Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I thought we lost because Madigan was selected over Jackson?

We actually lost because BOD didn't endorse McCloskey on twitter well enough.

molloyjh

leakyboots wrote: »

If so, and it was obvious to me in the stadium at the time in the early stages of the game when they seemed to have overlaps the whole time, is the management not culpable for sending the team out set up that way defensively? It's not like Argentina vastly overhauled their game for that match.

You can't change your entire defensive system in less than a week with a lack of defensive leaders in your side. It just can't be done. The simple truth is that the French game broke us. We lost too many important players to be able to really challenge Argentina.

sydthebeat

leakyboots wrote: »

If so, and it was obvious to me in the stadium at the time in the early stages of the game when they seemed to have overlaps the whole time, is the management not culpable for sending the team out set up that way defensively? It's not like Argentina vastly overhauled their game for that match.

we lost tommy bowe after 12 minutes... Luke Fitz came in which meant 3 positional switches !!!!

this meant we had a centre partnership playing for the first time, add onto that we were playing our reserve 10.

i dont think you appreciate the upheaval that causes in regards to systems.... in a RWC quarter final... its nightmare stuff

Podge_irl

leakyboots wrote: »

If so, and it was obvious to me in the stadium at the time in the early stages of the game when they seemed to have overlaps the whole time, is the management not culpable for sending the team out set up that way defensively? It's not like Argentina vastly overhauled their game for that match.

Absolutely. I think it would have been a lot different with Sexton and Payne in midfield (and probably SOB in the backrow) but they weren't there and so be it. When Argentina got the ball out to the wing as quickly as they did and in as much space as they did Ireland were toast. I certainly think the team could have approached the game better and it's perfectly reasonable to use it as a black mark against Schmidt & co. From where I'm sitting they still have a fair bit of credit in the bank though.

Bazzo

sydthebeat wrote: »

we lost tommy bowe after 12 minutes... Luke Fitz came in which meant 3 positional switches !!!!

this meant we had a centre partnership playing for the first time, add onto that we were playing our reserve 10.

i dont think you appreciate the upheaval that causes in regards to systems.... in a RWC quarter final... its nightmare stuff

? Fitzgerald came on to the left wing and Kearney moved to the right wing.

It's true that a lot of the defensive issues were team-wide that day though, Kearney often ended up being the last man.

jacothelad

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

It's weird, the logic some people seem to be going with is Jackson isn't a top class 10 and then they say the difference with Madigan is marginal, which implies he's not a top class 10 either. So if there's barely any difference between them why not pick the guy who has been playing really good rugby all season over the guy whose barely been playing any rugby at all?

Too logical....

wittycynic wrote: »

Yes, and he's gone well enough. But that doesn't make him a top class operator of comparable quality to some of the best in Europe, and he isn't pushing Johnny for a spot on the team.

When we, as a national side, get players of genuine top quality, like Henderson and Henshaw, they are fast tracked into the team (they are 23 and 22 respectively, and both nailed on starters when fit). By contrast, Paddy is usually omitted in favour of Ian Madigan, who most consider to be only a reasonably talented out half. Paddy is now 24, and if he is going to become something other than a stop gap solution until we find the next ROG or Sexton, he would want to start showing that quality pretty soon.

If Sexton gets injured, Jackson would start ahead of Madigan in all probability.

Larbre34 wrote: »

Horses for courses.

Wales are likely to dominate Ireland physically, I'd rather Madigan in that scenario than Jackson any day.

Yes, Jackson is looking very good this season in space and with a barbarian running game, but he does not cope with the world falling in on him.

Who does?

aimee1

sydthebeat wrote: »

we lost tommy bowe after 12 minutes... Luke Fitz came in which meant 3 positional switches !!!!

this meant we had a centre partnership playing for the first time, add onto that we were playing our reserve 10.

i dont think you appreciate the upheaval that causes in regards to systems.... in a RWC quarter final... its nightmare stuff

Fitz went to left wing. DK went to right wing. I know Fitz popped up in the centre a bit but it wasnt 3 switches, it was 1.

former total

jacothelad wrote: »

Too logical....
.

Flawed logic though. If Jackson had to compete with Sexton (or indeed, Gopperth) rather than a non-vintage Humphreys, he'd have a lot fewer minutes on the board. But in truth, both he and Madigan have played similar minutes this season so it's doubly flawed.

jacothelad wrote: »

If Sexton gets injured, Jackson would start ahead of Madigan in all probability.

