Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread VIII - ** MOD NOTE POST #4781 **

awec

Can you please explain how not playing players who are absolutely not good enough is a shocking decision?

Do you think all it takes is giving these lads a run out for the senior team to make them into semi-decent players?

The reason we signed Lealiifaano in the first place is the alternatives were ****. We would have to be pretty damn thick to sign a good 10 and then play our rubbish ones on a semi-regular basis.

When CL leaves we either need Jackson back or another signing. There is absolutely no way Ulster could have avoided being in that situation. Throwing the likes of Herron or McPhillips in more is not going to magically make them up to the task of running the show at the business end of the season.

Ciaran-Irl

awec wrote: »

Can you please explain how not playing players who are absolutely not good enough is a shocking decision?

Do you think all it takes is giving these lads a run out for the senior team to make them into semi-decent players?

The reason we signed Lealiifaano in the first place is the alternatives were ****. We would have to be pretty damn thick to sign a good 10 and then play our rubbish ones on a semi-regular basis.

When CL leaves we either need Jackson back or another signing. There is absolutely no way Ulster could have avoided being in that situation. Throwing the likes of Herron or McPhillips in more is not going to magically make them up to the task of running the show at the business end of the season.

You must have missed the memo. Players only get better with gametime. Training is irrelevant. If players can't do the basics in training, that only tells you that they haven't had enough gametime.

aloooof

Ciaran-Irl wrote: »

You must have missed the memo. Players only get better with gametime. Training is irrelevant. If players can't do the basics in training, that only tells you that they haven't had enough gametime.

Eh, what?!

molloyjh

prawnsambo wrote: »

Aarav Important Topic wrote: »

Would he want the France job

It's a bit of a poisoned chalice alright, but Cotter is an experienced guy who wouldn't go into it all starry eyed. He's probably one of the most successful and experienced coaches based in France. Language wouldn't be an issue and he would know a lot of the players already. I'd be afraid of a France team with him at the helm tbh.

Experienced yes. Successful? With one of the best sides in Europe for years he won what exactly? I’m really not at all convinced that Cotter is as good as people say. Other than that single T14 title he won nothing at all with a Clermont side that was easily one of the top 2 sides in Europe for half a decade.

People have spoken about Clermont’s bottle and natural ability to lose big games, but it’s not like they were a club of local lads all with the same issues stemming from the same place or an ingrained culture they’ve always known. With the collection of players they had he should have been able to get more from them.

He did okay at Scotland leading them to 5th, 4th and 4th in the 6Ns but also having a good win rate relative to previous coaches. But the SRU still decided not to keep him on. Montpellier are doing well now, but with a squad like theirs it’d he hard not to.

I’m sure Cotter is a good coach, but I’m not at all convinced he’s as good as some think. Is he really able to get the most out of a squad in difficult circumstances? Or has he been at the helm of some very good teams and not been able to get them over the line?

molloyjh

aloooof wrote: »

Ciaran-Irl wrote: »

You must have missed the memo. Players only get better with gametime. Training is irrelevant. If players can't do the basics in training, that only tells you that they haven't had enough gametime.

Eh, what?!

I don’t think Ciaran is being entirely serious with that post.

prawnsambo

molloyjh wrote: »

Experienced yes. Successful? With one of the best sides in Europe for years he won what exactly? I’m really not at all convinced that Cotter is as good as people say. Other than that single T14 title he won nothing at all with a Clermont side that was easily one of the top 2 sides in Europe for half a decade.

People have spoken about Clermont’s bottle and natural ability to lose big games, but it’s not like they were a club of local lads all with the same issues stemming from the same place or an ingrained culture they’ve always known. With the collection of players they had he should have been able to get more from them.

He did okay at Scotland leading them to 5th, 4th and 4th in the 6Ns but also having a good win rate relative to previous coaches. But the SRU still decided not to keep him on. Montpellier are doing well now, but with a squad like theirs it’d he hard not to.

I’m sure Cotter is a good coach, but I’m not at all convinced he’s as good as some think. Is he really able to get the most out of a squad in difficult circumstances? Or has he been at the helm of some very good teams and not been able to get them over the line?

Clermont have always been very competitve whilst he was in charge. Perhaps not in silverware, but they certainly challenged on both fronts under Cotter. Two European finals and four T14 finals, winning one. They also won a Challenge Cup under Cotter. They were only knocked out by the biggest teams in Europe: Toulon, Saracens and Leinster .

