Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

No, I am frustrated at the fact that people are saying we lost POC and had to play Henderson instead, instead of saying we lost POC and had to play Toner instead. How is that fair on the guy?

Henderson was Ireland's best forward (if not best player) over the entire tournament. If only all our so-called second choice players could outperform all the other players we'd be laughing.

Henderson playing against Argentina was not even in the slightest one of the issues. The problem was having to play Toner beside him instead of POC.

POC is Ireland captain. Henderson was Ireland's best player. Toner was good, but neither of the above. Yet it's because we have to play Henderson that we have a problem? How does that work?

Oh for Gods sake, look if it helps then just replace Henderson with Toner in my posts. It really doesn't matter in terms of the overall point that I was making. Neither would replace POC at the areas that I was talking about (except Toner at the line out). I picked Henderson because Toner was the incumbent, he had played the biggest game in the tournament prior to the QF and because Hendo will almost certainly be POCs replacement now that he has retired from international rugby. But it really doesn't matter a jot to the overall point.

rrpc

awec wrote: »

No, I am frustrated at the fact that people are saying we lost POC and had to play Henderson instead, instead of saying we lost POC and had to play Toner instead. How is that fair on the guy?

Henderson was Ireland's best forward (if not best player) over the entire tournament. If only all our so-called second choice players could outperform all the other players we'd be laughing.

Without trawling the stats interminably, I would have thought that Sean O'Brien was our best forward. Huge amount of carries across the gain line and a fair number of turnovers and tackles made as well.

awec wrote: »

Henderson playing against Argentina was not even in the slightest one of the issues. The problem was having to play Toner beside him instead of POC.

POC is Ireland captain. Henderson was Ireland's best player. Toner was good, but neither of the above. Yet it's because we have to play Henderson that we have a problem? How does that work?

Quite simply down to his experience. You yourself said he was exhausted from scrummaging and should have been subbed earlier. Toner can go the full 80 and generally does. So which would you have on the bench? The guy who can play the full 80 in any conditions?

shuffol

techdiver wrote: »

6. Mobility:
Whilst Mike Ross is fantastic at locking down the scrum, that is where his contribution ends. He is pretty much a passenger for other parts of the game, apart from lineout lifting. The era of carrying a player like that is coming to an end. Props from all other top nations are more mobile and skillful. New Zealand even sacrifice power in the scrum in order to have mobility in their front row.

You may agree/disagree with any/all of those suggestions, but the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

That sounds fantastic but try going into a game with a TH who can't lock a scrum and see how far it gets you. The notion that Ross doesn't contribute around the field is nonsense too, he's always among our top forwards when it comes to hitting rucks.

Zzippy

awec wrote: »

Sorry lads, I'm in an irritable mood today which is turning me into an argumentative oul sh!te!

Go home early. Get a nice takeaway. Get the ride. You'll be fine tomorrow

techdiver

shuffol wrote: »

That sounds fantastic but try going into a game with a TH who can't lock a scrum and see how far it gets you. The notion that Ross doesn't contribute around the field is nonsense too, he's always among our top forwards when it comes to hitting rucks.

Where did I say to replace him with someone who can't lock down a scrum???

molloyjh

techdiver wrote: »

1. Blood more options at every position:
Why it won't happen - As pointed out over and over again the 6 Nations is the cash cow for the IRFU and as such no risks will be permitted with team selection with the greater good in mind. I'm not suggesting cropping the entire team as some have, but to ensure potential younger talent get exposure to international rugby earlier in their careers. This works in other countries, why do we have to wait until a guy is 25 before capping him? (Hyperbole, I know, obvious exceptions apply - Henshaw, Henderson).

We have to wait until a guy is good enough before capping him. And when guys have been good enough (Moore, Hendo, Henshaw etc) they've gotten their shot.

techdiver wrote: »

2. Develop a more varied style of play:
Before anyone jumps down my neck, I'm not talking about abandoning the kick chase or the power game entirely. What I am suggesting is to develop a more varied game plan that is harder for the opposition to suss out and also provides more options mid game when "Plan A" is not working. I agree that the kick chase is a vital part of the modern game, but it needs to be supplemented.