I'm surprised that people are still so convinced of this after the World Cup.

My opinion anyway is that they are pretty close to each other. Just like most of all the other debates that consume this board, it's tight enough and the final call probably comes down to things we don't see.

bilston

former total wrote: »

Flawed logic though. If Jackson had to compete with Sexton, rather than a non-vintage Humphreys, he'd have a lot fewer minutes on the board. But in truth, both he and Madigan have played similar minutes this season so it's doubly flawed.



I'm surprised that people are still so convinced of this after the World Cup.

FT the WC was 4 months ago, since then Jackson has been playing really well week in week out while Madigan has been playing here and there.

And since the WC I would have thought that Jackson has played a lot more minutes than Madigan at out half.

irishbucsfan

bilston wrote: »

FT the WC was 4 months ago, since then Jackson has been playing really well week in week out while Madigan has been playing here and there.

And since the WC I would have thought that Jackson has played a lot more minutes than Madigan at out half.

Jackson has been far superior, that's really all that matters.

Madigan's versatility is what has him in the team.

Yeah_Right

Deleted User wrote: »

Earls' defence on the wing is very strong.

His instincts are spot on there. He struggles imo in the centre defensively because he's less certain and there's more space that he needs to mind.

When he burst onto the scene he wasn't a top notch defender (in an Ireland shirt) but gradually learned to use the touchline to great effect.

I don't think there's many issues with Earls' game at all once he's playing on the wing!

Fair enough. I just read "Earls is a strong defender", choked on my drink and had all these images flash through my mind of people going inside, outside and through Earls. They were probably when he was in the midfield though.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

former total wrote: »

Flawed logic though. If Jackson had to compete with Sexton (or indeed, Gopperth) rather than a non-vintage Humphreys, he'd have a lot fewer minutes on the board. But in truth, both he and Madigan have played similar minutes this season so it's doubly flawed.

Jackson has played twice as much rugby as Madigan at club level since the WC. Even if you add in WC game time I doubt it closes the gap that much either.

Jackson - 876 minutes.
Madigan - 490 minutes.

Madigan's minutes are actually closer to Henshaw's who has been out for nearly 2 months.

aimee1

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Jackson has played twice as much rugby as Madigan at club level since the WC. Even if you add in WC game time I doubt it closes the gap that much either.

Jackson - 876 minutes.
Madigan - 490 minutes.

Madigan's minutes are actually closer to Henshaw's who has been out for nearly 2 months.

Madigan has a few token minutes off the bench in a few games whereas PJ starts most of the time.

jacothelad

aimee1 wrote: »

Madigan has a few token minutes off the bench in a few games whereas PJ starts most of the time.

Yes but they're 'Madigan' minutes. Each one is worth approximately 2 of Jackson's.:D:D:D.

For what it's worth and to avoid any doubt I think Madigan should be in the 23 ahead of Jackson. He should be adding more to the team than he does as he is a real live wire player and has some great skills. I just chuckle at the contortions some people go through to come up with reason's why A should start and B is actually crap. For example A had a terrible game but it was because his back - line team mates let him down (Dave K.) - Jackson plays better than he actually plays (work that one out) because he plays in a better back line but if he played in an even better one he would be - well - even crappier.

former total

bilston wrote: »

FT the WC was 4 months ago, since then Jackson has been playing really well week in week out while Madigan has been playing here and there.

And since the WC I would have thought that Jackson has played a lot more minutes than Madigan at out half.

Or to put it another way, the World Cup is ONLY four months ago.

Again, Jackson's minutes for Ulster reflect the absence of competition as much as his own ability.

I'm not bigging up Madigan at all but the logic that people used to convince themselves that he's way out in front, would definitely start if Sexton was injured etc etc is fatally flawed and that's been borne out again today.

And then the fauxtrage that follows when the call goes exactly as any objective observer would have predicted, it bemuses me to be honest.

awec

former total wrote: »

Or to put it another way, the World Cup is ONLY four months ago.

Again, Jackson's minutes for Ulster reflect the absence of competition as much as his own ability.

I'm not bigging up Madigan at all but the logic that people used to convince themselves that he's way out in front, would definitely start if Sexton was injured etc etc is fatally flawed and that's been borne out again today.

