Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

CMOTDibbler

jm08 wrote: »

Wrong. Both dropped on last Lions Tour. RK didn't start a Test Match.

RK played in two of the pool games of Heineken Cup games in 10-11. He probably was dropped from HCup squad as he didn't play any rugby after October 2010.

Yeah, he was dropped alright. :rolleyes:

He was injured in the All Blacks game in November and had knee surgery.

ThisRegard

imacman wrote: »

Much as I hate to say it I agree with George Hook in his column today. Jonny Sexton needs to retire for his own health, he's not the same player he was and i think this is purely down to concussion.
I read an interview with Kevin McLaughlin recently and he had a very similar experience and took the decision to retire. I will be a big blow for Lenister and Ireland but i think for his own health and future he should stand down .

Unfortunately I'd be afraid it's heading that way, I mentioned it myself in the match thread over the weekend. Although it's hard to know what's really happening without being a doctor of his, but is he just unfortunate in getting a series of hard knocks to the head, or is it an accumulation of knocks meaning the next knock can be softer than the previous one, but still causing concussion.

McLaughin was the guy on the concussion documentary a few months ago wasn't he?

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

Of course it hasn't, but it's a very boring partnership that plays like two blokes being played in positions other than their best.

But just because it hasn't been a disaster doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking at other options. We have other options available to us that have the potential to be so much better.

If we play McCloskey and Henshaw and it turns out decent then everyone will be too afraid to ever play anyone else in the centre again which is equally wrong.

I personally think McCloskey and Henshaw is the best realistic combination we have right now and should be given a proper chance (i.e. not just given a token run out against Italy). Certainly Henshaw and Payne have not shown anything to suggest that partnership is untouchable. If that means Payne out of the 23 then so be it.

Nobody can argue with Schmidt's record. My argument is we have the potential to do even better if we are brave enough with our selections. The payoff may not be immediate but we need to get out of our habit of always focusing on the very short term.

McCloskey has been brought into the squad. If he can prove from there that he is the best option then he should get selected. He shouldn't get selected just because he is playing well at Ulster. What happens in training at the Ireland camp should, and will, have far more bearing.

OldRio

flangemeistro wrote: »

I haven't been on here in awhile because basically there's a group of 8 or so "experts" who if you don't completely agree with you are attacked and patronised,

So I log in this morning and surprise surprise some things never change, just a load of "imo" "tbf" "tbh" and then the ultimate boards insult and elitist jibe of "nonsense" if you go against the grain.

It's easy for these "experts" to be so sure and confident of their opinions because they are just rehashing the last two years of Joe Schmidt selections knowing that Schmidt is a creature of habit who doesn't like change and who doesn't do shock selections.

I used to believe Schmidt at the start when he said he chose form players and didn't have time for sentiment and that if a player didn't train on Tuesday then they wouldn't make the weekend 23.

That all went down the drain when on numerous occasions he played a clearly unfit sexton and brought an injured Cian Healy to the world cup amongst other dubious decisions.

Joe has a system and no matter what the hateful 8 on here say it is not an attacking system, it is a boring, unimaginative, possession based defensive system, it's ugly rugby and I know it's a fruitful system with back to back Six nations but Joe has been found out at this stage and that is one of the reasons he's not the front runner anymore to coach the Lions next year and Gatland is, Gatland isn't afraid to cap in form youngsters in a six nations game and when they were completely ravaged with injuries before and during the RWC his selections and call ups really shone through whereas we scrope past Italy and got embarrassed by an attacking Argentina.

Joe will stick with this crash ball set piece system in the hope to win the unheard of 3 in a row but with the combination of the predictability of his system and the out of form provinces unfortunately we'll fall short.

Barring injuries most people on here can guess the starting xv against Wales and they'll all be familiar faces.
He'll probably have Stander and McCloskey on the bench as token caps but that is just to avoid any criticism that he's not blooding new players.

All the Joe enthusiasts on here can spout all they want about players being familiar with the system and needing more time in camp holding tackle bags but I doubt any of them thought that choosing Earls over Cave was the right choice, but if Schmidt was faced with the same predicament against Wales and he had to choose between Earls and McCloskey I can guarantee he would go with Earls who has never proven himself in the centre over McCloskey who I'm sure everyone will agree has had an outstanding season.

