Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

Noopti

Jesus...the sooner the actual match day arrives the better

molloyjh

jm08 wrote: »

If he played so well against Canada, Why did Schmidt drop him out of the starting lineup and move Earls (recovering from a broken jaw) into centre along with Robbie Henshaw.

Earls did not replace Fitz. Fitz played 12 and Earls played 13. Both were used to provide back-up to the first choice centre partnership. Fitz backing up Henshaw and Earls backing up Payne.

Mahatma Geansai

CatFromHue wrote: »

Fitzgerald and Zebo are completely different players.

Zebo is a finisher who doesn't really create much whereas Fitzgerald is much more creative, he's able to play 12 to a high level for example, but can't finish anywhere near as good as Zebo.

Complete nonsense tbh. Zebo's playmaking skills are one of his primary selling points. His passing range is unmatched by any other outside back in the country.

sydthebeat

jm08 wrote: »

And finally, I will continue to state that Zebo was played at fullback and not on the wing for the World Cup until posters here continue to ignore that that is what happened.

no.

posters here have an issue with you denigrating zebo by saying his current poor form is DUE to him playing fullback at the RWC.

when its obvious its due to inept coaching, average players inside him, and just a plain lack of form on the players behalf.

and as an aside, trying to blame 'contract negotiations' on a players poor form is an insult to a professional player.

shootermacg

TBH I wouldn't have any of the munster back 3 (possibly Earls at a stretch although he's a knock-on machine) playing in the national squad. Munster has lost the kicking battle against pretty much every team this season.

More importantly, there's rarely anyone at home (at FB and on Zebo's wing) when the ball gets turned over. I don't blame Earls for this, the blame has to rest with Zebo and Conway. They've both cost Munster dearly this season because of it.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

I'd regard contract negotiations as distracting

They havent distracted SOB much given his most recent performances

awec

molloyjh wrote: »

The rest of the games? He played really well against Canada and then only had 4 minutes against Italy and 18 against France. I don't know where you get some of this stuff from.

Also nobody has ever said provincial form was irrelevant, just that it isn't the only consideration.

From watching the games.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, some people rate Fitzgerald very highly (especially on this forum) and some people think he's just a decent player. I'm in the latter camp and don't think he fits into Ireland's strongest 23 (an opinion I have held for ages now).

jm08

molloyjh wrote: »

Earls did not replace Fitz. Fitz played 12 and Earls played 13. Both were used to provide back-up to the first choice centre partnership. Fitz backing up Henshaw and Earls backing up Payne.

But everyone here (up to the arrival of Ringrose anyway ) claim that Robbie is a 13 and not a 12.

Then some here want Schmidt to be sacked if he ever picks Earls in the centre. How bad those that make Fitz look when it comes to pecking order.:D

CatFromHue

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Complete nonsense tbh. Zebo's playmaking skills are one of his primary selling points. His passing range is unmatched by any other outside back in the country.

It was a lovely pass but more exception to the rule I think. There's a reason why you'll never see Zebo at 12 or 13.

I'd say his play making skills are over rated. He does pop up regularly at first receiver for Munster but doesn't actually do much when he does. Compare that to Fitz who may beat a man or get a break, half break, or off load in the same position.

Edit: This isn't me having a go at Zebo as I think he's an excellent finisher.

jm08

aimee1 wrote: »

They havent distracted SOB much given his most recent performances

He was injured for most of the negotiations :P

aimee1

CatFromHue wrote: »

Compare that to Fitz who may beat a man or get a break, half break, or off load in the same position.

Like against argentina you mean

I assume there are many examples of Zebo's passing & playmaking prowess available, given that Mahatma Geansai asserts that his playmaking skills are one of his primary selling points?

ArmchairQB

aimee1 wrote: »

They havent distracted SOB much given his most recent performances

His most recent performances have been when his contract talks have been concluded, agreed & signed.

Bazzo

jm08 wrote: »

But everyone here (up to the arrival of Ringrose anyway ) claim that Robbie is a 13 and not a 12.

