Game Time Under Joe: The Numbers

Glass Prison 1214

When Joe Schmidt first became Irish coach he spoke of how critical it would be for us to develop depth across the park if we were to be successful, so I have gone and had a look at the game time per position over the course of his tenure. In total, we have played 18 games under Joe so far, which has been enough games for him to look at several different players per position. I have broken it down to be position specific so it's easier to see what positions game time has been more divided than others.

Key = Start(Sub)

Loosehead
• Jack McGrath 8(8), Cian Healy 8(4), David Kilcoyne 2(2), James Cronin 0(2)

Hooker
• Rory Best 16(0), Sean Cronin 1(15), Richardt Strauss 1(1), Damian Varley 0(1), Rob Herring 0(1)

Tighthead
• Mike Ross 18(0), Martin Moore 0(10), Rodney Ah You 0(3), Declan Fitzpatrick 0(2), Steven Archer 0(1), Jack McGrath 0(1)

Second Row
• Devon Toner 16(2), Paul O'Connell 15(1), Mike McCarthy 2(3), Ian Henderson 1(7), Dave Foley 1(1), Dan Tuohy 1(1)

Blindside Flanker
• Peter O'Mahony 14(0), Ian Henderson 1(2), Rhys Ruddock 1(1), Dominic Ryan 1(0), Robbie Diack 1(0), Kevin McLaughlin 0(2)

Openside Flanker
• Chris Henry 8(0), Sean O'Brien 6(1), Tommy O'Donnell 2(4), Rhys Ruddock 2(0)

Number 8
• Jamie Heaslip 14(1), Jordi Murphy 3(6), Robbie Diack 1(0), Robin Copeland 0(1)

Scrum Half
• Conor Murray 15(1), Eoin Reddan 3(7), Isaac Boss 0(4), Kieran Marmion 0(3)

Out Half
• Johnny Sexton 15(0), Ian Madigan 1(13), Paddy Jackson 1(4), Ian Keatley 1(1)

Centre
• Gordon D'Arcy 8(0), Brian O'Driscoll 8(0), Robbie Henshaw 7(1), Jared Payne 6(0), Darren Cave 3(0), Luke Marshall 3(0), Fergus McFadden 1(3), Stuart Olding 0(1), Noel Reid 0(1)

Wing
• Tommy Bowe 10(0), Simon Zebo 9(0), Andrew Trimble 7(0), Dave Kearney 6(1), Fergus McFadden 2(3), Luke Fitzgerald 1(1), Craig Gilroy 1(0)

Fullback
• Rob Kearney 16(0), Felix Jones 2(4)

Total Players Capped: 56
• Leinster: 24
• Ulster: 15
• Munster: 13
• Connacht: 3
• Racing Metro: 1

Newly Capped Players: 14
• Jack McGrath, James Cronin, Rob Herring, Martin Moore, Rodney Ah You, Dave Foley, Robbie Diack, Dominic Ryan, Jordi Murphy, Robin Copeland, Kieran Marmion, Jared Payne, Noel Reid, Dave Kearney

In total Joe has capped 56 different players. No doubt injuries have played a role in this but that is still an impressively high number of players to cap, while still being highly successful in the process. When looked at per position, apart from fullback there have been at least four players capped in each position, which shows that Joe has been successful in building depth across the squad. However it means that nearly half of the players used by Joe will be left out of the world cup squad. It is also impressive to see a massive fourteen new caps, which works out as 0.78 new caps per game.

On top of all the players capped, there have been further players, such as Earls, Bent and White who have all been involved in training as well as the Emerging Ireland tours which have taken place. In the past Joe has specifically spoken about how the purpose those tours was to allow players on the periphery of the squad to become accustomed to the different structures and systems used by the first team. I am sure that these have been useful for the players involved.

While Joe has done a great job of developing depth, there is still some way to go. He has started Mike Ross in every game, and despite bringing on five different tight heads from the bench, we would still be playing an inexperienced player if Ross was to get injured. Furthermore I think we lack an out and out 12. Don't get me wrong, Henshaw was excellent there for us during the six nations and he and Payne have built a solid partnership but with D'Arcy getting on we don't really have a viable alternative at the moment. These are both things I hope Joe looks at during the world cup warm up games.

