Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

The Black Stags

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

No it doesn't. Seriously you're grasping at straws here since TOD only had 24 involvements and Toner 36 despite being subbed. TOD came on for SOB remember?

The bottom line here is that in two matches for which we have numbers, Toner has performed at least as well as many of the other players in the pack. It's certainly not a "consistent weakness in his game" as you originally characterised it.

Just trying to sharpen this discussion, no one is saying he's just standing around on the pitch with his arms folded in open play. It's not the amount of involvement - but the amount of effective involvements.

People generally see a 124kg player and think he should be tossing aside other smaller players at will.

sydthebeat

leakyboots wrote: »

I think you're being a bit deliberately obtuse here.

How do you rate Scotland's attacking performances compared to ours?

I've been banging the attacking fullback drum relentlessly here for a while (to great annoyance to some no doubt )

??????? :rolleyes::rolleyes:

zebo has played 80 and RK has played 80....

how could EITHER appear in most meters gained against guys who have played 160 minutes.

RK has always been high on meters run with ball in all competitions as thats a full backs bread and butter.
For example last season 6 nations RK was second behind Hogg for meters gained

Its a great showing from North though.

The Black Stags

The Black Stags wrote: »

Just trying to sharpen this discussion, no one is saying he's just standing around on the pitch with his arms folded in open play. It's not the amount of involvement - but the amount of effective involvements.

People generally see a 124kg player and think he should be tossing aside other smaller players at will.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLRlqrD5-zk

ClanofLams

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

No it doesn't. Seriously you're grasping at straws here since TOD only had 24 involvements and Toner 36 despite being subbed. TOD came on for SOB remember?

The bottom line here is that in two matches for which we have numbers, Toner has performed at least as well as many of the other players in the pack. It's certainly not a "consistent weakness in his game" as you originally characterised it.

You found one game where he performed well and one game where Kinsella said he was best of the rest ie himself and the front row. Of course being subbed made his numbers look better hence why sub props were above back rows. Or do you think he would have been as fresh in the last 15 as he was in the first 15????

For an international second row of a top tier nation his rucking is a consistent weakness. Perhaps I should have put it in that context bit I assumed that was implied.

leakyboots

leakyboots wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/sixnations/12159058/Six-Nations-2016-top-performers.html?frame=3575696
Rory Best is 4th worst hooker in terms of lineout accuracy.

4th worst so he's 3rd Best? You just didn't want to say best is something Best? Or you mean he's 4th best?

ClanofLams

ClanofLams wrote: »

You found one game where he performed well and one game where Kinsella said he was best of the rest ie himself and the front row. Of course being subbed made his numbers look better hence why sub props were above back rows. Or do you think he would have been as fresh in the last 15 as he was in the first 15????

For an international second row of a top tier nation his rucking is a consistent weakness. Perhaps I should have put it in that context bit I assumed that was implied.

2 games suggest otherwise
v France in WC - http://www.the42.ie/ireland-rucks-france-argentina-rwc-15-2394014-Oct2015/
v England in 6N2015 - http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-england-rucks-1971929-Mar2015/

Could you offer anything tangible beyond an opinion that might back up your assertion? We have two pieces of 'evidence' which go against it, and none that back it up.

Here's two others
v SA in 2014 - http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-south-africa-rucks-1776408-Nov2014/
v Italy in 6N2015 - http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-italy-rucks-1931855-Feb2015/

How does he do in those?

Scythica

Deleted User wrote: »

2 games suggest otherwise
v France in WC - http://www.the42.ie/ireland-rucks-france-argentina-rwc-15-2394014-Oct2015/
v England in 6N2015 - http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-england-rucks-1971929-Mar2015/

Could you offer anything tangible beyond an opinion that might back up your assertion? We have two pieces of 'evidence' which go against it, and none that back it up.

Here's two others
v SA in 2014 - http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-south-africa-rucks-1776408-Nov2014/
v Italy in 6N2015 - http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-italy-rucks-1931855-Feb2015/

How does he do in those?

How dare you come up with reasonable judgements and evidence to support them.

ClanofLams

[Deleted User] wrote: »

2 games suggest otherwise
v France in WC - http://www.the42.ie/ireland-rucks-france-argentina-rwc-15-2394014-Oct2015/
v England in 6N2015 - http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-england-rucks-1971929-Mar2015/

Could you offer anything tangible beyond an opinion that might back up your assertion? We have two pieces of 'evidence' which go against it, and none that back it up.

