Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

Mahatma Geansai

errlloyd wrote: »

I know this is unlikely - but I also wonder if the fact that Ulster actually have a match this weekend had any bearing. In reality the material difference between Madigan and Jackson is small, and recently Joe hasn't subbed Sexton before 70 unless he's absolutely had to.

When Joe was Leinster coach he was vocally against the Ireland head coach unnecessarily taking his players away. Maybe Kiss suggested that as there is little between them, and as Jackson was useful to his province when Madigan is not, Mads got the nod this week.

I hope the above is the case. Jackson being released to his province will very possibly be the difference between them winning and losing this weekend, which in the long run is very good for the Irish set up.

The bolded bit is just false. Jackson is a significantly better 10 and is playing much better rugby than any other 10 on the island.

MJohnston

errlloyd wrote: »

I know this is unlikely - but I also wonder if the fact that Ulster actually have a match this weekend had any bearing. In reality the material difference between Madigan and Jackson is small, and recently Joe hasn't subbed Sexton before 70 unless he's absolutely had to.

When Joe was Leinster coach he was vocally against the Ireland head coach unnecessarily taking his players away. Maybe Kiss suggested that as there is little between them, and as Jackson was useful to his province when Madigan is not, Mads got the nod this week.

I hope the above is the case. Jackson being released to his province will very possibly be the difference between them winning and losing this weekend, which in the long run is very good for the Irish set up.

That argument is completely negated by the fact that Jackson is ON THE BENCH for Ulster.

shootermacg

murray, sexton, trimble, mccloskey, payne, earls, henshaw

Now that would make me happy.

murray, sexton, kearney, henshaw, payne, zebo, kearney

Now that would make me sad.

Podge_irl

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

The bolded bit is just false. Jackson is a significantly better 10 and is playing much better rugby than any other 10 on the island.

Yeah. It especially doesn't make sense if McCloskey is on the bench.

errlloyd

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

The bolded bit is just false. Jackson is a significantly better 10 and is playing much better rugby than any other 10 on the island.

I agree with your opinion but based on the only metric that really matters (getting picked by the coach) we are wrong. Logically if most people believe one thing to be greater, but a large minority believe another to be greater, the difference must indeed be small.

Also, while we're discussing it. How good Jackson is at playing 10, is not a perfect measurement of how good he is at playing 22. In a large minority of cases the 22 will not end up coming on at 10.

MJohnston wrote: »

That argument is completely negated by the fact that Jackson is ON THE BENCH for Ulster.

Didn't realise he was benching though! So my theory above holds no weight. Turns out Joe just thinks Mads is a better bench option.

molloyjh

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't think so either and I would be similarly surprised.

As far as I'm concerned (and no one in position of authority cares about my concerns) the above makes Payne just as much of a risk as McCloskey though.

Is it really as much of a risk? I agree both are risks, but Payne is proven at this level while McCloskey isn't.

ClanofLams wrote: »

Sexton is far more likely to have to come off than Henshaw/Payne, although obviously hoping he will play the full 80.

What makes you say that? Payne was injured in the 2014 AIs before Sexton was, both made it through the 2015 6 Nations and then Payne was injured before Sexton was in the RWC. Paynes injury profile with Ireland hasn't actually been that good at all and history would tell us he's more likely to get injured than Sexton.

Quint2010

Ireland gone out from -3 to -2 in the betting...

Hagz

Jackson is so overrated it's a joke. If he was as good as some people make him out to be he'd have more caps and wouldn't be riding pine tomorrow night for Ulster. The kid has the luxury of having the best back-line around him and also a hybrid 9 who takes a lot of responsibility off his shoulders. He's a decent 10 but that's all he is. The difference between himself and Madigan is marginal to say the least and with Madigan's kicking rep, it's no surprise he's on the bench.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I wonder if Fitzgerald's injury helped Madigan's chances

I would say so tbh. Luke covers 11-15 better than anyone else and his inclusion probably would have negated Madigans versatility.

awec

Hagz wrote: »

Jackson is so overrated it's a joke. If he was as good as some people make him out to be he'd have more caps and wouldn't be riding pine tomorrow night for Ulster. The kid has the luxury of having the best back-line around him and also a hybrid 9 who takes a lot of responsibility off his shoulders. He's a decent 10 but that's all he is. The difference between himself and Madigan is marginal to say the least and with Madigan's kicking rep, it's no surprise he's on the bench.