The record number of home wins came under Cotter as well.

Clegg

I think Cotter was a victim of timing when it came to the Scotland job. He did a lot to develop their style of play and has brought through a decent group of internationals. But Townsend was looking to move on from Glasgow and the SRU desperately needed to keep him in the system.

bilston

awec wrote: »

Can you please explain how not playing players who are absolutely not good enough is a shocking decision?

Do you think all it takes is giving these lads a run out for the senior team to make them into semi-decent players?

The reason we signed Lealiifaano in the first place is the alternatives were ****. We would have to be pretty damn thick to sign a good 10 and then play our rubbish ones on a semi-regular basis.

When CL leaves we either need Jackson back or another signing. There is absolutely no way Ulster could have avoided being in that situation. Throwing the likes of Herron or McPhillips in more is not going to magically make them up to the task of running the show at the business end of the season.

I agree in principle with this. But at the same time I'd be keen to see more of McPhillips before writing him off completely. He actually looked pretty sharp on Sat when he did a chance. Of course Connacht had eased off and the game was up, but I'd like to see a bit more of him.

Sure aren't we signing Soponga for next season if things don't go well for certain parties in the next few weeks?

Peregrine

awec wrote: »

Can you please explain how not playing players who are absolutely not good enough is a shocking decision?

Do you think all it takes is giving these lads a run out for the senior team to make them into semi-decent players?

The reason we signed Lealiifaano in the first place is the alternatives were ****. We would have to be pretty damn thick to sign a good 10 and then play our rubbish ones on a semi-regular basis.

When CL leaves we either need Jackson back or another signing. There is absolutely no way Ulster could have avoided being in that situation. Throwing the likes of Herron or McPhillips in more is not going to magically make them up to the task of running the show at the business end of the season.

I don't disagree but can you please explain how pushing a scrum half out to 10 to play alongside a rubbish 9 isn't a shocking decision?

I just haven't written off McPhillips yet and would prefer to see him outside Cooney than Cooney at 10 with Marshall inside. Yes, Ulster needs to sign a 10 because you absolutely can't bank on McPhillips coming through even if he isn't as bad as you say he is. I just havn't been holding out much hope that they will find one though. If the rumours about Ross Byrne are true then Ulster will have signed a solid young 10 for next year who can only get better.

The scrum half touches the ball so many more times than anyone else that a competent 9 is more important than a competent 10 imo. If Cooney is the best 9 and the best 10 available then put him at 9.

awec

bilston wrote: »

I agree in principle with this. But at the same time I'd be keen to see more of McPhillips before writing him off completely. He actually looked pretty sharp on Sat when he did a chance. Of course Connacht had eased off and the game was up, but I'd like to see a bit more of him.

Sure aren't we signing Soponga for next season if things don't go well for certain parties in the next few weeks?

Even if McPhillips gets more game time he is not going to be good enough to be the main man this season nor next season.

Ignoring the fact that he isn’t that highly regarded, it wouldn’t have made a difference if McPhillips had played every minute of every game this year, he is not yet at the stage of his development to warrant having such a major role in the senior side.

His game time has been limited for a reason. There is a reason we persist with the awful Nelson ahead of him. He’s either not ready or not good enough.

The Jackson situation threw all plans out the window. People criticising Ulster for playing Lealiifaano so much need to get a grip. I dread to think what our season would be like if we hadn’t played him. Kiss would probably have been out of the job already.

awec

I wouldn’t like to move Cooney to 10. The best outcome is a new singing at 10 or Jackson coming back.

One for the short term and then another from next season on is probably the most realistic outcome.

I’d be happy enough with Ross Byrne. Solid but unspectacular, probably cheap enough too and would allow NIQ spots to be used elsewhere. I would also be happy enough with a NIQ 10 of a good standard, the Sydney fisherman’s 3rd XV out half need not apply.

prawnsambo

awec wrote: »

I wouldn’t like to move Cooney to 10. The best outcome is a new singing at 10 or Jackson coming back.

One for the short term and then another from next season on is probably the most realistic outcome.

I’d be happy enough with Ross Byrne. Solid but unspectacular, probably cheap enough too and would allow NIQ spots to be used elsewhere. I would also be happy enough with a NIQ 10 of a good standard, the Sydney fisherman’s 3rd XV out half need not apply.

