Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

Fractured his jaw before the tournament, was healed for opener luckily enough.

clsmooth

jm08 wrote: »

Being played often is no indication of being fully fit.

It does however tend to be an indicator that you're not injured (minor bumps and bruises aside)

Bazzo

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.

It's like banging your head against the wall except you might actually eventually get somewhere doing that.

Look, you're obviously not going to agree with me... or almost anyone on here by the looks of things about Fitzgerald. I for one, will just leave it at that.

jm08

sydthebeat wrote: »

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

Are you telling me that Fitz would have not trained at 13 even though he was on the bench to presumably cover injuries?

Wasn't the reason for Madigan's inclusion was his ability to cover 12 & 15 as well? Of the 2 centres, Henshaw was the least likely to get injured.

Sanjuro

Andy Farrell hired as Ireland defense coach?!

sydthebeat

jm08 wrote: »

Are you telling me that Fitz would have not trained at 13 even though he was on the bench to presumably cover injuries?

Wasn't the reason for Madigan's inclusion was his ability to cover 12 & 15 as well? Of the 2 centres, Henshaw was the least likely to get injured.

dont go trying to move goal posts....

fitz was back up 12, earls was back up 13

thats the reason earls played when payne was injured... none else.
similarly fitz played 12 when henshaw was injured.

Trying to turn it into some 'my players better than your player' argument is petty and childish.

wicklowdub

Sanjuro wrote: »

Andy Farrell hired as Ireland defense coach?!

??? didnt see that coming

sydthebeat

Sanjuro wrote: »

Andy Farrell hired as Ireland defense coach?!

just got a little sick in my mouth there.....

BonnieSituation

wicklowdub wrote: »

??? didnt see that coming

Just popped up on FB there about 7 min ago.

http://www.irishrugby.ie/news/36562.php#.Vo0zwxWLShc

ClanofLams

Sanjuro wrote: »

Andy Farrell hired as Ireland defense coach?!

And in their tweet about it they used a photo of him in an England top. I know it's irrelevant to the merits of the appointment but fairly bad PR management.

weird

Pink Fairy

He-he!

aimee1

Sanjuro wrote: »

Andy Farrell hired as Ireland defense coach?!

Swing low, sweet chariot
Coming for to carry me home......

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

Are you telling me that Fitz would have not trained at 13 even though he was on the bench to presumably cover injuries?

Wasn't the reason for Madigan's inclusion was his ability to cover 12 & 15 as well? Of the 2 centres, Henshaw was the least likely to get injured.

When RK was injured, who replaced him ???

The guy designated as FB cover or Madigan?

Neil3030

At first I was like :eek:

Then I remember all the games we played against England recently and how balls hard it was to score a try against them.

Then I was like.... hmmmm....

LostArt

Facking hell.

molloyjh

Sanjuro wrote: »

Andy Farrell hired as Ireland defense coach?!

I don't know about that one. Has Englands defence been particularly good in the last while? I don't know that it has. In fairness in that game against us in Twickenham 2 years ago their defence was genuinely something special I thought, but since then I can't remember being overly impressed with them. They conceded quite a lot in the 2015 6 Nations, but then a lot of that is skewed by that game against France I suppose.

jm08

sydthebeat wrote: »

dont go trying to move goal posts....

fitz was back up 12, earls was back up 13

thats the reason earls played when payne was injured... none else.
similarly fitz played 12 when henshaw was injured.

Trying to turn it into some 'my players better than your player' argument is petty and childish.

You made the claim that the reason fitz would not have been considered for 13 is because he would not have trained there. I don't agree. As bench cover at least he would have trained there.

In that article of 20th NOvember, earls says it's alllright NOW which would indicate to me that it wasn't alright up to then.

vienne86

Sanjuro wrote: »

Andy Farrell hired as Ireland defense coach?!