No. But I don't agree at all that an international second row outperforming the front row alone equals evidence that his rucking is up to standard and not sure on what basis you deem it evidence.

leakyboots

Basil3 wrote: »

4th worst so he's 3rd Best? You just didn't want to say best is something Best? Or you mean he's 4th best?

Yeah I was going to edit that myself... I meant Best is 2nd Worst... or I mean 4th Best... I mean... JUST THROW IT TO F**KING TONER!

CMOTDibbler

ClanofLams wrote: »

You found one game where he performed well and one game where Kinsella said he was best of the rest ie himself and the front row. Of course being subbed made his numbers look better hence why sub props were above back rows. Or do you think he would have been as fresh in the last 15 as he was in the first 15????

For an international second row of a top tier nation his rucking is a consistent weakness. Perhaps I should have put it in that context bit I assumed that was implied.

Toner is a regular 80 minute player. He can continue at the same level as evidenced by his stats in the French game that I referenced earlier. You are trying to argue black is white now .

A lock who is consistently performing as well or close to as well as a back row at ruck time is not consistently weak in that area. In the France game at the RWC he was the top performer for first arrival at rucks.

ClanofLams

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Here's two others
v SA in 2014 - http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-south-africa-rucks-1776408-Nov2014/
v Italy in 6N2015 - http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-italy-rucks-1931855-Feb2015/

How does he do in those?

Admittedly I scanned through them fairly quickly but based on the numbers he doesn't appear to have stood out in any way against SA. Against Italy he had a high number but looks like also had a reasonably high number of ineffective/present?

Mahatma Geansai

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

A lock who is consistently performing as well or close to as well as a back row at ruck time is not consistently weak in that area. In the France game at the RWC he was the top performer for first arrival at rucks.

A lock should be out-performing a backrow at ruck time. Locks should be making a tonne of close-in tackles and hitting a tonne of rucks. That is what they are there to do.

CMOTDibbler

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

A lock should be out-performing a backrow at ruck time. Locks should be making a tonne of close-in tackles and hitting a tonne of rucks. That is what they are there to do.

Are you sure? A metric tonne? I would have thought an imperial ton would be sufficient.

I'm not disagreeing with you, POC would regularly top the stats, but if he didn't I think we'd all be shocked. The discussion started with ClanofLams saying that Toner was consistently weak at rucking. The stats say otherwise. That he's not up to POC's standard is a given, but then who is?

bilston

leakyboots wrote: »

Yeah I was going to edit that myself... I meant Best is 2nd Worst... or I mean 4th Best... I mean... JUST THROW IT TO F**KING TONER!

How many lineouts have we actually lost over the two games? I can think of two. One in each game, unfortunately the one against France stands out because it was on their 22, it was the first lineout of the game and it was solely down to Rory's throw that we lost it in that it was a crooked throw TO France!

Apart from that I think our lineout has been pretty reliable?

jm08

Deleted User wrote: »

Look at Dave Foley at Munster for example. Two years ago he was all set to push into the setup and there were people on here saying he would be ahead of Toner by the 2015 6 nations as "absolute fact".

The 'absolute fact' is that Foley got injured in Champs Cup game v. Sale in Jan 2015 which meant he missed the rest of the season.:rolleyes:

stephen_n

awec wrote: »

Toner doesn't continually prove people wrong, you make it sound like he's a consistent top performer. He is capable of very good games but he is also capable of very average ones. He's a decent player, but isn't going to ever really worry top level opposition.

I think if Ireland had any half-decent depth at lock his place would be under serious scrutiny.

He is unquestionably great in the lineout and the maul, but around the field he very often completely ineffectual.

He was our top preforming forward through the 6 Nations last year, that's pretty consistent. It's also pretty consistent that like Heaslip it doesn't matter what he does, people made their minds up a long time ago.

aimee1

stephen_n wrote: »

He was our top preforming forward through the 6 Nations last year, that's pretty consistent. It's also pretty consistent that like Heaslip it doesn't matter what he does, people made their minds up a long time ago.

its just like the "Joe's attritional rugby style causes the injuries" when there is zero substance to it. Sure look at connacht, the supposedly best coached province this season have had major injuries including sending only 22 players to fulfil a Challenge cup fixture in december.