But Ireland have varied their game over the last 2 years. Look at the 2014 6 Nations again. We played totally differently there than we did in 2015. And we were going back to more of a running game this RWC. What we've seen more and more since Joe took over is that Plan A generally works really well, and it changes depending on the opposition etc.

We also passed the ball more than any other team in the 6 Nations, which is conveniently forgotten in these debates.

techdiver wrote: »

3. Allow "some" offloading:
As with the above point, I'm not asking for a 7's game here. What I am saying is that a mixture of taking the ball into contact and recycling and some offloading can be quite effective on a number of fronts. Firstly, it varies the way we attack by altering the tempo and and numbers used, as well as the proposition of sucking in more defenders and creating space on subsequent phases of play. Secondly, it offers a new challenge to teams who play against us as we are currently "easy" to defend against. What I mean by easy, is we are too predictable in our attack and we reply on breaking teams down with brute force, or extremely accurate kick chase game.

Offloading is allowed. But it is seldom used (it is used though). Like Australia and New Zealand seldom used it in the SFs. We don't have players of the same skill set though which also hampers our ability to play that game.

techdiver wrote: »

4. Develop more "ball players":
This one is more long term. It is clear, or at least clear to the current coaching staff that we don't have the necessary skillsets to employ a more off the cuff/offloading game. It is hard to argue with in a way when you see some of the attempts at this World Cup. Earls threw a couple of offloads to people's ankles. As others have stated, size and bulk is the order of the day at youth level and this leads to us developing blunt force tools as opposed to skillful players. I also would like to see players of all positions have fundamental passing/kicking/catching skills. We have some players who never pass the ball. One thing that drives me mad also, is unforced knock ons. Sean O'Brien pretty much does one in every game. I can't for the life of me understand how that hasn't been coached out of him at this stage??

Everyone knocks on from time to time. Everyone. SOB gets so much ball in a game that its more likely to happen to him. As for the passing that is something that needs to be developed at all levels. I hope that is is changing now, and if it isn't then it does.

techdiver wrote: »

5. Better/More Kicking Options:
This was mentioned elsewhere too. We myopically rely on our 10 for kicking from hand, placed balls and in open play. In my opinion all players should be competent at kicking for territory accurately. With the GAA background of many of the players, we should be better than we are. Look at New Zealand and the ability they have with the ball. This has always been the case. When was the last time an Ireland back row player even thought about kicking a drop goal? (Zinzan Brooke anyone?). I understand that this is a long term goal as for the current batch of players that ship has sailed.

I'm not sure that's as big a deal as you might think. Remember Henshaws kick to the corner against SA last year, Redsers dink through against Romania or Healys monster boot during the RWC? Murray and Rob Kearney both have good boots on them as well.

techdiver wrote: »

6. Mobility:
Whilst Mike Ross is fantastic at locking down the scrum, that is where his contribution ends. He is pretty much a passenger for other parts of the game, apart from lineout lifting. The era of carrying a player like that is coming to an end. Props from all other top nations are more mobile and skillful. New Zealand even sacrifice power in the scrum in order to have mobility in their front row.

That's unfair on Rossy. He contributes a lot at ruck time as well. But he's from a different era. Look at Furlong and you can see we are developing more complete players at TH. Again it's a slow burner, but it is happening.

techdiver wrote: »

You may agree/disagree with any/all of those suggestions, but the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

The thing is we have never been guilty of "trying the same thing". The reasons we've failed at RWCs has changed from tournament to tournament. And we've been building the whole time. We're still not done yet though, but we are making a lot of progress in the right direction. Maybe the focus needs to shift a little in some areas, but overall we're in a good place. Especially compared to where we are coming from.

rrpc

techdiver wrote: »

1. Blood more options at every position:
Why it won't happen - As pointed out over and over again the 6 Nations is the cash cow for the IRFU and as such no risks will be permitted with team selection with the greater good in mind. I'm not suggesting cropping the entire team as some have, but to ensure potential younger talent get exposure to international rugby earlier in their careers. This works in other countries, why do we have to wait until a guy is 25 before capping him? (Hyperbole, I know, obvious exceptions apply - Henshaw, Henderson).

