Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

irishbucsfan

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.

It's far less down to luck than you're making out. If you're a top seed you avoid all the other top seeds regardless of how lucky you are. Avoiding the top seeds greatly increases the chances of wining your group in the world cup. Winning your group in the world cup gives you an easier quarter-final. An easier quarter-final increases your chances of getting to a semi-final. Getting to a semi-final is advisable for teams who want to win the competition.

jm08 wrote: »

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

They said they would consider it and then abandoned the idea, I'd imagine at this stage it'd be impossible for them to change it now.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

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.

But argentina went for space. By the time fitz came on ireland had got to grips with the game and dominated a good bit. And when they did score late on it was on the right wing and that wasnt where fitz was.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's far less down to luck than you're making out. If you're a top seed you avoid all the other top seeds regardless of how lucky you are. Avoiding the top seeds greatly increases the chances of wining your group in the world cup. Winning your group in the world cup gives you an easier quarter-final. An easier quarter-final increases your chances of getting to a semi-final. Getting to a semi-final is advisable for teams who want to win the competition.



They said they would consider it and then abandoned the idea, I'd imagine at this stage it'd be impossible for them to change it now.

Why do you think that trying other options in certain positions will see us fall down the rankings?

jm08

awec wrote: »

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 think Cave was brought because both Earls & Luke Fitz have had dodgy injury records.

Podge_irl

jm08 wrote: »

I think Cave was brought because both Earls & Luke Fitz have had dodgy injury records.

So he was brought in case we lost 3 centres? But not tournament ending injuries obviously or he could be brought out anyway. Seems like a pretty crappy use of resources to me.

I'll never understand the Cave selection for the squad to be honest.

jm08

aimee1 wrote: »

But argentina went for space. By the time fitz came on ireland had got to grips with the game and dominated a good bit. And when they did score late on it was on the right wing and that wasnt where fitz was.

I'm not following the logic here ... are you saying that Fitz was not covering the right wing defensively?

techdiver

This six nations is as much about game plan as it is personal. I was disappointed about the exclusions of Ringrose etc and am hoping the younger guys get a shot. But move on from this we must.

I am interested to see how the approach will be this season. Our attack and defense from 2015 was found out as far as I'm concerned and it failed when it mattered most at the rugby world cup. When I take my seat in the stand for the Wales game in a couple of weeks I want to see something that tells me that the lessons of WC 2015 were learned. Of course whether the approach of the opposition will try and exploit our defensive weakness or not will also determine a lot. If Wales just truck it up the middle, I believe we can deal with that.

The real test will be whether we can defend against a team with the attacking shape of Argentina in the WC. I suspect that France this year will be a different beast to years past and might possess more attacking threat similar to Argentina and France of old. Although, France being France, who knows!

I also want to see the team being able to adapt better when things are going wrong. We were too slow to adapt against Argentina and they were almost out of sight after 10 minutes. Whether it was leadership, coaching/game plan, I don't know, but this area needs to be better.

Many changes will be enforced for various reasons (POM, Ross, Moore, POC, Henderson, Tommy Bowe, etc missing). I fear that will be it from a change point of view. Even though the majority of the injuries are in the pack, I can't see any "WOW" selections in the back line. I was firmly pro Joe up to the World Cup, but my confidence in him was shaken quite a bit during the tournament. Injuries are one thing, but our dire defensive display was not excusable and the possibility of it being exploited was flagged well in advance of the Argentina game, yet nothing was done to address this. Even post tournament, the lack of acceptance that there was actually anything wrong was really annoying and the injuries became a crutch to excuse the poor game plan.

I just worry about the confidence of the players post World Cup and at the end of the worst European campaign by the collective Irish provinces (barring Connacht) ever.

In saying all this I am 100% behind the team and Joe. I hope Joe will bounce back from the World Cup and bring his team with him. He has shown before that he can adapt. In my opinion, he has a multi-faceted job this time around. He must rebuild a squad that will be low on confidence and possibly moral and he must delve into his technical knowhow in order to negotiate, what funnily enough could easily be a GS or Wooden Spoon year. I can't really predict it.

former total

jm08 wrote: »

I'm not following the logic here ... are you saying that Fitz was not covering the right wing defensively?

Dave Kearney switched to the right wing when Bowe went off.

