Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

Bazzo

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

Just Like the recent world cup not a sign of average Dave, well the argies did not see him either.
To borrow an old Irish rugby term he must have been hiding in the row.

Are you going to keep banging on about a turn of phrase that about half of the forum has assured you is really a thing, or actually going to address some of huge problems people have raised with your preferred team selection?

mansize

Dave Kearney played himself into position as Ireland's starting wing, and rightfully kept it, Zeebs is great and flash but can often go missing for the grunt work- though he has improved that aspect of his game

galwaylad14

I'm convinced that if Matt Healy was playing exactly as he has been this season for any other province he'd be in with a shout of starting in the 6 nations. He'd certainly be in the squad anyway.

I could never see what Dave Kearney offered. Just because he's very unspectacular in attack people seem to assume he must be very solid everywhere else but I've never been convinced he's any more dependable at the basics than Zebo or Fitzgerald.
Also there's the famous stat from the Argentina game: Attempted 9 tackles and missed 5 of them.
I think a stat like that just proves how out of his depth he is in international rugby

galwaylad14

galwaylad14 wrote: »

I'm convinced that if Matt Healy was playing exactly as he has been this season for any other province he'd be in with a shout of starting in the 6 nations. He'd certainly be in the squad anyway.

I could never see what Dave Kearney offered. Just because he's very unspectacular in attack people seem to assume he must be very solid everywhere else but I've never been convinced he's any more dependable at the basics than Zebo or Fitzgerald.
Also there's the famous stat from the Argentina game: Attempted 9 tackles and missed 5 of them.
I think a stat like that just proves how out of his depth he is in international rugby

Up to the Argentina game he'd been pretty dependable for Ireland to be fair, and he'd showed some really good form in the warm ups. He wasn't throwing skip passes about against third string Wales but he'd an excellent game against a strong England side.

For the coming 6N though I'm not sure he's done anything this season to justify his selection for Ireland, though with Bowe being out he has a chance. I'd like to see Trimble and Fitz on the wings I think with McCloskey and Henshaw in the centre.

phog

mansize wrote: »

Dave Kearney played himself into position as Ireland's starting wing, and rightfully kept it, Zeebs is great and flash but can often go missing for the grunt work- though he has improved that aspect of his game

Well we saw how when Dave goes missing it gifts the opposition a try.

I think I'm done with this thread

molloyjh

phog wrote: »

I might have accepted that selection but Zebo was the form player leading into that game. But one thing for sure Dave was the wrong selection.

Was he though? DK was the form winger coming into the RWC. And he had done well enough up to the Argie game. Zebo had too but was obviously looked at as back-up 15 hence his bench spot. I don't think the call was wrong at all. Debatable sure, but it's a stretch to call it wrong.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Bazzo wrote: »

Are you going to keep banging on about a turn of phrase that about half of the forum has assured you is really a thing, or actually going to address some of huge problems people have raised with your preferred team selection?

Why? I have not asked any poster to justify their selections.
So what if their is serious problems with my team, I am not Schmidt and so my team selection is only a bit of fun.
you and a few other posters need to understand this.
Dave Kearney is an average International rugby player promoted way above his talent. That is a fact.
McCarthy and Ryan are finished at international level, and so why not promote Ruddock to lock and put stander at 6.
If not Ruddock put OConnor in there, but lets do something positive.

molloyjh

galwaylad14 wrote: »

I'm convinced that if Matt Healy was playing exactly as he has been this season for any other province he'd be in with a shout of starting in the 6 nations. He'd certainly be in the squad anyway.

No he wouldn't. As I've said before Joe has never just dropped a guy straight into a match day squad without giving him time to get used to the set-up and the systems unless absolutely forced to do so.

galwaylad14 wrote: »

I could never see what Dave Kearney offered. Just because he's very unspectacular in attack people seem to assume he must be very solid everywhere else but I've never been convinced he's any more dependable at the basics than Zebo or Fitzgerald.
Also there's the famous stat from the Argentina game: Attempted 9 tackles and missed 5 of them.
I think a stat like that just proves how out of his depth he is in international rugby

That stat is useless without some context. How many of those missed tackles were defensive tackles? And how many were kick chases where the kick was slightly too long? He got rounded too easily for their first no doubt, although there were so many issues with the entire Irish defensive line for it that blaming just Dave is hugely unfair. Who was slowing down the ball at the previous ruck? Who was in midfield shooting up to cut off the wider channels? Our entire defensive line was all over the place for that try and yet all anyone ever talks about is Daves mistake. Not the handful of other mistakes that led to that point. He's been used as a scapegoat in a massive way and it's really poor form.

phog wrote: »

Well we saw how when Dave goes missing it gifts the opposition a try.

