Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

captbarnacles

wp_rathead wrote: »

I can't agree with this
What purpose would a media circus achieve?

It would salve the disappointment of some supporters who believe the team being hung, drawn and quartered English tabloids on England Soccer team style
would be emotionally cathartic for them and allow them to move on.

mfceiling

WarZ wrote: »

I am not going to give up an opinion simply because you don't like it.

We have almost double the playing population of Argentina and yet they consistently outperform us in world cups. We have more players than Wales and yet they have a number of Grand Slams. New Zealand are in a different class to Ireland despite similar playing numbers.

A lot of it has to do with the public and media completely overhyping average players. Watch a team like Argentina or Japan play above their ability because they aren't walking around with delusional egos.

Maybe if our media treated a WC exit trashing to the Four Nations whipping boys like the SA, Australian or New Zealand media would then we wouldn't see this happen EVERY world cup.

The only players that are respected in the SH are Sean O'Brien, Paul O'Connell and Jonathan Sexton.

And we see pieces in the media SHOCKED at the thought of only two Irish players making a pundit's Lions squad. Well that's reality. Ireland are a poor, overrated team playing in a poor overrated competition where losing to the only decent side (Wales) does not mean you can't win.

Japan have more registered players than us yet they couldn't get out of their group. How bad are they that Scotland managed to beat them.

Wait now, they beat the springboks...how bad are they? Wait now, the boks beat the all Blacks recently...how poor and overrated are the all Blacks? Hang on, they beat Argentina...how poor are Argentina? Wait wait, Argentina beat ireland...how poor are ireland? Hold on...ireland beat France...how poor are France? I love this game, you can play it all day.

partyguinness

mfceiling wrote: »

Japan have more registered players than us yet they couldn't get out of their group. How bad are they that Scotland managed to beat them.

Wait now, they beat the springboks...how bad are they? Wait now, the boks beat the all Blacks recently...how poor and overrated are the all Blacks? Hang on, they beat Argentina...how poor are Argentina? Wait wait, Argentina beat ireland...how poor are ireland? Hold on...ireland beat France...how poor are France? I love this game, you can play it all day.

So Japan is the level we are at? Sorry I am not sure of the point you are trying to make. We play very conservative pretty sterile rugby and paid the price for the predictable nature of our style. Nothing has really changed since 2003.

P.Walnuts

mfceiling wrote: »

Japan have more registered players than us yet they couldn't get out of their group. How bad are they that Scotland managed to beat them.

Wait now, they beat the springboks...how bad are they? Wait now, the boks beat the all Blacks recently...how poor and overrated are the all Blacks? Hang on, they beat Argentina...how poor are Argentina? Wait wait, Argentina beat ireland...how poor are ireland? Hold on...ireland beat France...how poor are France? I love this game, you can play it all day.

All of that can't gloss over the fact that we have never progressed past the QF's in a world cup

WarZ

South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Argentina win when it matters. At the world cup. Our players cant deal with them

Neil3030

P.Walnuts wrote: »

All of that can't gloss over the fact that we have never progressed past the QF's in a world cup

Bit of perspective.

There have been eight world cups.

For the first 4, we were still miles behind the southern hemisphere.

03 we lost to a superior French team.

07 was a shambles.

11 we lost to an equal team who outplayed us on the day.

15 we lose 5 key players and still could have won if certain things had gone our way.

This 'can't make it past the QF' narrative is sensationalist codswallop.

partyguinness

Neil3030 wrote: »

Bit of perspective.

There have been eight world cups.

For the first 4, we were still miles behind the southern hemisphere.

03 we lost to a superior French team.

07 was a shambles.

11 we lost to an equal team who outplayed us on the day.

15 we lose 5 key players and still could have won if certain things had gone our way.

This 'can't make it past the QF' narrative is sensationalist codswallop.

So you prove your point by showing how it is sensationalist codswallop by....highlighting how Ireland can't get past the q-finals?......riiiiiight then.

That's pretty much the entire repertoire of excuses listed there. We will go back to start again in 2019?

Here's a suggestion for 2019- flat tyre? Dog ate homework? Locks can't hear the line out due to passing plane?

The 2011 excuse is the most delusional.

Bridge93

partyguinness wrote: »

So you prove your point by showing how it is sensationalist codswallop by....highlighting how Ireland can't get past the q-finals?......riiiiiight then.

That's pretty much the entire repertoire of excuses listed there. We will go back to start again in 2019?