People still peddling this myth?

CMOTDibbler

errlloyd wrote: »

Didn't realise he was benching though! So my theory above holds no weight. Turns out Joe just thinks Mads is a better bench option.

There is also the (remote) possibility that Jackson could bench for Ulster and Ireland.

MJohnston

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

There is also the (remote) possibility that Jackson could bench for Ulster and Ireland.

I was wondering about this (purely in the hypothetical sense, because I think it's exceptionally unlikely) - does anyone know the rules?

former total

MJohnston wrote: »

I was wondering about this (purely in the hypothetical sense, because I think it's exceptionally unlikely) - does anyone know the rules?

No rule against it at all, and I'd imagine Jackson will be present on Sunday in case of emergency, but he won't be named in the Ireland squad tomorrow.

awec

MJohnston wrote: »

I was wondering about this (purely in the hypothetical sense, because I think it's exceptionally unlikely) - does anyone know the rules?

Not against the rules but definitely won't happen.

CMOTDibbler

MJohnston wrote: »

I was wondering about this (purely in the hypothetical sense, because I think it's exceptionally unlikely) - does anyone know the rules?

There aren't any?

An injury could happen at any time and any player could be called up. France have made an art form of finishing the six nations with an entirely different XV than the one they started with*.






*Slight exaggeration here, but just a slight one mind.

Hagz

awec wrote: »

People still peddling this myth?

It's not a myth in the slightest. Piennar is lauded for his game-management and he has a regular positive influence for Ulster when it comes to kicking for territory. There's a reason why he's comfortable slotting in at 10. He's aware of where the space in the back-field is and has the kicking game to exploit it.

jacothelad

]

Hagz wrote: »

Jackson is so overrated it's a joke. If he was as good as some people make him out to be he'd have more caps and wouldn't be riding pine tomorrow night for Ulster. The kid has the luxury of having the best back-line around him and also a hybrid 9 who takes a lot of responsibility off his shoulders. He's a decent 10 but that's all he is. The difference between himself and Madigan is marginal to say the least and with Madigan's kicking rep, it's no surprise he's on the bench.

awec wrote: »

People still peddling this myth?

Yes, it's surprising how many people still trot out this drivel about Pienaar. he's a 9. He passes the ball. he box kicks. Jackson does the 10 bit but of course that doesn't suit the narrative of some. Jackson actually plays more games with Marshall at 9 in most seasons. Also, surely the Ireland back line is better than the Ulster one..QED...or the Ulster back line would be synonymous with the Ireland one. Imagine then how much better still Jackson would be with the stellar talents of Zebo, Dave, Rob, Keet etc....... and behind a pack who actually have a back row, than having to drag mediocre guys like McCloskey, Olding, Marshall, Trimble, Bowe, Scholes and Payne around the pitch. Lacks logic. Maybe Jackson makes them look good. LOL

Hagz

You can drone on and on all you like, but he's still on the bench for Ulster tomorrow.

awec

Hagz wrote: »

You can drone on and on all you like, but he's still on the bench for Ulster tomorrow.

Do you honestly think this has any bearing on anything?

sullivlo

Not sure the exact rules and whether they apply to Ireland internationals, but in womens AIL1, a player cannot play in two games in 24 hours. We had fielding issues when our interpros were away so our seconds lined out for our firsts and couldn't play again that weekend.

CMOTDibbler

Is there some sort of alarm bell that goes off in HQ to warn Ulster posters of any perceived slight to an Ulster player?

Hagz

awec wrote: »

Do you honestly think this has any bearing on anything?