I'll start with this one. (Caps in brackets)

You've forgotten Marty Moore (10), Luke Marshall (6), Jordi Murphy (14), Rhys Ruddock (6), Jack McGrath (25), Kieran Marmion (4), Paddy Jackson (13).

All capped in their very early twenties. Jack McGrath has a cap for every year of his age.

Utah_Saint

awec wrote: »

Sorry lads, I'm in an irritable mood today which is turning me into an argumentative oul sh!te!

Don't worry...Doak is having the same affect on me too....;)

shuffol

techdiver wrote: »

Where did I say to replace him with someone who can't lock down a scrum???

Sorry then I'm not really sure what the point of what your saying is, unless it's that we need better players which is fairly simplistic.

The fact is I don't think Ross was ever a particularly talented player but Dean Richards noticed he could scrum and between him and Schmidt they turned him into a bloody good one. He's been worth his weight in gold the past 4 years. For the best part of 15 years we've barely had 2 TH props capable of locking a scrum.

jm08

rrpc wrote: »

No it's not. In any case we had not much defending to do against Mr. Bastareaud since he only got the ball five times and France had only 30% possession.

It's not only the centres who have to defend in midfield.

I'm not sure what your point is here - tackles still had to be made by the Kearney brothers and they more or less managed to do them in that game, presumably without the instruction of Earls which is what he is accused of - not organising the defence.

techdiver

molloyjh wrote: »

We have to wait until a guy is good enough before capping him. And when guys have been good enough (Moore, Hendo, Henshaw etc) they've gotten their shot.

I don't think we do enough in this area. Look how long it took the like of O'Brien and Heaslip to break through when others were crying out for their inclusion. Joe's record is better, but much of this was down to circumstantial situations (retirements, injuries, etc). We could still do better at developing young talent.

molloyjh wrote: »

But Ireland have varied their game over the last 2 years. Look at the 2014 6 Nations again. We played totally differently there than we did in 2015. And we were going back to more of a running game this RWC. What we've seen more and more since Joe took over is that Plan A generally works really well, and it changes depending on the opposition etc.

We also passed the ball more than any other team in the 6 Nations, which is conveniently forgotten in these debates.

On the passing front, I would be interested to know how many of them were from the base of the ruck to a forward 2 feet away. Other teams used the pick and go more than us, so the passing stat may be skewed by this.

molloyjh wrote: »

Offloading is allowed. But it is seldom used (it is used though). Like Australia and New Zealand seldom used it in the SFs. We don't have players of the same skill set though which also hampers our ability to play that game.

I don't think i is encouraged. There are many occasions where players are being tackled and have the chance to offload but actively make the decision not to and go for the recycle option, thus slowing the ball down. The weather played a major part in the changed game plan for New Zealand last Saturday. As I said earlier, I'm not asking for a 7's game as that would be silly.

molloyjh wrote: »

Everyone knocks on from time to time. Everyone. SOB gets so much ball in a game that its more likely to happen to him. As for the passing that is something that needs to be developed at all levels. I hope that is is changing now, and if it isn't then it does.

Agree to an extent, but I still think he does it far too often.

molloyjh wrote: »

I'm not sure that's as big a deal as you might think. Remember Henshaws kick to the corner against SA last year, Redsers dink through against Romania or Healys monster boot during the RWC? Murray and Rob Kearney both have good boots on them as well.