Here's a suggestion for 2019- flat tyre? Dog ate homework? Locks can't hear the line out due to passing plane?

The 2011 excuse is the most delusional.

How is it delusional? We were crap on the day and got it horribly wrong but Wales were as good as us at the time if not better. They won the Grand Slam a few months later and the championship again in 2013.
People are quick to point out now how we don't beat Wales every time and they are supposedly as good as us yet at a time they were actually at least as good as us many are calling it a massive embarrassment we lost to them.

As I said it was a dire performance but Wales were an excellent team and should've made a final that year

P.Walnuts

Neil3030 wrote: »

Bit of perspective.

There have been eight world cups.

For the first 4, we were still miles behind the southern hemisphere.

03 we lost to a superior French team.

07 was a shambles.

11 we lost to an equal team who outplayed us on the day.

15 we lose 5 key players and still could have won if certain things had gone our way.

This 'can't make it past the QF' narrative is sensationalist codswallop.

Hardly sensationalist, it's fact.

Neil3030

partyguinness wrote: »

So you prove your point by showing how it is sensationalist codswallop by....highlighting how Ireland can't get past the q-finals?......riiiiiight then.

That's pretty much the entire repertoire of excuses listed there. We will go back to start again in 2019?

Here's a suggestion for 2019- flat tyre? Dog ate homework? Locks can't hear the line out due to passing plane?

The 2011 excuse is the most delusional.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmWXVHBo84AA

Pudsy33

P.Walnuts wrote: »

Hardly sensationalist, it's fact.

We haven't made it past a quarter final, that's a fact. It's not that we can't. That's not a fact.

partyguinness

Bridge93 wrote: »

How is it delusional? We were crap on the day and got it horribly wrong but Wales were as good as us at the time if not better. They won the Grand Slam a few months later and the championship again in 2013.
People are quick to point out now how we don't beat Wales every time and they are supposedly as good as us yet at a time they were actually at least as good as us many are calling it a massive embarrassment we lost to them.

As I said it was a dire performance but Wales were an excellent team and should've made a final that year

Because by saying the teams were equal (which we both seem to agree that Wales were a better team) but were just beaten 'on the day' completely glosses over the fact the Irish team did not perform when it mattered most- Wales did. Delusional because it the poster is intent on blaming external factors instead of looking internally which would show up the uncomfortable fact that Ireland despite all the hype are limited and one dimensional. But blame everything and everyone else if you like.

rrpc

partyguinness wrote: »

instead of looking internally which would show up the uncomfortable fact that Ireland despite all the hype are limited and one dimensional. But blame everything and everyone else if you like.

This argument is limited and one dimensional.

It proves nothing other than you are experiencing an emotional response to a game of rugby.

partyguinness

Pudsy33 wrote: »

We haven't made it past a quarter final, that's a fact. It's not that we can't. That's not a fact.

Oh dear....this one is determined.

Until Ireland actually make it past the q-final then Ireland cannot make past the q-final stage. Play semantics all you want but the facts remain...painfully.

partyguinness

rrpc wrote: »

This argument is limited and one dimensional.

It proves nothing other than you are experiencing an emotional response to a game of rugby.

I'm sorry....were you partially quoting back my own reply or were making a point because it is hard to tell. Either way your post is nonsense.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

partyguinness wrote: »

Oh dear....this one is determined.

Until Ireland actually make it past the q-final then Ireland cannot make past the q-final stage. Play semantics all you want but the facts remain...painfully.

Until Ireland actually make it past a QF then Ireland haven't made it past a QF.

As long as Ireland make it to a QF it is possible for them to make it past a QF.

The only fact is that they have not.

rrpc

partyguinness wrote: »

I'm sorry....were you partially quoting back my own reply or were making a point because it is hard to tell. Either way your post is nonsense.

I'll paraphrase so.

You're saying: We were beaten, boo hoo, we're crap, we've always been crap, we'll always be crap.

It's been a pleasure to read such insightful stuff.

awec

In fairness I don't think the history books will judge the 2015 WC kindly from an Irish point of view. That may sound harsh, but I think it will be seen as another quarter final capitulation.

If you had asked people before hand would they be happy with yet another quarter final exit I doubt there would be many (if any) who said yes. Especially if you offered them a QF against Argentina, I suspect they would have bitten your hand, arm and a sizeable chunk of your torso off for such a draw and been thinking that this is the best chance Ireland have ever had at getting to a semi final (especially when we were drawn into an easy pool).