I'd agree except he's spectacularly good at the cross field kicks. Stockdale and Gilroy could really benefit from someone like him. Also very good from the tee, so no points given up there either.

bilston

Is there a rumour of Byrne going to Ulster. First I've heard or read of it.

Back on point, I'd have thought Byrne must be pretty close to the Irish squad by now.

bilston

bilston wrote: »

Is there a rumour of Byrne going to Ulster. First I've heard or read of it.

Back on point, I'd have thought Byrne must be pretty close to the Irish squad by now.

Only place I've seen it is on here. None of the other usual spots.

Squidgy Black

bilston wrote: »

Is there a rumour of Byrne going to Ulster. First I've heard or read of it.

Back on point, I'd have thought Byrne must be pretty close to the Irish squad by now.

He's definitely closer than Carty and Bleyendaal is relatively out of the picture. Wouldn't be surprised to see him called up for the 6 nations over Keatley either.

pickarooney

awec wrote: »

I wouldn’t like to move Cooney to 10. The best outcome is a new singing at 10 or Jackson coming back.

One for the short term and then another from next season on is probably the most realistic outcome.

I’d be happy enough with Ross Byrne. Solid but unspectacular, probably cheap enough too and would allow NIQ spots to be used elsewhere. I would also be happy enough with a NIQ 10 of a good standard, the Sydney fisherman’s 3rd XV out half need not apply.

Ah here, if you're going to nick Ross Byrne you'll have the good grace to be absolutely thrilled, thanks very much!

irishbucsfan

pickarooney wrote: »

Ah here, if you're going to nick Ross Byrne you'll have the good grace to be absolutely thrilled, thanks very much!

"Happy enough" is Ulster for "over the moon"

connachta

Carty has improved a lot very reecently, he could surprise a lot of you selected as 3rd choice in February

prawnsambo

Madelynn Glamorous Range wrote: »

Only place I've seen it is on here. None of the other usual spots.

That's because I don't post in those 'usual' spots. :P

Subpopulus

I don't really get how this Byrne to Ulster rumor got started. Even if the offer was on the table I'm not sure why Byrne would move to Ulster. He's getting a huge amount of gametime with Leinster as it is - despite being 'second choice' to Sexton. Except for European ties and bigger Pro14 games where Sexton gets wheeled out, he's basically the first choice. He stands a reasonable chance of winning silverware with Leinster this year - can Ulster offer that?

What can Ulster offer Byrne that he isn't already getting in Leinster? And why would Leinster let him go?

So what's the basis for these rumors?

prawnsambo

Subpopulus wrote: »

I don't really get how this Byrne to Ulster rumor got started. Even if the offer was on the table I'm not sure why Byrne would move to Ulster. He's getting a huge amount of gametime with Leinster as it is - despite being 'second choice' to Sexton. Except for European ties and bigger Pro14 games where Sexton gets wheeled out, he's basically the first choice. He stands a reasonable chance of winning silverware with Leinster this year - can Ulster offer that?

What can Ulster offer Byrne that he isn't already getting in Leinster? And why would Leinster let him go?

So what's the basis for these rumors?

It's not happening until the end of the season. Silverware not at risk.

Leinster currently have four out halves. Two of them are internationals. The pressure is on for Carbery to get game time and Byrne would have to give way for that to happen. So it makes sense.

Utah_Saint

Yeah heard the rumour also. Wouldn't really make sense unless byrne himself is pushing for it. You could twist it that he sees carbery being treated like the second coming of Christ and maybe he's a little put out by that. For me, with PJ gone byrne is the clear second choice for Ireland.

Granny15

awec wrote: »

Even if McPhillips gets more game time he is not going to be good enough to be the main man this season nor next season.

Ignoring the fact that he isn’t that highly regarded, it wouldn’t have made a difference if McPhillips had played every minute of every game this year, he is not yet at the stage of his development to warrant having such a major role in the senior side.

His game time has been limited for a reason. There is a reason we persist with the awful Nelson ahead of him. He’s either not ready or not good enough.

The Jackson situation threw all plans out the window. People criticising Ulster for playing Lealiifaano so much need to get a grip. I dread to think what our season would be like if we hadn’t played him. Kiss would probably have been out of the job already.