Then some here want Schmidt to be sacked if he ever picks Earls in the centre. How bad those that make Fitz look when it comes to pecking order.:D

Robbie started out as a full back and he's an excellent one. Due to a shortage of centres for Ireland Connacht started playing him at 13 a couple of years ago and he's done very well there too. Then, under Schmidt, he's been played at 12 for Ireland(still hasn't played there for Connacht btw) and has played well there too. He's just a talented player and he can cover pretty much any of the 3 positions equally competently.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

From watching the games.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, some people rate Fitzgerald very highly (especially on this forum) and some people think he's just a decent player. I'm in the latter camp and don't think he fits into Ireland's strongest 23 (an opinion I have held for ages now).

But you said he was average in the other RWC games. He was picked out as having had a very good game against Canada and wasn't on long enough in any others to really judge. He couldn't have been average in multiple other games when he only really played 1 other game. And he wasn't average in that game either.

awec

molloyjh wrote: »

But you said he was average in the other RWC games. He was picked out as having had a very good game against Canada and wasn't on long enough in any others to really judge. He couldn't have been average in multiple other games when he only really played 1 other game. And he wasn't average in that game either.

Even in the warmups he was average. I don't think he was THAT good against Canada, nothing noteworthy.

He's a player that wouldn't make it into my first choice 23 but if he was put in the side it wouldn't be annoying or anything like that.

As I said though, my selection was completely unrealistic so it's a moot point.

jm08

CatFromHue wrote: »

It was a lovely pass but more exception to the rule I think. There's a reason why you'll never see Zebo at 12 or 13.

I'd say his play making skills are over rated. He does pop up regularly at first receiver for Munster but doesn't actually do much when he does. Compare that to Fitz who may beat a man or get a break, half break, or off load in the same position.

The pass shows its in his range. You need a variety of passes.

What's your point about not seeing him at 12 or 13? He is a winger whose top required attribute is taking passes and scoring tries.

If you need to compare. Fitz and Zebo, it should be in the position they both play on - the wing.

awec

In other news Payne has been added to Ulster's european squad so must be due to return in the next few weeks, which probably means he'll be available for the 6N.

Mr Tickle

Given the form of McCloskey (spelled right?) i'd like to see himself and Henshaw in the centre.

Payne/Kearney to fight it out for FB. Personally I'd take Payne of the two but either seem plausible.

I think it's still a year early for Ringrose but going forward he could be brought in to 13 with Henshaw going to 15.

I'd still have Fitzgerald in the 23. Either on the bench or a wing. Particularly if it's decided that madigan is out of contention we could use the flexibilty that Fitz brings.

jm08

Bazzo wrote: »

Robbie started out as a full back and he's an excellent one. Due to a shortage of centres for Ireland Connacht started playing him at 13 a couple of years ago and he's done very well there too. Then, under Schmidt, he's been played at 12 for Ireland(still hasn't played there for Connacht btw) and has played well there too. He's just a talented player and he can cover pretty much any of the 3 positions equally competently.

So considering Robbie can play either 12 or 13 equally well, he selects Earls (with broken jaw) to to play in the centre ahead of a combination of Robbie & Luke

Scythica

awec wrote: »

In other news Payne has been added to Ulster's european squad so must be due to return in the next few weeks, which probably means he'll be available for the 6N.

As an Ulster fan I'm glad he's back (god please @ 15) but as an Ireland fan I can't help feel a bit disappointed that he's back in the centre mix...

Bazzo

jm08 wrote: »

So considering Robbie can play either 12 or 13 equally well, he selects Earls (with broken jaw) to to play in the centre ahead of a combination of Robbie & Luke

Indeed he did. I think you'll find that a lot of people here and in the punditry world weren't a big fan of the selection. Most people think it's because Payne was initially expected to only be out for about a week and it was the selection that caused the least upset in the backline.