How many chances did Schmidt give Bowe while everyone else who had use of their eyes knew he was only a shadow of his former self?

The same is happening with Rob Kearney, Cian Healy, Mike Ross, Jamie Heaslip and dare I say Jonathan Sexton.

None of the above mentioned have hit their full potential in 2 or 3 years yet Schmidt is still choosing them over in form players which is stunting Irelands growth which got highlighted at the world cup.
When most fans thought we had the best strength in depth in years because we had left so much talent behind nothing could have been further from the truth.

I know it's not a popular view to have but a lot of people need to take off their Joe Tinted glasses because predicting and quantifying Schmidts choices for a few virtual pat's on the back doesn't make those choices right it just highlights that if a few boards armchair experts can see which way Schmidt is going then the other 5 nations certainly can.

Fair due. The bully boys (experts) won't like it but it was refreshing to read such an honest post.

awec

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

That's a matter of opinion. Are you starting with what you want and working backwards? You continuously ignore the fact that Payne has been an outside centre for every team he's ever played for.

We clearly are looking at other options in the centre. Some have been forced on us and some have been manufactured. Earls and Fitz being the obvious examples. Fitz has worked out, have you forgotten that? That McCloskey has been called up indicates that he will be looked at. As for being too afraid to try anything else... Seriously


How are we focusing on the very short term?

Sorry, but Earls and Fitz played in the centre to cover injuries and allow players to be rested. This is not looking at other options, this is using a limited squad to manage players fitness.

Every man and his dog knows that neither Earls nor Fitz have a future in the centre for Ireland.

How are we looking short term? We continually say you can't change it up against our next opponent. Our next game is always the most important thing ever, we couldn't possibly switch out players who played in our last match. People say now we can't make changes against Wales, then people will say we can't make changes against England, etc etc.

Eventually the SA tour will come and we can't be subjecting guys to a tough series away against the very physical boks, then the AIs will be really important cause we're playing the all blacks and australia so we can't change there. Then next years 6 nations the cycle starts again.

Maybe in there a few new guys will get a token run out against some tier 2 nations, probably thrown into a second choice 15. They'll not shine in this cobbled-together squad and therefore the big question mark will remain over their head and we couldn't possibly risk them again in a match of any importance.

Eventually it'll be world cup 2019 time and Ireland will find itself in the same position as always - lacking genuine experience in depth.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

Wrong. Both dropped on last Lions Tour. RK didn't start a Test Match.

RK played in two of the pool games of Heineken Cup games in 10-11. He probably was dropped from HCup squad as he didn't play any rugby after October 2010.

I never said RK started a test match, I said he was a first choice pick - meaning selected in the initial squad.

In 2012 RK was the ERC player of the tournament, he started all 9 of leinsters games that season in europe and scored a few tries that season as well as that DG v clermont.

Edit - he was injured in AI in 2010 but played two pool games. But was still part of the squad that season.

Quint2010

I think Ireland needs an injection of new players. Not wholesale changes but would love to see McCloskey at 12, Stander at 6 and Payne at 15. Kearney is a fine player with loads of experience but don't think he is really playing that well and hasn't for a while. If Sexton doesn't make it Jackson starts right?

aimee1

Quint2010 wrote: »

I think Ireland needs an injection of new players. Not wholesale changes but would love to see McCloskey at 12, Stander at 6 and Payne at 15. Kearney is a fine player with loads of experience but don't think he is really playing that well and hasn't for a while. If Sexton doesn't make it Jackson starts right?

Ross, Healy, POC, POM, Bowe all injured/retired. Sexton might also be out. There will be plenty of enforced changes.

penybont exile

.ak wrote: »

Hopefully Philips worms his way back into the starting 15, and surely cuthbert deserves another bone? :pac:

Touché

Can't see Cuthbert making it ...... assuming Liam Williams proves his fitness.

awec

Even if Kearney starts at 15 I don't care, but why wouldn't we try Payne there? It makes absolutely no sense to continue to overlook it. Whatever about the past, there's no reason to ignore it any longer.