For me, it's a world cup that we headed into as the back to back 6n champions (though this WC suggests that doesn't really mean that much), knew from the start that avoiding the real problematic teams was completely in our control and where Ireland ultimately failed to achieve anything at all. In 2011 we at least could enjoy beating Australia like we did, in 2015 we did nothing of note except beat a piss poor France side that got 60 points put on it the week after.

May sound a bit negative, but that's my 2c.

P.Walnuts

awec wrote: »

In fairness I don't think the history books will judge the 2015 WC kindly from an Irish point of view. That may sound harsh, but I think it will be seen as another quarter final capitulation.

If you had asked people before hand would they be happy with yet another quarter final exit I doubt there would be many (if any) who said yes. Especially if you offered them a QF against Argentina, I suspect they would have bitten your hand, arm and a sizeable chunk of your torso off for such a draw and been thinking that this is the best chance Ireland have ever had at getting to a semi final (especially when we were drawn into an easy pool).

For me, it's a world cup that we headed into as the back to back 6n champions (though this WC suggests that doesn't really mean that much), knew from the start that avoiding the real problematic teams was completely in our control and where Ireland ultimately failed to achieve anything at all. In 2011 we at least could enjoy beating Australia like we did, in 2015 we did nothing of note except beat a piss poor France side that got 60 points put on it the week after.

May sound a bit negative, but that's my 2c.

That about sums it up for me

Neil3030

Out of interest, I wonder how New Zealand would have done against Argentina, without McCaw, Kaino, Smith, Carter and Whitelock and then losing Savea in the first half with injury.

Evidence from the pool game suggests Argentina would run them bloody close.

captbarnacles

awec wrote: »

In fairness I don't think the history books will judge the 2015 WC kindly from an Irish point of view. That may sound harsh, but I think it will be seen as another quarter final capitulation.

If you had asked people before hand would they be happy with yet another quarter final exit I doubt there would be many (if any) who said yes. Especially if you offered them a QF against Argentina, I suspect they would have bitten your hand, arm and a sizeable chunk of your torso off for such a draw and been thinking that this is the best chance Ireland have ever had at getting to a semi final (especially when we were drawn into an easy pool).

For me, it's a world cup that we headed into as the back to back 6n champions (though this WC suggests that doesn't really mean that much), knew from the start that avoiding the real problematic teams was completely in our control and where Ireland ultimately failed to achieve anything at all. In 2011 we at least could enjoy beating Australia like we did, in 2015 we did nothing of note except beat a piss poor France side that got 60 points put on it the week after.

May sound a bit negative, but that's my 2c.

Not missing SOB, Sexton, POC, Payne and POM though. I'd have preferred a full team facing anyone but the all blacks rather than that.

.ak

awec wrote: »

In fairness I don't think the history books will judge the 2015 WC kindly from an Irish point of view. That may sound harsh, but I think it will be seen as another quarter final capitulation.

If you had asked people before hand would they be happy with yet another quarter final exit I doubt there would be many (if any) who said yes. Especially if you offered them a QF against Argentina, I suspect they would have bitten your hand, arm and a sizeable chunk of your torso off for such a draw and been thinking that this is the best chance Ireland have ever had at getting to a semi final (especially when we were drawn into an easy pool).

For me, it's a world cup that we headed into as the back to back 6n champions (though this WC suggests that doesn't really mean that much), knew from the start that avoiding the real problematic teams was completely in our control and where Ireland ultimately failed to achieve anything at all. In 2011 we at least could enjoy beating Australia like we did, in 2015 we did nothing of note except beat a piss poor France side that got 60 points put on it the week after.

May sound a bit negative, but that's my 2c.

History books, fair enough.

Thankfully we're all still alive, the game was only a couple of weeks ago, and most of us have the common sense to understand we lost because we were missing our 5 best players.

I don't really care what my grand children think, or what other people think for that matter.

A bit of perspective and context never goes astray.

molloyjh

captbarnacles wrote: »

Not missing SOB, Sexton, POC, Payne and POM though. I'd have preferred a full team facing anyone but the all blacks rather than that.

Exactly. We all wanted a QF against Argentina. Saying that is hardly announcing anything revelatory. What awec and others constantly fail to acknowledge is that before the tournament we also said that we needed to ensure that certain players were fit and firing to get to a SF. POC, Murray and Sexton were all the names people kept coming back to. We were missing 2 of those, plus 2 of our most important other forwards, plus the only 13 we'd really used and who had become very important to our game. Of course then we lost a winger in the first half as well.