What do you think? Is there anything else Joe could have done or should do prior to the world cup to develop depth?

*****Disclaimer: Putting in the substitute appearances was a bit subjective, for example, against Australia in 2013, Henshaw first came on as a blood sub for BOD in the centre, yet later came on permanently at full back for Kearney. Likewise, Jones often came on for centres during the six nations, yet there was a backline reshuffling, so for simplistic purposes I put all his appearances at fullback. So as a result, it may not be 100% accurate. It is also possible that I made mistakes, although I double checked everything******

Bridge93

Slow day at work?
Interesting to see the numbers.

Glass Prison 1214

Bridge93 wrote: »

Slow day at work?
Interesting to see the numbers.

Avoiding my college assignments more like It only took me about half an hour or so anyway

Tox56

Interesting thanks for that. Id cut him some slack on the 12 thing because he moved us forward in a way nobody really expected by blooding Henshaw there, and unless we go back to D'Arcy there are no realistic options at all really

My main complaint would be 3 as you said, Moore could definitely have done with a start at some point, and if Ross gets injured we are going in very cold, although admittedly Moore is regularly getting a lot of time off the bench

I also think we have a big problem at 15 with Kearney injured, and although in Joe's mind Jones is probably more than ready for that, I can't say I share whatever he clearly sees in Jones

its_phil

Sean Cronin. 1 start, 15 sub appearances... Wow

Glass Prison 1214

Tox56 wrote: »

Interesting thanks for that. Id cut him some slack on the 12 thing because he moved us forward in a way nobody really expected by blooding Henshaw there, and unless we go back to D'Arcy there are no realistic options at all really

My main complaint would be 3 as you said, Moore could definitely have done with a start at some point, and if Ross gets injured we are going in very cold, although admittedly Moore is regularly getting a lot of time off the bench

I also think we have a big problem at 15 with Kearney injured, and although in Joe's mind Jones is probably more than ready for that, I can't say I share whatever he clearly sees in Jones

When I spoke about 12 being an issue, that wasn't a criticism of Joe, more just an acknowledgement that it's going to be a challenging position to deal with for Joe. In fact Joe has handled it very well, no one saw Henshaw as the answer to who would be first choice, and I thought before the South Africa game that it wouldn't work but it has. It's just that at this point, I wouldn't have a lot of confidence in any of the alternatives.

I guess tighthead has been an interesting one. I agree it would have been great for Moore to have gotten a start by now but there has never really been a time. He was injured during the summer, injured during the autumn and has only been available during both six nations, which Joe always went with first choice players for. I reckon Moore will get a couple of starts during the warm ups and start against the weakest team in our world cup pool (I'm blanking on who that is).

That's true about 15 as well. I would like to see Payne there if Rob got injured, but that would cause problems in our centre, which going back to my previous point, a top class 12 would solve the problem as Henshaw could be moved to 13. I would also consider going with Dave Kearney if he had been getting any provincial game time there, which he hasn't. So there isn't really any choice other than Jones, and I reckon Joe recognises that, hence Jones getting game time. It's easier said than done though to develop depth and I think Joe has done as well as is realistically possible with the players at his disposal.

Neil3030

I'd like to see Luke or Earls get a run at 13 during one of the warmups, so that if Kearney gets injured we can move Payne to FB and slot one of the former 2 into the centre.

I'd be very curious as to who he sees as the 2nd choice 12. Though when Trimble comes back, Tommy Bowe could be a shout here, if he likes all of the outside 5 to offer a kick-chase?

Utah_Saint

Neil3030 wrote: »

I'd like to see Luke or Earls get a run at 13 during one of the warmups, so that if Kearney gets injured we can move Payne to FB and slot one of the former 2 into the centre.

I'd be very curious as to who he sees as the 2nd choice 12. Though when Trimble comes back, Tommy Bowe could be a shout here, if he likes all of the outside 5 to offer a kick-chase?

