International Referees Panel after the World Cup!!

Buer

awec wrote: »

Talk of Payne as a centre last night and now talk of Henderson as a lock.

I'd swear you lot are just trying to wind me up now.

It's like some sort of weird Beetlejuice effect. If we say Henderson 3 times, you show up.

On a tangent, I look forward to McCloskey's emergence as a winger.

clsmooth

molloyjh wrote: »

This. Ireland's need is at lock and not blindside. We can debate the merits of a player and where they are playing (like the Payne debate) but it all ultimately comes down to what Ireland needs. POC retires from international rugby in 2 months. We need to replace him. We have POM and Ruddock already there at 6. We don't need Hendo there as well.

Agree that we need him as a lock going forward. But in the short term (ie World Cup), should he be starting at 6?

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

http://uk.reuters.com/sport/rugby/lacey-steps-up

John Lacey to become the head of the World Rugby International Referees Panel after the World Cup!!

You got me.

molloyjh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

http://uk.reuters.com/sport/rugby/lacey-steps-up

John Lacey to become the head of the World Rugby International Referees Panel after the World Cup!!

You cruel, cruel man you!

clsmooth

Buer wrote: »

It's like some sort of weird Beetlejuice effect. If we say Henderson 3 times, you show up.

On a tangent, I look forward to McCloskey's emergence as a winger.

A Trimble/Payne centre combo with McCloskey outside them would be something to behold :eek:

thomond2006

Is Blind Dave still head of the 6N panel?

awec

clsmooth wrote: »

A Trimble/Payne centre combo with McCloskey outside them would be something to behold :eek:

Trimble and McCloskey score too many tries, they're not bland enough to play for Ireland right now.

Yeah_Right

awec wrote: »

Talk of Payne as a centre last night and now talk of Henderson as a lock.

I'd swear you lot are just trying to wind me up now.

Sorry mate but Ulster's needs are unimportant. Ireland first. Do your patriotic duty and get behind these ideas

Buer

awec wrote: »

Trimble and McCloskey score too many tries, they're not bland enough to play for Ireland right now.

That's ok, we're just moving the Irish coaching staff into Ulster to sort out your team and get you lads up to speed after the RWC.

molloyjh

clsmooth wrote: »

Agree that we need him as a lock going forward. But in the short term (ie World Cup), should he be starting at 6?

Because you don't go upsetting a settled back row that works in the hope that Hendo can fill the same role for a few weeks before moving him to a different position. You try and get him as comfortable with lock play now so that he can slot in there when Paulie goes. POM is probably a better 6 anyway. Not as eye catching at times but gets through all the work you want him to. He's been a pretty important part of both 6Ns wins. Plus he's a leader.

total former

smiley_face wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, are there a couple of main reasons why it's not a good idea?
Would appreciate if you could expand a bit, genuinely interested in hearing your reasons.
Thanks

Because Heaslip is one of our few genuinely world-class players; to move him to a position he has never played before, to accommodate a guy who has never played at 8, would be utter madness.

Also, #8 is a very technical position, it's not something you can pick up overnight.

Finally, Heaslip gets through a phenomenal amount of donkey work at 8, we don't need to move him to get him tackling and rucking.

If Heaslip and Henderson were to switch it would be for one reason, and one alone, and that would be to have the ability to send Henderson off the back of the scrum.

You'd do nothing else in terms of switching them, they'd both play the entire rest of the game the way they would play if they were at their 'normal' positions. They'd only set up differently for attacking scrums, and probably only ones closer than 10m to the opposition try line.

All that being said, I'm not sure (and only because we've never seen it) Henderson would be that much more effective at getting over the gain line from the base of a scrum.
(If you consider times when the scrum might not be solid enough to get him moving, Heaslip's ability at the base is excellent etc)

CatFromHue

Also how often do you see a No.8 break from a scrum anymore?

smiley_face

total former wrote: »

Because Heaslip is one of our few genuinely world-class players; to move him to a position he has never played before, to accommodate a guy who has never played at 8, would be utter madness.

Also, #8 is a very technical position, it's not something you can pick up overnight.

Finally, Heaslip gets through a phenomenal amount of donkey work at 8, we don't need to move him to get him tackling and rucking.

Deleted User wrote: »

If Heaslip and Henderson were to switch it would be for one reason, and one alone, and that would be to have the ability to send Henderson off the back of the scrum.

