Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

1eg0a3xv7b82of

stephen_n wrote: »

So your answer is bring in a winger who hasn't even proven himself at European level, seems legit.



I'm not sure you understand this, so I'll explain. Rugby is a TEAM sport, that relies on systems not individuals. Against Argentina those systems failed, or rather the Pumas found a way to beat them. This left DK exposed, yes he could have done better, but no it proves nothing beyond what can happen on a rugby pitch, if you can create space to attack into.

I do not blame Dave for the loss to Argentina, he should have never have been out there. Just like McFadden, both have been promoted way beyond their skill.
Thats the hard facts.

Leandro Round Billboard

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

I do not blame Dave for the loss to Argentina, he should have never have been out there. Just like McFadden, both have been promoted way beyond their skill.
Thats the hard facts.

Yeah. Stupid players with all their European and six nations winners medals.

Anyway, your entitled to your opinion, just like everyone else is entitled to put you on ignore. That's the hard facts, as they say in the row.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah. Stupid players with all their European and six nations winners medals.

Anyway, your entitled to your opinion, just like everyone else is entitled to put you on ignore. That's the hard facts, as they say in the row.

2 points
1. stop using my jokes
2, you have been served with this notice - you are now on my and many others ignore list. Your only hurting yourself with your confrontational postings.

aimee1

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

2 points
1. stop using my jokes
2, you have been served with this notice - you are now on my and many others ignore list. Your only hurting yourself with your confrontational postings.

Medals on the table - FACT.

Players abilities are judging as opinion.

Pink Fairy

I enjoy a good argument as much as (some would say more than) anyone else...... But this thread is anything but a good argument these days ffs !

irishbucsfan

Pink Fairy wrote: »

I enjoy a good argument as much as (some would say better than) anyone else...... But this thread is anything but a good argument these days ffs !

I enjoy arguing more than you do

1eg0a3xv7b82of

aimee1 wrote: »

Medals on the table - FACT.

Players abilities are judging as opinion.

medals have zero to do with judging a players ability.
kearney the younger is an average international player, thats ok again 6 nation teams where every game is tight and wings hardly see the ball.
but Argentina had his card marked and by God did they go after him.
Thats all fact forever captured on celluloid.

CMOTDibbler

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

medals have zero to do with judging a players ability.
kearney the younger is an average international player, thats ok again 6 nation teams where every game is tight and wings hardly see the ball.
but Argentina had his card marked and by God did they go after him.
Thats all fact forever captured on celluloid.

I didn't think they used film any more.

Neil3030

Bazzo wrote: »

If Mike Ross was fit I'd say that'd be game over for the rest.

Arrrgh!! How could I have forgotten the great man.

I will carry this shame for eternity...

aimee1

Leandro Round Billboard wrote: »

medals have zero to do with judging a players ability.
kearney the younger is an average international player, thats ok again 6 nation teams where every game is tight and wings hardly see the ball.
but Argentina had his card marked and by God did they go after him.
Thats all fact forever captured on celluloid.

Successful teams win trophies because they generally have better players then teams that win nothing. So players who win medals generally are good players part of a group of good players.

DK is not an average international player. He is better then that. But we have 3 other players who I would rate as better options then him [Earls, Fitz, Zebo]. What also is captured on camera is an ireland defence all over the shop in the first 20 minutes of that game, DK was one player of many who were not up to the level required in the first 20 minutes.

Pink Fairy

Pink Fairy wrote: »

I enjoy a good argument as much as (some would say more than) anyone else...... But this thread is anything but a good argument these days ffs !

Things got silly during the WC and haven't gotten un-silly.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I enjoy arguing more than you do

Simon Zebo has never been given a fair shot to show how much he loves to argue!

Pink Fairy

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I enjoy arguing more than you do

No you don't

1eg0a3xv7b82of

aimee1 wrote: »

Successful teams win trophies because they generally have better players then teams that win nothing. So players who win medals generally are good players part of a group of good players.