And then the fauxtrage that follows when the call goes exactly as any objective observer would have predicted, it bemuses me to be honest.

Pffft! I'll not hear a bad word spoken about iHumph! Quality player.

Could do a job for Leinster, I swear.

molloyjh

jacothelad wrote: »

For example A had a terrible game but it was because his back - line team mates let him down (Dave K.)

Has anyone ever said this? People have said he had a bad game and wasn't helped by his team mates. I haven't seen anyone say he had a bad game because of his team mates.

MLC61

This is truly a "deckchairs on the Titanic' moment. Informed speculation is that Kearney is out and possibly Zebo in at full back.
Sean O"Brien may be out and Tommy O"Donnell playing.
And the argument rages about the substitute out half?

Stheno

MLC61 wrote: »

This is truly a "deckchairs on the Titanic' moment. Informed speculation is that Kearney is out and possibly Zebo in at full back.
Sean O"Brien may be out and Tommy O"Donnell playing.
And the argument rages about the substitute out half?

Go back about 200 posts and read from there
Your post is like groundhog day

MLC61

Stheno wrote: »

Go back about 200 posts and read from there
Your post is like groundhog day

I am assuming that the debate on the substitute out half selection is about a perceived injustice rather than for any fear that this selection may affect the outcome of the game?

MJohnston

sydthebeat wrote: »

we lost tommy bowe after 12 minutes... Luke Fitz came in which meant 3 positional switches !!!!

this meant we had a centre partnership playing for the first time, add onto that we were playing our reserve 10.

i dont think you appreciate the upheaval that causes in regards to systems.... in a RWC quarter final... its nightmare stuff

The thing with this argument, is that bizarrely enough, we actually staunched the bleeding after the 12 minute mark, at least until the second half. Bowe going off essentially coincided with our best period of play in the entire game

The Rape of Lucretia

jacothelad wrote: »

Too logical....


If Sexton gets injured, Jackson would start ahead of Madigan in all probability.


Who does?

Madigan for one if probably the prime example.
Best, Ruddock, Reddan, Trimble also probably.

The Rape of Lucretia

MLC61 wrote: »

This is truly a "deckchairs on the Titanic' moment. Informed speculation is that Kearney is out and possibly Zebo in at full back.
Sean O"Brien may be out and Tommy O"Donnell playing.
And the argument rages about the substitute out half?

Its a slam dunk Madigan. Versatility wins. And he can kick.
In an non fit Sexton scenario, it is equally clear - Paddy starts, Madigan still wears the tracksuit.
Still important to discuss it though and helps keep us away from the truly terrifying Zebo at fullback rumour/troll.

Pink Fairy

Reports today that Jackson doesn't make the matchday 23

The Rape of Lucretia

Podge_irl wrote: »

Dave Kearney had a terrible game against Argentina but a huge amount of the fault also lies with players in midfield.

Which really means he didnt have a terrible game at all. You can only respond to the situation around you and the performance and team work of his compadres. If they were terrible, its even possible, playing the cards he was dealt, Dave had a fine game against The Argentine.

dubal

Jackson has been released back to Ulster I heard

edit: Its old news it seems

Pink Fairy

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Which really means he didnt have a terrible game at all. You can only respond to the situation around you and the performance and team work of his compadres. If they were terrible, its even possible, playing the cards he was dealt, Dave had a fine game against The Argentine.

And if your aunt had balls

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Pink Fairy wrote: »

Reports today that Jackson doesn't make the matchday 23

dubal wrote: »

Jackson has been released back to Ulster I heard

The Rape of Lucretia

How can Joe just kill the Mads/Jackson debate like that on us at this early juncture ?????:eek:
WTF are we doing for the evening now? This is outrageous.

dubal

Well this a pretty reliable source on Jackson

http://www.ulsterrugby.com/fixtures/14560.php#.VrOmwvmLSUk

Though I guess benching on Friday wouldn't completely rule him out, it seems unlikely.

Dubal

ThisRegard

Pink Fairy wrote: »

Reports today that Jackson doesn't make the matchday 23

He's been released back to Ulster.

bilston

dubal wrote: »

Well this a pretty reliable source on Jackson

http://www.ulsterrugby.com/fixtures/14560.php#.VrOmwvmLSUk

Though I guess benching on Friday wouldn't completely rule him out, it seems unlikely.