He has proven, time and time again, that he is absolutely quality at 15 for Ulster, arguably the best in the league. If we give him his chance and he shines at 15 then we have gained another option there, and have genuine choice between him and Kearney.

awec

Even if Kearney starts at 15 I don't care, but why wouldn't we try Payne there? It makes absolutely no sense to continue to overlook it. Whatever about the past, there's no reason to ignore it any longer.

He has proven, time and time again, that he is absolutely quality at 15 for Ulster, arguably the best in the league. If we give him his chance and he shines at 15 then we have gained another option there, and have genuine choice between him and Kearney.

former total

awec wrote: »

Even if Kearney starts at 15 I don't care, but why wouldn't we try Payne there? It makes absolutely no sense to continue to overlook it. Whatever about the past, there's no reason to ignore it any longer.

He has proven, time and time again, that he is absolutely quality at 15 for Ulster, arguably the best in the league. If we give him his chance and he shines at 15 then we have gained another option there, and have genuine choice between him and Kearney.

Because:
a) He won't be playing there for Ulster in the medium to long term (or even the short term, depending on Ludik)
b) He's older than Kearney so it's not really succession planning
c) The coach regards him as the best option at 13

So yeah, let's look at alternatives, it just won't be Payne.

Zzippy

swiwi_ wrote: »

*Comes back 12 hours later to find RK has replaced SZ as the source of the latest forum fracas*

As a generic comment, I suggested on a NZ rugby forum that I was happy Israel Dagg was sticking around a bit longer in NZ, he might still have something to offer at international level. A number of posters replied nah not really, he's approaching 30 (he's only 27....) which is usually the age when NZ will no longer pick you in the back three (especially on the wing).

RK is 29 and JP is 30 - maybe the debate shouldn't be RK vs JP at 15...

I don't think RK is anywhere near the outstanding form of the Lions 2009 tour, I don't think currently he would make a Lions tour. I think the jury has to be completely out on Payne, unless I'm mistaken he's never started a match for Ireland at 15 - provincial form doesn't always translate upwards.

I'd be happy to see Henshaw given a go there too, he broke into the Connacht team at 15 and showed huge potential there. McCloskey 12, Payne 13, Henshaw 15 would do me too. Henshaw is 8 years younger than Payne, could be the future at fullback with McCloskey and Ringrose pushing for the centre spots in the coming years.



*runs and hides before awec sees this :pac:

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

ThisRegard wrote: »

Unfortunately I'd be afraid it's heading that way, I mentioned it myself in the match thread over the weekend. Although it's hard to know what's really happening without being a doctor of his, but is he just unfortunate in getting a series of hard knocks to the head, or is it an accumulation of knocks meaning the next knock can be softer than the previous one, but still causing concussion.

McLaughin was the guy on the concussion documentary a few months ago wasn't he?

Think it was John Fogarty. Mclaughlin was still playing when the documentary was made.

Mahatma Geansai

OldRio wrote: »

Fair due. The bully boys (experts) won't like it but it was refreshing to read such an honest post.

The bullying is something I've noticed and highlighted in the past also. Its largely due to the composition of the forum. There is a large group of similarly minded posters who like to shout down any opinions and berate any posters of different beliefs.

awec

former total wrote: »

Because:
a) He won't be playing there for Ulster in the medium to long term (or even the short term, depending on Ludik)
b) He's older than Kearney so it's not really succession planning
c) The coach regards him as the best option at 13

So yeah, let's look at alternatives, it just won't be Payne.

a) Kiss has already said he'll be picking Payne in the position that best suits Ulster, not Ireland. This is clearly 15. medium to long term who knows, he is out of contract at the end of the season.

b) It's not succession planning, but it gives us an alternative to Kearney now. This is a very good thing and a low risk selection which is why continuing to ignore it is daft.

c) In the past he has because there was nobody else. This is no longer the case, we have options in the centre.


We should absolutely look at Henshaw as well. No question about that.

wp_rathead

awec wrote: »

Even if Kearney starts at 15 I don't care, but why wouldn't we try Payne there? It makes absolutely no sense to continue to overlook it. Whatever about the past, there's no reason to ignore it any longer.

He has proven, time and time again, that he is absolutely quality at 15 for Ulster, arguably the best in the league. If we give him his chance and he shines at 15 then we have gained another option there, and have genuine choice between him and Kearney.