Olding when fit and firing is the most talented back I've seen since Fitz early days. He will definitely be one of the first names to partner henshaw.

But prob not in time for wc

pickarooney

For all the talk of Payne's attacking capabilities he's a bit of a liability in the air and I can't see him displacing Kearney for that reason.

Buer

pickarooney wrote: »

For all the talk of Payne's attacking capabilities he's a bit of a liability in the air and I can't see him displacing Kearney for that reason.

He was bloody lucky to stay on the pitch at the weekend. He contested in the air but when it was lost, he grabbed and pulled the Scottish player down while he was still off the ground. It was a nervous moment. I honestly believe that if it was another referee, he'd have been given a yellow but the history between Garces and Payne played a part.

bilston

Buer wrote: »

He was bloody lucky to stay on the pitch at the weekend. He contested in the air but when it was lost, he grabbed and pulled the Scottish player down while he was still off the ground. It was a nervous moment. I honestly believe that if it was another referee, he'd have been given a yellow but the history between Garces and Payne played a part.

Thought that myself. If anything the incident was worse than the one where he got sent off. Not that I'm saying for a minute he should have got a red but he was lucky not to have got yellow.

bilston

Neil3030 wrote: »

I'd like to see Luke or Earls get a run at 13 during one of the warmups, so that if Kearney gets injured we can move Payne to FB and slot one of the former 2 into the centre.

I'd be very curious as to who he sees as the 2nd choice 12. Though when Trimble comes back, Tommy Bowe could be a shout here, if he likes all of the outside 5 to offer a kick-chase?

I think Olding still has a part to play in all of this but assuming he gets a start in August he will have to grab it with both hands.

captbarnacles

Tox56 wrote: »

Interesting thanks for that. Id cut him some slack on the 12 thing because he moved us forward in a way nobody really expected by blooding Henshaw there, and unless we go back to D'Arcy there are no realistic options at all really

My main complaint would be 3 as you said, Moore could definitely have done with a start at some point, and if Ross gets injured we are going in very cold, although admittedly Moore is regularly getting a lot of time off the bench

I also think we have a big problem at 15 with Kearney injured, and although in Joe's mind Jones is probably more than ready for that, I can't say I share whatever he clearly sees in Jones

Madigan?

.ak

Schmidt likes his backs to be around 14st and 6"+

So guys like Olding pretty probably won't fit in.

If one of the centres got injured I could imagine Darce or McFadden being brought in... Mcfadden's kick chase and aerial superiority would probably clinch it.

Or Luke or earls might be moved in there.

Tox56

captbarnacles wrote: »

Madigan?

Dont see him as a realistic option to start at 12 in an international of any importance. Hes definitely not going to do that long term, and short term I'd much rather Olding gets whatever gametime is available instead

The Pheasant2

Had the final squad been announced before or after Olding got injured? One of my favourite young players, though I wonder if he'd have got a game even if he was fit - given how Joe likes to keep the team as constant as possible.

Tox56

.ak wrote: »

Schmidt likes his backs to be around 14st and 6"+

So guys like Olding pretty probably won't fit in.

If one of the centres got injured I could imagine Darce or McFadden being brought in... Mcfadden's kick chase and aerial superiority would probably clinch it.

Or Luke or earls might be moved in there.

Has there ever been a time where it looked like that height/weight was an expectation or demand at all? Its pretty hard to think of any backs who are in the Irish picture who are smaller than that, Earls and Olding have never really been options under Schmidt due to injury and BOD and Darce were automatic starters, and Madigan/Jackson/Keatley are always picked. Pretty much every Irish centre and back 3 player otherwise is 6' or above.

errlloyd

Also Schmidt seemed to be a big fan of EOM who isn't massive.

.ak

errlloyd wrote: »

Also Schmidt seemed to be a big fan of EOM who isn't massive.

Well that's club rugby.