I still think we need to improve there. Kearney is very hit and miss with ball out of hand. He slices an awful lot of kicks. I also meant that the situation we found ourselves in when Sexton couldn't play, was that we had no one who could pin Argentina back when we were under pressure. Madigan is a fantastic place kicker and good from hand from penalties, but he can't kick for territory especially when we are on the back foot. There is no reason why another player can't fill that breach in the same mould as Giteau for Australia (I know he has experience at 10).

molloyjh wrote: »

That's unfair on Rossy. He contributes a lot at ruck time as well. But he's from a different era. Look at Furlong and you can see we are developing more complete players at TH. Again it's a slow burner, but it is happening.

Locking the scrum and hitting rucks is not enough in my opinion. I agree that Furlong is a step in the right direction. Moore, whilst more mobile than Ross is still not mobile enough in my books.

molloyjh wrote: »

The thing is we have never been guilty of "trying the same thing". The reasons we've failed at RWCs has changed from tournament to tournament. And we've been building the whole time. We're still not done yet though, but we are making a lot of progress in the right direction. Maybe the focus needs to shift a little in some areas, but overall we're in a good place. Especially compared to where we are coming from.

We just always seem to behind the curve when it matters at World Cups. We are the only top tier county to have consistently failed to produce at the World Cup. It's not just about finding problems and fixing them, it innovating so that all potential problems are mitigated.

To be honest all the points I have made could be bull**** by the time the next World Cup comes around. We need to keep our finger on the pulse of what is happening in world rugby and be agile enough to adapt.

techdiver

shuffol wrote: »

Sorry then I'm not really sure what the point of what your saying is, unless it's that we need better players which is fairly simplistic.

The fact is I don't think Ross was ever a particularly talented player but Dean Richards noticed he could scrum and between him and Schmidt they turned him into a bloody good one. He's been worth his weight in gold the past 4 years. For the best part of 15 years we've barely had 2 TH props capable of locking a scrum.

My point is a change of focus from the big barrel tight head to a more mobile one. Furlong is an example, but we need more. You can be mobile and still possess enough power to lock a scrum down.

jm08

awec wrote: »

There's nothing binary about it molloyjh, it's just the reality.

In fact, the argument could easily be made that Henderson was Ireland's best player across all positions for the world cup.

I really don't think that's up for much discussion.

This is different to me saying that Henderson is a better player than Toner. This is me saying that during the World Cup, Henderson out performed his peers. There is a subtle, but important difference.

It is frustrating that the guy played out of his skin and is talked about as if him playing was one of the issues. If POC was fit I suspect he'd have been playing anyway, Henderson was absolutely no part of the problem.

Most players look great when paired with POC - he facilitated that (many people will say that DOC had a great career on the back of POC!).

In one of the warm-up games when Henderson was paired with Ryan, he didn't look anything special and I think the same thing may have happened for the Argentinian game when paired with Toner.

Clearlier

techdiver wrote: »

I don't think we do enough in this area. Look how long it took the like of O'Brien and Heaslip to break through when others were crying out for their inclusion. Joe's record is better, but much of this was down to circumstantial situations (retirements, injuries, etc). We could still do better at developing young talent.

O'Brien came through like a train - I have no recollection of any hesitation to include him in the Irish team, he made his debut for Ireland in an autumn international a year after he made his debut for Leinster and 15 months later started every game in the 6 nations.

Heaslip was delayed by Eddie but I think we all recognise that Eddie and his untouchables are a past era for Irish rugby. He did a lot of good things but he wasn't great at bringing through players.

techdiver wrote: »

On the passing front, I would be interested to know how many of them were from the base of the ruck to a forward 2 feet away. Other teams used the pick and go more than us, so the passing stat may be skewed by this.

We did a lot of one out rucking which skews the passing stats.

techdiver wrote: »

I don't think i is encouraged. There are many occasions where players are being tackled and have the chance to offload but actively make the decision not to and go for the recycle option, thus slowing the ball down. The weather played a major part in the changed game plan for New Zealand last Saturday. As I said earlier, I'm not asking for a 7's game as that would be silly.