See above. The witch hunt over this has been pretty shameful. And lazy.

Deleted User wrote: »

I think I'm done with this thread

One things for sure, I've probably doubled my ignore list in the last few days. We're coming into another international window, which people seem to think gives them the right to get their knives out. With supporters like these.....

molloyjh

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

Dave Kearney is an average International rugby player promoted way above his talent. That is a fact.

It is not fact. It is opinion.

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

McCarthy and Ryan are finished at international level, and so why not promote Ruddock to lock and put stander at 6.

Because Ruddock is a flanker, not a lock. It's not that difficult. Although that said we don't have to justify this do we. I mean what's good for the goose....

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

If not Ruddock put OConnor in there, but lets do something positive.

Positive or reactionary?

O'Connor has spent a good chunk of this season playing AIL.

I'm worried about our second row. I think it'll be Toner and Ryan but that doesn't fill me with confidence.

phog

molloyjh wrote: »

See above. The witch hunt over this has been pretty shameful. And lazy.

No witch hunt by me and to be honest I resent your insinuation.

I said it before the game Dave was the wrong call.

Iirc, he was also responsible for a try v England in the 2014 6Ns, possibly cost us a Grand Slam that year.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

molloyjh wrote: »

It is not fact. It is opinion.



Because Ruddock is a flanker, not a lock. It's not that difficult. Although that said we don't have to justify this do we. I mean what's good for the goose....



Positive or reactionary?

Ruddock is meant to be a 6 put played 7 to a good standard, Ruddock is a talented strong player and while I know 6 and 7 are not locks, Ruddock could do it.

Dave Kearney point is a fact, proven by a group of men who wear blue and white strip jerseys. Thats life.

molloyjh

phog wrote: »

No witch hunt by me and to be honest I resent your insinuation.

I said it before the game Dave was the wrong call.

Iirc, he was also responsible for a try v England in the 2014 6Ns, possibly cost us a Grand Slam that year.

Like I said the call may have been debatable at the time. But there were no signs that Dave was going to be caught out like that up to that point so you can't say you were right by design.

As for the try against England Dave missed a covering tackle. It was Best and one of our centres I think that allowed the initial break. But of course blame Dave for the whole thing. And then blame the loss of the game and the GS on that one moment. Sure that's not a lazy witch hunt at all, is it?

For all the talk about DKs defensive issues it might be worth noting that it was he that forced the turnover against NZ that led to his brothers try. I mean if we're allowed to start singling out incidents to prove a narrative.....

phog

phog wrote: »

No witch hunt by me and to be honest I resent your insinuation.

I said it before the game Dave was the wrong call.

Iirc, he was also responsible for a try v England in the 2014 6Ns, possibly cost us a Grand Slam that year.

Resenting and perpetuating the witch hunt all in one post. Impressive.

clsmooth

Theres a surprising lack of support for Duncan Casey as new captain on here.

CMOTDibbler

jacothelad wrote: »

Isn't one of his children in need of specialist medical cover. I'm sure it is top notch in N.Z. but it certainly is pretty good in Europe. Also, are any of his children in 3rd level education?

His son Luke has epilepsy which followed from a brain tumour that was removed when he was four. His older son Tim is a very useful scrum half playing for Terenure.

molloyjh

molloyjh wrote: »

With supporters like these.....

Well these are the same supporters that jeer their own players so...

molloyjh

molloyjh wrote: »

As for the try against England Dave missed a covering tackle. It was Best and one of our centres I think that allowed the initial break. But of course blame Dave for the whole thing. And then blame the loss of the game and the GS on that one moment. Sure that's not a lazy witch hunt at all, is it?