Mahatma Geansai

stephen_n wrote: »

He was our top preforming forward through the 6 Nations last year, that's pretty consistent. It's also pretty consistent that like Heaslip it doesn't matter what he does, people made their minds up a long time ago.

:eek: :pac:

I guess that's why POC won player of the tournament.

Toner is a grand player, but he isn't type of player you build a top international pack around.

Mahatma Geansai

jm08 wrote: »

The 'absolute fact' is that Foley got injured in Champs Cup game v. Sale in Jan 2015 which meant he missed the rest of the season.:rolleyes:

The board has spoken. Didn't you get the memo?

Foley (and Ryan) have been terrible for Munster. Just as Cronin was destroyed in the scrum against the French.

CMOTDibbler

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

:eek: :pac:

I guess that's why POC won player of the tournament.

Toner is a grand player, but he isn't type of player you build a top international pack around.

So he's one of the 'around' guys that the international pack is made of?

Pink Fairy

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

So he's one of the 'around' guys that the international pack is made of?

I think he means you miss top class players like Heaslip and SOB in big games, Toner not so much

awec

stephen_n wrote: »

He was our top preforming forward through the 6 Nations last year, that's pretty consistent. It's also pretty consistent that like Heaslip it doesn't matter what he does, people made their minds up a long time ago.

Was he? I am not so sure. He has good games in him, but is he a top class lock? No way, he is prone to hitting rucks like a new born giraffe running head first into a brick wall.

There is quite a massive distance between Heaslip and Toner.

Nobody (ok, some do, but not me) is saying he's rubbish. But nor is he as good as made out on here sometimes.

aimee1 wrote: »

its just like the "Joe's attritional rugby style causes the injuries" when there is zero substance to it. Sure look at connacht, the supposedly best coached province this season have had major injuries including sending only 22 players to fulfil a Challenge cup fixture in december.

It's hardly anything like that at all.

aimee1

awec wrote: »

It's hardly anything like that at all.

general assumptions with no basis in fact. Toner is terrible despite the evidence, the other day it was Joe's style of play is too attritional and causes injuries.

Its a pity really because we have a very good coach and a group of very good players who just lacked accuracy in two games so far and the knives are out in some quarters

awec

aimee1 wrote: »

general assumptions with no basis in fact. Toner is terrible despite the evidence, the other day it was Joe's style of play is too attritional and causes injuries.

Its a pity really because we have a very good coach and a group of very good players who just lacked accuracy in two games so far and the knives are out in some quarters

Who said he was terrible?

wp_rathead

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

The board has spoken. Didn't you get the memo?

Foley (and Ryan) have been terrible for Munster. Just as Cronin was destroyed in the scrum against the French.

Infairness Dave Foley has been dissapointing for Munster this season..

ClanofLams

aimee1 wrote: »

general assumptions with no basis in fact. Toner is terrible despite the evidence, the other day it was Joe's style of play is too attritional and causes injuries.

Its a pity really because we have a very good coach and a group of very good players who just lacked accuracy in two games so far and the knives are out in some quarters

Don't be lying about what people said. I said he was average at international level. Nobody mentioned terrible.

Yeah_Right

When Toner first started playing for Leinster, I thought he was a joke.i couldn't believe when he got selected for Ireland. Over the last 3 or 4 years he has proved me wrong and turned into a solid international class lock.

He will never be POC. Henderson will be a fair better player. At the moment though he is the best healthy lock in Ireland. If Ryan hadn't had a bad run of injuries he might have been ahead of Toner. He will do good (but not spectacular) job for Ireland until someone better comes along.

former total

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

The board has spoken. Didn't you get the memo?

Foley (and Ryan) have been terrible for Munster. Just as Cronin was destroyed in the scrum against the French.

You've misunderstood. He's not criticising Foley. He's criticising the absolute certainty with which a lot of people were saying that Foley would displace Toner very quickly, on the basis of very little evidence.

And that is a fair criticism.

awec

Yeah_Right wrote: »

When Toner first started playing for Leinster, I thought he was a joke.i couldn't believe when he got selected for Ireland. Over the last 3 or 4 years he has proved me wrong and turned into a solid international class lock.