OMG - didn't see that one coming!

sydthebeat

jm08 wrote: »

1. You made the claim that the reason fitz would not have been considered for 13 is because he would not have trained there..

i absolutely did not

jm08 wrote: »

In that article of 20th NOvember, earls says it's alleging NOW which would indicate to me that it wasn't alright up to then.

really... is THAT the line your now trying to pull????
youre gone beyond parody now.
the guy HIMSELF has said it

molloyjh

jm08 wrote: »

You made the claim that the reason fitz would not have been considered for 13 is because he would not have trained there. I don't agree.

Whether you agree or not doesn't change the facts. Which are pretty blatant. Fitz was back up 12 and Earls was back up 13.

Now maybe once Payne was injured Fitz started doing more training at 13 to back up Earls but in terms of the hierarchy Earls was ahead o Fitz at 13 and Fitz was ahead of Earls at 12.

Is there any chance we can now end this entirely moronic conversation. It's all very simple and self explanatory so shouldn't require all this time and effort.

LostArt

Re: Andy Farrell, thank god it's not Kurt McQuilken.

shootermacg

Is there not a conflict of interest, how do we know he won't be throwing his kid an auld bone every know and then?

Mahatma Geansai

There's a list of Ireland's top 30 rugby players of 2015 on pundit arena here.

Its not at all surprising to see POM, Best, and POC rounding out the top 3, although sentimentality would have seen me give the top spot to POC.

Mahatma Geansai

LostArt wrote: »

Re: Andy Farrell, thank god it's not Kurt McQuilken.

Club before country?

jm08

sydthebeat wrote: »

i absolutely did not



really... is THAT the line your now trying to pull????
youre gone beyond parody now.
the guy HIMSELF has said it

Apologies I thought you were supporting that claim that ventour made.

He was hardly going to say it was fractured straight out and land the irfu medical people in the **** particularly when Schmidt pretended it was a concussion at the time!

He did let slip thought that it was OK NOW in November which is around the usual time a fracture would take to heal.

LostArt

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Club before country?

We've given enough, we can't even hire a forwards coach so Kurt going would have been a disaster.

jm08

molloyjh wrote: »

Whether you agree or not doesn't change the facts. Which are pretty blatant. Fitz was back up 12 and Earls was back up 13.

Now maybe once Payne was injured Fitz started doing more training at 13 to back up Earls but in terms of the hierarchy Earls was ahead o Fitz at 13 and Fitz was ahead of Earls at 12.

Is there any chance we can now end this entirely moronic conversation. It's all very simple and self explanatory so shouldn't require all this time and effort.

All very simple indeed interpreted like that, particularly when Cave is excluded from the equation.

Neil3030

Schmidt: "Go get that really good English coach... name begins with an 'F'.... son plays outhalf... ugggh what's his name again..."

IRFU: "Say no more Joe, we know EXACTLY who you're talking about!"

Noopti

I would love to see Payne compete with Kearney at FB. Kearney just isn't doing it for me these past couple of years. He is good under the high ball, but his counter attacking is non-existent these days and his defence is always worrying.

So would love to see Payne handed the 15 jersey for a game or two, see how he goes. He was the best back in the country when playing 15 for Ulster. Combine him with some really talented other backs.....could be very special. When he has more time and space he glides past players, and makes good decisions. We have many more options at centre now, and we have scope to experiment (to a degree) with the next world cup a number of years away. So we could have a look at a new centre partnership(s), and shift Payne out to FB. And he can cover centre if required. Kearney is a FB. And Joe loves players who can cover other positions as we have seen. At the very least, it would give Kearney a genuine class FB he needs to compete with.

Can't see it happening for a few reasons, but would be very interesting if it did.

awec

Andy Farrell is just an early april fools joke, right?

sydthebeat

jm08 wrote: »

He was hardly going to say it was fractured straight out and land the irfu medical people in the **** particularly when Schmidt pretended it was a concussion at the time!

He did let slip thought that it was OK NOW in November which is around the usual time a fracture would take to heal.

you really have:
a. no idea, or
b. a very poor idea of:

1. the capabilities of the irish medical staff
2. the professionalism of munster players

if you think keith earls wanted to / was able to keep a broken jaw from the medics there

ClanofLams

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

There's a list of Ireland's top 30 rugby players of 2015 on pundit arena here.

