Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

CatFromHue

I'd wait to see how he gets on next week tbh.

CIARAN_BOYLE

digzy wrote: »

Just watching stander lately, surely he's worth a place on our bench for the 6n.
Personally I'd have him on ahead of heaslip in at least 2 of the games.

Id have him in a group with Murphy Ruddock Henry and TOD fighting for a spot on the bench.

case885

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote:

Id have him in a group with Murphy Ruddock Henry and TOD fighting for a spot on the bench.

Blindside will have to be filled for the 6n.

CIARAN_BOYLE

case885 wrote: »

Blindside will have to be filled for the 6n.

Right so Ruddock starts if fit and in form, if not I think Stander might get the shirt depending on form. SOB might shift over and Henry could start either.

A lot of rugby between now and then.

irishbucsfan

He may not start for us right away but I think he's good enough to do it long-term. Young guy as well, I think himself/SOB/POM could be our back row after Heaslip retires. Of course there's any number of other players who could emerge and push them.

Triumvirate

Stander needs to be tested at a higher level before we really know where he is. To date, he benefits from being a very good player playing in teams shorn of internationals and against similar. He has done well in the ECC but certainly not as prevalent as he has been in the international window Pro12 games.

He's definitely someone that could be test level though and given that JH is about to turn 32, we need someone to take be a genuine test option in the next 18 months or so; Stander looks potentially to be a strong option for that spot.

shootermacg

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Right so Ruddock starts if fit and in form, if not I think Stander might get the shirt depending on form. SOB might shift over and Henry could start either.

A lot of rugby between now and then.

I see him as a young Heaslip / wrecking-ball hybrid, both work hard, make the tackles and pop up all over the field and turn over ball when needed, but CJ is the better carrier these days.

I do see him as being head and shoulders over Ruddock. I'd have Stander for his work-rate and confidence, he's really looking like a leader on the field.

Just watching him off the ball is crazy, he's bouncing up after a tackle and bloody sprinting just to get in place to make another tackle, which is nuts for an 6/8 in the closing minutes of a game. There's a hunger about him that's been missing among some of the bigger names.

I'm starting to feel a bit ghey, so I'll get me coat...

CatFromHue

shootermacg wrote: »

Just watching him off the ball is crazy, he's bouncing up after a tackle and bloody sprinting just to get in place to make another tackle, which is nuts for an 6/8 in the closing minutes of a game. There's a hunger about him that's been missing among some of the bigger names.

I never really saw that hunger in him before this season so it's good to see him trying to make that step up.

The Diamond Sea

Triumvirate wrote: »

Stander needs to be tested at a higher level before we really know where he is. To date, he benefits from being a very good player playing in teams shorn of internationals and against similar. He has done well in the ECC but certainly not as prevalent as he has been in the international window Pro12 games.

He's definitely someone that could be test level though and given that JH is about to turn 32, we need someone to take be a genuine test option in the next 18 months or so; Stander looks potentially to be a strong option for that spot.

He got Motm today and scored , what else do you want . He nearly gets MOTM in every second game he plays

CMOTDibbler

The Diamond Sea wrote: »

He got Motm today and scored , what else do you want . He nearly gets MOTM in every second game he plays

Stander is an excellent player and should be able to step it up to international level. However, the problem is that he would be taking the place of somebody like Jack Conan who is also an excellent player and that would be a shame imo.

Rightwing

Well one thing is certain, our back row is nowhere near as strong as many thought once you take out 1 or 2 like POM/SOB. The Argies proved this. Therefore, CJ will have to be given an opportunity.

Yeah_Right

Does CJ have any experience at 6 or 7?

case885

Yeah_Right wrote:

Does CJ have any experience at 6 or 7?

He played games at openside for the bulls and a few for Munster but he's really a 8/6. I'd say he's equally comfortable/effective at blindside as at no 8.

Deise Hurler

Another poor performance from the likes of Dave Kearney, Jordi Murphy and a few more of the Leinster lads who once again were on the bench today, (McGrath, Furlong, etc) but will still be deemed good enough for Ireland by he in the blue tinted glasses who can do no wrong.
It's time for Joe to look outside D4.

case885

In regards to the captaincy heaslip did himself no favours today either.

Tox56

Deise Hurler wrote: »

Another poor performance from the likes of Dave Kearney, Jordi Murphy and a few more of the Leinster lads who once again were on the bench today, (McGrath, Furlong, etc) but will still be deemed good enough for Ireland by he in the blue tinted glasses who can do no wrong.
It's time for Joe to look outside D4.