What kind of a question is that? He isn't in the Irish set-up once again. Time and time again other options are preferred to him. He clearly isn't at the level you and others regard him to be.

molloyjh

Just for the record, assuming SOB and Rob are both out, my selection for the weekend would be:

McGrath Best Furlong
Toner McCarthy
Ruddock Heaslip TOD

Murray Sexton
McCloskey Henshaw
Earls Payne Trimble

Strauss, Cronin, White, Ryan, Stander, Reddan, Madigan, D Kearney

While I may have argued the point re McCloskey not being a nailed on starter I do think with Rob unavailable we need to seriously look at Payne to FB. I wouldn't be selecting Zebo at all personally as he just hasn't done enough for Munster or Ireland outside some good work against the minnows in the RWC. That decision at FB has serious bearings on the rest of the back line. The only other questionable calls are Furlong ahead of White and TOD starting ahead of Stander. Personally I think Furlong brings more to the table than White and TOD is more of a natural 7 than Stander is. I think that side also has a good shot at winning while also bringing in guys like Furlong and McCloskey.

All that said I'm not so myopic in my views that I can't see the logic in other selections. And at this stage I've seen very little from Joe to suggest he manages these things badly. So I'm willing to put my faith in him until such a time as there is a logical and reasonable case for not putting my faith in him. I might disagree with certain selections, but I also acknowledge that I'm doing so with a fraction of the knowledge of and access to information of the players and the game. I think absolute statements that are being flung about here are just that though. Myopic. And I think some should take a breath, step back and look at things again with a more critical mind. Joe hasn't been as successful as he is by chance. There's reason in what he does. And if people can't see the reason then that's not on Joe.

Mahatma Geansai

Hagz wrote: »

It's not a myth in the slightest. Piennar is lauded for his game-management and he has a regular positive influence for Ulster when it comes to kicking for territory. There's a reason why he's comfortable slotting in at 10. He's aware of where the space in the back-field is and has the kicking game to exploit it.

If only Ireland had a 9 with a world-class kicking game that could play alongside Jackson. Oh, wait...

Madigan can't even nail down a spot in what's probably the worst Leinster backline in recent memory. That doesn't say too much about him, does it?

jacothelad

Hagz wrote: »

You can drone on and on all you like, but he's still on the bench for Ulster tomorrow.

Lucky for Jackson then. He can't be blamed if things go bosoms up.

ClanofLams

molloyjh wrote: »

Is it really as much of a risk? I agree both are risks, but Payne is proven at this level while McCloskey isn't.



What makes you say that? Payne was injured in the 2014 AIs before Sexton was, both made it through the 2015 6 Nations and then Payne was injured before Sexton was in the RWC. Paynes injury profile with Ireland hasn't actually been that good at all and history would tell us he's more likely to get injured than Sexton.

It's a pretty small sample size and if you factor in their fitness at club/provincial level over the same period it's fairly obvious Sexton is the greater concern. Also Sexton missed the first game of the 2015 6Ns that Keatley played so he wasn't available for the entire tournament.

Mahatma Geansai

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

If only Ireland had a 9 with a world-class kicking game that could play alongside Jackson. Oh, wait...

Madigan can't even nail down a spot in what's probably the worst Leinster backline in recent memory. That doesn't say too much about him, does it?

It says he's behind the player that's starting for Ireland at his club too.

Hagz

jacothelad wrote: »

]





Yes, it's surprising how many people still trot out this drivel about Pienaar. he's a 9. He passes the ball. he box kicks. Jackson does the 10 bit but of course that doesn't suit the narrative of some. Jackson actually plays more games with Marshall at 9 in most seasons. Also, surely the Ireland back line is better than the Ulster one..QED...or the Ulster back line would be synonymous with the Ireland one. Imagine then how much better still Jackson would be with the stellar talents of Zebo, Dave, Rob, Keet etc....... and behind a pack who actually have a back row, than having to drag mediocre guys like McCloskey, Olding, Marshall, Trimble, Bowe, Scholes and Payne around the pitch. Lacks logic. Maybe Jackson makes them look good. LOL

What are you even saying? Of course the Irish back-line is better than the Ulster one. It's the national side. It's supposed to be the sum of the best parts of the provinces. What point were you even trying to make?

awec

Hagz wrote: »

What kind of a question is that? He isn't in the Irish set-up once again. Time and time again other options are preferred to him. He clearly isn't at the level you and others regard him to be.