So while we all wanted to face Argentina in a QF, none of us would ever have wanted to do it with a decimated squad missing 2 of our 3 key players.

Now it also doesn't help that many Irish fans also massively underestimated Argentina. And it's not like there wasn't people trying to point that out before the game.

The result is a huge disappointment and the history books will just chalk it down to another QF exit. The reasons for it though are not the same as previous years. We were never going to win that game with those guys missing and Argentina at 100%. And we need to continue to develop our depth to ensure we're not as badly hurt by injuries again. But even NZ would struggle with injuries like that. No other team would have won that game with injuries like that. But how many people crying about how bad things are have acknowledged that?

partyguinness

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Until Ireland actually make it past a QF then Ireland haven't made it past a QF.

As long as Ireland make it to a QF it is possible for them to make it past a QF.

The only fact is that they have not.

You just don't get it do you?

The issue for Irish rugby is far more serious and complex but all I am reading here is nonsense about 'ifs and buts' or 'oh just a bit of bad luck on the day' or missing 5 players (which of course made a difference). The style of rugby is the problem and needs to be addressed. Basically it was everyone else's fault and sure really we are great- let's put a good win against Italy and Scotland under our belt and all will be great again.

We are doomed to repeat the same mistakes- as mentioned earlier we really are no better than 2003. Relatively speaking we have not progressed and indeed we have been passed out.

Bury your head in the sand all you want if it makes you feel better.

awec

captbarnacles wrote: »

Not missing SOB, Sexton, POC, Payne and POM though. I'd have preferred a full team facing anyone but the all blacks rather than that.

Whatever the reason for it, that's a separate discussion. I think that has been discussed to death at the moment and everyone has different views. I'm just talking about the overall result of a going out with a whimper in a QF.

At the moment people still have the buzz of winning back to back six nations which is probably why going out like we did isn't annoying them as much. The fact the coach is still in the good books does no harm either.

But in a year or two or three nobody is going to be saying "yea, Ireland did well at WC2015". It will be seen as another Irish team failing to fulfill it's potential at this tournament.

Ireland have now had problems at three world cups in a row. For me that is not a coincidence and is indicative of an underlying flaw somewhere in our setup or in how we approach these tournaments.

irishbucsfan

I don't know why it matters what people will be saying in two or three years. The facts won't change over time unless someone comes out and claims there was unrest in the camp, which I think most people will agree seems unlikely to happen. The truth will still be the truth, and the fact that we were missing our 5 (arguably) most important players won't be unaltered.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't know why it matters what people will be saying in two or three years. The facts won't change over time unless someone comes out and claims there was unrest in the camp, which I think most people will agree seems unlikely to happen. The truth will still be the truth, and the fact that we were missing our 5 (arguably) most important players won't be unaltered.

Of course it matters. Does our 2014 6N win not matter any more? Or our grand slam?

Sport is all about winning and part of that is looking back at past achievements.

rrpc

awec wrote: »

In fairness I don't think the history books will judge the 2015 WC kindly from an Irish point of view. That may sound harsh, but I think it will be seen as another quarter final capitulation.

The history books will not be that black and white. The injuries we sustained were in all the commentary before the game and will form part of that history, the same as Wales' horrendous run of injuries will also feature as will England's brainfart against Wales. History is littered with colour like this.

awec wrote: »

If you had asked people before hand would they be happy with yet another quarter final exit I doubt there would be many (if any) who said yes. Especially if you offered them a QF against Argentina, I suspect they would have bitten your hand, arm and a sizeable chunk of your torso off for such a draw and been thinking that this is the best chance Ireland have ever had at getting to a semi final (especially when we were drawn into an easy pool).

Agreed. Nobody wanted to face New Zealand, especially when the price was being beaten by France. The pool didn't look that easy on the way in and certainly not a guarantee of a first place finish. France had actually done a bit better than us against the same opponents. Just go back to the lead-up thread to see the doubts being expressed here at the time.

awec wrote: »

For me, it's a world cup that we headed into as the back to back 6n champions (though this WC suggests that doesn't really mean that much), knew from the start that avoiding the real problematic teams was completely in our control and where Ireland ultimately failed to achieve anything at all. In 2011 we at least could enjoy beating Australia like we did, in 2015 we did nothing of note except beat a piss poor France side that got 60 points put on it the week after.
May sound a bit negative, but that's my 2c.