You'd do nothing else in terms of switching them, they'd both play the entire rest of the game the way they would play if they were at their 'normal' positions. They'd only set up differently for attacking scrums, and probably only ones closer than 10m to the opposition try line.

All that being said, I'm not sure (and only because we've never seen it) Henderson would be that much more effective at getting over the gain line from the base of a scrum.
(If you consider times when the scrum might not be solid enough to get him moving, Heaslip's ability at the base is excellent etc)

Apart from the scrums, how is it a technical position?
All of the loose forwards pretty much do they same jobs nowadays, unless they choose to nominate a specialist for things like rucking, tackling or carrying.
And picking up the ball off the back of a scrum isn't that difficult, people were trying to say that Seán O'Brien couldn't do it until he gave an exhibition of No. 8 play against Scotland and firmly put that notion to bed I hope.

Aydin Creamy Misfortune made the point I was getting at, mainly for carrying forcefully at the base of the scrum in attacking positions, Henderson would be better that Heaslip IMO.
Other that that in open play they could share out the jobs to form the best balance across the backrow as possible.

Also, don't think Heaslip has never played 6 before, or that he couldn't adapt perfectly to it.

I also agree that he does a lot of donkey work, but in terms of ball carrying in certain situations that Henderson would be better.

Basically, as Aydin Creamy Misfortune said, perhaps it could be a weapon to switch the 2 of them at times in attacking positions.

Buer

CatFromHue wrote: »

Also how often do you see a No.8 break from a scrum anymore?

Very rarely. There are a few powerhouse carriers that can do it on occasion such as Morgan and Vunipola but teams set themselves up to deal with them now and their influence off the base is pretty limited.

Also worth noting that both Vunipola and Morgan have slimmed down significantly since their initial breakthroughs as their work rate around the field wasn't good enough.

Buer

smiley_face wrote: »

Also, don't think Heaslip has never played 6 before, or that he couldn't adapt perfectly to it.

Heaslip has never played 6.

smiley_face

Buer wrote: »

Heaslip has never played 6.

But couldn't he adapt to it fairly quickly, no?

Buer

smiley_face wrote: »

But couldn't he adapt to it fairly quickly, no?

Not as quickly as Henderson. 6 is a power rucking position where they're the blindside flanker coming around off set piece to clear the opposition away after the carrier and possibly openside secure possession.

Heaslip could potentially do it but Henderson would be far better at it.

At the base of the scrum, there's a lot more to things than just carrying. The control and footwork is a big element and an area where Heaslip is probably the best in Europe, let alone Ireland. We also perform a lot of planned moves at set piece where Heaslip links with his scrumhalf or flanker to get move the point of attack. Again, no Irish back row player is as good or comfortable with this.

Moving Henderson there would be pointless. It'd be for the sake of one element of the game which would have limited impact. His ability in the loose is based on mis-matches and opposition being caught off guard by a 6'6" man exploding into contact. Off the base of the scrum, he'd be eaten up. The flankers would simply cut him down at the ankles and his gains would be eliminated. Not only that but we'd lose the link play that Heaslip provides while losing the explosive clear outs that Henderson provides on set plays from blindside.

Regarding SOB off the base against Scotland, he had a fine game there but was pretty average in his carrying. When people know it's coming, they're prepared for it and you've to adjust. His performance was based on his breakdown work in phase play. 14m off 6 carries is nothing out of the ordinary or eye catching.

awec

Henderson is fantastic at 6. You'd almost think he actually was a 6.

(I'm in that sort of mood today)

Buer

awec wrote: »

Henderson is fantastic at 6. You'd almost think he actually was a 6.

(I'm in that sort of mood today)

He's not a bad. Luckily, he'll assume his final form as a lock and play there for 10 years for Ireland and Ulster, buried in every ruck, the ball a distant memory from his youth.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Heaslip is nearly 32. Given his ever presence in the team do we have a suitable replacement in waiting? Physically Heaslip could probably go on for years but I've heard a lot of players say the mind went before the body. I'm just wondering as people are saying Henderson is the automatic replacement for O'Connell how many of our other more senior players have automatic replacements lined up?

awec

Stander and Conan.

