Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

Podge_irl

kilns wrote: »

Its more his defending which should be a worry

Wasn't exactly Kearney's strongest suit either (well, tackling rather than defence)

His positioning won't be as good obviously but honestly the biggest problems we have are going to be in the front 5 I would think. Get on top/parity there and we have a shot.

kilns

kilns wrote: »

Its more his defending which should be a worry

Zebo's defending is exceptional, massively better in defence than the "Kearney Brothers".

kilns

Podge_irl wrote: »

Wasn't exactly Kearney's strongest suit either (well, tackling rather than defence)

His positioning won't be as good obviously but honestly the biggest problems we have are going to be in the front 5 I would think. Get on top/parity there and we have a shot.

I still think if Madigan concentrated on that position he would be fantastic there, but that ship has sailed

kilns

Deleted User wrote: »

Zebo's defending is exceptional, massively better in defence than the "Kearney Brothers".

Quote of the day!

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Zebo's defending is exceptional, massively better in defence than the "Kearney Brothers".

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Here is a great example of Dreamboat Dave's lack of pace and poor tackling.

How he ever got capped!

Zzippy

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Also, why persist with this total blanking of Payne's substantial history of playing centre? AFAIK, he's played centre in every team he's ever played for. He was captain and centre for his provincial side; Northland for years.

He has also played fullback a lot. His last season in NZ he played centre 11 times and fullback 6 times for the Blues, although with Toeava at fullback a lot of the time it's not hard to see why he played 13. It's not unreasonable of people to consider him a better 15 than a 13, although he is a very accomplished 13 too.

Zzippy

Deleted User wrote: »

Zebo's defending is exceptional, massively better in defence than the "Kearney Brothers".

OK, we've had enough of this. You can put posters on ignore if you have no time for their opinions, but that's enough of the sarcastic put-downs. I could quote a dozen more posts so don't think it's this one that is out of order. This is a general warning to everyone, I could be quoting a lot more of you and issuing warnings, but some of us have work to do. Zero tolerance starts now. No more provincial bickering. Respond to inflammatory posts and you will be treated just the same.

Final warning.

CMOTDibbler

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

It's logical because of the timing of Kearney's injury. It's frustrating because there were other options available.

I'm not a great fan of moving players around the pitch without a really good long term reason for it. One injury should always mean just one replacement and not a couple unless absolutely necessary.

If anyone should be moved to full back, then it would be Payne on the basis that McCloskey/Henshaw is the long term centre pairing. As it stands, Zebo is the current full back replacement having had the most starts in that position in the last six months, so it makes sense to put him in there and not have more reshuffles going on.

If McCloskey is going to get in the squad, it should be in the most controlled way possible to mitigate any issues he may have.

penybont exile

It's been interesting reading / listening to all the debate, abuse, angst etc. over the last few days both on here and in the Irish rugby media in general.

In my twelve years living here I don't think I've ever witnessed such pessimism going into this fixture be it in Dublin, Cardiff or elsewhere.

IMO this game is 50/50. Wales have the team do to the job but that's no guarantee that it will get done. 15 blokes against 15 blokes ..... You guys at home, the weather looking bad & players in your team with plenty to prove.

The X over Y debates on here are largely irrelevant in my book. This game is going to be determined by the forward battle and a "no backward step" attitude from 1 to 15 (or 23). Conditions will make this a war ..... The loser will be the team that blinks first .......

irishbucsfan

Zzippy wrote: »

He has also played fullback a lot. His last season in NZ he played centre 11 times and fullback 6 times for the Blues, although with Toeava at fullback a lot of the time it's not hard to see why he played 13. It's not unreasonable of people to consider him a better 15 than a 13, although he is a very accomplished 13 too.

Only played fullback when Toeava was out. He was favoured at 13. As he always is, because it's a hugely important position and he's very very good at it.

Riskymove

penybont exile wrote: »

In my twelve years living here I don't think I've ever witnessed such pessimism going into this fixture be it in Dublin, Cardiff or elsewhere.

in my experience we are always either world beaters or completely useless

there is usually no inbetween in the Irish outlook

former total

Zzippy wrote: »

He has also played fullback a lot. His last season in NZ he played centre 11 times and fullback 6 times for the Blues, although with Toeava at fullback a lot of the time it's not hard to see why he played 13. It's not unreasonable of people to consider him a better 15 than a 13, although he is a very accomplished 13 too.