The Argies were avoiding Luke because he's such an awesome defender, obvs.

techdiver

This six nations is as much about game plan as it is personal. I was disappointed about the exclusions of Ringrose etc and am hoping the younger guys get a shot. But move on from this we must.

I am interested to see how the approach will be this season. Our attack and defense from 2015 was found out as far as I'm concerned and it failed when it mattered most at the rugby world cup. When I take my seat in the stand for the Wales game in a couple of weeks I want to see something that tells me that the lessons of WC 2015 were learned. Of course whether the approach of the opposition will try and exploit our defensive weakness or not will also determine a lot. If Wales just truck it up the middle, I believe we can deal with that.

The real test will be whether we can defend against a team with the attacking shape of Argentina in the WC. I suspect that France this year will be a different beast to years past and might possess more attacking threat similar to Argentina and France of old. Although, France being France, who knows!

I also want to see the team being able to adapt better when things are going wrong. We were too slow to adapt against Argentina and they were almost out of sight after 10 minutes. Whether it was leadership, coaching/game plan, I don't know, but this area needs to be better.

Many changes will be enforced for various reasons (POM, Ross, Moore, POC, Henderson, Tommy Bowe, etc missing). I fear that will be it from a change point of view. Even though the majority of the injuries are in the pack, I can't see any "WOW" selections in the back line. I was firmly pro Joe up to the World Cup, but my confidence in him was shaken quite a bit during the tournament. Injuries are one thing, but our dire defensive display was not excusable and the possibility of it being exploited was flagged well in advance of the Argentina game, yet nothing was done to address this. Even post tournament, the lack of acceptance that there was actually anything wrong was really annoying and the injuries became a crutch to excuse the poor game plan.

I just worry about the confidence of the players post World Cup and at the end of the worst European campaign by the collective Irish provinces (barring Connacht) ever.

In saying all this I am 100% behind the team and Joe. I hope Joe will bounce back from the World Cup and bring his team with him. He has shown before that he can adapt. In my opinion, he has a multi-faceted job this time around. He must rebuild a squad that will be low on confidence and possibly moral and he must delve into his technical knowhow in order to negotiate, what funnily enough could easily be a GS or Wooden Spoon year. I can't really predict it.

awec

jm08 wrote: »

I think Cave was brought because both Earls & Luke Fitz have had dodgy injury records.

If he was behind both Earls and Fitz in the pecking order then he was definitely a waste of selection.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

I'm not following the logic here ... are you saying that Fitz was not covering the right wing defensively?

Late in the game im fairly sure dk was on the right wing with fitz on the left.

jm08

Podge_irl wrote: »

So he was brought in case we lost 3 centres? But not tournament ending injuries obviously or he could be brought out anyway. Seems like a pretty crappy use of resources to me.

I'll never understand the Cave selection for the squad to be honest.

I do. There was every chance that Fitz & Earls could break down. Thankfully both seem to have got over the injury problems now, so it might be a different story if the squad was being picked now.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

Why do you think that trying other options in certain positions will see us fall down the rankings?

I don't think playing new players will see us fall down the rankings. I think not playing our best players will see us less likely to win during the 6 Nations. I would have CJ Stander in the matchday 23 immediately.

Fitness permitting I'd like to see us take all three of Ringrose/Olding/McCloskey to South Africa. Outside of those guys I really don't think there's outside players who will put any pressure on the guys we already know about, maybe some more will come through by the end of the season.

OldRio

irishbucsfan wrote: »

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!

Perhaps some posters just want good form rewarding. Radical I know but lets give it a go. Perhaps some posters do not want wholesale changes but caps given to guys who are playing really well.

awec

On Schmidt, I firmly believe he is the best man for the job and his position isn't even questionable. It would take a very terrible 6 nations for questions to be asked.

However, if you will all allow me to make a football analogy for one moment (I know, I know ), I am a bit frustrated that Schmidt has turned from being Pep Guardiola at Leinster (winning and exciting) to Jose Mourinho at Ireland (winning but boring and conservative).

awec

On Schmidt, I firmly believe he is the best man for the job and his position isn't even questionable. It would take a very terrible 6 nations for questions to be asked but even then I seriously doubt it.