DK is not an average international player. He is better then that. But we have 3 other players who I would rate as better options then him [Earls, Fitz, Zebo]. What also is captured on camera is an ireland defence all over the shop in the first 20 minutes of that game, DK was one player of many who were not up to the level required in the first 20 minutes.

i would add conway, trimble, bowe, healy, gilroy to that list.

i have and never will rate d kearney, firstly hes too slow and secondly he is a continuity player - a label I coined myself - in that he takes a pass and gives a pass. thats it. at international level he does not do line breaks never mind tries.
He is a zero threat, he is an average international player.

molloyjh

Pink Fairy wrote: »

No you don't

The point has never been about arguing, and I suspect you know that. So just put that straw man down and stop moving the goal posts.

Pink Fairy

molloyjh wrote: »

The point has never been about arguing, and I suspect you know that. So just put that straw man down and stop moving the goal posts.

Have you got any stats to prove that, video evidence too while we're at it

molloyjh

Pink Fairy wrote: »

Have you got any stats to prove that, video evidence too while we're at it

No but it's my opinion. And that makes it valid all by itself. Besides stats are misleading when they don't back up my argument.

Pink Fairy

molloyjh wrote: »

No but it's my opinion. And that makes it valid all by itself. Besides stats are misleading when they don't back up my argument.

Is mentioning Dave Kearney on boards Irish rugby thread our version of Godwin's law?

Zzippy

Pink Fairy wrote: »

No you don't

You forgot to put FACT at the end. Jeez, I hate working with amateurs!

aimee1

http://www.independent.ie/style/celebrity/rugby-star-jamie-heaslip-pops-question-to-millionaires-daughter-34342582.html

Interesting comment about his private life, maybe explains a little

Neil3030

Pink Fairy wrote: »

Is mentioning Dave Kearney on boards Irish rugby thread our version of Godwin's law?

No. The irish rugby thread Godwin's law is as follows:

Upon the release of an international training or matchday squad, the probability of someone lamenting the exclusion of an unselected "form player" in any recognised position of rugby union approaches 1.

CMOTDibbler

aimee1 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/style/celebrity/rugby-star-jamie-heaslip-pops-question-to-millionaires-daughter-34342582.html

Interesting comment about his private life, maybe explains a little

He has a few bob in his own right and as far as I know is now a qualified biomedical engineer.

Pink Fairy

Zzippy wrote: »

You forgot to put FACT at the end. Jeez, I hate working with amateurs!

Says the queen of amateurs! End of!

That's how you do it

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

aimee1 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/style/celebrity/rugby-star-jamie-heaslip-pops-question-to-millionaires-daughter-34342582.html

Interesting comment about his private life, maybe explains a little

I don't know that previous captains were all that open about their private lives. Nor should they be. It's not like their other half is the first lady. Maybe he's got a bit annoyed if pushed on the matter and that's what some of the journalists were referring to the other day? Seems quite petty if that's what they were getting at.

alias no.9

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I don't know that previous captains were all that open about their private lives. Nor should they be. It's not like their other half is the first lady. Maybe he's got a bit annoyed if pushed on the matter and that's what some of the journalists were referring to the other day? Seems quite petty if that's what they were getting at.

I have to respect his f u to the glossys and the Redtop's

"I'm fine talking about rugby, but my private life I like to keep private," he said in 2014. "I don't believe anybody involved in my personal life asked to be talked about, so they don't deserve it," he added.

But I'd be more of an admirer of Paul Scholes than David Beckham when it comes to media personas

jm08

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I don't know that previous captains were all that open about their private lives. Nor should they be. It's not like their other half is the first lady. Maybe he's got a bit annoyed if pushed on the matter and that's what some of the journalists were referring to the other day? Seems quite petty if that's what they were getting at.

BOD is pretty open about his private life, but that is probably because his wife has her own high profile. I really doubt if rugby journalists would be too interested in the private part of rugby players lives tbh.

Heaslip and the media came up on Off the Ball and while Thornley said he did not criticise Jamie for his dealings with the media and he didn't have a problem with him, he said he had one poor experience with him where Jamie wasn't happy about having to do an early morning press conference and showed it. Thornley said didn't seem to realise that the press there were not jumping up and down with joy to be there either.

Quinny was also sympathetic to him, but said it was part of the job to deal with the press well.

jm08

alias no.9 wrote: »

I have to respect his f u to the glossys and the Redtop's

But I'd be more of an admirer of Paul Scholes than David Beckham when it comes to media personas

A lot of these lads girlfriends are into modelling and on the social scene and want to be in the glossies - ie, I see rob kearney's girlfriend all over the papers promoting the euro lottery today.