They're encouraged to make good decision and recognise when the risk/reward of an offload justifies it.

techdiver wrote: »

I still think we need to improve there. Kearney is very hit and miss with ball out of hand. He slices an awful lot of kicks. I also meant that the situation we found ourselves in when Sexton couldn't play, was that we had no one who could pin Argentina back when we were under pressure. Madigan is a fantastic place kicker and good from hand from penalties, but he can't kick for territory especially when we are on the back foot. There is no reason why another player can't fill that breach in the same mould as Giteau for Australia (I know he has experience at 10).

Kearney isn't hit and miss with the ball out of hand anymore. Having a Giteau style player at 12 would be great if we had a Giteau style player. For evidence of how hard it is to do you need only look at Madigan who should have the skillset to do it but has been underwhelming in the position.

techdiver wrote: »

Locking the scrum and hitting rucks is not enough in my opinion. I agree that Furlong is a step in the right direction. Moore, whilst more mobile than Ross is still not mobile enough in my books.

When it comes to a modern day tighthead you first get a guy who can scrummage, everything else is a distant second because if you're tighthead can't scrummage your scrum is in trouble and you've lost one of the key platforms in the game.

techdiver wrote: »

We just always seem to behind the curve when it matters at World Cups. We are the only top tier county to have consistently failed to produce at the World Cup. It's not just about finding problems and fixing them, it innovating so that all potential problems are mitigated.

I'd argue that we've started to move ahead of the curve and innovate. We introduced the choke tackle, we brought the focus on rucking to a new level, Ireland were the first team to have centres who saw stealing ball at a ruck as a key part of their skillset. There's room for improvement for sure but it does feel like you're castigating Ireland for not being more like the All Blacks and not being innovative - the two don't really mix and I certainly don't want to try and copy another team.

techdiver wrote: »

To be honest all the points I have made could be bull**** by the time the next World Cup comes around. We need to keep our finger on the pulse of what is happening in world rugby and be agile enough to adapt.

I can't imagine a better person to do that than Schmidt.

Bogsnorkler

techdiver wrote: »

My point is a change of focus from the big barrel tight head to a more mobile one. Furlong is an example, but we need more. You can be mobile and still possess enough power to lock a scrum down.

Like Tony Buckley; a baller in fairness.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

I'm not sure what your point is here - tackles still had to be made by the Kearney brothers and they more or less managed to do them in that game, presumably without the instruction of Earls which is what he is accused of - not organising the defence.

The defensive deficiencies were collective and not down to any one person. Ive not seen anyone blame Earls.

Awesomeness

Felix Jones forced to retire. Real shame he might not have been everyones favourite but sad to see him go out like that

http://www.irishrugby.ie/news/36045.php#.VjD5prfhCM8

rrpc

Awesomeness wrote: »

Felix Jones forced to retire. Real shame he might not have been everyones favourite but sad to see him go out like that

http://www.irishrugby.ie/news/36045.php#.VjD5prfhCM8

Really bad news.

Another neck injury.

molloyjh

Awesomeness wrote: »

Felix Jones forced to retire. Real shame he might not have been everyones favourite but sad to see him go out like that

http://www.irishrugby.ie/news/36045.php#.VjD5prfhCM8

That's crap for the guy. He looked really good in the build up to the 2011 RWC but really has struggled with injuries since and never quite got back to the level he'd been at. Seems like a really sound guy too.

jm08

aimee1 wrote: »

The defensive deficiencies were collective and not down to any one person. Ive not seen anyone blame Earls.

Brian O'Driscoll (on Newstalk):

“I’ve never seen Ireland defend as narrow as they did and the disappointing thing for me is that you could see it early on. We never actually fixed it throughout the whole game.


“You’ve guys in there that don’t know each other and weren’t big communicators. For me, the two biggest losses were Jonny at 10 and possibly from a defensive point of view, Jared at 13, just being able to pull guys out to the width.