"Because why do you hate rob Kearney awec?" seems to be the response to that

molloyjh

OldRio wrote: »

Fair due. The bully boys (experts) won't like it but it was refreshing to read such an honest post.

The problem is that if you compare it to actual facts it doesn't stand up. In the 2013 AIs we played a very expansive attacking style. Then in the 2014 6 Nations we continued that and wcored the second highest number of tries and the most number of points in the competition. We reverted to a very different style for the 2014 AIs and 6 Nations but then in the RWC we changed again and started attacking from deep a lot more.

Schmidt has said in a number of occasions that any side that doesn't change how they play will get found out and will end up falling behind. To think we've always played the same way and only have 1 style of playing may suit a particular narrative but it is probably false. People my not like hearing their opinions rubbished, but when they are not based on reality they need to accept that. Joe isn't completely without fault, but he is the most successful coach this country has ever had. So maybe some should keep that in mind when they feel the need to knock him.

Mahatma Geansai

Going into the 6N, it would be great to see a progressive backline which rewards form and ability. Something like the following would be great to see at some stage during the 6N:

Murray, Jackson;
Earls, McCloskey, Henshaw, Trimble;
Payne.

We need to see if Jackson can run the side from 10. He is the form 10 in the country and Sexton needs to manage himself. Payne would add significantly more to the side from 15 than Kearney. Give him a change to nail down the 15 jersey while Ringrose develops. In another year or so, Ringrose should be ready to step in at 13 and Henshaw can be shifted out to 15.

Mahatma Geansai

Going into the 6N, it would be great to see a progressive backline which rewards form and ability. Something like the following would be great to see at some stage during the 6N:

Murray, Jackson;
Earls, McCloskey, Henshaw, Trimble;
Payne.

We need to see if Jackson can run the side from 10. He is the form 10 in the country and Sexton needs to manage himself. Payne would add significantly more to the side from 15 than Kearney. Give him a change to nail down the 15 jersey while Ringrose develops. In another year or so, Ringrose should be ready to step in at 13 and Henshaw can be shifted out to 15.

imacman

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Think it was John Fogarty. Mclaughlin was still playing when the documentary was made.

I heard Mclaughlin interviewed and he was knew it was time to go when he got hit on the shoulder and it affected his head badly. I think Sexton was concussed in the tackle from Picamoles in the world cup too and the abductor strain was a cover story.I cant see him continuing in the long run.

awec

wp_rathead wrote: »

"Because why do you hate rob Kearney awec?" seems to be the response to that

Well I don't! I think RK is a good player who will earn plenty more caps.

But for us to have no tried and tested alternatives for his position (of a similar standard to him) is absolutely nonsensical.

Henshaw and Payne are the two who can provide options here, Henshaw obviously a longer term option. It comes down to whether Henshaw is seen as a long term 13 or a long term 15.

Payne is older, so we don't need to worry about his long term future with Ireland. He should be used as a player to fill gaps now, Henshaw is still a player that needs nurturing.

CMOTDibbler

awec wrote: »

Sorry, but Earls and Fitz played in the centre to cover injuries and allow players to be rested. This is not looking at other options, this is using a limited squad to manage players fitness.

Every man and his dog knows that neither Earls nor Fitz have a future in the centre for Ireland.

I don't know this. I'd agree about Earls because he's clearly better on the wing but FitzGerald was a game changer in the centre when he played there. I certainly would not write him off as just injury cover.

awec wrote: »

How are we looking short term? We continually say you can't change it up against our next opponent. Our next game is always the most important thing ever, we couldn't possibly switch out players who played in our last match. People say now we can't make changes against Wales, then people will say we can't make changes against England, etc etc.

Eventually the SA tour will come and we can't be subjecting guys to a tough series away against the very physical boks, then the AIs will be really important cause we're playing the all blacks and australia so we can't change there. Then next years 6 nations the cycle starts again.

Maybe in there a few new guys will get a token run out against some tier 2 nations, probably thrown into a second choice 15. They'll not shine in this cobbled-together squad and therefore the big question mark will remain over their head and we couldn't possibly risk them again in a match of any importance.

Eventually it'll be world cup 2019 time and Ireland will find itself in the same position as always - lacking genuine experience in depth.