Heaslip's fiancée used be marketing manager of leinster rugby, so I'd imagine a lot of the press know her from that.

Clegg

I'm not trying to start a sh1t fight over selection, but I was talking to someone today who told me Stander had to start due to his excellent form. I said fair enough, but Heaslip has also been in great form himself so how to you pick between the two? He told me Heaslip was in terrible form. Wasn't carrying hard etc etc and Stander was the main man.

I just don't know how to reason with this argument. For me Heaslip is the better player and is someone you'll only realise how much he adds when he's not there. We're really going to miss him when he retires.

sydthebeat

Clegg wrote: »

I'm not trying to start a sh1t fight over selection, but I was talking to someone today who told me Stander had to start due to his excellent form. I said fair enough, but Heaslip has also been in great form himself so how to you pick between the two? He told me Heaslip was in terrible form. Wasn't carrying hard etc etc and Stander was the main man.

I just don't know how to reason with this argument. For me Heaslip is the better player and is someone you'll only realise how much he adds when he's not there. We're really going to miss him when he retires.

just point that "someone" to a rerun of the latest munster v leinster game.....

there is an AWFUL lot more to an 8s game than hard running, especially if SOB is in the same team. No point two back row forwards doing the same job... thats what you get with heaslip.

Rightwing

Clegg wrote: »

I'm not trying to start a sh1t fight over selection, but I was talking to someone today who told me Stander had to start due to his excellent form. I said fair enough, but Heaslip has also been in great form himself so how to you pick between the two? He told me Heaslip was in terrible form. Wasn't carrying hard etc etc and Stander was the main man.

I just don't know how to reason with this argument. For me Heaslip is the better player and is someone you'll only realise how much he adds when he's not there. We're really going to miss him when he retires.

His woeful form will worry Schmidt and probably cost heaslip the captaincy.

sydthebeat

His form is fine, I'd be HIGHLY surprised if he isn't the starting 8 in feb.

Standers main aim is for the 6 jersey imho.

.ak

Rightwing wrote: »

His woeful form will worry Schmidt and probably cost heaslip the captaincy.

I think you're alone there.

Teferi

Rightwing wrote: »

His woeful form will worry Schmidt and probably cost heaslip the captaincy.

Pure spoofology. He's been in a cracking little run of form.

aimee1

.ak wrote: »

I think you're alone there.

read the last 10 pages of this thread and you will find stander is the backrow with unrivaled form in the last few years. :P

jm08

sydthebeat wrote: »

just point that "someone" to a rerun of the latest munster v leinster game.....

there is an AWFUL lot more to an 8s game than hard running, especially if SOB is in the same team. No point two back row forwards doing the same job... thats what you get with heaslip.

Quite a lot saying that Heaslip raised his game for mun v leinster, and that a bit of competition is good for him.

If Stander is involved I'd imagine it will be from the bench or at 6. Id say Jamie is safe enough for a while at 8 and as there is a very short lead time into first game in 6Ns with no SAxons game. I'd expect to see a back row of Ruddock/sob/Heaslip v Wales with maybe TOD (who was excellent Wales in warmup game) or Henry on the bench, though having stander & sob carrying would make it a long day for the Welsh.

molloyjh

.ak wrote: »

I think you're alone there.

Sadly that's not the case. There are a lot of people who seem to think that because Heaslip isn't making huge line breaking runs he's in poor form. Because they need to be appeased with the obvious. The number of people who refuse to recognise the massive game changing moments Heaslip came up with in Thomond is staggering. Selective blindness is about the only explanation.

Stander carried a lot more than Heaslip that day which makes people think he's great, but Heaslip had a far bigger impact on the match. And that's what really matters, even if a load of people can't see that.

The Rape of Lucretia

molloyjh wrote: »

Sadly that's not the case. There are a lot of people who seem to think that because Heaslip isn't making huge line breaking runs he's in poor form. Because they need to be appeased with the obvious. The number of people who refuse to recognise the massive game changing moments Heaslip came up with in Thomond is staggering. Selective blindness is about the only explanation.