Ahhh France
It's easy to look at France with the benefit of hindsight, but lets look at it the way it was viewed before we played them. They had a condensed squad (one of their criticisms is how they use so many players during the 6N) and had the most time in camp together ever. They had cruised through the pool beating Italy easily (much more easily than us) and had; if we're taking history into account, been to three RWC finals, three semi-finals and lost the last final by a point. The perceived wisdom was France were always 'up' for a World cup and had the pedigree to prove it. They needed to win as much as we did and on the day, put up huge resistance.

That they capitulated to New Zealand so easily is just the reverse side of the coin to the damage they inflicted on us. They knew they were beaten before the match was five minutes old. They had put everything into avoiding NZ and not only had they not done that, but had done so by being humiliated by an Ireland side that was getting shorn of its leaders as the match progressed.

Would they have beaten Argentina had the roles been reversed? Nobody knows, but I suspect that there would have been a tighter match and not the hammering people think Argentina would have inflicted on them.

.ak

awec wrote: »

Of course it matters. Does our 2014 6N win not matter any more? Or our grand slam?

Sport is all about winning and part of that is looking back at past achievements.

It's fairly well agreed upon that the 09 slam was won on some pretty poor form and BOD dragging us over the line. That's 6 years ago and the result still hasn't changed people's opinions on that.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

Of course it matters. Does our 2014 6N win not matter any more? Or our grand slam?

Sport is all about winning and part of that is looking back at past achievements.

No you misunderstood. It doesn't matter what people will be saying in 2 or 3 years relative to what people are saying now. If people are incorrect in 2 or 3 years because they're incapable of taking into account the facts of what happened then I really dont see why it's worth talking about.

In reality though people are a lot sharper than that, people still remember what happened in 2011 pretty accurately.

shuffol

If anything with the way Argentina are improving history will look more fondly upon us.

Maybe after Joe's gone we'll resume our previous pattern of 6 nations finishes which will make our performance look even better again.

It seems like expectations were high this year due to our success over the past 2 years, now that they haven't been met it seems the knives are coming out in some quarters for the person responsible for our success and without whom there wouldn't have been such high expectations in the first place.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

Whatever the reason for it, that's a separate discussion. I think that has been discussed to death at the moment and everyone has different views. I'm just talking about the overall result of a going out with a whimper in a QF.

At the moment people still have the buzz of winning back to back six nations which is probably why going out like we did isn't annoying them as much. The fact the coach is still in the good books does no harm either.

But in a year or two or three nobody is going to be saying "yea, Ireland did well at WC2015". It will be seen as another Irish team failing to fulfill it's potential at this tournament.

Ireland have now had problems at three world cups in a row. For me that is not a coincidence and is indicative of an underlying flaw somewhere in our setup or in how we approach these tournaments.

Nobody has or ever will say we did well though. Or if they do they're kidding themselves. We didn't do well. But the reason for that is pure luck. It's not like we're England, who truly did under achieve massively. They were just poor with no real excuse for it. Ireland on the other hand got their prep right and were building into the tournament exactly as we should have done. Despite the criticisms of how we played in the 6 Nations we were expanding our game in the RWC. We saw pretty clear evidence of that against France where we kicked a lot less and ran the ball a lot more.

In many ways it really doesn't matter what "the history books" say. What matters is that we learn whatever lessons we need to from the tournament. We heard Williams talk about NZ in 2003 (?) where they identified a leadership issue that they addressed. That's something we need to do. We don't have the depth to handle a number of injuries (although few teams really do) so we need to improve that element of the squad. Can we get to a point where we can cope with 5 key injuries at some point? Probably not in fairness, but we should be trying to at least get very close to that.

The result isn't a positive one. Nobody is fooling themselves there. We have issues that need to be addressed. Again nobody is fooling themselves there. But let's not get so caught up in the negatives that we ignore the positives. And there are positives. We have an excellent first choice 23. We have better depth than ever before. We've shown an ability over the last 2 years to adapt our game plan to remain competitive. We've become a bloody hard team to beat (and a single game in its own does not change that). We were considered contenders for the title the world over before the tournament so we were obviously doing something right. We were managing the tournament well and l honestly believe had we a full strength squad we'd have won that QF. I think we'd have been aiming for a performance very similar to Australia's in the SF given what we'd seen from Ireland in the pool stages. We didn't get there, but let's not allow ourselves to get carried away with the fall out from that. As some here clearly already have.

awec

shuffol wrote: »

If anything with the way Argentina are improving history will look more fondly upon us.