However, if you will all allow me to make a football analogy for one moment (I know, I know ), I am a bit frustrated that Schmidt has turned from being Pep Guardiola at Leinster (winning and exciting) to Jose Mourinho at Ireland (winning but boring and conservative).

jacothelad

Deleted User wrote: »

Nonsense.

You're 'Nonsense' kind of proving part of his post...and some of it is accurate. Other parts are perfectly reasonable opinions. They might not be everyone's views but they certainly are not nonsense. However, Schmidt is the man who carries the can if things go bosoms up. I sincerely doubt that he'll deliberately overlook a player just to keep his old faithfuls in the team.

My view is that at some time, every team reaches a point where it starts going backwards. It usually comes to a point of realisation in a sudden happening. Both Munster and Leinster for example. They are not the great teams of just recent history. Nor are the still remaining players by and large just as good as they once were. They are older, beginning to suffer from more injuries and take a bit longer to heal. Even Heaslip has shown a bit of vulnerability. Sexton's concussions are hopefully of no consequence to him but it would be naive to ignore them for his long term well being. I feel that injuries, retirements and a few other factors have resulted in the teams looking jaded. Maybe the Six nations will be the spark to reignite the fire. If it doesn't we are not going to come out of it well. papering over the cracks is an old standby in the history of Irish international rugby.

CMOTDibbler

awec wrote: »

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.

Pages I tell you, pages.

awec wrote: »

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.

More crap!

Why is it conservative? If you're going to make two changes to a team, then moving a player from one position to another wouldn't be my preferred way of being adventurous. Bring in another player, cap someone new. Don't just go shuffling guys around the pitch to make some sort of half-arsed attempt at 'changing things up'. We know Payne is up to international standard, but if you're looking for depth at full back (or any other position) then it's young uncaped players we should be looking at, not 30 year olds.

They've played together exactly seven times. The last of which was almost a year ago, unless you count the warm up game against England. Either way, it's certainly not 'more than enough'.

jm08

aimee1 wrote: »

Late in the game im fairly sure dk was on the right wing with fitz on the left.

OK, so he wasn't in the centre then!

Podge_irl

jm08 wrote: »

I do. There was every chance that Fitz & Earls could break down. Thankfully both seem to have got over the injury problems now, so it might be a different story if the squad was being picked now.

Bringing a player into a limited 31 man squad in case three players in front of him have niggling injuries is utterly nonsensical.

It is by far the least understandable thing I've seen Schmidt do (to me at least).


I have absolutely no clue how this 6N is going to go. I would like to see some freshness in the team for sure, but I genuinely have no clue roughly where we rank. Very interested to see the Welsh game to get an idea.

aimee1

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't think playing new players will see us fall down the rankings. I think not playing our best players will see us less likely to win during the 6 Nations. I would have CJ Stander in the matchday 23 immediately.

Fitness permitting I'd like to see us take all three of Ringrose/Olding/McCloskey to South Africa. Outside of those guys I really don't think there's outside players who will put any pressure on the guys we already know about, maybe some more will come through by the end of the season.

With 7-8 guys who would have been picked v Argentina if all fit not available for the wales and france games coming up i think there will be plenty of changes enforced. Thats a lot.

Mccloskey and Stander will be involved. Possibly Dillane too. Thats a big turnover numbers wise

At some point the coach has to have tried and trusted guys on the pitch

former total

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't think playing new players will see us fall down the rankings. I think not playing our best players will see us less likely to win during the 6 Nations. I would have CJ Stander in the matchday 23 immediately.

Fitness permitting I'd like to see us take all three of Ringrose/Olding/McCloskey to South Africa. Outside of those guys I really don't think there's outside players who will put any pressure on the guys we already know about, maybe some more will come through by the end of the season.

See, this is more important (for the IRFU) than rankings places. They put all their eggs in the Six Nations basket, rightly or wrongly. Anything less than four wins will be a failure for Joe. Of course, you can experiment against Italy with little fear of defeat but then your first-liners won't have played for three weeks going into the last round and that's not ideal either. These are the realities facing Schmidt, like it or not.

South Africa involves three tests in three weeks, beginning two weeks after the Pro12 final. We're going to be carrying injuries and we'll absolutely have to rotate. It also won't matter as much to Joe's bosses if we lose. I'd expect a lot more rotation then.