You said very short term. I bolded it to make sure that you knew what I was asking. We haven't picked a single 6N squad yet and you're already writing off the entire season despite the fact that four uncapped players have already been added to the training squad.

How is that very short term thinking?

awec

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I don't know this. I'd agree about Earls because he's clearly better on the wing but FitzGerald was a game changer in the centre when he played there. I certainly would not write him off as just injury cover.


You said very short term. I bolded it to make sure that you knew what I was asking. We haven't picked a single 6N squad yet and you're already writing off the entire season despite the fact that four uncapped players have already been added to the training squad.

How is that very short term thinking?

We haven't picked a squad yet, I am talking about the discussion on here which seems to be supporting a very conservative approach.

And honestly people keep mentioning these 4 uncapped guys in a training squad as if that's some huge deal. It's no good if those 4 guys are going to spend the next few months holding tackle bags.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

imacman wrote: »

I heard Mclaughlin interviewed and he was knew it was time to go when he got hit on the shoulder and it affected his head badly. I think Sexton was concussed in the tackle from Picamoles in the world cup too and the abductor strain was a cover story.I cant see him continuing in the long run.

Yeah. I think particularly when you have had two serious knocks directly to the head you're more at risk from other impacts doing harm. At least there's no Bastereau to do harm this year ☺

OldRio

molloyjh wrote: »

The problem is that if you compare it to actual facts it doesn't stand up. In the 2013 AIs we played a very expansive attacking style. Then in the 2014 6 Nations we continued that and wcored the second highest number of tries and the most number of points in the competition. We reverted to a very different style for the 2014 AIs and 6 Nations but then in the RWC we changed again and started attacking from deep a lot more.

Schmidt has said in a number of occasions that any side that doesn't change how they play will get found out and will end up falling behind. To think we've always played the same way and only have 1 style of playing may suit a particular narrative but it is probably false. People my not like hearing their opinions rubbished, but when they are not based on reality they need to accept that. Joe isn't completely without fault, but he is the most successful coach this country has ever had. So maybe some should keep that in mind when they feel the need to knock him.

I absolutely agree that JS is our most successful coach. I had almost lost the will to live watching Ireland play under Uncle Deccie, 'Shudders' at the memory.
The post that I quoted was not something I agree completely with but it was honest. From the heart. It's good to read such posts. The posters point about the 'experts' was well made IMHO.

CMOTDibbler

awec wrote: »

Well I don't! I think RK is a good player who will earn plenty more caps.

But for us to have no tried and tested alternatives for his position (of a similar standard to him) is absolutely nonsensical.

Henshaw and Payne are the two who can provide options here, Henshaw obviously a longer term option. It comes down to whether Henshaw is seen as a long term 13 or a long term 15.

Payne is older, so we don't need to worry about his long term future with Ireland. He should be used as a player to fill gaps now, Henshaw is still a player that needs nurturing.

What you're really saying is that now McCloskey is in the squad, players have to be shuffled around to make sure (a) that he gets played and (b) no Ulster player suffers as a result.

So Rob has to go. Either way. Henshaw can go to full back and Payne and McCloskey in the centre or Payne goes to full back and Henshaw moves out to 13 so that McCloskey can slot in at 12.

CMOTDibbler

awec wrote: »

We haven't picked a squad yet, I am talking about the discussion on here which seems to be supporting a very conservative approach.

You referred very specifically to the RWC and the lack of depth there. So it's not just about what people are saying here but a perceived lack of experimentation on behalf of the coaching staff.

awec wrote: »

And honestly people keep mentioning these 4 uncapped guys in a training squad as if that's some huge deal. It's no good if those 4 guys are going to spend the next few months holding tackle bags.

Some of them might. Some of them just might not be good enough or good enough yet. There are no guarantees that a good provinicial player is going to turn out to be a good international player. Every single newly capped player that I've ever heard talk about the transition has said that it's much faster, much harder and much more energy sapping. Some players never make the transition, some take time and a very few take to it like a duck to water.

They certainly won't get the chance if they're not in the training squad. Let's start there shall we, before we start writing the whole exercise off as some sort of optical delusion. :rolleyes:

awec

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

What you're really saying is that now McCloskey is in the squad, players have to be shuffled around to make sure (a) that he gets played and (b) no Ulster player suffers as a result.