Not sure why you keep adding in that Earls was back from a broken jaw. Or are you just criticising him being selected at all after the injury?

molloyjh

Scythica wrote: »

As an Ulster fan I'm glad he's back (god please @ 15) but as an Ireland fan I can't help feel a bit disappointed that he's back in the centre mix...

He may not be. There are 4 games between now and the 6 Nations and Payne isnb't back yet. He might get 2 or 3 games between now and then but will that be enough to see him back in contention for the Ireland jersey? There's still no guarantee that he'll be playing centre for Ulster, nevermind Ireland.

Either way he gets far too much grief. He's a pretty handy centre and works just fine at Test level.

awec

He will definitely play 13 for Ulster unfortunately.

Bridge93

I would've thought there is 0 chance of Payne playing fullback in the 6N. He hasn't played in months so if he is going to go straight back into the team it won't be in a position he hasn't played in even longer

jm08

Bazzo wrote: »

Indeed he did. I think you'll find that a lot of people here and in the punditry world weren't a big fan of the selection. Most people think it's because Payne was initially expected to only be out for about a week and it was the selection that caused the least upset in the backline.

Not sure why you keep adding in that Earls was back from a broken jaw. Or are you just criticising him being selected at all after the injury?

I'm making the point that even though earls wasn't fully fit to play, Schmidt gave him a lot of game time when he could have used a fully fit Fitzgerald which suggests that Fitz's form for the World Cup is getting better and better.

Mr Tickle

Bridge93 wrote: »

I would've thought there is 0 chance of Payne playing fullback in the 6N. He hasn't played in months so if he is going to go straight back into the team it won't be in a position he hasn't played in even longer

I know but a girl can dream....

jm08

jm08 wrote: »

So considering Robbie can play either 12 or 13 equally well, he selects Earls (with broken jaw) to to play in the centre ahead of a combination of Robbie & Luke

Your not confused, your ignoring what people are saying and as always making up some narrative to promote one set of players or slight another.

Henshaw was built into Ireland's system at 12. Payne at 13. That's where they trained, that was their job. Earls and Fitz were there as wingers and backup centres with Earls fitting in at 13 and Fitz fitting in at 12.

They were not in competition with each other at centre, they both had separate and distinct backup roles there. Earls could have had a skull fracture and leprosy and it still wouldn't make any difference to whatever argument your trying to make.

sydthebeat

jm08 wrote: »

I'm making the point that even though earls wasn't fully fit to play, Schmidt gave him a lot of game time when he could have used a fully fit Fitzgerald which suggests that Fitz's form for the World Cup is getting better and better.

who says he wasnt fully fit to play?

either he was cleared fit to play or he wasnt........

are you saying the irish medical staff were negligent?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Your not confused, your ignoring what people are saying and as always making up some narrative to promote one set of players or slight another.

Henshaw was built into Ireland's system at 12. Payne at 13. That's where they trained, that was their job. Earls and Fitz were there as wingers and backup centres with Earls fitting in at 13 and Fitz fitting in at 12.

They we're not in competition with each other at centre, they both had separate and distinct backup roles there. Earls could have had a skull fracture and leprosy and it still wouldn't make any difference to whatever argument your trying to make.

So what you're saying is that even with leprosy Earls was still a better option that Fitz?

Zzippy

molloyjh wrote: »

He may not be. There are 4 games between now and the 6 Nations and Payne isnb't back yet. He might get 2 or 3 games between now and then but will that be enough to see him back in contention for the Ireland jersey? There's still no guarantee that he'll be playing centre for Ulster, nevermind Ireland.

Either way he gets far too much grief. He's a pretty handy centre and works just fine at Test level.

Agreed, but IMO a) he's a better 15, b) he's not the best option at 13, c) he was only played at 13 because Henshaw was moved to 12 to fill the gap left by Darcy and d) now that McCloskey has emerged as a viable option at 12 Henshaw should be played at 13 and let Payne duke it out with Kearney for the 15 jersey.

Journeyman_1

Deleted User wrote: »

Your not confused, your ignoring what people are saying and as always making up some narrative to promote one set of players or slight another.