The key thing about Payne is not whether he's a better 15 than a 13 - that doesn't really matter.

The deciding factor was always going to be how critical Payne is to Joe's game plan at 13 and how he holds things together in terms of the shape and structure of the team. The Argentina game basically meant there was zero chance of Payne being dropped or moved IMO.

CMOTDibbler

Zzippy wrote: »

He has also played fullback a lot. His last season in NZ he played centre 11 times and fullback 6 times for the Blues, although with Toeava at fullback a lot of the time it's not hard to see why he played 13. It's not unreasonable of people to consider him a better 15 than a 13, although he is a very accomplished 13 too.

Mostly I suspect because he's played so much at full back for Ulster.

I'm not saying he's not a full back by the way, just that the constant referring to him as a full back playing centre is frustrating because it's just not true.

Zzippy

former total wrote: »

The key thing about Payne is not whether he's a better 15 than a 13 - that doesn't really matter.

The deciding factor was always going to be how critical Payne is to Joe's game plan at 13 and how he holds things together in terms of the shape and structure of the team. The Argentina game basically meant there was zero chance of Payne being dropped or moved IMO.

Oh I agree, whether he's better at 15 or not is irrelevant if he's considered the best option at 13 - that's more the question that should be asked. Personally I'm ok with Payne at 13, but I don't think Henshaw at 13 weakens the team much, certainly not as much as Zebo at 15. Maybe a straight swap - McCloskey for Henshaw and Henshaw for Kearney would have been a better option.

BTW, I wouldn't hold the Argentina game up as an example for any of our players or the structure of our team. If anything it should be a catalyst for change.

gamma001

Zzippy wrote: »

BTW, I wouldn't hold the Argentina game up as an example for any of our players or the structure of our team. If anything it should be a catalyst for change.

He means the defensive performance during the Argentina game shows how important Payne is to Ireland at 13, and I'd 100% agree.

edit: rereading, I think that might be what your getting at but i'm not sure.

Zzippy

gamma001 wrote: »

He means the defensive performance during the Argentina game shows how important Payne is to Ireland at 13, and I'd 100% agree.

D'oh! Brain fart here, had forgotten Payne was out for that game...

CMOTDibbler

Zzippy wrote: »

D'oh! Brain fart here, had forgotten Payne was out for that game...

Really?

A bit like the New Zealand game that never happened?

former total

gamma001 wrote: »

He means the defensive performance during the Argentina game shows how important Payne is to Ireland at 13, and I'd 100% agree.

Yeah, exactly. Pushing Payne back to 15 makes him more peripheral to the overall effort and that's not what Joe wants at all.

CMOTDibbler

former total wrote: »

Yeah, exactly. Pushing Payne back to 15 makes him more peripheral to the overall effort and that's not what Joe wants at all.

Also having one of your best defenders at full back is pretty poor use of resources.

molloyjh

case885 wrote: »

That doesn't equate to much of a difference between the two, I'd hold Ryan's pedigree at international much higher than McCarthy's form for Leinster.
I think if dillane had that bit more experience we'd see him on the bench with Ryan starting.

I agree with your assessment of Ryan vs McCarthy and have said the very same myself a couple of times already. But Ryans pedigree is ultimately irrelevant if he's playing badly, which he is at the moment. He's been behind Foley and Chisholm for Munster don't forget.

I've no idea why Ryan would start ahead of McCarthy if Dillane was fit, but wouldn't if Dillane wasn't fit.

molloyjh

penybont exile wrote: »

IMO this game is 50/50.

It's too late to start appeasing the mocker Gods now PE. They still remember what you said only the other day.....

penybont exile wrote: »

I would never under estimate an Irish team playing at home ........

.... however if Wales lose to that line-up next week I'd be extremely disappointed.

Rightwing

penybont exile wrote: »

It's been interesting reading / listening to all the debate, abuse, angst etc. over the last few days both on here and in the Irish rugby media in general.

In my twelve years living here I don't think I've ever witnessed such pessimism going into this fixture be it in Dublin, Cardiff or elsewhere.

IMO this game is 50/50. Wales have the team do to the job but that's no guarantee that it will get done. 15 blokes against 15 blokes ..... You guys at home, the weather looking bad & players in your team with plenty to prove.