.ak

Tox56 wrote: »

Has there ever been a time where it looked like that height/weight was an expectation or demand at all? Its pretty hard to think of any backs who are in the Irish picture who are smaller than that, Earls and Olding have never really been options under Schmidt due to injury and BOD and Darce were automatic starters, and Madigan/Jackson/Keatley are always picked. Pretty much every Irish centre and back 3 player otherwise is 6' or above.

I think he's had the opportunity to pick smaller players, definitely. It's easy to say with hindsight that henshaw and Payne are automatic picks but in reality in autumn there were other smaller players at his disposal but he went with the bigger taller guys. It's easy to see why too. They're basically all big fullbacks when the ball goes in the air.

Tox56

.ak wrote: »

I think he's had the opportunity to pick smaller players, definitely. It's easy to say with hindsight that henshaw and Payne are automatic picks but in reality in autumn there were other smaller players at his disposal but he went with the bigger taller guys. It's easy to see why too. They're basically all big fullbacks when the ball goes in the air.

Who though? If he wasn't going to pick Darce you're down to Olding and Madigan, and at the time at least I don't think size was the reason they weren't starting. There was an element of wanting physicality in the 12 channel sure, but also of getting our best players on the park, and I don't think it would have made a difference if Madigan or Olding 6' or 6'1 instead of 5'11 given where they were in their careers at the time, especially given Darce started the next game in Payne's absence. Thinking about it Schmidt picked the relatively short L Marshall a good bit too.

UnitedWeStand

Bah Joe is overrated, PSA has much more player rotation going on than this paltry amount!

shuffol

Did somebody mention big centers.

pickarooney

.ak wrote: »

Schmidt likes his backs to be around 14st and 6"+

So guys like Olding pretty probably won't fit in.

If one of the centres got injured I could imagine Darce or McFadden being brought in... Mcfadden's kick chase and aerial superiority would probably clinch it.

Or Luke or earls might be moved in there.

Are any of those over 6'? How has McCloskey been doing recently?

bilston

pickarooney wrote: »

Are any of those over 6'? How has McCloskey been doing recently?

He is on the naughty step at the minute, before that he was injured but did play a couple of games between his injury and suspension and was very good. One game in particular he came off the bench in a game at Ravenhill (can't remember the opposition) and tore them to shreds with his running. He is someone who could definitely come into Joe's plans post WC, (he certainly fits .aks criteria!) but not before.

Utah_Saint

bilston wrote: »

He is on the naughty step at the minute before that he was injured but didnplay a couple.of games between his injury and suspension and was very good. One game in particular he came off the bench in a game at Ravenhill (can't remember the opposition) and tore them to shreds with his running. He is someone who could definitely come into Joe's plans post WC, (he certainly fits .aks criteria!) but not before.

He has great hands for a big lad. Prob due to the fact that he was a scrum half most of his younger days until he took a 'minor' growth spurt!

Olding is no lightweight. After his last injury he really put the muscle on. He reminds me of D'arcy in terms of build

Utah_Saint

pickarooney wrote: »

Are any of those over 6'? How has McCloskey been doing recently?

Olding is 5"11" i believe. Big Mc is 6"3" or 6"4"

.ak

Tox56 wrote: »

Who though? If he wasn't going to pick Darce you're down to Olding and Madigan, and at the time at least I don't think size was the reason they weren't starting. There was an element of wanting physicality in the 12 channel sure, but also of getting our best players on the park, and I don't think it would have made a difference if Madigan or Olding 6' or 6'1 instead of 5'11 given where they were in their careers at the time, especially given Darce started the next game in Payne's absence. Thinking about it Schmidt picked the relatively short L Marshall a good bit too.

Mcfadden, Olding, Earls, Madigan are all under 5'11" which makes a big difference. And to be honest I don't believe those stats, Madigan is no taller than me and I'm 5'9" at best.

There's also other options like JJ, Cave, Reid, Keatley etc., etc.