Podge_irl

former total wrote: »

See, this is more important (for the IRFU) than rankings places. They put all their eggs in the Six Nations basket, rightly or wrongly. Anything less than four wins will be a failure for Joe. Of course, you can experiment against Italy with little fear of defeat but then your first-liners won't have played for three weeks going into the last round and that's not ideal either. These are the realities facing Schmidt, like it or not.

To be fair here, very few people are suggesting some kind of rotation policy for the sake of it. The sentiment is the changed selections would give us a better chance of winning now. Tried and trusted is not always better.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

OK, so he wasn't in the centre then!

He was on occasion. He created a try for Jordi and was in the defensive line at centre a few times. Its just one of those things, only one tackle attempt. Means nothing

aimee1

former total wrote: »

See, this is more important (for the IRFU) than rankings places. They put all their eggs in the Six Nations basket, rightly or wrongly. Anything less than four wins will be a failure for Joe. Of course, you can experiment against Italy with little fear of defeat but then your first-liners won't have played for three weeks going into the last round and that's not ideal either. These are the realities facing Schmidt, like it or not.

South Africa involves three tests in three weeks, beginning two weeks after the Pro12 final. We're going to be carrying injuries and we'll absolutely have to rotate. It also won't matter as much to Joe's bosses if we lose. I'd expect a lot more rotation then.

If we are 2 win from 3 then we are chasing points against italy. Cant see (m)any unforced changes if that comes to pass.

CMOTDibbler

Podge_irl wrote: »

Bringing a player into a limited 31 man squad in case three players in front of him have niggling injuries is utterly nonsensical.

It is by far the least understandable thing I've seen Schmidt do (to me at least).

I think you have to look at it from the point of view of all the backs that were brought, not just the centres.

Henshaw and Payne had concurrent injuries meaning that they never played together at the RWC. We had five wings: Bowe, Kearney, Earls, Zebo and Fitz and only RK as a full back and Cave at centre only. Fitz and Zebo were looked at for the 23 shirt and possibly Earls, but he was immediately drafted into the centre to cover the injuries there.

Apart from injuries, there was also a need for squad rotation. Cave was actually needed for that purpose but if Earls had been injured he would have been next in line for the centre. Fitz/Zebo still being needed for No. 23. It was really tight, even before we started the competition.

jm08

Podge_irl wrote: »

Bringing a player into a limited 31 man squad in case three players in front of him have niggling injuries is utterly nonsensical.

It is by far the least understandable thing I've seen Schmidt do (to me at least).

Well, if its any consolation now, he hasn't included Cave in the 6Ns squad and more than likely won't call him up unless there are quite a few injuries.

aimee1 wrote: »

He was on occasion. He created a try for Jordi and was in the defensive line at centre a few times. Its just one of those things, only one tackle attempt. Means nothing

He was still not a centre as you claimed.

former total

Podge_irl wrote: »

To be fair here, very few people are suggesting some kind of rotation policy for the sake of it. The sentiment is the changed selections would give us a better chance of winning now. Tried and trusted is not always better.

I could not agree more. I just don't think anyone has made a compelling claim to displace the incumbents.

irishbucsfan

OldRio wrote: »

Perhaps some posters just want good form rewarding. Radical I know but lets give it a go. Perhaps some posters do not want wholesale changes but caps given to guys who are playing really well.

Well form is entirely subjective.

Also, form is just a function of fitness/ability/confidence and a lot of that changes during the switchover into the international game. We see it every year that guys struggling for form end up playing very well in the 6 Nations, Kearney and Earls both seem to have done it quite often (remember Earls had an awful day out against Castres in 2013 and then played excellently throughout the 6 Nations).

Schmidt had no problem putting Henshaw into the team. Ahead of someone who had been a long-time servant in D'Arcy. He had no problem putting Marty Moore into the team, ahead of Mike Ross who had been the same. I don't see any reason why he wouldn't put anyone he thought was a better option into the team now. Who knows, maybe he will.

former total

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well form is entirely subjective.

Also, form is just a function of fitness/ability/confidence and a lot of that changes during the switchover into the international game. We see it every year that guys struggling for form end up playing very well in the 6 Nations, Kearney and Earls both seem to have done it quite often (remember Earls had an awful day out against Castres in 2013 and then played excellently throughout the 6 Nations).