The X over Y debates on here are largely irrelevant in my book. This game is going to be determined by the forward battle and a "no backward step" attitude from 1 to 15 (or 23). Conditions will make this a war ..... The loser will be the team that blinks first .......

Bit of reality creeping in now. The Schmidt era has hit serious potholes, then throw in a key retirement, and a few injuries. But no team in the 6N stands out that you could say with any degree of certainty that will be able to capitalise on it. Wales look best positioned to do so with wily Gatland at the helm, they will heavily target any perceived weaknesses in the Irish set up.

penybont exile

molloyjh wrote: »

It's too late to start appeasing the mocker Gods now PE. They still remember what you said only the other day.....

I don't think those two statements are mutually exclusive.

Trust me I'm disappointed whenever we lose to Ireland and whenever we've lost to any 6N opposition especially post 2005.

aimee1

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

I generally try to avoid responding to the group posters who actively pick on and bully me.

However, I would have liked to see the following:

McGrath, Best, White;
Toner, Ryan;
Stander, TOD, Heaslip.

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

Replacements:
Cronin, Cronin, Furlong, Dillane, Ruddock, Marmionn, Jackson, Zebo.

That team isnt too far from the one selected and the differences as picked have logic behind them

1. McCarthy is in far better form. Dillane is unrealistic when we are missing so many players as we need some level of continuity. Ryan has been either injured or playing poorly but he must have shown something in training to merit a bench spot.

2. Midfield was always going to be Henshaw-Payne. With Murray and Sexton inside them. It has a history together, the only real combination from last years 6n. I would like to see McCloskey get a run but its perfectly understandable to see the 9-10-12-13 as picked by JS.

3. Jackson is unlucky to miss out but Madigan's ability to fit into 10/12/15 for the last 20 is understandable why he got the 22 shirt. Its easy to pick a team on the interweb forum but JS has to pick a 23 in reality and there is judgement calls to be made. There is consequences for him as coach which none of us on here have to consider.

4. Once RK was ruled out it was always going to be Zebo at full back. Its clear JS sees him as the backup to RK for now and wants to minimize the disruption to the backline.

mfceiling

Zebo at 15....hope he remembers where to be on the pitch and how to tackle. I reckon we will now see why Rob K is our number one full back. Will Zebo be the super counter attacker that Rob isn't? I don't think so.

Delighted to see Stander there. If he brings his club form then Wales will have their hands full trying to stop him.

Overall we look very light in places but Joe is no dozer and we'll be ready for action come Sunday.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I was listening to the Second Captains 6 Nations special there and they were asking Shane Horgan about how maybe for the first time in his Ireland reign people are beginning to question Joe Schmidt, especially since the World Cup.

It's kind of a strange thing though. The World Cup was the first tournament under Schmidt that we did "badly" in, I mean we should never have thought we were going to win it but making the SF was a realistic goal. But the thing is that most of the decisions made for the WC that people now question were ones forced on Schmidt. He's the same guy who made the decisions that won us back to back 6 Nations, so it just feels a bit weird that people are now so anxious to question his decisions. I mean what decisions/choices has he made where he genuinely had a lot of options and took the wrong one?

Everything about the Argentina game was forced on him. Really the only choice he had there was Madigan v Jackson and as much as I prefer Jackson I don't think his presence in those opening 20 minutes would have changed how Argentina came out of the blocks. Maybe you could argue Trimble should have been included in the squad but even then, at the time of selection, he was a doubt, and chances are his inclusion wouldn't have changed anything anyway.

I'm not advocating blind devotion to the way of Joe, it just seems kind of strange that all of a sudden he's open to criticism and a lot of people are taking the opportunity to do it. I suppose that's what happens when you lose, regardless of the circumstances of the loss. If we'd lost the 6 Nations on the last day last season I'm sure the criticism would have started before the World Cup.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I was listening to the Second Captains 6 Nations special there and they were asking Shane Horgan about how maybe for the first time in his Ireland reign people are beginning to question Joe Schmidt, especially since the World Cup.

It's kind of a strange thing though. The World Cup was the first tournament under Schmidt that we did "badly" in, I mean we should never have thought we were going to win it but making the SF was a realistic goal. But the thing is that most of the decisions made for the WC that people now question were ones forced on Schmidt. He's the same guy who made the decisions that won us back to back 6 Nations, so it just feels a bit weird that people are now so anxious to question his decisions. I mean what decisions/choices has he made where he genuinely had a lot of options and took the wrong one?