“I’m not shooting down (Keith) Earlsy. He’s played a lot out on the wing so he’s not as up to speed as some people are at 13.”

http://www.the42.ie/brian-odriscoll-argentina-ireland-2398687-Oct2015/

rrpc

jm08 wrote: »

Brian O'Driscoll (on Newstalk):



http://www.the42.ie/brian-odriscoll-argentina-ireland-2398687-Oct2015/

Is he not right though?

WarZ

I never thought I would see jm08 linking us to material that actually criticizes Keith Earls. I can't disagree with what BOD said now that I think about it. Hopefully this will end the Earls at 13 debate once and for all.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

Brian O'Driscoll (on Newstalk):



http://www.the42.ie/brian-odriscoll-argentina-ireland-2398687-Oct2015/

The quotes you provided are hardly pinning the blame on earls. Payne has been our 13 through a successful 6n and was our defensive lynchpin. Just because we missed payne doesnt automatically translate to blame earls. Earls did a job but he just isnt international class 13 and has had no real gametime at 13 at that level for 3-4 seasons until the rwc.

I dont think he is being scapegoated either. Its fair comment from BOD. And its hardly a shock statement to say we missed payne. Earls was not the only one who made errors but as far as the 13 jersey is concerned Payne is a better option especially in defence.

Edit* BOD does actually stick up for Earls

mfceiling

awec wrote: »

Sorry lads, I'm in an irritable mood today which is turning me into an argumentative oul sh!te!

Hope to jesus she had the dinner ready for you this evening!!

jm08

aimee1 wrote: »

The quotes you provided are hardly pinning the blame on earls. Payne has been our 13 through a successful 6n and was our defensive lynchpin. Just because we missed payne doesnt automatically translate to blame earls. Earls did a job but he just isnt international class 13 and has had no real gametime at 13 at that level for 3-4 seasons until the rwc.

I dont think he is being scapegoated either. Its fair comment from BOD. And its hardly a shock statement to say we missed payne. Earls was not the only one who made errors but as far as the 13 jersey is concerned Payne is a better option especially in defence.

Edit* BOD does actually stick up for Earls

I'd describe that quote as a fine example of damning with faint praise.

As for Payne's success in the 6Ns - Earls did well in the centre against the 2 6Ns teams involved (France & Italy) so that is a bit pointless. We haven't seen him defend against a SH team in this world cup.

ps (Payne was the centre in the 2 losses this season to England & Wales between 6Ns and Warmup games - Earls was MOTM v Wales in the centre in the first game).

Stheno

mfceiling wrote: »

Hope to jesus she had the dinner ready for you this evening!!

I reckon it's awecs tturn to cook and the missus will have a headache

Pink Fairy

Stheno wrote: »

I reckon it's awecs tturn to cook and the missus will have a headache

He's heading over to a.k.'s gaff......he'll get dinner and a shag

Stheno

Pink Fairy wrote: »

He's heading over to a.k.'s gaff......he'll get dinner and a shag

Jaysis that's two mods you've hit in one post!

Pink Fairy

Stheno wrote: »

Jaysis that's two mods you've hit in one post!

It's a talent

rrpc

jm08 wrote: »

We haven't seen him defend against a SH team in this world cup.
).

I thought Argentina was in the Southern hemisphere.

jm08

rrpc wrote: »

I thought Argentina was in the Southern hemisphere.

Yes. And Payne was injured for the Argentinian game so we haven't seen him defend against a SH Tier 1 team in this world cup.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Did Payne play against Australia and South Africa last November?

jm08

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Did Payne play against Australia and South Africa last November?

He played against SA last November and was injured for Australia.

Note my initial post on the subject:

As for Payne's success in the 6Ns - Earls did well in the centre against the 2 6Ns teams involved (France & Italy) so that is a bit pointless. We haven't seen him defend against a SH team in this world cup.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

I'd describe that quote as a fine example of damning with faint praise.

As for Payne's success in the 6Ns - Earls did well in the centre against the 2 6Ns teams involved (France & Italy) so that is a bit pointless. We haven't seen him defend against a SH team in this world cup.

ps (Payne was the centre in the 2 losses this season to England & Wales between 6Ns and Warmup games - Earls was MOTM v Wales in the centre in the first game).