He will never be POC. Henderson will be a fair better player. At the moment though he is the best healthy lock in Ireland. If Ryan hadn't had a bad run of injuries he might have been ahead of Toner. He will do good (but not spectacular) job for Ireland until someone better comes along.

Exactly, worded more eloquently than I!

I am impressed with how you use your words Yeah Right!

stephen_n

awec wrote: »

Was he? I am not so sure. He has good games in him, but is he a top class lock? No way, he is prone to hitting rucks like a new born giraffe running head first into a brick wall.

There is quite a massive distance between Heaslip and Toner.

Nobody (ok, some do, but not me) is saying he's rubbish. But nor is he as good as made out on here sometimes.



It's hardly anything like that at all.

Can't find the link but found it during the world cup when a certain Ryan fan was saying he'd be the starting second row in the RWC. One of the English papers ran an article about how important he was to us. They had rated him as our top performing forward in last years 6 Nations, don't no exactly what metric they were using was, but toner had the highest points.

salmocab

Which player are we going to argue about next week?

salmocab

salmocab wrote: »

Which player are we going to argue about next week?

I don't know, but the usual crowd will make some outrageously negative statement about him. Then a couple of people will provide evidence and information contradicting that. Then the first crowd will accuse them of being "dismissive, and patronising, and the hateful 8" or whatever but ultimately fail to back up any of the criticisms they put forward.

Then we will do the same the following week.

And again...

And...

A...

Rugbymad96

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Are you sure? A metric tonne? I would have thought an imperial ton would be sufficient.

I'm not disagreeing with you, POC would regularly top the stats, but if he didn't I think we'd all be shocked. The discussion started with ClanofLams saying that Toner was consistently weak at rucking. The stats say otherwise. That he's not up to POC's standard is a given, but then who is?

The last WC alone every SA lock had better stats than POC?

CMOTDibbler

Rugbymad96 wrote: »

The last WC alone every SA lock had better stats than POC?

None of your Johnny come lately facts now, get back to the start of the discussion and start there. :pac:

Rugbymad96

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

None of your Johnny come lately facts now, get back to the start of the discussion and start there. :pac:

Poster said nobody beats POC on stats?i just answered it as LOOD,EBEN and old man Victor all had much better stats,and all players played from injury or carried an injury.Nothing against POC just stating his not the God people make him out to be.

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know, but the usual crowd will make some outrageously negative statement about him. Then a couple of people will provide evidence and information contradicting that. Then the first crowd will accuse them of being "dismissive, and patronising, and the hateful 8" or whatever but ultimately fail to back up any of the criticisms they put forward.

Then we will do the same the following week.

And again...

And...

A...

People have backed up their criticisms just as much as you have backed up any of your opinions Venjur.

You may not like other people's opinions but they are just as valid as yours, and you shouldn't be so dismissive and patronising toward them.

How would you feel if someone started labelling you as "the usual crowd who will over exaggerate the talent and importance of certain players in the squad"? Please stop doing that.

Yes, there are people on here who are overly critical, but there are also others who will refuse to listen to any sort of criticism of certain players in the Ireland team. When the two get together it leads to page after page of frustration, when posters start getting ultra-defensive of the players they like.

Pink Fairy

Rugbymad96 wrote: »

Poster said nobody beats POC on stats?i just answered it as LOOD,EBEN and old man Victor all had much better stats,and all players played from injury or carried an injury.Nothing against POC just stating his not the God people make him out to be.

Im sure POC's teammates always pointed out his shït stats to him when he was leading them on the field

dub_skav

I think next week we should all pile onto either murray or van der flier.
They are the really contentious and exciting discussions that must be had

CatFromHue

salmocab wrote: »

Which player are we going to argue about next week?

Garry Ringrose, there's just too many r's in that Garry for me

wp_rathead

CatFromHue wrote: »

Garry Ringrose, there's just too many r's in that Garry for me

Gay Ingose

1eg0a3xv7b82of

aimee1 wrote: »

sack the coach for not getting 6 points from a possible 4 :eek:

There is only 3 games left but I like your thinking.

ulster_Beef

Gary?

awec

awec wrote: »

People have backed up their criticisms just as much as you have backed up any of your opinions Venjur.

You may not like other people's opinions but they are just as valid as yours, and you shouldn't be so dismissive and patronising toward them.