I was wondering what you meant by that.

Are you making reference to the fact he has been released, or trying to make a point about him benching instead of starting for Ulster?

awec

Hagz wrote: »

What are you even saying? Of course the Irish back-line is better than the Ulster one. It's the national side. It's supposed to be the sum of the best parts of the provinces. What point were you even trying to make?

He's saying this idea that Jackson only looks good cause he plays outside Pienaar and with the Ulster back line is total rubbish.

jacothelad

Hagz wrote: »

What are you even saying? Of course the Irish back-line is better than the Ulster one. It's the national side. It's supposed to be the sum of the best parts of the provinces. What point were you even trying to make?

You said that Jackson was made to look good because he was playing in a good back line.

"The kid has the luxury of having the best back-line around him and also a hybrid 9 who takes a lot of responsibility off his shoulders."

stephen_n

awec wrote: »

McCloskey is only a 12. Marshall can at least play 13.

Madigan McCloskey makes even less sense than Madigan Marshall.

Madigan Earls is most likely I reckon.

If Madigan is on the bench it won't be Marshall or McCloskey it will be either Zebo or Kearney depending on who starts at FB.

Neil3030

I can't see how Madigan gets the nod here. I can only presume it's for goal kicking, but is that even fair?. The flexibility argument doesn't even hold any more; in addition to 10, he covers centre and 15. Pretty much everyone in our backline will be a centre/15.

I'd much prefer seeing Jackson running a backline with 3 or 4 Ulster players in it.

Neil3030

I can't see how Madigan gets the nod here. I can only presume it's for goal kicking, but is that even fair?. The flexibility argument doesn't even hold any more; in addition to 10, he covers centre and 15. Pretty much everyone in our backline will be a centre/15.

I'd much prefer seeing Jackson running a backline with 3 or 4 Ulster players in it.

Hagz

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

If only Ireland had a 9 with a world-class kicking game that could play alongside Jackson. Oh, wait...

Madigan can't even nail down a spot in what's probably the worst Leinster backline in recent memory. That doesn't say too much about him, does it?

Conor Murray doesn't have the tactical kicking game of Ruan Pienaar Mahatma..

As for your second point. Madigan is equally nothing more than a decent fly-half. You seem to think I'm defending in Madigan's corner when in actuality I'm attacking Jackson's. Both are nothing more than stand ins. Madigan doesn't deserve to start for Leinster. Sexton is a better out-half than he will ever be, Fitzgerald is a better 12 and Rob Kearney is a better 15.

awec

Neil3030 wrote: »

I can't see how Madigan gets the nod here. I can only presume it's for goal kicking, but is that even fair?. The flexibility argument doesn't even hold any more; in addition to 10, he covers centre and 15. Pretty much everyone in our backline will be a centre/15.

I'd much prefer seeing Jackson running a backline with 3 or 4 Ulster players in it.

Madigan "covers" 15.

Let's be honest here, he's not even related to a test level fullback. I would rather re-jig the entire back line than have Madigan play at 15 for any length of time.

former total

Neil3030 wrote: »

I can't see how Madigan gets the nod here. I can only presume it's for goal kicking, but is that even fair?. The flexibility argument doesn't even hold any more; in addition to 10, he covers centre and 15. Pretty much everyone in our backline will be a centre/15.

It's not goal kicking. It's not flexibility.

It's because Joe thinks he's the better out half.

Agree or disagree, at some point people are going to have to accept that this is what Joe thinks.

Mr Tickle

Madigan starts at 15 and mcCloskey + winger-of-your-choice on the bench

molloyjh

Neil3030 wrote: »

I can't see how Madigan gets the nod here. I can only presume it's for goal kicking, but is that even fair?. The flexibility argument doesn't even hold any more; in addition to 10, he covers centre and 15. Pretty much everyone in our backline will be a centre/15.

I'd much prefer seeing Jackson running a backline with 3 or 4 Ulster players in it.