It was Best and Murray I think, rushed up creating a dog leg.

sydthebeat

phog wrote: »

Iirc, he was also responsible for a try v England in the 2014 6Ns, possibly cost us a Grand Slam that year.

well thats complete crap anyway. there were a few reasons for that try

1. rory best had darcys inside shoulder but couldnt get to the pitch of browns inside run

2. conor murray, 3rd defender, was completely too far away from darcys blitz run, meaning he ended up tackling robshaw as darcy had him already tackled, leaving the space for brown.

3. after that brown steps inside RK, straight up space running, not much anyone can do about that. Brown gets inside RK and looks to have passed him by RK skrags him down... its scrambling from here.

4. DK has come in off his wing into FB position at this stage and sets to tackle Brown, who had Care on his shoulder. Brown passes basically right in front of DKs face. again, not much could have been done about that. There was a lack of scramble defenders running with Care.... but it was a text book finish of setting the defender and running off a shoulder, The problem happend at the robshaw tackle.

aimee1

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

Ruddock is meant to be a 6 put played 7 to a good standard, Ruddock is a talented strong player and while I know 6 and 7 are not locks, Ruddock could do it.

Dave Kearney point is a fact, proven by a group of men who wear blue and white strip jerseys. Thats life.

On what basis can ruddock play lock at international level? What is the logic behind that? He doesnt even play lock at pro12 level barring the odd emergency cover.

Dave Kearney has a 6n winners medal. Think that shows that in some way he has something good enough for international rugby. Rugby players miss tackles all the time.

Teferi

If I say 'it's going to rain' enough times I will eventually be right.

Same goes for those saying 'Dave Kearney had a bad game'.

CMOTDibbler

Teferi wrote: »

If I say 'it's going to rain' enough times I will eventually be right.

Same goes for those saying 'Dave Kearney had a bad game'.

I don't know why you bother. People are winding themselves up for a burst of outrage when the inevitable happens and Dave Kearney starts during the 6N. Or a chorus of 'told you so' if he doesn't.

former total

The problem with boards in general is that whenever Ireland concede a try, the first instinct is to see who was to blame. Sometimes it's just a case of the other team playing some nice rugby.

former total

former total wrote: »

The problem with boards in general is that whenever Ireland concede a try, the first instinct is to see who from another province can potentially be blamed to use as a stick to beat them with. Sometimes it's just a case of the other team playing some nice rugby.

FYP

More often than not it is:

Dave Kearney's fault
Rob Kearney's fault
Jamie Heaslip (or his leaderships) fault
Devon Toner only being in the team for his height's fault

If all the close call or just generally disliked players moved south to play their rugby all the arguing would stop pretty much overnight one would think.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

FYP

More often than not it is:

Dave Kearney's fault
Rob Kearney's fault
Jamie Heaslip (or his leaderships) fault
Devon Toner only being in the team for his height's fault

If all the close call or just generally disliked players moved south to play their rugby all the arguing would stop pretty much overnight one would think.

And most of the time it's Joe Schmidt's fault for not picking *insert name of non Leinster player here* who was in fact the form choice at the time.

Cost us a slam don't you know.

Mahatma Geansai

Deleted User wrote: »

FYP

More often than not it is:

Dave Kearney's fault
Rob Kearney's fault
Jamie Heaslip (or his leaderships) fault
Devon Toner only being in the team for his height's fault

If all the close call or just generally disliked players moved south to play their rugby all the arguing would stop pretty much overnight one would think.

:pac:

CMOTDibbler

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

:pac:

The irony is lost in this one :pac:

phog

Harley Uptight Light wrote: »

Resenting and perpetuating the witch hunt all in one post. Impressive.

No witch hunt, I'm stating my opinion. I just think we have better players.

Deleted User wrote: »

FYP

More often than not it is:

Dave Kearney's fault
Rob Kearney's fault
Jamie Heaslip (or his leaderships) fault
Devon Toner only being in the team for his height's fault

If all the close call or just generally disliked players moved south to play their rugby all the arguing would stop pretty much overnight one would think.