I don't understand this opinion on McPhillips. His place kicking is poor but other than that I consider him a very good player

arsebiscuits1

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's not happening until the end of the season. Silverware not at risk.

Leinster currently have four out halves. Two of them are internationals. The pressure is on for Carbery to get game time and Byrne would have to give way for that to happen. So it makes sense.

Leinster have 3.5 outhalves. Full respect to Marsh, he is a good 4th choice option but he is bottom half of Pro12 standard which is why hes gotten 26 caps in 4 seasons.

I don't really agree with the "he'll have to make room" Carbery and Sexton have both shown themselves to be a bit fragile. There will always be game time for Byrne here.

Ross is a pro. Who has played in the big games for Leinster. His mentality is not to be a place holder or keep the seat warm. He'd want to kick on and make the 10 shirt his. It's how these guys tick.

Subpopulus

prawnsambo wrote: »

Leinster currently have four out halves. Two of them are internationals. The pressure is on for Carbery to get game time and Byrne would have to give way for that to happen. So it makes sense.

Why wouldn't Carbery give way? Currently he's stuck behind Byrne, and it would be more in his interests to move to Ulster than Byrne's. I know a lot of people on here have faith that Joey will develop into a world-class out-half yet, but Byrne's currently the better operator and I think it would be unwise of Leinster to let him go when he's playing so well.

It's a bit of a tortoise and hare situation - Byrne and Carbery were about the same level a year and a half ago, Carbery bursts onto the scene in late 2016 looking like the next big thing, Byrne plodded along steadily, game after game, improving bit by bit to the point where currently he's getting the game time and gaining experience. It'll be interesting to see how their two careers play out over the next few years.

prawnsambo

arsebiscuits1 wrote: »

Leinster have 3.5 outhalves. Full respect to Marsh, he is a good 4th choice option but he is bottom half of Pro12 standard which is why hes gotten 26 caps in 4 seasons.

I don't really agree with the "he'll have to make room" Carbery and Sexton have both shown themselves to be a bit fragile. There will always be game time for Byrne here.

Ross is a pro. Who has played in the big games for Leinster. His mentality is not to be a place holder or keep the seat warm. He'd want to kick on and make the 10 shirt his. It's how these guys tick.

Yes it his. And regardless of how good he is or thinks he is, Sexton will always be ahead of him when fit. Carbery is also currently ahead of him for an Ireland jersey. At ten. Joe Schmidt was unhappy about Carbery playing at 15, but accepted that this was necessary given the injuries at wing and FB. So those issues are fixed and one would assume Joe will be unhappy and vocal about it if the situation were to continue. That's why Byrne will have to take a back seat. And that doesn;t suit anyone, so Ulster would be a good choice.

It obviously also means that the prognosis for PJ is not good.

prawnsambo

Subpopulus wrote: »

Why wouldn't Carbery give way? Currently he's stuck behind Byrne, and it would be more in his interests to move to Ulster than Byrne's. I know a lot of people on here have faith that Joey will develop into a world-class out-half yet, but Byrne's currently the better operator and I think it would be unwise of Leinster to let him go when he's playing so well.

He's not behind Byrne by any measure. See above.

AdamD

Nobody knows if Carbery is ahead or behind of Byrne yet as there hasn't been a situation where Sextons been out and Leinster have had a fit full back to play instead of Carbery. We've yet to see who gets picked when its just between the two of them to play 10, with no 15 issue.

prawnsambo

AdamD wrote: »

Nobody knows if Carbery is ahead or behind of Byrne yet as there hasn't been a situation where Sextons been out and Leinster have had a fit full back to play instead of Carbery. We've yet to see who gets picked when its just between the two of them to play 10, with no 15 issue.

Seriously? You can't tell who's ahead between a guy with six Irish caps and a guy with none?

Buer

prawnsambo wrote: »

Seriously? You can't tell who's ahead between a guy with six Irish caps and a guy with none?

It's not a concrete situation by any stretch. Byrne is eating up the ground and Carbery's versatility also plays a role in his Irish involvement as a Madigan style option at 22.

If Leinster had a straight call tomorrow for outhalf, I think Byrne has the stronger case right now.

prawnsambo

Buer wrote: »

It's not a concrete situation by any stretch. Byrne is eating up the ground and Carbery's versatility also plays a role in his Irish involvement as a Madigan style option at 22.