Yeah we've been crippled by Schmidt's Leinster bias over the last two years, ffs at this stage he has been Ireland coach almost as long as he was Leinster coach

Todd Toddington III

case885 wrote:

In regards to the captaincy heaslip did himself no favours today either.

he seems to come across as whining to the ref on TV, never a good approach imo

CatFromHue

Deise Hurler wrote: »

Another poor performance from the likes of Dave Kearney, Jordi Murphy and a few more of the Leinster lads who once again were on the bench today, (McGrath, Furlong, etc) but will still be deemed good enough for Ireland by he in the blue tinted glasses who can do no wrong.
It's time for Joe to look outside D4.

I don't think Kearney played bad. He messed up a bouncing ball for their try all right but other than that he was good.

Not sure why you mention Furlong either as I don't think he's being picked in the Irish squad ahead of any other TH's.

molloyjh

CatFromHue wrote: »

I don't think Kearney played bad. He messed up a bouncing ball for their try all right but other than that he was good.

You're wasting your time. One mistake and they're all out from the long grass having a go. That he was actually quite good other than that mistake is irrelevant. Sure you can tell from the post that the individual has an agenda.

Deise Hurler

molloyjh wrote: »

You're wasting your time. One mistake and they're all out from the long grass having a go. That he was actually quite good other than that mistake is irrelevant. Sure you can tell from the post that the individual has an agenda.

No have said it before Dave Kearney is not good enough for ireland. Very average player. Shown up against Argentina. Zebo is far superior.

And yes I do have an agenda. The constant picking of Leinster players over those from other provinces just because Joe has worked with them before.

CatFromHue

He's started 11 good games for Ireland and only 1 poor 1 so I'm not sure of your maths.

Clegg

Heaslip's started this season poorly for Leinster, but was our best player against Argentina so I think his place is pretty secure. I'm more worried about Healy tbh. It was right to gamble on his fitness and bring him to the WC, but his performances since being passed fit have been nothing special. Might need to have a look at Kilcoyne to deputise for McGrath if Healy doesn't improve.

Sanjuro

Deise Hurler wrote: »

deemed good enough for Ireland by he in the blue tinted glasses who can do no wrong.
It's time for Joe to look outside D4.

My god. Is this kind of talk still going on?

Kirk Van Houten

Sanjuro wrote:

My god. Is this kind of talk still going on?

What makes you think it will stop. I dont remember it stopping when Kidney was in charge.

.ak

Deise Hurler wrote: »

No have said it before Dave Kearney is not good enough for ireland. Very average player. Shown up against Argentina. Zebo is far superior.

And yes I do have an agenda. The constant picking of Leinster players over those from other provinces just because Joe has worked with them before.

No more provincial bs please or you can take a break from the forum.

Pink Fairy

Have just arrived in home and saw the scoreline, were Wasps that good or were Leinster that bad?

sullivlo

Pink Fairy wrote: »

Have just arrived in home and saw the scoreline, were Wasps that good or were Leinster that bad?

Leinster were horrific.

techdiver

Pink Fairy wrote: »

Have just arrived in home and saw the scoreline, were Wasps that good or were Leinster that bad?

Leinster were hopeless. Worst performance I've ever seen.

International players continuing their poor world cup form and even taking it a step further. No intensity and a complete lack of interest shown!

molloyjh

techdiver wrote: »

Leinster were hopeless. Worst performance I've ever seen.

International players continuing their poor world cup form and even taking it a step further. No intensity and a complete lack of interest shown!

Poor RWC form? They were poor against Italy and for part of the Argentina game. Other than that they were actually pretty good.

God it's painful how history gets rewritten....

techdiver

molloyjh wrote: »

Poor RWC form? They were poor against Italy and for part of the Argentina game. Other than that they were actually pretty good.

God it's painful how history gets rewritten....

40 minutes against France does not a world cup make! Plus it was subsequently proven that France were truly awful in this world cup.

So in essence we beat no one of any significance.

As for Argentina, we were poor for most of that game. We were good for the middle section of the game but started terribly and finished just as badly. 2 breaks from Luke resulted in 2 tries. Only for that the scoreline would have been even more embarrassing.

Stheno

Pink Fairy wrote: »

Have just arrived in home and saw the scoreline, were Wasps that good or were Leinster that bad?

Leinster were desperate

P.Walnuts

molloyjh wrote: »

Poor RWC form? They were poor against Italy and for part of the Argentina game. Other than that they were actually pretty good.