I've seen players from other provinces receiving the blame for tries conceded. You might need to remove those blue tinted glasses.

molloyjh

In fairness it's not just one single province. Earls certainly gets far more grief than he deserves. Zebo gets a bit much too. Payne has been on the receiving end of a tonne of unwarranted crap. I think TFs more general take on it is about right.

molloyjh

phog wrote: »

No witch hunt, I'm stating my opinion. I just think we have better players.

I'd have no issues with your opinion that Zebo is a better player at all. It's the other comments you made about DK (you said he possibly cost us a GS FFS) that were a problem.

phog

phog wrote: »

No witch hunt, I'm stating my opinion. I just think we have better players.

That's fine, I think we have better players too, that isn't all you said though.

The bit of your post I was referring to was the fairly pathetic accusation that Dave Kearney cost us a grand slam.

Yeah_Right

sydthebeat wrote: »

well thats complete crap anyway. there were a few reasons for that try

1. rory best had darcys inside shoulder but couldnt get to the pitch of browns inside run

2. conor murray, 3rd defender, was completely too far away from darcys blitz run, meaning he ended up tackling robshaw as darcy had him already tackled, leaving the space for brown.

3. after that brown steps inside RK, straight up space running, not much anyone can do about that. Brown gets inside RK and looks to have passed him by RK skrags him down... its scrambling from here.

4. DK has come in off his wing into FB position at this stage and sets to tackle Brown, who had Care on his shoulder. Brown passes basically right in front of DKs face. again, not much could have been done about that. There was a lack of scramble defenders running with Care.... but it was a text book finish of setting the defender and running off a shoulder, The problem happend at the robshaw tackle.

Stop. Please stop. Giving an accurate description of what happened ruins it for everyone. How are people meant to rant and rave and make crap up about the whichever player annoys them most if you keep posting facts!

phog

Harley Uptight Light wrote: »

That's fine, I think we have better players too, that isn't all you said though.

The bit of your post I was referring to was the fairly pathetic accusation that Dave Kearney cost us a grand slam.

If you want me to take you seriously then ease up with your emotive posts.

molloyjh wrote: »

I'd have no issues with your opinion that Zebo is a better player at all. It's the other comments you made about DK (you said he possibly cost us a GS FFS) that were a problem.

I meant the try (I blamed him for the try) possibly cost us the GS.

phog, can you give us a critical analysis of Dave Kearney's play in the build up to the try scored by England?

MJohnston

phog wrote: »

I meant the try (I blamed him for the try) possibly cost us the GS.

There's no semantic difference between this and "I blame DK for possibly costing Ireland the GS"

phog

phog wrote: »

If you want me to take you seriously then ease up with your emotive posts.



I meant the try (I blamed him for the try) possibly cost us the GS.

There's nothing emotive about what I said. You can see all sorts of people think you're talking nonsense.

Yeah_Right

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

Why? I have not asked any poster to justify their selections.
So what if their is serious problems with my team, I am not Schmidt and so my team selection is only a bit of fun.
you and a few other posters need to understand this.
Dave Kearney is an average International rugby player promoted way above his talent. That is a fact.
McCarthy and Ryan are finished at international level, and so why not promote Ruddock to lock and put stander at 6.
If not Ruddock put OConnor in there, but lets do something positive.

Don't think anyone would dispute that Dave Kearney is an average international rugby player but advocating Ruddock as a test lock is insane. While we're at it lets put Healy at hooker, McCloskey at 8, S Cronin in the midfield and Sexton at FB. They're talented players and I'm sure they could cope. It's positive and exciting.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

phog, can you give us a critical analysis of Dave Kearney's play in the build up to the try scored by England?

You need a critical analysis of the entire defensive alignment in order to see why that try was scored (a decent job of it is done above).

It goes slightly beyond "blame the guy who was in the team ahead of my favourite player" unfortunately.

Harley Uptight Light

Harley Uptight Light wrote: »

You need a critical analysis of the entire defensive alignment in order to see why that try was scored (a decent job of it is done above).

It goes slightly beyond "blame the guy who was in the team ahead of my favourite player" unfortunately.

phog suggests that he blames Kearney. I'm very interested in his reasoning.

molloyjh

phog wrote: »

I meant the try (I blamed him for the try) possibly cost us the GS.