Mads would be used to cover 10, 12 and 15. By doing this we then don't need to disrupt the entire back line for an injury. Simples.

Mahatma Geansai

Neil3030 wrote: »

I can't see how Madigan gets the nod here. I can only presume it's for goal kicking, but is that even fair?. The flexibility argument doesn't even hold any more; in addition to 10, he covers centre and 15. Pretty much everyone in our backline will be a centre/15.

I'd much prefer seeing Jackson running a backline with 3 or 4 Ulster players in it.

Goal-kicking can't be the reason. If Joe selected based on goal-kicking, it would be Madigan and Jackson in the squad.

jacothelad

molloyjh wrote: »

Mads would be used to cover 10, 12 and 15. By doing this we then don't need to disrupt the entire back line for an injury. Simples.

Unless we get injury to 2 or more of those positions. Madigan is simply worth his place as a player...when he gets it right.

Hagz

awec wrote: »

I was wondering what you meant by that.

Are you making reference to the fact he has been released, or trying to make a point about him benching instead of starting for Ulster?

The former

jacothelad wrote: »

You said that Jackson was made to look good because he was playing in a good back line.

"The kid has the luxury of having the best back-line around him and also a hybrid 9 who takes a lot of responsibility off his shoulders."

Yeah.... So again, what point were you trying to make?

He is playing with the best provincial back-line. Do you disagree?

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

Madigan "covers" 15.

Let's be honest here, he's not even related to a test level fullback. I would rather re-jig the entire back line than have Madigan play at 15 for any length of time.

It's as well you're not the coach so. The game is far too structured these days for that not to be a major disruption. Especially given how often a FB is involved in a game compared to a centre.

Mahatma Geansai

molloyjh wrote: »

Mads would be used to cover 10, 12 and 15. By doing this we then don't need to disrupt the entire back line for an injury. Simples.

Tomas O'Leary has played wing (and maybe centre) for Munster. Lets select him on the bench while we are at it.

jacothelad

Hagz wrote: »

The former


Yeah.... So again, what point were you trying to make?

He is playing the best provincial back-line. Do you disagree?

Have another read at my post. Get all the way through it. Get to the bit about the Ireland back-line. you said he only looked good because of the backs. I asked how good would he look playing with an even better one....the Irish one. It's not rocket science.

Mahatma Geansai

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Tomas O'Leary has played wing (and maybe centre) for Munster. Lets select him on the bench while we are at it.

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

........ can't even nail down a spot in what's probably the worst ........... backline in recent memory. That doesn't say too much about him, does it?

Try to contradict your own logic less. It might allow some points actually register.

Riskymove

aimee1 wrote: »

Thats what i am getting at, we are literally changing close to half the match day squad which played france in october (if sob and rk are out its 10-11 changes). One or two calls will be made purely because its bare bones stuff.

I know I was agreeing with you:)

awec

Hagz wrote: »

The former


Yeah.... So again, what point were you trying to make?

He is playing with the best provincial back-line. Do you disagree?

You think the Ulster back line is better than the Ireland back line?

There's an interesting thought...

molloyjh

jacothelad wrote: »

Unless we get injury to 2 or more of those positions. Madigan is simply worth his place as a player...when he gets it right.

Well regardless of the make-up of the bench multiple injuries to outside backs is always going to present a problem. More-so in fact if Jackson is the 22.

Personally I do think Jackson is a better 10, even if his goal kicking isn't up to scratch. But I'm still not sure of that means I'd select him ahead of Madigan or not. For me it has to be Mads from the bench due to his versatility and his reliability from the tee. But to start I'd probably prefer Jackson. If he isn't doing the job then we can replace him, but I just feel he's a better 10 overall. I don't think Madigan has ever gotten the Irish back line moving the way Jackson did against Scotland back in 2013 for example.

Riskymove

awec wrote: »

Madigan "covers" 15.

Let's be honest here, he's not even related to a test level fullback. I would rather re-jig the entire back line than have Madigan play at 15 for any length of time.

more likely he would go to centre and one of them go to FB