How would you feel if someone started labelling you as "the usual crowd who will over exaggerate the talent and importance of certain players in the squad"? Please stop doing that.

Yes, there are people on here who are overly critical, but there are also others who will refuse to listen to any sort of criticism of certain players in the Ireland team. When the two get together it leads to page after page of frustration, when posters start getting ultra-defensive of the players they like.

Valid criticism is fine, I used the word "outrageous" for a reason so you can drop the "outrage" there awec.

What has dragged the forum into an absolute abyss at times in recent weeks is the hatchet job that some posters take joy in, and then the pages of nonsense that follow from both sides.

And I reserve the right to be dismissive if someone is posting drivel.

salmocab

dub_skav wrote: »

I think next week we should all pile onto either murray or van der flier.
They are the really contentious and exciting discussions that must be had

Van der Flier, whats the beef with his name? How is it pronounced? is the d in der capital. Is he one of the wexford der Fliers?

wittycynic

Mark Twain's 'there are three types of lies' quote was never more apt than when applied to rugby forums. They are as helpful as they are misleading.

Bazzo

wittycynic wrote: »

Mark Twain's 'there are three types of lies' quote was never more apt than when applied to rugby forums. They are as helpful as they are misleading.

I was going to say something about this earlier. People get too bogged down in statistics. They are a helpful guide but they hardly paint the whole picture.

For instance specifically earlier there were a lot ruck statistics being thrown around. They showed how many rucks a player was "involved" in. If I was playing at the weekend with some mates I could do nothing for the whole match except trot from ruck to ruck and involve myself and by just looking at that statistic you could surmise that I was hitting a huge amount of rucks and had a great performance.

So yes, use them to assist you in making your point but don't just throw figures out there and then say "Well, there it is. FACT."

CMOTDibbler

Rugbymad96 wrote: »

Poster said nobody beats POC on stats?i just answered it as LOOD,EBEN and old man Victor all had much better stats,and all players played from injury or carried an injury.Nothing against POC just stating his not the God people make him out to be.

I am that poster and I was referring to Ireland, not the world or a tournament.

Which is why I suggested you go back to the beginning of the conversation.

rsh118

Shane Jennings seemed pretty upbeat on the 42 today in their second video show. Reckon Kinsella is doing well with this format, though he seems to spend half the time soaking up everything Jennings has to say!

jm08

Bazzo wrote: »

I was going to say something about this earlier. People get too bogged down in statistics. They are a helpful guide but they hardly paint the whole picture.

For instance specifically earlier there were a lot ruck statistics being thrown around. They showed how many rucks a player was "involved" in. If I was playing at the weekend with some mates I could do nothing for the whole match except trot from ruck to ruck and involve myself and by just looking at that statistic you could surmise that I was hitting a huge amount of rucks and had a great performance.

So yes, use them to assist you in making your point but don't just throw figures out there and then say "Well, there it is. FACT."

Murray Kinsella rates them though:

First arrivals

20 Devin Toner – 3 dominant, 12 effective, 3 guard, 1 present, 1 ineffective
15 Jamie Heaslip – 9 effective, 5 guard, 1 present
15 Sean O’Brien – 11 effective, 4 ineffective
13 Rory Best – 1 dominant, 8 effective, 2 guard, 1 present, 1 ineffective
11 Keith Earls – 8 effective, 2 guard, 1 present
8 Tommy Bowe – 5 effective, 2 guard, 1 ineffective

The Rape of Lucretia

jm08 wrote: »

Murray Kinsella rates them though:

First arrivals

20 Devin Toner – 3 dominant, 12 effective, 3 guard, 1 present, 1 ineffective
15 Jamie Heaslip – 9 effective, 5 guard, 1 present
15 Sean O’Brien – 11 effective, 4 ineffective
13 Rory Best – 1 dominant, 8 effective, 2 guard, 1 present, 1 ineffective
11 Keith Earls – 8 effective, 2 guard, 1 present
8 Tommy Bowe – 5 effective, 2 guard, 1 ineffective

You have to know how to interpret them though. Sure, Dev's effort looks good. But how long was he on the pitch for on Saturday? Compare with what Keith and Bowe were able to do with the limited time they had to do it. And they are the really standout stats from the above despite at first glance being seemingly overshadowed by better efforts.