If Leinster had a straight call tomorrow for outhalf, I think Byrne has the stronger case right now.

It's been proven very recently. We're only talking barely a couple of months ago when Carbery was called up and Byrne wasn't. Ian Keatley was also ahead of him.

Anyway, the word will be out soon enough I would imagine, probably when PJ's situation becomes clearer. So we can leave it until then for further discussion.

irishbucsfan

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's been proven very recently. We're only talking barely a couple of months ago when Carbery was called up and Byrne wasn't. Ian Keatley was also ahead of him.

Anyway, the word will be out soon enough I would imagine, probably when PJ's situation becomes clearer. So we can leave it until then for further discussion.

Just because a player is ahead for Ireland does not mean they're ahead for Leinster.

It is likely the case, but it has not been proven at any point at all.

durkadurka

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Just because a player is ahead for Ireland does not mean they're ahead for Leinster.

It is likely the case, but it has not been proven at any point at all.

I agree, I don’t think Cullen trusts Joey at outhalf. He’s had chances to pick him there and didn’t do it.

molloyjh

prawnsambo wrote: »

Buer wrote: »

It's not a concrete situation by any stretch. Byrne is eating up the ground and Carbery's versatility also plays a role in his Irish involvement as a Madigan style option at 22.

If Leinster had a straight call tomorrow for outhalf, I think Byrne has the stronger case right now.

It's been proven very recently. We're only talking barely a couple of months ago when Carbery was called up and Byrne wasn't. Ian Keatley was also ahead of him.

Anyway, the word will be out soon enough I would imagine, probably when PJ's situation becomes clearer. So we can leave it until then for further discussion.

We’ve seen cases before where a guy is preferred provincially but is behind his competition nationally. It’s also only really been this season that we’ve seen Byrne really start to step up. At no point this season have we really seen what the pecking order is at Leinster.

For me I’d have Byrne ahead of Carbery right now. He’s a better 10, mainly because he’s been getting the game time. That’s unfortunate for Joey, but IMO Byrne is further along in his development.

AdamD

durkadurka wrote: »

I agree, I don’t think Cullen trusts Joey at outhalf. He’s had chances to pick him there and didn’t do it.

Why do people have to jump to such extremes? Maybe he trusts him but prefers other options, maybe he prefers him at full back? Not everything has to be so black and white. This is the same Cullen who started Carbery at 10 in European games in his debut season..

prawnsambo

molloyjh wrote: »

We’ve seen cases before where a guy is preferred provincially but is behind his competition nationally. It’s also only really been this season that we’ve seen Byrne really start to step up. At no point this season have we really seen what the pecking order is at Leinster.

For me I’d have Byrne ahead of Carbery right now. He’s a better 10, mainly because he’s been getting the game time. That’s unfortunate for Joey, but IMO Byrne is further along in his development.

OK. So given the choice, you'd prefer Carbery to go to Ulster?

durthacht

AdamD wrote: »

Why do people have to jump to such extremes? Maybe he trusts him but prefers other options, maybe he prefers him at full back? Not everything has to be so black and white. This is the same Cullen who started Carbery at 10 in European games in his debut season..

In fairness, Cullen started Carbery at 10 against Castres in October 2016 when his only other option was Cathal Marsh - so I wouldn't read too much into that. Both Sexton and Byrne were injured then.

prawnsambo wrote: »

OK. So given the choice, you'd prefer Carbery to go to Ulster?

The point is that it's unclear what is the pecking order at Leinster. We know Schmidt prefers Carbery, but we have no evidence who is Cullen's preference. Nobody knows Cullen's rationale - maybe he picked Byrne because Carbery is more versatile, maybe because he just prefers Byrne. Nobody knows.

There is no evidence Cullen prefers either to the other in a straight decision between the two.

EDIT: sorry - lost my bearings. I thought this was the Leinster thread.

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

OK. So given the choice, you'd prefer Carbery to go to Ulster?

I'd have to think about it to be honest. It would be a short term decision but potentially the better one given the squads needs right now.

Granny15

durthacht wrote: »

In fairness, Cullen started Carbery at 10 against Castres in October 2016 when his only other option was Cathal Marsh - so I wouldn't read too much into that. Both Sexton and Byrne were injured then.



The point is that it's unclear what is the pecking order at Leinster. We know Schmidt prefers Carbery, but we have no evidence who is Cullen's preference. Nobody knows Cullen's rationale - maybe he picked Byrne because Carbery is more versatile, maybe because he just prefers Byrne. Nobody knows.