Buer

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Heaslip is nearly 32. Given his ever presence in the team do we have a suitable replacement in waiting? Physically Heaslip could probably go on for years but I've heard a lot of players say the mind went before the body. I'm just wondering as people are saying Henderson is the automatic replacement for O'Connell how many of our other more senior players have automatic replacements lined up?

Best - Casey, Strauss, Cronin all in their twenties.
Ross - Moore, Furlong
Heaslip - By the time he's finishing up, I'd be optimistic for Conan and JOD coming through.
POC - Henderson

Think we're ok in other areas of the pack although with Ryan starting to age, I wouldn't mind another option there.

awec

awec wrote: »

Stander and Conan.

And your own lad in waiting!

Buer

Buer wrote: »

Best - Casey, Strauss, Cronin all in their twenties.
Ross - Moore, Furlong
Heaslip - By the time he's finishing up, I'd be optimistic for Conan and JOD coming through.
POC - Henderson

Think we're ok in other areas of the pack although with Ryan starting to age, I wouldn't mind another option there.

Time for Mick Kearney to start hitting 4th gear alright!

Clearlier

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Heaslip is nearly 32. Given his ever presence in the team do we have a suitable replacement in waiting? Physically Heaslip could probably go on for years but I've heard a lot of players say the mind went before the body. I'm just wondering as people are saying Henderson is the automatic replacement for O'Connell how many of our other more senior players have automatic replacements lined up?

Who says that the mind goes before the body? I would have said the opposite with many players mentioning how they understand the game much better but they're body's just not up to it any more.

Surprised that nobody mentioned Murphy as a potential replacement for Heaslip.

smiley_face

Buer wrote: »

Very rarely. There are a few powerhouse carriers that can do it on occasion such as Morgan and Vunipola but teams set themselves up to deal with them now and their influence off the base is pretty limited.

Also worth noting that both Vunipola and Morgan have slimmed down significantly since their initial breakthroughs as their work rate around the field wasn't good enough.

I just did a scan of the number 8 players across the RWC squads, most of the top teams have bigger and better ball carriers than Heaslip.
Apart from Wales, Argentina, Fiji and possibly Japan?, we are slightly undersized by about a stone.
It's not necessarily an issue, huge admiration for Heaslip by the way as an all-round good rugby player as there's a lot more aspects to playing No. 8 than size alone, but it does reveal a bit of an explanation why we get bossed around by the other teams a bit at times and find it difficult to win the gainline battle.

Sorted by World Rugby rankings:
1) Kieran Read or Victor Vito for New Zealand,
2) Wycliff Palu or Ben McCalman for Australia,
3) Duane Vermeulen or Schalk Burger for South Africa,
4) Ben Morgan or Billy Vunipola for England,
5) Taulupe Faletau for Wales,
6) Jamie Heaslip or Jordi Murphy for Ireland
7) Louis Picamoles or Damien Chouly for France,
8) Leonardo Senatore or Facundo Isa for Argentina,
9) Netani Talei or Sakiusa Matadigo for Fiji,
10) Josh Strauss or David Denton for Scotland,
11) Opeti Fonua or Viliami Ma'afu for Tonga.
12) Sanele Vavae Tuilagi or Ofisa Treviranus for Samoa,
13) No idea how big the two No. 8 players are for Japan??
14) Sergio Parisse or Samuela Vunisa for Italy.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Clearlier wrote: »

Who says that the mind goes before the body? I would have said the opposite with many players mentioning how they understand the game much better but they're body's just not up to it any more.

Surprised that nobody mentioned Murphy as a potential replacement for Heaslip.

Brian O'Driscoll has said it a few times. I heard him saying it only the other day while doing commentary On that Rugby Aid match and his co commentators agreed. It's not that they don't underwear the game it's the motivation to get up every morning and put your body through the heavy work and the recovery and the nutrition and all that kind of thing. It gets harder and harder to do. Obviously it's not the case for everyone but for a lot of players they would be quite happy to keep playing the matches on the weekend if they didn't have to go through the week of training to get there. Physically they're still capable but the motivation needed goes.

irishbucsfan

There's no chance of Henderson displacing POM at 6. POM showed against Wales exactly what he's selected to do, he's very good at it. Henderson can't do that and they're not going to change the balance of the back row for some offensive rucking power, it doesn't fit the philosophy.

Henderson is the POC replacement in waiting. He'll be his understudy for the tournament.