Henshaw was built into Ireland's system at 12. Payne at 13. That's where they trained, that was their job. Earls and Fitz were there as wingers and backup centres with Earls fitting in at 13 and Fitz fitting in at 12.

They we're not in competition with each other at centre, they both had separate and distinct backup roles there. Earls could have had a skull fracture and leprosy and it still wouldn't make any difference to whatever argument your trying to make.

A bit of leprosy wouldn't be a bad quality to have in a centre. It would really affect the oppositions willingness to tackle him. The only problem is that it wouldn't be as useful with Earls, as he'd still need to catch the ball occasionally!

sydthebeat

Zzippy wrote: »

Agreed, but IMO a) he's a better 15, b) he's not the best option at 13, c) he was only played at 13 because Henshaw was moved to 12 to fill the gap left by Darcy and d) now that McCloskey has emerged as a viable option at 12 Henshaw should be played at 13 and let Payne duke it out with Kearney for the 15 jersey.

agreed in principle, though id like to see mccloskey get some game time at international level before rubber stamping his credentials. Pity theres no wolfhounds game.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So what you're saying is that even with leprosy Earls was still a better option that Fitz?

Yes and more photogenic too. He has been in 27% more IRFU promotional materials also so should be captain and you can see the team gets a big lift every time he knocks on.

Also, Earls agent doesn't do anything in public and is in fact a mute so there won't be any conflict of interest with media duties.

Earls also had a stern look on his face, the sort that gets Donnchadh Ryan into the Ireland squad, when Keatley was being ironically reverse supported all of which points to him being first choice 13 but actually backup just to confuse other teams.

Mr Tickle

Zzippy wrote: »

Agreed, but IMO a) he's a better 15, b) he's not the best option at 13, c) he was only played at 13 because Henshaw was moved to 12 to fill the gap left by Darcy and d) now that McCloskey has emerged as a viable option at 12 Henshaw should be played at 13 and let Payne duke it out with Kearney for the 15 jersey.

Agree completely. I also think we missed Payne in terms of organising the defense in the argentina game. I think BOD wrote an article at some point earlier in the tournament pointing out the same thing.

I can't think of anything that Kearney brings that he doesn't at 15.

awec

Mr Tickle wrote: »

Agree completely. I also think we missed Payne in terms of organising the defense in the argentina game. I think BOD wrote an article at some point earlier in the tournament pointing out the same thing.

I can't think of anything that Kearney brings that he doesn't at 15.

Kearney is better in the air than Payne whereas Payne offers a lot more in attack than Kearney. I think Payne is probably a bit better defensively too, though it's probably six of one half a dozen of the other.

awec

Bridge93 wrote: »

I would've thought there is 0 chance of Payne playing fullback in the 6N. He hasn't played in months so if he is going to go straight back into the team it won't be in a position he hasn't played in even longer

In fairness this hasn't been an issue in the past.

I agree it's highly unlikely we'll see it, but for example Luke Fitzgerald hadn't played 12 in something like 4 years before the Canada game this year.

awec

Zzippy wrote: »

Agreed, but IMO a) he's a better 15, b) he's not the best option at 13, c) he was only played at 13 because Henshaw was moved to 12 to fill the gap left by Darcy and d) now that McCloskey has emerged as a viable option at 12 Henshaw should be played at 13 and let Payne duke it out with Kearney for the 15 jersey.

Have to agree. Ireland are missing out not giving him at go at 15. He is lethal at finding space from deep and joining the attacking line.

If he can play 15 at test level as good as he could for Ulster then Ireland would have a serious weapon in their arsenal. In all honesty his best performances for Ulster have all come at full back.

CatFromHue

Hard to know what Schmidt will do as when Payne first moved to 13 there was a strong need for it as there weren't many other options and RK was there at 15.

With McCloskey, Cave, and Marshall getting back to form Ulster have plenty of options at 13 but only have Ludik at 15.