Just because BOD states Payne is our best 13 defender doesnt mean he is blaming Earls. It is more a case of stating the bleedin obvious.

Our defence at the start was all over the place starting at the breakdown and going out from there. So it was very much a collective over individual

rrpc

jm08 wrote: »

Yes. And Payne was injured for the Argentinian game so we haven't seen him defend against a SH Tier 1 team in this world cup.

A second hyphen in your post would have eased my confusion.

'him' could have meant either Payne or Earls.

jm08

aimee1 wrote: »

Just because BOD states Payne is our best 13 defender doesnt mean he is blaming Earls. It is more a case of stating the bleedin obvious.

Our defence at the start was all over the place starting at the breakdown and going out from there. So it was very much a collective over individual

Going on the comments, it would seem that people thought that BOD was blaming Earls (going on the thumbs up).

Sample here:

Earls getting blamed again? He would have preferred to be on the wing Im sure but he was by far our best option after Payne’s injury . He was also unable to tackle on the Kearney’s behalf unfortunately, there was no point in having a non scoring wing there to tackle when he missed 5 tackles in a game. Rob has been missing his fair share over the years but has never been called to task as much as Earls.

jm08

rrpc wrote: »

A second hyphen in your post would have eased my confusion.

'him' could have meant either Payne or Earls.

Sorry, reprimand accepted.

WarZ

I would trust BOD's opinion. Earls is no 13. Then again most people on here knew that already.

He can't defend and he's prone to knock ons and poor vision when attacking.

Leave him on the wing. In the centre he is too distracted.

captbarnacles

It was disconcerting watching him being picked up and driven back twice by argentina. Not his fault obviously.

rrpc

WarZ wrote: »

I would trust BOD's opinion. Earls is no 13. Then again most people on here knew that already.

He can't defend and he's prone to knock ons and poor vision when attacking.

Leave him on the wing. In the centre he is too distracted.

That's a bit unfair. He can defend his own channel very well and doesn't often miss tackles. It's being asked to run the defensive line that's a step too far.

I'm not sure if Cave can do it either. But that's the problem when the side is shorn of defensive leaders suddenly, you lose plan A, B and C all in one go.

QuinDixie

I would rank Heaslip in international terms as very average, more often than not overshadowed by his opposite number.
read. vuinaploa, vermullen, faletau, pocock, picamoles, parisse are vastly superior to heaslip.
his ball carrying stats are very poor and he has not sold a side step since 2009.
I accept his defense and set piece are good, but his general play of passing, running and dodging tackles are poor compared to those named above

QuinDixie

QuinDixie wrote: »

I would rank Heaslip in international terms as very average, more often than not overshadowed by his opposite number.
read. vuinaploa, vermullen, faletau, pocock, picamoles, parisse are vastly superior to heaslip.
his ball carrying stats are very poor and he has not sold a side step since 2009.
I accept his defense and set piece are good, but his general play of passing, running and dodging tackles are poor compared to those named above

If those players are 10/10, Heaslip is 9/10. The language your using suggests there is a vast gulf which there is not.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

If those players are 10/10, Heaslip is 9/10. The language your using suggests there is a vast gulf which there is not.

The fact Warren Gatland selected Heaslip at 8 ahead of two of those guys (and would have selected him there ahead of a bunch of the rest of them) for the majority of the Lions' tests shows the poster is obviously missing something pretty significant in his appraisal of Heaslip.

molloyjh

QuinDixie wrote: »

I would rank Heaslip in international terms as very average, more often than not overshadowed by his opposite number.
read. vuinaploa, vermullen, faletau, pocock, picamoles, parisse are vastly superior to heaslip.
his ball carrying stats are very poor and he has not sold a side step since 2009.
I accept his defense and set piece are good, but his general play of passing, running and dodging tackles are poor compared to those named above

His passing is actually pretty good by any standard. And as people have tried to explain to you (and others before you) he is not there to "dodge tackles" and make line breaks. He has shown in the past he can do those things, but he is being asked now to do other things.