Everything about the Argentina game was forced on him. Really the only choice he had there was Madigan v Jackson and as much as I prefer Jackson I don't think his presence in those opening 20 minutes would have changed how Argentina came out of the blocks. Maybe you could argue Trimble should have been included in the squad but even then, at the time of selection, he was a doubt, and chances are his inclusion wouldn't have changed anything anyway.

I'm not advocating blind devotion to the way of Joe, it just seems kind of strange that all of a sudden he's open to criticism and a lot of people are taking the opportunity to do it. I suppose that's what happens when you lose, regardless of the circumstances of the loss. If we'd lost the 6 Nations on the last day last season I'm sure the criticism would have started before the World Cup.

case885

molloyjh wrote:

I've no idea why Ryan would start ahead of McCarthy if Dillane was fit, but wouldn't if Dillane wasn't fit.

If dillane had international experience then he'd be a more viable option for the bench, nothing to do with whether he's fit or not.
I think it's either start or drop out of the 23 with McCarthy because he'd never last if he had to be brought off the bench early in a game.

The Black Stags

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I was listening to the Second Captains 6 Nations special there and they were asking Shane Horgan about how maybe for the first time in his Ireland reign people are beginning to question Joe Schmidt, especially since the World Cup.

It's kind of a strange thing though. The World Cup was the first tournament under Schmidt that we did "badly" in, I mean we should never have thought we were going to win it but making the SF was a realistic goal. But the thing is that most of the decisions made for the WC that people now question were ones forced on Schmidt. He's the same guy who made the decisions that won us back to back 6 Nations, so it just feels a bit weird that people are now so anxious to question his decisions. I mean what decisions/choices has he made where he genuinely had a lot of options and took the wrong one?

He had Cave as specialist centre cover (priority 13) and instead played a wing in that position.
With defence in the outer channels being exposed we really needed to have someone in there who could read the game from the position.

But, yeah the problems were further in field - the ball shouldn't have gotten to the outer channels with such speed. Their forwards won the collisions and broke the gain line every time giving them quick ball.

Our guys just didn't look up for it on the day - when they really should have been.

MJohnston

From Joe's talk here http://www.the42.ie/schmidt-team-selection-combinations-doubt-2586932-Feb2016/?utm_source=twitter_self it's hard to say whether or not he thinks Payne is the best 13 in the team, but that he IS the best 13 who can slot into a centre partnership that has familiarity. I think most probably think McCloskey-Henshaw would be stronger, but for him, they had zero time together.

Might we see a McC-Marshall pairing for Italy?

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

MJohnston wrote: »

From Joe's talk here http://www.the42.ie/schmidt-team-selection-combinations-doubt-2586932-Feb2016/?utm_source=twitter_self it's hard to say whether or not he thinks Payne is the best 13 in the team, but that he IS the best 13 who can slot into a centre partnership that has familiarity. I think most probably think McCloskey-Henshaw would be stronger, but for him, they had zero time together.

Might we see a McC-Marshall pairing for Italy?

I'd imagine it very much depends on how the tournament is playing out. If we were to lose to Wales and then France next weekend I'd think we'll see a different team for Italy and Scotland than we would if we were trying to close out the championship.

JPNelsforearm

Dillane isnt big enough to fill in for McCarthy at tighthead, he doesnt have the ballast for international rugby, yet.


As for people questioning Schmidt, we have been pretty crap to watch for the majority of his tenure, playing the percentages and being really conservative in attack, the criticism was kept at bay by six nations wins, but we got beasted when it mattered, at the WC, the conservative gameplan was found out. If we return to that conservative game plan because we know it'll keep us competitive in the six nations I'll be very very disappointed. I want to enjoy watching rugby, I dont enjoy watching Joe Schmidts Ireland, its like a better, more efficient/accurate version of Kidneyball

irishbucsfan

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Dillane isnt big enough to fill in for McCarthy at tighthead, he doesnt have the ballast for international rugby, yet.