Now, these may seem like strange choices, but like I said, try to remove ourselves from our current situation. A few months ago Henshaw had a few token caps and Payne had none. The announcement of Henshaw at 12 and Payne at 13 was considered very experimental at the time. So it wasn't like they were more experienced or even better than guys like the above. For me, I think he sees the way modern centres are going; guys like Fickou, Fofana, Basteraud, Burrell, Davies, Roberts etc are all big guys, tall and hefty, and presumably good in the air and good with the boot. It means that you're not limiting your midfield to guys who are purely there for distribution. Bigger guys offer a better running threat for dummy lines, but also they can compete in the air, and can return kicks, which is instrumental to Schmidt's game plan at times. Defensively having big units like Henshaw and Payne in midfield has clearly paid off - Basteraud barely got a sniff of a midfield break.

The beauty is these guys are outrageously skilled as well, so I don't think they're there to be big league-style lumps, and we've yet to see them at their full potential - hopefully we're patient with them.

The point is I can't see guys like Olding or Madigan ever playing there bar injury.

.ak

McCloskey for me is the future. I hope to see him in green in less than 4 years. He's ideally suited to the modern game, the complete package.

Big Nelly

What about the big lad down in Grenoble? he done anything recently after scoring that try?

I know Jackman said on radio before that Joe was aware of him and would use any player at his disposal if he thought he could help the team

.ak

A centre? Are you thinking of Hart who's a 09/10?

EDIT: Oh forgot Farrell went down there.

shuffol

Big Nelly wrote: »

What about the big lad down in Grenoble? he done anything recently after scoring that try?

I know Jackman said on radio before that Joe was aware of him and would use any player at his disposal if he thought he could help the team

Chris Farrell, very like McCloskey except a little less physical but a more natural runner.

Oldings no shrinking violet, very much like D'arcy in terms of build.

bilston

.ak wrote: »

Mcfadden, Olding, Earls, Madigan are all under 5'11" which makes a big difference. And to be honest I don't believe those stats, Madigan is no taller than me and I'm 5'9" at best.

There's also other options like JJ, Cave, Reid, Keatley etc., etc.

Now, these may seem like strange choices, but like I said, try to remove ourselves from our current situation. A few months ago Henshaw had a few token caps and Payne had none. The announcement of Henshaw at 12 and Payne at 13 was considered very experimental at the time. So it wasn't like they were more experienced or even better than guys like the above. For me, I think he sees the way modern centres are going; guys like Fickou, Fofana, Basteraud, Burrell, Davies, Roberts etc are all big guys, tall and hefty, and presumably good in the air and good with the boot. It means that you're not limiting your midfield to guys who are purely there for distribution. Bigger guys offer a better running threat for dummy lines, but also they can compete in the air, and can return kicks, which is instrumental to Schmidt's game plan at times. Defensively having big units like Henshaw and Payne in midfield has clearly paid off - Basteraud barely got a sniff of a midfield break.

The beauty is these guys are outrageously skilled as well, so I don't think they're there to be big league-style lumps, and we've yet to see them at their full potential - hopefully we're patient with them.

The point is I can't see guys like Olding or Madigan ever playing there bar injury.

So you are basically saying that if BOD had emerged now he wouldn't have made it?

.ak

Jaysus the size of his arms! Yeah he's a very explosive package - but he is short, and that's my point. He's not the big package players like Henshaw and Payne etc.

.ak

bilston wrote: »

So you are basically saying that if BOD had emerged now he wouldn't have made it?

Unfortunately I think there is an element of that isn't there? BOD and Darce really struggled last season against big centres. I'm trying to block the Toulon game out of my mind but Basteraud was making hay of them... and that was after he did the exact same thing in Paris a few months before where literally in the first moments of the game BOD and Darce doubled up on Basteraud and he still broke the line. A few backs were actually giving BOD the slip in those games just through sheer bulk.

... now BOD is special, and has always been able to change up his game, and I'm sure being on retirements door didn't help, but you wonder even if he had an extra few years in him I could see Schmidt not picking him. Sure Gatland didn't pick him for that very reason, rightly or wrongly.

Olding is very much the reincarnation of BOD (only slightly bigger I think?) in the modern game... but I struggle to see how he'll make it in a green jersey.