So Rob has to go. Either way. Henshaw can go to full back and Payne and McCloskey in the centre or Payne goes to full back and Henshaw moves out to 13 so that McCloskey can slot in at 12.

No, I haven't said that at all. You should go back and read my posts where I say I don't care if RK plays or not. You should also go back and read the bits where I have said I have no problem with Payne being dropped out of the 23. So much for no Ulster player suffering. :rolleyes:

And the smiley faces at the end of your sentences don't really disguise the underlying message in your post (which is absolutely rubbish).

irishbucsfan

People are forgetting, or are maybe unaware entirely, how important winning individual games this season is. Next year is the year for reckless abandon and trying out new partnerships and players. There's a reason Gatland only picked one uncapped player in his squad.

AdamD

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

What you're really saying is that now McCloskey is in the squad, players have to be shuffled around to make sure (a) that he gets played and (b) no Ulster player suffers as a result.

So Rob has to go. Either way. Henshaw can go to full back and Payne and McCloskey in the centre or Payne goes to full back and Henshaw moves out to 13 so that McCloskey can slot in at 12.

You mean players can now be shuffled back to their correct positions as we have an actual 12 now

Wish people would stop suggesting that playing the form 12 in Europe is 'reckless' or 'experimenting'.

awec

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

You referred very specifically to the RWC and the lack of depth there. So it's not just about what people are saying here but a perceived lack of experimentation on behalf of the coaching staff.

Yes, this was because we failed to develop adequate depth. Schmidt cannot be held to blame for this really as he only took the job mid-cycle and obviously needed time to figure things out.

But right now people are saying we can't start making the necessary adjustments for the next work cup because it's too risky. This is what I am taking issue with.

Some of them might. Some of them just might not be good enough or good enough yet. There are no guarantees that a good provinicial player is going to turn out to be a good international player. Every single newly capped player that I've ever heard talk about the transition has said that it's much faster, much harder and much more energy sapping. Some players never make the transition, some take time and a very few take to it like a duck to water.

They certainly won't get the chance if they're not in the training squad. Let's start there shall we, before we start writing the whole exercise off as some sort of optical delusion. :rolleyes:

Well unless they turn up to training and their form falls completely off a cliff I don't think we need to worry too much about not being good enough.

OldRio

irishbucsfan wrote: »

People are forgetting, or are maybe unaware entirely, how important winning individual games this season is. Next year is the year for reckless abandon and trying out new partnerships and players. There's a reason Gatland only picked one uncapped player in his squad.

I do not want 'reckless abandon' this year or any year thank you.
Just players who have shown they can execute the game plan playing in their correct position will be enough.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

People are forgetting, or are maybe unaware entirely, how important winning individual games this season is. Next year is the year for reckless abandon and trying out new partnerships and players. There's a reason Gatland only picked one uncapped player in his squad.

And here again we hear about these world cup rankings.

Tell me ibf, how did being SECOND in the world rankings fare for Australia for the 2015 world cup draw?

England were ranked higher than Ireland but Ireland got an easier group. Scotland were ranked TWELFTH and got a realtively ok group.

The draw is pot luck. People put way too much emphasis on the rankings here.


Anyway, to suggest anything other than Henshaw and Payne in the centre is reckless abandon is just crazy.

aimee1

awec wrote: »

But right now people are saying we can't start making the necessary adjustments for the next work cup because it's too risky. This is what I am taking issue with.

The next 11 [Or maybe 12 if the 2nd NZ game happens] will determine our seeding when the draw is made in december. So yes it does have to be considered. We will have enough changes with the current list of injuries and POC is gone, others will retire in the next few seasons too [Reddan, Boss & possibly sexton for example].

CMOTDibbler

awec wrote: »

No, I haven't said that at all. You should go back and read my posts where I say I don't care if RK plays or not. You should also go back and read the bits where I have said I have no problem with Payne being dropped out of the 23. So much for no Ulster player suffering. :rolleyes:

I'll give you that. You certainly did say that Payne could be dropped from the 23 but you soon got over it and suggested he start at 15 instead. No more talk of him being dropped after that.

awec wrote: »

And the smiley faces at the end of your sentences don't really disguise the underlying message in your post (which is absolutely rubbish).