Like I said he does a lot of the blindside work in open play. Take Locky at Leinster a few years back. Never got much in the way of recognition but was a core part to the way Leinster played the game. You need that guy who is going to do the crap work around the fringes. Take on ball in bad/tight areas, make a yard or two and present decent ball back for next phase. Heaslip does that incredibly well. And by having him do that it means that we can better utilise POMs athleticism and SOBs ball carrying in the wider channels.

Rugby isn't a simple game of "he who runs furthest and past most people is best". Everyone has a role, and all parts build to the whole. Heaslip plays his part and plays it well. And he is far better than someone like Vunipola in a lot of areas, but because Vunipola is a big guy who you can see running through people a few times he looks like he is doing more. But it's just not that simple at all.

CurryFlavoured

Heaslip's a good player but not elite imo, I don't think he'd be in my top 5 #8s in the world.

aimee1

QuinDixie wrote: »

I would rank Heaslip in international terms as very average, more often than not overshadowed by his opposite number.
read. vuinaploa, vermullen, faletau, pocock, picamoles, parisse are vastly superior to heaslip.
his ball carrying stats are very poor and he has not sold a side step since 2009.
I accept his defense and set piece are good, but his general play of passing, running and dodging tackles are poor compared to those named above

Vunipola? Seriously? He is a good player but thats all.
Picamoles has a good media reputation but he hardly ever delivers consistantly from what I see.

Some of the others are better players but Heaslip is the most decorated player in NH rugby at club/country level in the last 7-8 years that i can think of. Not many guys in that time have won as many titles as JH and he contributed greatly to a lot of those successes.

Faletau vanishes when playing for the dragons a bit like how warburton goes missing in a cardiff blues shirt. That never happens with JH at leinster

Heaslip has delivered consistantly over a long time but he gets criticised because he doesn't do 30 yard runs beating 3 defenders to score a try like croker v france in 2009 every time he plays. Different players can wear the same number but perform different roles.

When he does retire he will be missed, not in the same category as BOD or POC but he is in the next group with the likes of ROG, Darcy etc.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

QuinDixie wrote: »

I would rank Heaslip in international terms as very average, more often than not overshadowed by his opposite number.
read. vuinaploa, vermullen, faletau, pocock, picamoles, parisse are vastly superior to heaslip.
his ball carrying stats are very poor and he has not sold a side step since 2009.
I accept his defense and set piece are good, but his general play of passing, running and dodging tackles are poor compared to those named above

Pocock's not even really an 8. Poor Jamie

Zzippy

QuinDixie wrote: »

I would rank Heaslip in international terms as very average, more often than not overshadowed by his opposite number.
read. vuinaploa, vermullen, faletau, pocock, picamoles, parisse are vastly superior to heaslip.
his ball carrying stats are very poor and he has not sold a side step since 2009.
I accept his defense and set piece are good, but his general play of passing, running and dodging tackles are poor compared to those named above

Let me guess. You'd pick CJ?

Neil3030

A back row either poaches ball or does the smashy smashy linford. Everyone knows that.

Yeah_Right

What would you all think about a draft system for the Irish provinces? I was talking about with some mates before the RWC and with the Super rugby squads being announced this week, I thought I'd ask you guys.

In NZ the franchises can name a squad of protected players from their region. I think it's 30. Any players not on that list can be picked up by other franchises. This has resulted in Dagg going to the Crusaders, Fekitoa and Naholo going to the Highlanders for example.

What if the provinces did something similar? Each province names a squad of say 40 players and other provinces can pick up any left overs. This means that Leinster's abundance of talent in the front row and loose forwards and Ulster's midfielders (for example) could be spread around and be getting regular game time. Surely that would be better for Ireland than having (potential) international players not even making the match day squad for Pro 12 and ERC matches.