Schmidt had no problem putting Henshaw into the team. Ahead of someone who had been a long-time servant in D'Arcy. He had no problem putting Marty Moore into the team, ahead of Mike Ross who had been the same. I don't see any reason why he wouldn't put anyone he thought was a better option into the team now. Who knows, maybe he will.

Pedantry alert: Schmidt has never picked Moore ahead of Ross.

irishbucsfan

former total wrote: »

Pedantry alert: Schmidt has never picked Moore ahead of Ross.

Ah yeah that's right I was confusing who had done that. Apologies.

OldRio

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well form is entirely subjective.

Also, form is just a function of fitness/ability/confidence and a lot of that changes during the switchover into the international game. We see it every year that guys struggling for form end up playing very well in the 6 Nations, Kearney and Earls both seem to have done it quite often (remember Earls had an awful day out against Castres in 2013 and then played excellently throughout the 6 Nations).

Schmidt had no problem putting Henshaw into the team. Ahead of someone who had been a long-time servant in D'Arcy. He had no problem putting Marty Moore into the team, ahead of Mike Ross who had been the same. I don't see any reason why he wouldn't put anyone he thought was a better option into the team now. Who knows, maybe he will.

Agree entirely.

molloyjh

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.

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.

Ah not the tackle bags line. Please anything but that. If they are in camp and training with the squad there very much is value in that. Just not value that you or I will see straight away. Like with Henshaw being involved in camp for so long before getting any meaningful game time. When he did step in he did so having been fully armed with what he needed to step up. It's just plain wrong to suggest there is no benefit in having guys in camp unless they get capped.

Good managers provide people with what they need to succeed. They don't just throw everyone in the deep end and reward those who swim. They build an environment and develop the people in a way that will see them do well. For some throwing them in the deep end is perfect, for others it isn't. And a good manager knows who needs what. Cries for people to be getting capped for the first time against Wales are made by people from a point of near complete ignorance as to what those players need and how they will react. The coaches see them more, know them better and are better placed than any of us to make the calls they are making.

And they have been successful coaches who have been capping young guys regularly enough. And doing so without having them out of their depth in important games (where possible). That doesn't happen by accident. A lot of work goes on in camp to ensure these guys are able to perform to the standard expected of them.

former total

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Ah yeah that's right I was confusing who had done that. Apologies.

But it's still relevant though.

MOC dropped Ross and brought in Moore, which was a fair call at the time, but Joe still clearly thought Ross was up to the task for the 6N and he was proved right.

This goes to show that (as I pointed out yesterday), we never have the full set of facts when we're commenting on all these selection injustices. We don't know what happens at training and we don't know how Joe sees guys in the context of his tactics.

The guys will be assembling in camp probably today so we won't have any idea what Joe sees for the next two weeks. We'd probably get more civil debates if people just took a second to remember that.

Timothy Bryce

Various media outlets reporting Marty Moore is out for the 6N. Grade 2 hamstring tear.

molloyjh

OldRio wrote: »

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.

Donald Trump and Sarah Palin are being equally honest. Does that mean their opinions should be praised? The fact is that the majority of what that poster wrote quite simply is wrong. It's not a matter of opinion or a heart felt emotion. It is factually incorrect. And while there may be individuals here who are a bit less accommodating of other points of view I would hope none of us are comfortable with falsehoods and misrepresentations. Those things should be challenged and pointed out for being exactly what they are.

Timothy Bryce

Timothy Bryce wrote: »

Various media outlets reporting Marty Moore is out for the 6N. Grade 2 hamstring tear.

Is White our starting TH for the first two tests then or might Furlong be picked as first choice?

I don't know who is going better at the moment, but White probably a little more tested.

molloyjh

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.

You can pick out anomalies all you want. The simple fact is that the higher you seed the more likely you are to get a better group. Nothing is guaranteed, but you can be sure that if you seed badly you will struggle. You talk about England and Australia, but it was the Welsh seeding badly that made that pool as difficult as it was. So therefore seeding does matter.

It should also be noted that NZ had the easiest pool of the lot.

Quint2010

molloyjh wrote: »

You can pick out anomalies all you want. The simple fact is that the higher you seed the more likely you are to get a better group. Nothing is guaranteed, but you can be sure that if you seed badly you will struggle. You talk about England and Australia, but it was the Welsh seeding badly that made that pool as difficult as it was. So therefore seeding does matter.