Dubal

Tickle Me Elmo is being sarky. The news on PJ broke about 6 hours ago.

For what it's worth I can understand the decision to go with Madigan even though I disagree with it.

For me versatility is all well and good but if you think about Madigan is our 3rd best out half (some will say 2nd in fairness), probably our 5th choice centre and maybe our 4th or 5th choice FB. Is that the sort of versatility that we aspire to?

Obviously if you feel Madigan is our 2nd best out half then it is a moot argument. But given the versatility of Payne, Earls, Zebo and Henshaw I think we should just pick our next best 10 and be done with it. As I said maybe Joe has picked his second best 10.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

bilston wrote: »

Tickle Me Elmo is being sarky. The news on PJ broke about 6 hours ago.

I was going for mildly humorous.

CMOTDibbler

leakyboots wrote: »

I think some of it stems from BOD's hatchet job on Earls in the media, similar to this 'Earls can't pass myth' that stemmed from Earls passing into touch when BOD couldn't keep up with him and BOD bawling him out of it publicly on the pitch. Great and all as he was as a player, there's something a bit bitter about him as a man or at least he comes across that way sometimes.

Well that's an interesting slant on it.

Well done that man.

Stheno

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

How can Joe just kill the Mads/Jackson debate like that on us at this early juncture ?????:eek:
WTF are we doing for the evening now? This is outrageous.

We'll just have to resume the "zebo at full back shocker!" Discussion

Pink Fairy

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I was going for mildly humorous.

I was going for mischevious

wp_rathead

Stheno wrote: »

We'll just have to resume the "zebo at full back shocker!" Discussion

Plus I might start a Dillane vs Ryan debate for the craic

Stheno

Pink Fairy wrote: »

I was going for mischevious

We just thought you were being a bit slow :pac:

Stheno

wp_rathead wrote: »

Plus I might start a Dillane vs Ryan debate for the craic

Ah marmion versus boss for the crack :pac:

Pink Fairy

Stheno wrote: »

We just thought you were being a bit slow :pac:

Well... You created me mom!!

Podge_irl

wp_rathead wrote: »

Plus I might start a Dillane vs Ryan debate for the craic

I don't think I've ever seen Dillane play because no one gives a **** about Connacht.

The Rape of Lucretia

Stheno wrote: »

We'll just have to resume the "zebo at full back shocker!" Discussion

My mind is still in 'tilt' over that curveball and can not move on to process that information yet. It may mean I have a couple of tickets for Sunday spare.

Everyone will be up in arms saying the obvious thing for Joe to have done was to have moved Madigan to 15 which also makes room for Jackson on the bench. Everyone's a winner.

Stheno

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

My mind is still in 'tilt' over that curveball and can not move on to process that information yet. It may mean I have a couple of tickets for Sunday spare.

Everyone will be up in arms saying the obvious thing for Joe to have done was to have moved Madigan to 15 which also makes room for Jackson on the bench. Everyone's a winner.

Have we not exhausted the subject this afternoon?

This place is like seeing the emotional cycle of change being played out for real

By the time the team is announced tomorrow we'll all have hit acceptance

former total

Stheno wrote: »

Ah marmion versus boss for the crack :pac:

It's a shame Boss got injured there a while back, it would have been epic if he was picked.

wp_rathead

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't think I've ever seen Dillane play because no one gives a **** about Connacht.

......ah that's end of that debate

awec

So the ref on Sunday is Garces.

*bites tongue*

Stheno

awec wrote: »

So the ref on Sunday is Garces.

*bites tongue*

He always strikes me as a sloppy ref

Is he on your most unwanted list?

awec

Stheno wrote: »

He always strikes me as a sloppy ref

Is he on your most unwanted list?

Oh now Stheno, I won't be drawn down that road.

All I'll say is I'm surprised Garces is free to referee us this weekend, I was sure he'd be togging out for Saracens on Sunday.

Zzippy

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't think I've ever seen Dillane play because no one gives a **** about Connacht.

Stheno

awec wrote: »

Oh now Stheno, I won't be drawn down that road.

All I'll say is I'm surprised Garces is free to referee us this weekend, I was sure he'd be togging out for Saracens on Sunday.

It was a genuine question I only remember you dislike Clancy/lacey