As for people questioning Schmidt, we have been pretty crap to watch for the majority of his tenure, playing the percentages and being really conservative in attack, the criticism was kept at bay by six nations wins, but we got beasted when it mattered, at the WC, the conservative gameplan was found out. If we return to that conservative game plan because we know it'll keep us competitive in the six nations I'll be very very disappointed. I want to enjoy watching rugby, I dont enjoy watching Joe Schmidts Ireland, its like a better, more efficient/accurate version of Kidneyball

"Crap to watch" is completely subjective of course.

CMOTDibbler

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

As for people questioning Schmidt, we have been pretty crap to watch for the majority of his tenure, playing the percentages and being really conservative in attack, the criticism was kept at bay by six nations wins, but we got beasted when it mattered, at the WC, the conservative gameplan was found out. If we return to that conservative game plan because we know it'll keep us competitive in the six nations I'll be very very disappointed. I want to enjoy watching rugby, I dont enjoy watching Joe Schmidts Ireland, its like a better, more efficient/accurate version of Kidneyball

I actually enjoy watching Ireland play rugby under Schmidt. For a start, we're winning a lot more games. Secondly, who didn't enjoy watching us take France apart at the RWC? Or beating England in the 6N last year?

Then there's the new players coming in: Henshaw, Henderson, McGrath, Furlong etc. and now Dillane, McCloskey, VdF and Stander.

It's all very exciting tbh.

Rightwing

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Dillane isnt big enough to fill in for McCarthy at tighthead, he doesnt have the ballast for international rugby, yet.


As for people questioning Schmidt, we have been pretty crap to watch for the majority of his tenure, playing the percentages and being really conservative in attack, the criticism was kept at bay by six nations wins, but we got beasted when it mattered, at the WC, the conservative gameplan was found out. If we return to that conservative game plan because we know it'll keep us competitive in the six nations I'll be very very disappointed. I want to enjoy watching rugby, I dont enjoy watching Joe Schmidts Ireland, its like a better, more efficient/accurate version of Kidneyball

And Kidney at his worst it must be said. Whatever happened to the style he used to employ at club level , eh?

Scythica

Ireland U20s and Wales U20s on tonight, I'm sure theres a U20s topic somewhere but can't find it.

Any potential superstars playing?

Scythica

Ireland U20s and Wales U20s on tonight, I'm sure theres a U20s topic somewhere but can't find it.

Any potential superstars playing?

CMOTDibbler

Rightwing wrote: »

And Kidney at his worst it must be said. Whatever happened to the style he used to employ at club level , eh?

I smell bait :P

But it wasn't all running rugby with Leinster. There was a lot of hard grunt work in the trenches as well. There is also the fact that there were some players in that squad that just aren't available to Ireland.

Zzippy

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Dillane isnt big enough to fill in for McCarthy at tighthead, he doesnt have the ballast for international rugby, yet.

Dillane looks lanky on tv but he's a big unit when you see him in the flesh. Interestingly, both are listed at 115kg on their respective team pages. I'd be more worried about his lack of experience than lack of bulk.

Rightwing

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I smell bait :P

But it wasn't all running rugby with Leinster. There was a lot of hard grunt work in the trenches as well. There is also the fact that there were some players in that squad that just aren't available to Ireland.

I agree with all of that, & similarly with Clermont's back play . J Schmidt comes across as a very nice chap and one most of us would like to see to do well, but his style of play has disappointed me greatly.

The Lost Sheep

Scythica wrote: »

Ireland U20s and Wales U20s on tonight, I'm sure theres a U20s topic somewhere but can't find it.

Any potential superstars playing?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=98622288#post98622288
Some very good players involved. Just look at last few posts in that thread

Zzippy wrote: »

Dillane looks lanky on tv but he's a big unit when you see him in the flesh. Interestingly, both are listed at 115kg on their respective team pages. I'd be more worried about his lack of experience than lack of bulk.

+1
Dillane is far from lanky in person. Have seen him play AIL and with Connacht this season and he's getting on to be a big unit...

The Rape of Lucretia

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

As for people questioning Schmidt, we have been pretty crap to watch for the majority of his tenure, playing the percentages and being really conservative in attack

We have been pretty excellemt to watch fr the entirety of his tenure. Playing the percentages is a euphemism for playing smart winning rugby. I dont know how you can possibly say they are conservative in attack. They completely eschew old style flash it across the 3/4 line, and 10 man shove it up the jumper rugby, in favour of a backline packed with kickers, chaser-pressurisers, and constestible contesters to a level no other team has tried before - innovative - and effective.