Stander carried a lot more than Heaslip that day which makes people think he's great, but Heaslip had a far bigger impact on the match. And that's what really matters, even if a load of people can't see that.

Well said.

Jamie's showpony era (which was a justifiable criticism 4-5 years ago where he had far to many completely anonymous games both for Lei and Irl) is well behind him and while not the superlative 'complete' number 8 a la Parisse, he is nevertheless, complete, playing to a high level more or less game in game out, and contributing in all aspects of forward play.

I dont think I have seen a better Irishman playing in the row (back, middle) actually. Duggan dates from a different sport almost. Spillers, Mannion, Robinson, and Axel had their moments. Big Vic certainly brought some impressive ball carrying from the back of the scrum, and Miller in his young prime was a very athletic open field player in the Harinordoquy vein, and were probably the more obvously impressive.

But Heaslip has had the greatest contribution overall to the teams he has playing in.

aimee1

molloyjh wrote: »

Sadly that's not the case. There are a lot of people who seem to think that because Heaslip isn't making huge line breaking runs he's in poor form. Because they need to be appeased with the obvious. The number of people who refuse to recognise the massive game changing moments Heaslip came up with in Thomond is staggering. Selective blindness is about the only explanation.

Stander carried a lot more than Heaslip that day which makes people think he's great, but Heaslip had a far bigger impact on the match. And that's what really matters, even if a load of people can't see that.

Its like Payne v BOD. People expect Payne to be BoD of the noughties just because he has 13 on his back.

Likewise if Heaslip isnt scoring like v france in the grand slam year then he must be anonymous.

Cheika, Kidney, EoS, McGeechan, Gatland, Joe and MoC all capped Heaslip for club/country. There is a lot of coaching ability and silverware and knowledge amongst that group of coaches. If people can't see what they see then something is amiss.......... off the top of my head between those coaches they won 7 HECs and 4/5 grand slams plus a further 3/4 6n titles, a lions tour. Not to mention pro12 or aviva prem titles.

aimee1

jm08 wrote: »

Quite a lot saying that Heaslip raised his game for mun v leinster, and that a bit of competition is good for him.

If Stander is involved I'd imagine it will be from the bench or at 6. Id say Jamie is safe enough for a while at 8 and as there is a very short lead time into first game in 6Ns with no SAxons game. I'd expect to see a back row of Ruddock/sob/Heaslip v Wales with maybe TOD (who was excellent Wales in warmup game) or Henry on the bench, though having stander & sob carrying would make it a long day for the Welsh.

IMO Heaslip didnt raise his game specifically. He has been playing that well for a long time now. He hasnt achieved all he has in the last 7-8 years by playing poorly

jm08

aimee1 wrote: »

Its like Payne v BOD. People expect Payne to be BoD of the noughties just because he has 13 on his back.

Likewise if Heaslip isnt scoring like v france in the grand slam year then he must be anonymous.

Cheika, Kidney, EoS, McGeechan, Gatland, Joe and MoC all capped Heaslip for club/country. There is a lot of coaching ability and silverware and knowledge amongst that group of coaches. If people can't see what they see then something is amiss.......... off the top of my head between those coaches they won 7 HECs and 4/5 grand slams plus a further 3/4 6n titles, a lions tour. Not to mention pro12 or aviva prem titles.

EOS Left him at home for the 07 World Cup and Gatland dropped him out of the 23 on the Lions.

Neil3030

Against a team where we don't need a mop-up man as badly, i'd love to see a back row of

6. SOB
7. JVDF
8. CJS

With maybe TOD on the bench.

Lovely balance and not to mention ball carrying, DEAR GOD THE BALL CARRYING.

irishbucsfan

jm08 wrote: »

EOS Left him at home for the 07 World Cup and Gatland dropped him out of the 23 on the Lions.

Gatland started him in two Tests ahead of Faletau and EOS immediately recitified his mistake in the 6 Nations that followed that disaster of a World Cup.

jm08

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Well said.

Jamie's showpony era (which was a justifiable criticism 4-5 years ago where he had far to many completely anonymous games both for Lei and Irl) is well behind him and while not the superlative 'complete' number 8 a la Parisse, he is nevertheless, complete, playing to a high level more or less game in game out, and contributing in all aspects of forward play.