God it's painful how history gets rewritten....

Cant agree with this, we were poor in two of the three games that mattered. It was a poor world cup

flangemeistro

Sanjuro wrote: »

My god. Is this kind of talk still going on?

This talk will always go on as long as the the national team is made up of 80% from one province, who on recent results aren't even the form province.
Joe needs to look outside the box and stop choosing guys simply because he intimated them for two years and knows they'll do exactly what he says rather than bringing in new blood who might actually show a bit of flare and threat in attack which will call into question his negative game plan.
And this isn't provincial BS, I'm saying he needs to bring new blood from all four provinces and not just sticking with the ones who he has experience with.

sydthebeat

^^^

He says at a time connacht have never had more players involved in the international set up.

Pathetic provincial cry babying

flangemeistro

flangemeistro wrote: »

This talk will always go on as long as the the national team is made up of 80% from one province, who on recent results aren't even the form province.
Joe needs to look outside the box and stop choosing guys simply because he intimated them for two years and knows they'll do exactly what he says rather than bringing in new blood who might actually show a bit of flare and threat in attack which will call into question his negative game plan.
And this isn't provincial BS, I'm saying he needs to bring new blood from all four provinces and not just sticking with the ones who he has experience with.

Let's bring in players who won't listen to the coach. Okay.

Will people please try get it in their heads that it doesn't ****ing matter which province a player comes from

former total

Deleted User wrote: »

Will people please try get it in their heads that it doesn't ****ing matter which province a player comes from

It doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is whether Zebo is picked or not.

Let's be honest, that's the only selection people are complaining about.

flangemeistro

sydthebeat wrote: »

^^^

He says at a time connacht have never had more players involved in the international set up.

Pathetic provincial cry babying

Wow, name calling, your input really added to the discussion.
Thank you.

CMOTDibbler

flangemeistro wrote: »

This talk will always go on as long as the the national team is made up of 80% from one province, who on recent results aren't even the form province.
Joe needs to look outside the box and stop choosing guys simply because he intimated them for two years and knows they'll do exactly what he says rather than bringing in new blood who might actually show a bit of flare and threat in attack which will call into question his negative game plan.
And this isn't provincial BS, I'm saying he needs to bring new blood from all four provinces and not just sticking with the ones who he has experience with.

This is complete rubbish. Break down the Irish team and look at the various positions and you won't find too many tight decisions. I assume by 'intimated' you mean intimidated? Do you seriously think Joe Schmidt coaches by intimidation? That guys like POC are praising him because they're intimidated by him? POC has retired from international rugby now and has had ample time to set the record straight if that's what it was.

Between 2011 (Kidney) and 2015 (Schmidt) there were more players from Connacht and Ulster in 2015 than in 2011. The only player that showed any flair (I presume that's what you meant by flare) in attack in tough games was Luke FitzGerald.

And if it's not provincial BS, why are you referring to provincial results which have no relationship to individual player's skillsets or abilities?

flangemeistro

former total wrote: »

It doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is whether Zebo is picked or not.

Let's be honest, that's the only selection people are complaining about.

Well if that is what you have taken from the last few pages of this thread then you really are blinded and have a talent for selective reading and misinterpretation.

I hear they're still looking for someone to replace Kiss, you're unimaginative narrow mindedness would slot in perfectly in the current coaching setup.

jm08

former total wrote: »

It doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is whether Zebo is picked or not.

Let's be honest, that's the only selection people are complaining about.

On Zebo, I'd query why he wasn't given a chance in the warm-ups on the wing. I'd also query why Henderson wasn't started at 6 and D Ryan in the row with Toner.

I'd query how he got it so wrong about Cian Healy & his fitness. He at least should have brought Kilcoyne as cover as the most like-for-like replacement (probably instead of Darren Cave who he had no intention of using anyway).

phog

Deleted User wrote: »

Let's bring in players who won't listen to the coach. Okay.

Pathetic

errlloyd

I'll accept that players were picked off form if that is the debate we're having. Leinster clearly were not in good form at the end of the season. If in April you'd suggested Madigan would start the quarter final I think even the most ardent Leinster supporters would have been concerned. Keatley is a worse player on better form. Jackson is potentially a better player, but also wasn't on brilliant form.

There are a number of Leinster players who need a kick in the ass, and the funny thing is, I think they're going to get it in Leinster. Healy is now on the bench in crucial provincial games. Reddan and Boss will probably begin losing their place to McGrath. Madigan no longer starts inside centre, instead that is Reid.