Utah_Saint

Big Nelly wrote: »

What about the big lad down in Grenoble? he done anything recently after scoring that try?

I know Jackman said on radio before that Joe was aware of him and would use any player at his disposal if he thought he could help the team

Chris Farrell. Haven't heard much about him. He's in the same sort size as Big Mc. Again very much a modern centre. I can see him back in Ireland in a few seasons if he's going well.

Utah_Saint

Forfana and Mermoz are both 5"11". More athletic than muscular

The Pheasant2

I'd be really disappointed if Olding doesn't get a chance - he has such ability to carve defences open and his bit of experience at 10 gives him those distribution skills. Not a Roberts or a Nonu but I think there's definitely a place for Olding's play style; maybe as more of a "second 5/8"

Tox56

.ak wrote: »

Mcfadden, Olding, Earls, Madigan are all under 5'11" which makes a big difference. And to be honest I don't believe those stats, Madigan is no taller than me and I'm 5'9" at best.

There's also other options like JJ, Cave, Reid, Keatley etc., etc.

Now, these may seem like strange choices, but like I said, try to remove ourselves from our current situation. A few months ago Henshaw had a few token caps and Payne had none. The announcement of Henshaw at 12 and Payne at 13 was considered very experimental at the time. So it wasn't like they were more experienced or even better than guys like the above. For me, I think he sees the way modern centres are going; guys like Fickou, Fofana, Basteraud, Burrell, Davies, Roberts etc are all big guys, tall and hefty, and presumably good in the air and good with the boot. It means that you're not limiting your midfield to guys who are purely there for distribution. Bigger guys offer a better running threat for dummy lines, but also they can compete in the air, and can return kicks, which is instrumental to Schmidt's game plan at times. Defensively having big units like Henshaw and Payne in midfield has clearly paid off - Basteraud barely got a sniff of a midfield break.

The beauty is these guys are outrageously skilled as well, so I don't think they're there to be big league-style lumps, and we've yet to see them at their full potential - hopefully we're patient with them.

The point is I can't see guys like Olding or Madigan ever playing there bar injury.

McFadden is down as 6' and nearly 15 stone and he punches above his weight physically too so size wouldn't really be an issue for him, but in any case he and Earls were both injured for the SA game, and with all respect to Olding and Madigan I don't think size was their problem, and long term I don't think size is why Madigan won't be an international 12, but I do think Olding has a very good chance at making it. I think he'll at the very least get an opportunity for Ireland, he just needs to take it with both hands when he does. We won a six nations with two very small guys in midfield, if there's enough quality in an Olding-Henshaw midfield I don't think size will be a problem

captbarnacles

BOD and Darcys low centre of gravity made them great at jackaling though. Olding might be the same or even better looking at those biceps :eek:

dub_skav

Coaches can certainly have a preference for a type/size of player, but I think it's hilarious to suggest that Joe has a sign on the wall in his office that says "You must be this tall to play centre ---->".

Coaches will make the best use of the players available to them. If there is a tight call between 2 players they may choose the bigger/taller/faster/better kicker/insert criterium here, but they will not exclude a special talent based on their physical size.

There has been a perceived move to bigger centres, but I don't think it's as pronounced as people are making out.

.ak

McFadden is 6" me hole. :P The Irish site says 5'11" but frankly I've met him enough times to know he isn't 6".

He is a big lad tho.


Anyway, we'll see, our opinions will only really come through over the next year or two.... so book mark this page!

.ak

dub_skav wrote: »

Coaches can certainly have a preference for a type/size of player, but I think it's hilarious to suggest that Joe has a sign on the wall in his office that says "You must be this tall to play centre ---->".

Coaches will make the best use of the players available to them. If there is a tight call between 2 players they may choose the bigger/taller/faster/better kicker/insert criterium here, but they will not exclude a special talent based on their physical size.

There has been a perceived move to bigger centres, but I don't think it's as pronounced as people are making out.