Maybe after Joe's gone we'll resume our previous pattern of 6 nations finishes which will make our performance look even better again.

It seems like expectations were high this year due to our success over the past 2 years, now that they haven't been met it seems the knives are coming out in some quarters for the person responsible for our success and without whom there wouldn't have been such high expectations in the first place.

I don't think knives are out. We have the best coach available.

Doesn't mean people have to be happy with our performances.

I think an attitude change is required in the IRFU. Otherwise we'll be sitting in 4 years time making more excuses.

I think there's a bit of a small time attitude. "ah sure we're only Ireland and we've never done well, we're happy enough with 6N wins instead". IMO that needs to go away as well.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

Of course it matters. Does our 2014 6N win not matter any more? Or our grand slam?

Sport is all about winning and part of that is looking back at past achievements.

How would you know, you're from Ulster!? :pac:

Seriously though, he not saying that the result won't matter. He's saying what people say about it won't because the reasons won't change over time.

irishbucsfan

I don't see how we could possibly get close to being able to deal with 5 key losses. New Zealand could not do that in a World Cup knockout match. Despite their braggadocio I don't think you'd find many Kiwis who'd argue they would have beaten South Africa without McCaw, Carter, Retallick, Smith and Kaino. People are just being entirely uneasonable.

molloyjh

rrpc wrote: »

That they capitulated to New Zealand so easily is just the reverse side of the coin to the damage they inflicted on us. They knew they were beaten before the match was five minutes old. They had put everything into avoiding NZ and not only had they not done that, but had done so by being humiliated by an Ireland side that was getting shorn of its leaders as the match progressed.

This. They took the field against us believing they would win and came at us hard and strong. They took the field against NZ already beaten and didn't get stuck in the same way at all. There were massive differences between France against us and France against NZ.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

I I think there's a bit of a small time attitude. "ah sure we're only Ireland and we've never done well, we're happy enough with 6N wins instead". IMO that needs to go away as well.

Where are you getting that from given that one of the goals for Ireland was to make the SF? I think that is hugely unfair and does a massive disservice to a hell of a lot of good work that has gone on in recent years.

rrpc

awec wrote: »

Doesn't mean people have to be happy with our performances.

I'm quite happy with our performances. I'm even happy to say I'm happy . I'm not happy with the result and I'm not happy that we lost so many players, but I'm happy with what we were doing as a full strength squad.

awec wrote: »

I think an attitude change is required in the IRFU. Otherwise we'll be sitting in 4 years time making more excuses.

I think there's a bit of a small time attitude. "ah sure we're only Ireland and we've never done well, we're happy enough with 6N wins instead". IMO that needs to go away as well.

Ok, that's just not true. There's nobody I know that is taking that attitude and I haven't seen it expressed here except in the negative, hyperbolic, throwing the hands up kind of way that some posters here are dealing with it.

And I'm not seeing this from the IRFU either. All I'm seeing from calm commentary is that we didn't have the depth required to deal with the injury crisis we suffered.

We did have the depth to handle a couple of key departures and a couple more less impactful ones (Bowe or Healy for example) but no team; as has been pointed out many times would have been the same with their spine ripped out.

We've identified those areas now. We need to continue to build to eliminate these weaknesses, but we're not a big rugby nation and developing international standard players is not an easy task.

.ak

awec wrote: »

I don't think knives are out. We have the best coach available.

Doesn't mean people have to be happy with our performances.

I think an attitude change is required in the IRFU. Otherwise we'll be sitting in 4 years time making more excuses.

I think there's a bit of a small time attitude. "ah sure we're only Ireland and we've never done well, we're happy enough with 6N wins instead". IMO that needs to go away as well.

I don't get this. Help me out. What attitude change? How will that affect us in 4 years time? How would it have affected us against Argentina? Did we do something wrong in terms of PREVENTING injury? Or was our back up not adequately ready?

We're playing well, the silverware is proof that. We're a good team in good form. I don't buy that we didn't play well in the warmups and as such it's a representation of where we're sitting in terms of form. Anyone expecting us to play with 100% intensity there is naive. The same can be said against Italy - we didn't need to reach top gear to win, much like the ABs vs Pumas.

We've played well over the past 24 months and will continue to do so. We've varied our game, we play to our strengths, and we've had a very good success rate.

Of course there's scope for improvement, but I'm not sure what attitude needs to be changed?