Even the options available for Schmidt at centre are far better than 2 years ago.

jm08

sydthebeat wrote: »

who says he wasnt fully fit to play?

either he was cleared fit to play or he wasnt........

are you saying the irish medical staff were negligent?

If there was a good enough option to play there (Fitz) why wasn't he used? The point is that not a fully fit earls was regarded as a better option than a fully fit Fitz.

As for the medical staff - they seemed to have been rather slow finding out how bad Payne's injury was.

jm08

Deleted User wrote: »

Your not confused, your ignoring what people are saying and as always making up some narrative to promote one set of players or slight another.

Henshaw was built into Ireland's system at 12. Payne at 13. That's where they trained, that was their job. Earls and Fitz were there as wingers and backup centres with Earls fitting in at 13 and Fitz fitting in at 12.

They were not in competition with each other at centre, they both had separate and distinct backup roles there. Earls could have had a skull fracture and leprosy and it still wouldn't make any difference to whatever argument your trying to make.

So Earls had no cover in the event of Injury? What would have happened if he had to go off?

Fireball07

If I was picking the team, I'd probably go for:

McGrath Best White
Toner Ryan
Ruddock Heaslip O'Brien

Murray Sexton
McCloskey Henshaw
Earls Payne Trimble

Cronin Kilcoyne Moore McCarthy Stander Reddan Jackson Fitzgerald

With Strauss, Healy, Ross, Muldowney, Henry, Marmion, Madigan, Zebo and Kearney in and around the squad too.


However, I don't really expect Joe to pick that team.

Mahatma Geansai

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

I think that Stander needs to be involved somewhere, but I'm quite happy with that side.

I really think that Zebo needs to be developed as a play-making and strike-running fullback, but that needs to happen at Munster first. Short of putting Madigan/Olding there, we have no outside back that has a combined passing and kicking game which approaches his.

Even though I 100% agree that Stander should be involved, a part of me wants to see the ensuing ****storm if he's not called up :pac:

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

So Earls had no cover in the event of Injury? What would have happened if he had to go off?

Either

Fitz at 12 and henshaw moved out.

Jackson to 10 and madigan to 12 with henshaw moving out to 13

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

If there was a good enough option to play there (Fitz) why wasn't he used? The point is that not a fully fit earls was regarded as a better option than a fully fit Fitz.

As for the medical staff - they seemed to have been rather slow finding out how bad Payne's injury was.

Earls was fully fit in the RWC though. He played often enough.

Mahatma Geansai

aimee1 wrote: »

Earls was fully fit in the RWC though. He played often enough.

Apart from the broken jaw anyway.

sydthebeat

jm08 wrote: »

If there was a good enough option to play there (Fitz) why wasn't he used? The point is that not a fully fit earls was regarded as a better option than a fully fit Fitz.

As for the medical staff - they seemed to have been rather slow finding out how bad Payne's injury was.

because, as has been painfully point out to you again and again and again... fitz was back up 12, earls was back up 13

its really not hard to understand

jm08

aimee1 wrote: »

Earls was fully fit in the RWC though. He played often enough.

Being played often is no indication of being fully fit.

aimee1

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Apart from the broken jaw anyway.

Wales game was august 28th?? RWC opener was sept 19th. Earls played in every game. No way he was on the pitch with an injury of that nature not fully healed. So he was not playing with a broken jaw

sydthebeat

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Apart from the broken jaw anyway.

earls had recovered from the broken jaw in time for the RWC

it healed up within 2 weeks, according to the man himself

http://www.the42.ie/keith-earls-munster-ireland-tackle-technique-2454628-Nov2015/

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/munster-rugby/earls-reveals-preworld-cup-jaw-scare-and-hails-conway-34218109.html

"Tackle technique nearly cost me a World Cup against Wales, I fractured my jaw the week before that. I was blessed that it was only a cosmetic thing that I didnt need to worry about and it isn't too bad now even so it healed up within two weeks.

the two of ye really are a parody at this stage, looking for any reason at all to hail the red ahead of the blue.