It should also be noted that NZ had the easiest pool of the lot.

Did they? It was the only group two semi-finalists came out of...

molloyjh

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Nobody (me included) is arguing against a change in the centre.

I think this is a crucial point. There are a few people here that are all but demanding change and a lot of others saying that it's more complicated than simple provincial form. That change may happen and may not depending on other factors. Most of us (if not all of us) ultimately want to see McCloskey at 12 at some point in the near future for example. But a lot of us are willing to accept that there may need to be a transition period where McCloskey doesn't play so that he can bed in to the side properly. We're even willing to accept that there is still a possibility, remote though it is, that he won't be able to do that. I'm not sure what exactly about that is overly conservative. To me it just seems to be prudent and fair to all concerned.

The days of meeting in the car park before the game are long gone and things are far more structured now than ever before. So provincial form can only do so much for a player. Maybe McCloskey will step up immediately and maybe he won't. The coaches will know where is more than any of us.

wp_rathead

Deleted User wrote: »

Is White our starting TH for the first two tests then or might Furlong be picked as first choice?

I don't know who is going better at the moment, but White probably a little more tested.

White has been going well but I'd love Furlong to start

OldRio

molloyjh wrote: »

Donald Trump and Sarah Palin are being equally honest. Does that mean their opinions should be praised? The fact is that the majority of what that poster wrote quite simply is wrong. It's not a matter of opinion or a heart felt emotion. It is factually incorrect. And while there may be individuals here who are a bit less accommodating of other points of view I would hope none of us are comfortable with falsehoods and misrepresentations. Those things should be challenged and pointed out for being exactly what they are.

If you think Trump and Palin are honest you obviously know nothing about politics. Way off topic.
The majority of what that poster wrote was opinion. You may not like it but there you go. Your accusations of falsehoods kind of make the posters point.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Is White our starting TH for the first two tests then or might Furlong be picked as first choice?

I don't know who is going better at the moment, but White probably a little more tested.

How lucky are we for THs these days?

Back in the ligind-era if we lost 1 international quality tighthead it would be curtains on our entire championship.

We're going into a game against Wales now with 2 international quality tightheads out of the reckoning (OK, Ross possibly past it as an international quality player) and we still have 2 more waiting in the wings who are still very good. Even if we lost one of those Rodney is still probably good enough to sit on the bench for us.

The IRFU deserve a lot of praise for this sort of thing

molloyjh

Quint2010 wrote: »

Did they? It was the only group two semi-finalists came out of...

I would say it was. They only had 1 other team that could potentially cause them problems (but never have done in the past) and 3 minnows. Although looking at it again SA probably did have an easier pool.

I've looked into it though and Australia were not second seeds. South Africa were. Australia were third. So the two teams who had it easiest were 1st and 2nd seed. So ultimately that proves the point. England seeded 5th which put them in tier 2. Had they seeded 4th ahead of France they wouldn't have ended up in the pool they were in. Seeding does matter but it is not the be all and end all.

stephen_n

Quint2010 wrote: »

Did they? It was the only group two semi-finalists came out of...

Which says what about the group? Argentina were pretty much able to canter through the group after the NZ game.

bilston

former total wrote: »

I could not agree more. I just don't think anyone has made a compelling claim to displace the incumbents.

There is literally nothing else McCloskey could have done to make a compelling case! He has torn teams apart all season, even the much vaunted Wolf Pack defence struggled with him.

thomond2006

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Back in the ligind-era if we lost 1 international quality tighthead it would be curtains on our entire championship.

This comment deserves a quote and a thanks. With your permission I shall occasionally use the phrase ligind-era.

bilston

Timothy Bryce wrote: »

Various media outlets reporting Marty Moore is out for the 6N. Grade 2 hamstring tear.

Balls. He'd have been my starting TH.

MJohnston

No concussion for Sexton apparently: http://www.the42.ie/leinster-press-conference-monday-johnny-sexton-2565508-Jan2016/?utm_source=twitter_self

Clegg

I wouldn't have a problem seeing Henshaw and Payne partner up again. I've always thought they mixed well together and was one of the definite successes of last years 6Nations strategy. There's a push for what some are calling more progressive selections, but I'm not sure it should be at the expense of one of things we got right last year.