Nobody actually suggested that though, atleast not to that level of 'hilarity'? :P He's obviously not going to deny players like Olding a cap if they're the best for the job... but, my point is, right now the best men for the current job are the big fullback-cum-centres ala Henshaw and Payne. Those couple of inches make a big difference in international rugby.

And Schmidt has always wanted big tall centres in Leinster, they just weren't he wanted Sheridan to be developed, he signed Goodman, he was the man behind the Coughlan to 12 development.

dub_skav

.ak wrote: »

Nobody actually suggested that though, atleast not to that level of 'hilarity'? :P He's obviously not going to deny players like Olding a cap if they're the best for the job... but, my point is, right now the best men for the current job are the big fullback-cum-centres ala Henshaw and Payne. Those couple of inches make a big difference in international rugby.

And Schmidt has always wanted big tall centres in Leinster, they just weren't he wanted Sheridan to be developed, he signed Goodman, he was the man behind the Coughlan to 12 development.

He also stuck with Darce through some tough times and tried his best to get O'Malley into the team, aswell as using Madigan at 12.
So, like I said he may have a preference, but he will recognise potential and work with what he has.

total former

.ak wrote: »

Unfortunately I think there is an element of that isn't there? BOD and Darce really struggled last season against big centres. I'm trying to block the Toulon game out of my mind but Basteraud was making hay of them... and that was after he did the exact same thing in Paris a few months before where literally in the first moments of the game BOD and Darce doubled up on Basteraud and he still broke the line. A few backs were actually giving BOD the slip in those games just through sheer bulk.

... now BOD is special, and has always been able to change up his game, and I'm sure being on retirements door didn't help, but you wonder even if he had an extra few years in him I could see Schmidt not picking him. Sure Gatland didn't pick him for that very reason, rightly or wrongly.

Olding is very much the reincarnation of BOD (only slightly bigger I think?) in the modern game... but I struggle to see how he'll make it in a green jersey.

Ehhh, I think I disagree with absolutely everything in this post, if that's OK?

BOD and D'Arcy would absolutely have made it if they came through now. At no point in their careers did either man lack for physicality. Yes, they got bumped around by Bastareaud but who doesn't? D'Arcy in particular was a defensive rock in last year's 6N, stats similar to Henshaw this season IIRC.

It's not all about size; Payne might be bigger than BOD but is he a better or more physical defender? He's not even close, based on what I've seen. If BOD had "an extra few years in him", he'd still be first choice, I don't think there's any doubt about that.

I don't think the selection of Henshaw at 12 means that Joe exclusively wants big men in the back line, that's a serious extrapolation there; so if Olding can demonstrate that he has the ability, then he'll get a shot - his problem is that he hasn't really done so yet.

.ak

total former wrote: »

Ehhh, I think I disagree with absolutely everything in this post, if that's OK?

BOD and D'Arcy would absolutely have made it if they came through now. At no point in their careers did either man lack for physicality. Yes, they got bumped around by Bastareaud but who doesn't? D'Arcy in particular was a defensive rock in last year's 6N, stats similar to Henshaw this season IIRC.

It's not all about size; Payne might be bigger than BOD but is he a better or more physical defender? He's not even close, based on what I've seen. If BOD had "an extra few years in him", he'd still be first choice, I don't think there's any doubt about that.

I don't think the selection of Henshaw at 12 means that Joe exclusively wants big men in the back line, that's a serious extrapolation there; so if Olding can demonstrate that he has the ability, then he'll get a shot - his problem is that he hasn't really done so yet.

No, it's not OK!!!

:P

I just think the size centres are now adays is vastly different to 10 years ago. There's no doubt BOD and Darce struggled to deal with big men in the last 12 months and I don't think that has anything to do with age - if anything they're better defenders now then they ever were.

Payne isn't a better defender, you're right, but physics play a huge part in rugby system defence. One on one BOD was a mean defender and his ability to get back onto his feet after completing a tackle was massive.. however, a blitz defence standing up attackers requires big units, and we've seen how our defence has been organised it requires that blanket of big men rather than shooters. We also look to put two in each tackle, you can't really do that effectively with one little man and one big one. Look how we defended against France this year for example.