All of that being said, I don't think you can pick on form as much as people would like. Stuart Lancaster was a great coach for picking form players imo. That's how outsiders like Slade, Joseph, Nowell, May, George and Watson broke into his backline. Even players like Haskell and Easter knocking around were coming out of international exile (effectively). But that chopping and changing was the reason his team lacked consistency and fell apart.

CMOTDibbler

jm08 wrote: »

On Zebo, I'd query why he wasn't given a chance in the warm-ups on the wing. I'd also query why Henderson wasn't started at 6 and D Ryan in the row with Toner.

I'd query how he got it so wrong about Cian Healy & his fitness. He at least should have brought Kilcoyne as cover as the most like-for-like replacement (probably instead of Darren Cave who he had no intention of using anyway).

Sensible questions.

I suspect that Zebo was being looked at as full back cover given that Schmidt already knew how he would go at wing. Because of the small squad size, backs would need to be able to double-up and cover more than one position. 5 of the 14 backs were half backs and even that was looked at as tight with Madigan being asked to cover SH. That left 9 to cover 5 positions.

Regarding Healy, with hindsight clearly it didn't work out, but how many here were saying that before the RWC? Henderson at 6 just doesn't make sense because he's clearly the anointed one for the second row in place of POC. That's a big enough job without throwing in the added work that a back row would have to do in training. It might have worked in a one off game, but it would have been a massive gamble.

kuang1

Jaysus lads it's hot in here today.

flangemeistro

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

This is complete rubbish. Break down the Irish team and look at the various positions and you won't find too many tight decisions. I assume by 'intimated' you mean intimidated? Do you seriously think Joe Schmidt coaches by intimidation? That guys like POC are praising him because they're intimidated by him? POC has retired from international rugby now and has had ample time to set the record straight if that's what it was.

Between 2011 (Kidney) and 2015 (Schmidt) there were more players from Connacht and Ulster in 2015 than in 2011. The only player that showed any flair (I presume that's what you meant by flare) in attack in tough games was Luke FitzGerald.

And if it's not provincial BS, why are you referring to provincial results which have no relationship to individual player's skillsets or abilities?

Firstly Thanks for picking up on my phones inaccuracy in spelling corrections, not sure what that has to do with anything but I suppose if you're desperately trying to pick holes in someone's posts then misspellings are a good start.

When it comes to Paul O'Connell he is a gent and role model of the game and it is certainly not his style to come out and question the current coach who has another two years left in his contract.
And not to mention a coach who has on national tv guaranteed POC a position in the Irish setup, and with POC Toulon future a little in doubt pending on how he recovers from this injury then it wouldn't be in his interest to give a warts and all description of Schmidts coaching tactics.

As for flair (once again thank you for correcting me) I wasn't on about in the current Irish camp, I was on about the flair that was left in all four of the provinces not the one we brought.

And as you brought up Fitz, ya he showed great imagination and flair against Argentina, but he wasn't in Schmidts game plan, that was forced upon him when a washed up Bowe (who should have never made the squad) got injured.

Fitz is a far better winger and should have started a lot more games but he's unpredictable, and Joe doesn't do unpredictable.

Can you imagine the difference if he trusted Cave in the centre alongside Henshaw with Earls and Fitz on both wings.

But no he puts Earls who was on fire on the wing into the centre because he had a run in with Cave a while back.
Petty methodical ****e that could have changed our WC journey.

If anyone here thinks there's nothing wrong with Joes selection process and were happy with the way we played against Italy and Argentina then you've set your expectations way too low or you're defending him for all the wrong reasons.

phog

phog wrote: »

Pathetic

Sorry what?

I rephrased this

Joe needs to look outside the box and stop choosing guys simply because he intimated them for two years and knows they'll do exactly what he says rather than bringing in new blood who might actually show a bit of flare and threat in attack which will call into question his negative game plan.

Why oh why would a coach wish to bring in players which won't listen to what he says

phog

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry what?

I rephrased this



Why oh why would a coach wish to bring in players which won't listen to what he says

Who do you think these players are? Where are you getting your information from?

former total

phog wrote: »

Who do you think these players are? Where are you getting your information from?

He's not. He's responding to the poster who was complaining that Joe didn't pick players who would not follow his game plan.

phog

phog wrote: »

Who do you think these players are? Where are you getting your information from?

I don't think these players exist