I wasn't trying to disguise it. Rubbish or not. :pac:

jacothelad

Yeah_Right wrote: »

A lot of people calling for Payne to move to fullback or be dropped from the 23 completely. Can I ask these posters, has Payne ever had a bad game for Ireland at 13? Has the Payne/Henshaw midfield ever been destroyed, embarrassed, shown up?

No he hasn't but for those who have watched him week in and out at Ulster he adds far more to the team from 15 than 13. he is a fine 13. I have no problem with him playing there, however, as most Ulster watchers will tell you, Cave adds far more creativity and attack to the back line and is a more effective defender. Since Ulster have also got Luke Marshall who, after about 5 years of being played mainly out of position at 12 is now showing what he can do at 13. Stuart Olding who many think is the most talented of the lot and probably 13 will be his best position. Then there is Sam Arnold and Jacob Stockdale. Ulster's glass is truly more than half full.

Of course the Payne at 13 debate will be a short lived one now that we have the Messiah Ringrose getting up to speed.

awec

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I'll give you that. You certainly did say that Payne could be dropped from the 23 but you soon got over it and suggested he start at 15 instead. No more talk of him being dropped after that.


I wasn't trying to disguise it. Rubbish or not. :pac:

Yea but to try and paint this argument as provincialism is actually total crap. If the best you can come up with is that then you haven't really got much at all.

Q: Why shouldn't we develop options at full back?
A: Cause you're just an Ulster fan promoting Ulster players.

Yea, good one.


This argument is probably one of the least provincial arguments about the squad. If you read this forum you will see Ulster fans, Munster fans, Connacht fans and even a few Leinster fans call for something other than Henshaw and Payne in the centre.

The full back discussion is secondary.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

And here again we hear about these world cup rankings.

Tell me ibf, how did being SECOND in the world rankings fare for Australia for the 2015 world cup draw?

England were ranked higher than Ireland but Ireland got an easier group. Scotland were ranked TWELFTH and got a realtively ok group.

The draw is pot luck. People put way too much emphasis on the rankings here.


Anyway, to suggest anything other than Henshaw and Payne in the centre is reckless abandon is just crazy.

:pac:

Wales end up in a group with England and Australia and you're going to sit there and say that the draw is luck and seeding doesn't matter!

Being a top seed would mean ensuring that you wouldn't be in a group with New Zealand, South Africa or Australia (most likely). The value of that is self-evident.

irishbucsfan

OldRio wrote: »

I do not want 'reckless abandon' this year or any year thank you.
Just players who have shown they can execute the game plan playing in their correct position will be enough.

That's exactly what people have been asking for in this thread.

But supposedly Joe has been "found out" and is only capable of playing one style of rugby and will only pick his mates to do that. Anyone who has ben watching rugby since 2014 and ignored all of his prior achievements can tell you that!

jm08

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I don't know this. I'd agree about Earls because he's clearly better on the wing but FitzGerald was a game changer in the centre when he played there. I certainly would not write him off as just injury cover.

He came on for Tommy Bowe on the wing in the Argentinian game.

I still can't figure out how he played for 68 minutes and only attempted one tackle and missed it. Its not as if the rest of the backs were having it easy.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

:pac:

Wales end up in a group with England and Australia and you're going to sit there and say that the draw is luck and seeding doesn't matter!

Being a top seed would mean ensuring that you wouldn't be in a group with New Zealand, South Africa or Australia (most likely). The value of that is self-evident.

No, I am saying they are not the be all and end all. You can finish high and get a crap group, you can finish low and get a good group.

CMOTDibbler

awec wrote: »

Yea but to try and paint this argument as provincialism is actually total crap. If the best you can come up with is that then you haven't really got much at all.

Q: Why shouldn't we develop options at full back?
A: Cause you're just an Ulster fan promoting Ulster players.

Yea, good one.

This argument is probably one of the least provincial arguments about the squad. If you read this forum you will see Ulster fans, Munster fans, Connacht fans and even a few Leinster fans call for something other than Henshaw and Payne in the centre.

The full back discussion is secondary.