There is no evidence Cullen prefers either to the other in a straight decision between the two.

EDIT: sorry - lost my bearings. I thought this was the Leinster thread.

Cullen will do as Joe thinks best. At the moment we know that Joe rates Carberry as backup 10 to Sexton for Ireland. Therefore at Leinster Byrne is third choice behind Carberry simply because joey is ahead for Ireland. Carberry is the better 10 IMO and until something changes at 10 for Ireland Leinster will follow suit

prawnsambo

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd have to think about it to be honest. It would be a short term decision but potentially the better one given the squads needs right now.

End of the season doesn't sound short term to me.

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

End of the season doesn't sound short term to me.

That's not what I meant. If I had to choose between Ross Byrne to go to Ulster for 2 years or Carbery to go to Ulster for 2 years, Ross Byrne is the one I'd hold onto as he is a more complete 10 for us right now. We'd be in a different place this season without him whereas Carbery hasn't been available at all.

Basing a decision on this and last season it's a no brainer, but Carbery may end up the better player and hopfully more robust so Ross Byrne might be a better call short term but long term you would lose out.

prawnsambo

Deleted User wrote: »

That's not what I meant. If I had to choose between Ross Byrne to go to Ulster for 2 years or Carbery to go to Ulster for 2 years, Ross Byrne is the one I'd hold onto as he is a more complete 10 for us right now. We'd be in a different place this season without him whereas Carbery hasn't been available at all.

Basing a decision on this and last season it's a no brainer, but Carbery may end up the better player and hopfully more robust so Ross Byrne might be a better call short term but long term you would lose out.

Well I don't agree. Byrne is good, but he doesn't attack the line like Carbery does. I'd suggest that their playing styles are what influences their injury profiles.

Podge_irl

prawnsambo wrote: »

molloyjh wrote: »

We’ve seen cases before where a guy is preferred provincially but is behind his competition nationally. It’s also only really been this season that we’ve seen Byrne really start to step up. At no point this season have we really seen what the pecking order is at Leinster.

For me I’d have Byrne ahead of Carbery right now. He’s a better 10, mainly because he’s been getting the game time. That’s unfortunate for Joey, but IMO Byrne is further along in his development.

OK. So given the choice, you'd prefer Carbery to go to Ulster?

I realize it’s not what you asked but I’d keep Byrne at 10 and Carberry at 15 and laugh heartily while the next 10 European Cups roll in. It’s by far the best use of their talents (at this point in time).

swiwi_

Does anyone else think we should pool together and petition Leinster rugby to tell us who Cullen prefers at 10? If we go through official channels we could solve this dilemma once and for all. I can act as a neutral Swiss intermediary if required.

salmocab

swiwi_ wrote: »

Does anyone else think we should pool together and petition Leinster rugby to tell us who Cullen prefers at 10? If we go through official channels we could solve this dilemma once and for all. I can act as a neutral Swiss intermediary if required.

Telling us is the least they could do. They owe it to us as key board warriors to keep us all in the loop.

Squidgy Black

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well I don't agree. Byrne is good, but he doesn't attack the line like Carbery does. I'd suggest that their playing styles are what influences their injury profiles.

That and the sheer size difference, Byrne is listed as 4 inches taller than Carbery and nearly 10kg heavier. That's gonna go a long way when taking a hit.

Buer

That and the sheer size difference, Byrne is listed as 4 inches taller than Carbery and nearly 10kg heavier. That's gonna go a long way when taking a hit.

It's an overlooked part of his game. Byrne is a remarkably comfortable and strong defender for someone so young. His tackle count is often up to double figures and he rarely misses one. His size allows him get in amongst his back row and Henshaw also when they're looking to hold a carrier up similar to how Sexton does.

Granny15

Buer wrote: »

It's an overlooked part of his game. Byrne is a remarkably comfortable and strong defender for someone so young. His tackle count is often up to double figures and he rarely misses one. His size allows him get in amongst his back row and Henshaw also when they're looking to hold a carrier up similar to how Sexton does.

Carberry is the better tackler though. Carberry has noticeably taken big hits in his career and put the attacker backwards in the tackle. Byrne tends to flake off tackles.

irishbucsfan

Speak up Buer