Change for change's sake is nonsensical.

If there's a worthwhile change of anything available, spit it out. Tangible example. Specify something!

Bridge93

I would view the World Cup as a missed opportunity rather than the failure some claim it to be that a combination of bad luck and getting it wrong on the day to a certain extent.

Pink Fairy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Change for change's sake is nonsensical.

If there's a worthwhile change of anything available, spit it out. Tangible example. Specify something!

Play our best backs in their best positions perhaps? Not square pegs in round holes, that would be my 1 major concern about the team

Pink Fairy

Pink Fairy wrote: »

Play our best backs in their best positions perhaps? Not square pegs in round holes, that would be my 1 major concern about the team

Which were the best backs in the wrong positions?

Be specific!

.ak

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Which were the best backs in the wrong positions?

Be specific!

Rob Kearney should've played 12.

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

Which were the best backs in the wrong positions?

Be specific!

The selection of Earls at 13.

The selection of Dave Kearney.

The lack of selection of Cave.

The selection of an awful Cian Healy.


The failure to sub a floundering Madigan against Argentina.

The failure to sub a visibly wrecked Henderson or Toner until the game was dead and buried already.

The premature subbing of Ireland's best player on the day (Best).

The drift defence tactics used against Argentina.


The boring, limited game plan with which we play (kick, kick, powerplay, kick kick powerplay). We look absolutely clueless when this doesn't work.

It is not as if these concerns appeared after the Argentina game. People were concerned about our showing right through August and September and were dismissed.

I'm sure there are more.

People can point to the injuries all they want. Injuries don't help, but they don't excuse the pitiful performance we put in against Argentina. Are people really saying that our players outside the missing 5 are all rubbish (cause that's how we looked) ?

partyguinness

awec wrote: »

The selection of Earls at 13.

The selection of Dave Kearney.

The lack of selection of Cave.

The selection of an awful Cian Healy.


The failure to sub a floundering Madigan against Argentina.

The failure to sub a visibly wrecked Henderson or Toner until the game was dead and buried already.

The premature subbing of Ireland's best player on the day (Best).

The drift defence tactics used against Argentina.


The boring, limited game plan with which we play (kick, kick, powerplay, kick kick powerplay). We look absolutely clueless when this doesn't work.

It is not as if these concerns appeared after the Argentina game. People were concerned about our showing right through August and September and were dismissed.

I'm sure there are more.

People can point to the injuries all they want. Injuries don't help, but they don't excuse the pitiful performance we put in against Argentina. Are people really saying that our players outside the missing 5 are all rubbish (cause that's how we looked) ?

I guess another factor may be that perhaps we expected too much without the evidence there to back it up.

My main gripe is as you mentioned is the complete lack of a plan B and sterile predictable rugby.

It is obvious that ARG said to themselves:"Get fast quick ball out wide and we will get results."

Even with the 5 players, they would have done the same.

I wrote about it here before the game that my money if I is was a neutral was on ARG- they have the off-the cuff fast quick rugby needed for knock-out tournaments that Ire does not have. Before ARG, it was Wales in 2011 and France up to a few years ago and even ARG in 1999.

We can keep going the way we are and be content with a few triple crowns or scrapping a few 6Ns or even living off the odd fluke result against the SH or we can decide to move from a good competent team to a very good team. We are built for the slugfest of the 6N but not much else.

Worryingly, other teams are catching up to us quicker than we are catching up to the SH which inevitably means we will keep having this conversation for many more WCs to come unless it changes from school level up.

awec

In terms of going forward, I have already said much earlier in the thread.

1. Rob Kearney needs to be dropped. Give Zebo or Payne a go at 13. We need more options at 15. I am not saying dropped forever, but IMO he shouldn't be a certain starter any more.
2. Gilroy absolutely has to come in to the Ireland setup now. The excuses for overlooking him are wearing thin.
3. Earls is possibly Ireland's best winger at this stage. He should never be moved to 13 again. Ever.
4. Madigan or Jackson (pick one) need more game time at 10. Probably Jackson for me.
5. Marmion needs to come in as backup 9 now.
6. McGrath is now comfortably ahead of Healy.
7. Mike Ross is done. A busted flush at this stage.
8. Stop constantly kicking the fcuking ball.
9. Look at moving Henshaw to 13 (if Payne moves to 15) and bringing in another 12. That might be McCloskey, it might not.
10. Kick the ball less.
11. For the love of all that is good, please offload the ball more.
12. Kick chase to be used sparingly.
13. Can we please try Henderson at 6? Pretty please?