You blame the loss of the GS on the try. You blame the try on DK. Ergo you blame the loss of the GS on DK. It's inaccurate and quite obviously a lazy with hunt. I could blame Murray or Best for creating the hole if I was so predisposed, but the thing is the winning and losing of a game is not decided on single moments like that.

Rightwing

phog wrote: »

If you want me to take you seriously then ease up with your emotive posts.



I meant the try (I blamed him for the try) possibly cost us the GS.

I've seen nothing to convince me the Schmidt is capable of delivering a GS. There will always be excuses.

shootermacg

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Don't think anyone would dispute that Dave Kearney is an average international rugby player but advocating Ruddock as a test lock is insane. While we're at it lets put Healy at hooker, McCloskey at 8, S Cronin in the midfield and Sexton at FB. They're talented players and I'm sure they could cope. It's positive and exciting.

Isn't he on the wrong side of of 6'3? Which is a shame because he has all the other attributes of a good lock.

molloyjh

Rightwing wrote: »

I've seen nothing to convince me the Schmidt is capable of delivering a GS. There will always be excuses.

We lost to Wales this year by 7 points so it was beyond 1 score. But we lost to England by just 3 points. The only closer he could get to a GS is winning an actual GS. Yet you've still seen nothing to suggest he can do it? Really? I suggest you open your eyes so, because you won't see anything at all with them closed like that.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

aimee1 wrote: »

On what basis can ruddock play lock at international level? What is the logic behind that? He doesnt even play lock at pro12 level barring the odd emergency cover.

Dave Kearney has a 6n winners medal. Think that shows that in some way he has something good enough for international rugby. Rugby players miss tackles all the time.

Shontayne Hape also holds a championship medal, there is many average players who have won 6 nation championship medals.
Dave Kearney does not belong in a green jersey, unless he transfers to a club who wear green jerseys.:)

Rightwing

molloyjh wrote: »

We lost to Wales this year by 7 points so it was beyond 1 score. But we lost to England by just 3 points. The only closer he could get to a GS is winning an actual GS. Yet you've still seen nothing to suggest he can do it? Really? I suggest you open your eyes so, because you won't see anything at all with them closed like that.

Wales & England were also close over the last 2 seasons, but just not close enough.

Let's see can E Jones do it.

CMOTDibbler

Rightwing wrote: »

I've seen nothing to convince me the Schmidt is capable of delivering a GS. There will always be excuses.

You may well be proven right. Grand slams seem to be getting rarer and rarer these days.

2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015.

This is the first time since Italy joined the 6N that a three year gap without a grand slam has happened. Our chances of getting one this year are reduced because of the fact of having to play England and France away. Never mind the continued rise of Scotland.

Rightwing

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

You may well be proven right. Grand slams seem to be getting rarer and rarer these days.

2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015.

This is the first time since Italy joined the 6N that a three year gap without a grand slam has happened. Our chances of getting one this year are reduced because of the fact of having to play England and France away. Never mind the continued rise of Scotland.

Nice post. England stand out like a sore thumb on that chart. Something wrong somewhere with the resources they have available.

The difference between winning a GS and a championship simply can't be overstated.

CMOTDibbler

Rightwing wrote: »

Nice post. England stand out like a sore thumb on that chart. Something wrong somewhere with the resources they have available.

The difference between winning a GS and a championship simply can't be overstated.

And their rarity as of late. In every five year period since Italy joined there have been at least three. But only one in the last five years (two in the last six).

England have always found it difficult to win them. Even when they dominated in the run up to the 2003 RWC, they were frustrated by one off performances that killed their GS hopes.

The 2003 GS was eight years after their previous one in 1995.

Rightwing

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

And their rarity as of late. In every five year period since Italy joined there have been at least three. But only one in the last five years (two in the last six).

England have always found it difficult to win them. Even when they dominated in the run up to the 2003 RWC, they were frustrated by one off performances that killed their GS hopes.

The 2003 GS was eight years after their previous one in 1995.

True enough.

Also from that chart, to win the world cup, a team needs to be heading in as GS winners.