EDIT: Also, by the way, I never said BOD wouldn't make it - infact, I implied BOD is so good he probably would and be able to change his style to suit the modern game as he's done before.

.ak

dub_skav wrote: »

He also stuck with Darce through some tough times and tried his best to get O'Malley into the team, aswell as using Madigan at 12.
So, like I said he may have a preference, but he will recognise potential and work with what he has.

Yeah, absolutely, and I don't disagree with that.

My point is about his preference and how it's used to implement a certain style and gameplan - what you say is pretty much in agreement with the point I'm making?

Olding/'small centres' won't get a look in unless there's injuries. He certainly won't be changing that up this side of the RWC, or after imo.

dub_skav

.ak wrote: »

No, it's not OK!!!

:P

I just think the size centres are now adays is vastly different to 10 years ago. There's no doubt BOD and Darce struggled to deal with big men in the last 12 months and I don't think that has anything to do with age - if anything they're better defenders now then they ever were.

Payne isn't a better defender, you're right, but physics play a huge part in rugby system defence. One on one BOD was a mean defender and his ability to get back onto his feet after completing a tackle was massive.. however, a blitz defence standing up attackers requires big units, and we've seen how our defence has been organised it requires that blanket of big men rather than shooters. We also look to put two in each tackle, you can't really do that effectively with one little man and one big one. Look how we defended against France this year for example.

EDIT: Also, by the way, I never said BOD wouldn't make it - infact, I implied BOD is so good he probably would and be able to change his style to suit the modern game as he's done before.

Maybe we're using a blanket because Payne is a poor shooter?

I'm sure that Les Kiss - like Joe - can adapt to use the skills of the best players available to him, rather than having a rigid system that the players all must conform to.

I don't think we'll agree on this. I just don't see the imminent demise of the smaller player, that's all really.

Edit: OK, maybe we do agree after all. You think he has a strong preference, I believe he may have a preference, but if he does he is willing to look beyond it very quickly.

.ak

Well I assume having a good strength in midfield collectively is far more effective than having good shooters like BOD or Darce. The issue with the shooter system, which is still very much considered a traditional system by a lot of teams, is we see how dangerous it can be. We saw it against France last year with the two of them often shooting but slipping off Basteraud or another attacker and then we'd concede 20m in territory. A blanket defence designed to smoother big runners might not stop the runner dead in their tracks but it potentially concedes less ground.

I don't think guys like Olding or Madigan can adapt to that sort of system - well, I'm sure they can as they're both great defenders but they wouldn't be as effective.

total former

.ak wrote: »

No, it's not OK!!!

:P

I just think the size centres are now adays is vastly different to 10 years ago. There's no doubt BOD and Darce struggled to deal with big men in the last 12 months and I don't think that has anything to do with age - if anything they're better defenders now then they ever were.

Payne isn't a better defender, you're right, but physics play a huge part in rugby system defence. One on one BOD was a mean defender and his ability to get back onto his feet after completing a tackle was massive.. however, a blitz defence standing up attackers requires big units, and we've seen how our defence has been organised it requires that blanket of big men rather than shooters. We also look to put two in each tackle, you can't really do that effectively with one little man and one big one. Look how we defended against France this year for example.

But see I think you're looking at the Bastareaud situation in isolation; Roberts and Burrell would surely be classed as 'big men' and got nowhere against us last season? So I think there is definitely doubt that they struggled against big men, Bastareaud is just a freak.

EDIT: Also, by the way, I never said BOD wouldn't make it - infact, I implied BOD is so good he probably would and be able to change his style to suit the modern game as he's done before.

Did I misunderstand this bit then?

.ak wrote: »

bilston wrote: »

So you are basically saying that if BOD had emerged now he wouldn't have made it?

Unfortunately I think there is an element of that isn't there?

shuffol

Last year we could have been saying that big centers won't have a future under Schmidt as both our starters are under 6 foot. Too much shouldn't be read into the current selection. They got their chance in the AI's, looked alright and were stuck with.