Lineup I would like to see developed:

Zebo / Payne, Trimble, Henshaw, McCloskey, Earls, Sexton, Murray, McGrath, Best, Moore, Ryan, Henderson, POM, SOB, Heaslip. Alternatively you put Toner in for Ryan. You can also try Toner, Ryan, Henderson as 4, 5 and 6. This Jordi Murphy business just won't do for me. The current midfield with Zebo at 15 is also work experimenting with.

Ball through the hands with kicking only used when it makes sense to do so.

What I don't want to see is the same old lineup going into the 6n, and the same old kick chase.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

The selection of Earls at 13.

I don't believe Cave would have been any better or worse than Earls tbh.

awec wrote: »

The selection of Dave Kearney.

Dave was in good form in the lead up to the game. He made 1 obvious error (after a load of others had made errors in the same play) but because you saw a stat you didn't like you've now decided he shouldn't have been selected.

awec wrote: »

The lack of selection of Cave.

Is this not the exact same point as your first one? Cave wouldn't have made a difference IMO.

awec wrote: »

The selection of an awful Cian Healy.

The selection of LH in that game wasn't the winning or losing of it. Although I would agree McGrath should have at least come on earlier, if not started the game.

awec wrote: »

The failure to sub a floundering Madigan against Argentina.

You mean the floundering Madigans who was the 10 when we very much got ourselves back into the game? I don't think Mads is a particularly great 10 but to say he was floundering is just nonsense awec.

awec wrote: »

The failure to sub a visibly wrecked Henderson or Toner until the game was dead and buried already.

The call to replace Toner came before the Argentinian try in 70 mins. When that call came in there were 6 points in it. It was not dead and buried so maybe get your facts straight there.

awec wrote: »

The premature subbing of Ireland's best player on the day (Best).

So the locks were replaced too late at 71 mins but Best was replaced too early at 66?

awec wrote: »

The drift defence tactics used against Argentina.

So we should have implemented an entirely new defensive system in a week!? Jaysus I didn't realise that was such an easy thing to do.

awec wrote: »

The boring, limited game plan with which we play (kick, kick, powerplay, kick kick powerplay). We look absolutely clueless when this doesn't work.

We weren't playing that game in the RWC though????

awec wrote: »

It is not as if these concerns appeared after the Argentina game. People were concerned about our showing right through August and September and were dismissed.

People who were concerned about the performances in the warm-ups just missed the point entirely.

awec wrote: »

People can point to the injuries all they want. Injuries don't help, but they don't excuse the pitiful performance we put in against Argentina. Are people really saying that our players outside the missing 5 are all rubbish (cause that's how we looked) ?

Do you have to make such huge leaps of logic? The issues we had were clearly caused by missing personnel. And that's been explained again and again. We were only poor for the first 10-15. After that we came back into it well. We lost it again in the last 20 through tiredness and chasing the game. Some perspective on the full 80 would be nice, not just the parts of it you want to point at.

awec

awec wrote: »

The selection of Earls at 13.

The selection of Dave Kearney.

The lack of selection of Cave.

The selection of an awful Cian Healy.


The failure to sub a floundering Madigan against Argentina.

The failure to sub a visibly wrecked Henderson or Toner until the game was dead and buried already.

The premature subbing of Ireland's best player on the day (Best).

The drift defence tactics used against Argentina.


The boring, limited game plan with which we play (kick, kick, powerplay, kick kick powerplay). We look absolutely clueless when this doesn't work.

It is not as if these concerns appeared after the Argentina game. People were concerned about our showing right through August and September and were dismissed.

I'm sure there are more.

People can point to the injuries all they want. Injuries don't help, but they don't excuse the pitiful performance we put in against Argentina. Are people really saying that our players outside the missing 5 are all rubbish (cause that's how we looked) ?

These aren't changes. They're whinges.
Give me the alternative in each case and you present the change.

In any case, that's not what I asked. Unless of course you're suggesting we simply blanket ban Healy from ever playing again?

What changes do you want us to make now? Changes, not whinges.
You want us to change tactics for example. What would you like to see us play instead?

Bridge93

Why should Rob Kearney be dropped? He was very good at the World Cup
If you go onto those sites picking Lions teams he's one of the few Irish players who gets respect from the Welsh or English with many picking him ahead of Brown when other Irish suggestions are laughed off.