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

the criticism was kept at bay by six nations wins

Oh, so, if he didnt keep winning stuff, people would give him all the criticism that he deserves ?

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

but we got beasted when it mattered, at the WC, the conservative gameplan was found out.

It isnt the gameplan that failed there, it was the bad luck with injuries combined with IRFU pressure to get as far as he could in the tourny rather than go for the big prize and take out the NZ team with his fully fit A-team when he had the option.

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

I dont enjoy watching Joe Schmidts Ireland, its like a better, more efficient/accurate version of Kidneyball

There is no such thing as Kidneyball. The Kidney era was a shambles of non-coaching that doesnt even get to the level of a -ball moniker.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

McCloskey on the bench for Ulster. Last minute replacement for Scholes.

JPNelsforearm

Originally Posted by The Rape of Lucretia View Post
We have been pretty excellemt to watch fr the entirety of his tenure. Playing the percentages is a euphemism for playing smart winning rugby. I dont know how you can possibly say they are conservative in attack. They completely eschew old style flash it across the 3/4 line, and 10 man shove it up the jumper rugby, in favour of a backline packed with kickers, chaser-pressurisers, and constestible contesters to a level no other team has tried before - innovative - and effective.

kick chase rugby, yawn.

Oh, so, if he didnt keep winning stuff, people would give him all the criticism that he deserves ?

Absolutely, you can forgive a loss if we die on our feet, or are bedding in a new exciting gameplan and young players, winning playing "kick contestables" is crap rugby, its a regression.

It isnt the gameplan that failed there, it was the bad luck with injuries combined with IRFU pressure to get as far as he could in the tourny rather than go for the big prize and take out the NZ team with his fully fit A-team when he had the option.

It was the gameplan, we didnt have any ideas beyond kicking contestables, and Earls at 13, just lol, the chap cant defend. Terrible selection, injuries notwithstanding

There is no such thing as Kidneyball. The Kidney era was a shambles of non-coaching that doesnt even get to the level of a -ball moniker.

Im no Kidney fan, but he looked to get big runners, secure ruck ball and have ROG playing percentages. Its was crap and found out after we won the 6N, we are playing a more refined version of that, kick chase, hit rucks and play percentages, its not some rugby revolution like when he was at Leinster where we passed teams off the park.

JPNelsforearm

Zzippy wrote: »

Dillane looks lanky on tv but he's a big unit when you see him in the flesh. Interestingly, both are listed at 115kg on their respective team pages. I'd be more worried about his lack of experience than lack of bulk.

He does have a few inches on McCarthy, but tbf I havent seen Dillane in the flesh, he just looks a bit bambyish on tv, compared to say, even Quinn Roux

Bazzo

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

He does have a few inches on McCarthy, but tbf I havent seen Dillane in the flesh, he just looks a bit bambyish on tv, compared to say, even Quinn Roux

He's definitely not. At 115kg he's already bulkier than Ryan, Foley, Tuohy etc etc etc

Zzippy

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

He does have a few inches on McCarthy, but tbf I havent seen Dillane in the flesh, he just looks a bit bambyish on tv, compared to say, even Quinn Roux

He doesn't look as muscular on tv alright, but he's a massive pair of shoulders on him, carries plenty of weight on a big frame. He'll probably fill out another 2-3kg but he wouldn't want to get too big.

The Lost Sheep

Zzippy wrote: »

He doesn't look as muscular on tv alright, but he's a massive pair of shoulders on him, carries plenty of weight on a big frame. He'll probably fill out another 2-3kg but he wouldn't want to get too big.

Ultan has said in interviews that ultimate goal re his weight is about 120kg as Connacht S&C think he has the frame for it.

leakyboots

mfceiling wrote: »

Zebo at 15....hope he remembers where to be on the pitch and how to tackle. I reckon we will now see why Rob K is our number one full back. Will Zebo be the super counter attacker that Rob isn't? I don't think so.

.

:rolleyes:

Sounds like you've your mind made up and your knives sharpened already for a fella learning his trade in the position compared to a Lion's test 15.

As for his counter-attacking, he's only Munster's joint all-time try scorer at the age of 25 with 41 tries. Kearney has 38 for Leinster. (Heaslip has 36 - very impressive!)