Sorry awec, but the outrage you express every time an Ulster player is overlooked or dropped is just hilarious at times. How many pages did the Darren Cave World Cup outrage thread last for? and the Iain Henderson/Devin Toner one?

I'm going to drop this now as it's flying in the face of the charter. I was slagging you originally but now it's gone a bit off the rails.

Nobody (me included) is arguing against a change in the centre. However people seem to forget that we haven't seen Payne and Henshaw together since the last 6N and I for one would like to see how it goes again before I start throwing my hands up in the air and caling it boring.

Maybe McCloskey might be better, but I doubt very much if one of the 'current' centres will move to full back to accommodate him. It will be a straight swap for the very simple reason that you don't go rattling the team around like a dice in a cup to slot one player in.

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

People are forgetting, or are maybe unaware entirely, how important winning individual games this season is. Next year is the year for reckless abandon and trying out new partnerships and players. There's a reason Gatland only picked one uncapped player in his squad.

Are you sure its this year. I think it maybe changed to next year.

CMOTDibbler

awec wrote: »

No, I am saying they are not the be all and end all. You can finish high and get a crap group, you can finish low and get a good group.

Drop below eighth and you will definitely get a tough group because you'll have two Tier 1 nations in there with you.

This is exactly what happened with Australia; Wales were ninth and so got landed in with England and Australia. There's always the danger of something like that heppening again, but the only surety we have is to control where we end up and let the rest worry about themselves.

awec

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Sorry awec, but the outrage you express every time an Ulster player is overlooked or dropped is just hilarious at times. How many pages did the Darren Cave World Cup outrage thread last for? and the Iain Henderson/Devin Toner one?

Again, more crap.

I questioned why Cave was in the squad if he wasn't going to be used. I wasn't the only one. Why bring him if you're not going to use him? Why not bring someone else instead? Bringing Cave as the 23rd man was clearly a mistake by Schmidt.

I questioned why Henderson was dropped despite being Ireland's best player. This is hardly surprising, when your best player is dropped it surely raises eyebrows. I'd have raised the same question no matter who had been Ireland's stand out player, the fact it was Henderson was coincidental.

I'm going to drop this now as it's flying in the face of the charter. I was slagging you originally but now it's gone a bit off the rails.

Nobody (me included) is arguing against a change in the centre. However people seem to forget that we haven't seen Payne and Henshaw together since the last 6N and I for one would like to see how it goes again before I start throwing my hands up in the air and caling it boring.

Maybe McCloskey might be better, but I doubt very much if one of the 'current' centres will move to full back to accommodate him. It will be a straight swap for the very simple reason that you don't go rattling the team around like a dice in a cup to slot one player in.

And why not? This is like the most conservative Irish thing ever. "We can't play him cause we'd have to move someone else as well".

Seriously, how are we ever going to develop depth if we are so afraid of switching the team up a bit?

And I think we've seen more than enough of Henshaw and Payne to know what it's like by now.

LostArt

jm08 wrote: »

Are you sure its this year. I think it maybe changed to next year.

It's in December.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

He came on for Tommy Bowe on the wing in the Argentinian game.

I still can't figure out how he played for 68 minutes and only attempted one tackle and missed it. Its not as if the rest of the backs were having it easy.

because Ireland were in the ascendency for quite a lot of that time, and argentina were going very wide with quick ball bypassing the centres

jm08

aimee1 wrote: »

because Ireland were in the ascendency for quite a lot of that time, and argentina were going very wide with quick ball bypassing the centres

Luke wasn't in the centre. He was on the right wing having come on as a replacement for Tommy Bowe in the 12th minute.

In the 12 minutes before his injury, Tommy Bowe made one tackle and missed another.

awec

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Drop below eighth and you will definitely get a tough group because you'll have two Tier 1 nations in there with you.

This is exactly what happened with Australia; Wales were ninth and so got landed in with England and Australia. There's always the danger of something like that heppening again, but the only surety we have is to control where we end up and let the rest worry about themselves.

Scotland were ranked 12th for the 2015 world cup and got a group that in no circumstances could be described as awful (they even managed to get out of it).

SA
Samoa
Scotland
Japan
USA

BTW, I am not saying we should forget about the rankins altogether, but they are not all-important. I also think it is very disingenuous to suggest that rotating some players will see us fall down the rankings.