I dont think I have seen a better Irishman playing in the ronw (back, middle) actually. Duggan dates from a different sport almost. Spillers, Mannion, Robinson, and Axel had their moments. Big Vic certainly brought some impressive ball carrying from the back of the scrum, and Miller in his young prime was a very athletic open field player in the Harinordoquy vein, and were probably the more obvously impressive.

But Heaslip has had the greatest contribution overall to the teams he has playing in.

You forgot to include Denis Leamy in your critique of 8s, the reason why Heaslip didn't make the World Cup squad in 07. Pity himself and ferris had to retire early. Leamy, one of the few Irish players to get an admiring word from the kiwis.

aimee1 wrote: »

IMO Heaslip didnt raise his game specifically. He has been playing that well for a long time now. He hasnt achieved all he has in the last 7-8 years by playing poorly

Nearly all the pundits have said that Heaslip raised his game and that the competition was good for him.

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Gatland started him in two Tests ahead of Faletau and EOS immediately recitified his mistake in the 6 Nations that followed that disaster of a World Cup.

He was dropped for the last one (ie, you are only as good as your last game).

Heaslip made the bench for the first game of the 6Ns in 2008 with Leamy starting at 8 along with easterby & wally. Easterby was retired for the next game, with Leamy moved to Blndside to accommodate Heaslip at No 8.

Nothing immediate about that.

errlloyd

jm08 wrote: »

He was dropped for the last one (ie, you are only as good as your last game).

Heaslip made the bench for the first game of the 6Ns in 2008 with Leamy starting at 8 along with easterby & wally. Easterby was retired for the next game, with Leamy moved to Blndside to accommodate Heaslip at No 8.

Nothing immediate about that.

Jamie Heaslip got dropped playing for the lions after playing two tests. At roughly the same time CJ Stander had left South Africa because he couldn't even get a cap.

what is your point?

Journeyman_1

jm08 wrote: »

You forgot to include Denis Leamy in your critique of 8s, the reason why Heaslip didn't make the World Cup squad in 07. Pity himself and ferris had to retire early. Leamy, one of the few Irish players to get an admiring word from the kiwis.

is it important that Heaslip didnt get picked once over 8 years ago when he was 23/24?

Nearly all the pundits have said that Heaslip raised his game and that the competition was good for him.

Well if the pundits have been saying it.... Surely they'd have no reason to want to drum up a bit of controversy or speculation. Leinster fans have been watching the guy play and are saying that he has been playing consistently well and they he wasn't noticeably better in that game than he normally is. It's OK to admit that! Also OK to admit that he is a better overall player than Stander right now.

Rightwing

errlloyd wrote: »

Jamie Heaslip got dropped playing for the lions after playing two tests. At roughly the same time CJ Stander had left South Africa because he couldn't even get a cap.

what is your point?

Basically, he needs to up his game in a big way.

But I believe he can do this. Many others also need to show considerable improvement.

irishbucsfan

jm08 wrote: »

He was dropped for the last one (ie, you are only as good as your last game).

Heaslip made the bench for the first game of the 6Ns in 2008 with Leamy starting at 8 along with easterby & wally. Easterby was retired for the next game, with Leamy moved to Blndside to accommodate Heaslip at No 8.

Nothing immediate about that.

Really? Going from not being in the squad at all to cementing a place as the starting number 8 after one substitute appearance is not an immediate reversal?

jm08

errlloyd wrote: »

Jamie Heaslip got dropped playing for the lions after playing two tests. At roughly the same time CJ Stander had left South Africa because he couldn't even get a cap.

what is your point?

It was pointed out that Gatland must have rated him as he made it as a Test Lion. Well, Gatland must have not rated him that highly because he dropped him.

That is not the reason CJ left SA at 21 as it is likely he would have been capped as even at that age he had been called into national training squads.

The reason why CJ left SA was because H Mayer has some sort of obsession with turning back rowers into hookers and CJ didn't want to be a hooker. Meyer thought that CJ is too small to be a backrower:D

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Really? Going from not being in the squad at all to cementing a place as the starting number 8 after one substitute appearance is not an immediate reversal?

No. It's not. He only got selected because Easterbys legs were gone and Leamy could play blindside. Lucky for him Leamy was versatile because Leamy was having one of his best seasons ever.