Its not at all surprising to see POM, Best, and POC rounding out the top 3, although sentimentality would have seen me give the top spot to POC.

I saw that before and thought there was some unusual selections so checked the guys twitter, was not surprised that he's a Munster supporter.

Noopti

That is an unexpected announcement.

However, in my opinion that is a very good appointment.

jm08

molloyjh wrote: »

Whether you agree or not doesn't change the facts. Which are pretty blatant. Fitz was back up 12 and Earls was back up 13.

Now maybe once Payne was injured Fitz started doing more training at 13 to back up Earls but in terms of the hierarchy Earls was ahead o Fitz at 13 and Fitz was ahead of Earls at 12.

Is there any chance we can now end this entirely moronic conversation. It's all very simple and self explanatory so shouldn't require all this time and effort.

All very simple indeed interpreted like that, particularly when Cave is excluded from the equation.

For the record - cave started 2 games at 12 in the rugby World Cup campaign, none at 13. There must have been some queue to train at 12 for the World Cup.

AGC

Noopti wrote: »

That is an unexpected announcement.

However, in my opinion that is a very good appointment.

Agreed. Very good experience as a coach for someone so young. Lions and England and you would have to trust Schmidt in his decisions.

molloyjh

jm08 wrote: »

All very simple indeed interpreted like that, particularly when Cave is excluded from the equation.

Well in fairness he pretty much was.

For the record he played 1 game in the RWC, not 2.

jm08

sydthebeat wrote: »

you really have:
a. no idea, or
b. a very poor idea of:

1. the capabilities of the irish medical staff
2. the professionalism of munster players

if you think keith earls wanted to / was able to keep a broken jaw from the medics there

We only found out in November that it was a fractured jaw, not concussion. I guess we are not been told the truth by the Irish management - otherwise they are not getting their diagnosis right.

Interesting that the team doctor has recently resigned.

awec

Noopti wrote: »

That is an unexpected announcement.

However, in my opinion that is a very good appointment.

The biggest winners are Leinster who get to keep their current defence coach. :pac:

gally74

AGC wrote: »

Agreed. Very good experience as a coach for someone so young. Lions and England and you would have to trust Schmidt in his decisions.

Great announcement

Neil3030

So is this kind of like Vince bringing Paul Heyman in to run ECW?

Rightwing

gally74 wrote: »

Great announcement

Agreed, Schmidt badly needs assistance, no question about that.

Fireball07

I know Argentina made fools out of us, but I would have thought that our defence is one of our strongest areas generally. We don't concede many tries. Obviously if you think that the Argentina thing wasn't a blip, then fair enough, but England equally were exposed by Australia.

Hagz

I think it could be an excellent appointment. Farrell obviously impressed the Irish lads on the Lions tour you'd have to imagine.

Neil3030

Fireball07 wrote: »

I know Argentina made fools out of us, but I would have thought that our defence is one of our strongest areas generally. We don't concede many tries. Obviously if you think that the Argentina thing wasn't a blip, then fair enough, but England equally were exposed by Australia.

But with Kiss gone to Ulster we needed to appoint someone, right?

awec

The other downside being is we have another coach who loves kicking the ball away.

Fireball07

Neil3030 wrote: »

But with Kiss gone to Ulster we needed to appoint someone, right?

True, I actually forgot about that

awec

awec wrote: »

The other downside being is we have another coach who loves kicking the ball away.

If his remit is defence and nothing else then I think this could be an OK appointment.

Rightwing

awec wrote: »

The other downside being is we have another coach who loves kicking the ball away.

Agreed, but this tactic will work out just fine, until we meet oppostion outside of the 6N, so apart from the irrelevant Autumn internationals teams will just cancel each other out with the box kicks etc.

thomasm

Indo Speculating he could be lined up as next coach if Schmidt goes next year

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/international-rugby/breaking-andy-farrell-to-become-irelands-defence-coach-after-six-nations-34341287.html