Ireland Team Talk X: The Long Hard Road to a Semi. MOD WARNING POSTS #1, #1474, #5707

aloooof

errlloyd wrote: »

Is Slade injured? If not then maybe I think the main change would be him slotting in at 13, Ford dropped and everyone else moves in one.

Agreed, Tuilagi and Slade seemed to go really well in the 6 Nations to be fair. Maybe Nowell for Cokanasiga aswell?

Watson surely gets in somewhere

aloooof

kingofthekong wrote: »

England look very very strong, this may not be that competitive

We've 11 players starting that started the 2018 GS winning game in Twickenham. England look stronger, but we should at least be competitive.

ManAboutCouch

kingofthekong wrote: »

England look very very strong, this may not be that competitive

I agree that this is quite possibly England's strongest starting XV, while Ireland probably have 11 or 12 of their strongest starting. England are more match fit too. Add in home advantage and it should be a decent home win.

There are rumours on Twitter that Jaco Peyper isn't going to make it due to travel delays. Nigel will ref this instead.

Burkie1203

ManAboutCouch wrote: »

.

There are rumours on Twitter that Jaco Peyper isn't going to make it due to travel delays. Nigel will ref this instead.

That's been confirmed. Peyper won't arrive until tomorrow so Nigel taking charge (not of the breakdown tho)

Bazzo

I'd take Owens ahead of Peyper any day of the week

molloyjh

reg114 wrote: »

molloyjh wrote: »

But we did play a weakened team against Italy. That's just a fact. And we beat NZ without Murray so I dont think we're snooker at all if we lose him.

It's been 5 months since the 6Ns. Our form changed drastically in the 3 months from Nov 2018 to Feb 2019. So there's no reason to believe that we cant turn things around in a longer timeframe. We simply dont know whether that has happened yet or not. Let's just hold fire for another few weeks. And while we do it's worth remembering that we dont need to be hitting form now. We need to be hitting it in about 7-8 weeks time. Until then we just need to be moving in the right direction.

I heard the same argument in the weeks before the last World cup when we performed poorly. The problem is lack of momentum. A poor performance against italy continued the underwhelming form that has dogged this ireland side this calendar year. What I meant about us fielding a second string against italy, was that our performance regardless of personnel should have been alot more convincing that it was. If we lose against England at the weekend we have a serious momentum and confidence problem. Winning breeds winning.

France lost to Tonga in the pools in 2011, went on to the final and should have won by all accounts. This is a knock out competition. Luck plays almost as much of a factor as anything else. Luck with the draw, with injuries etc. We played well in the pools in the last 2 RWCs and still crashed out in the quarters. We got horribly unlucky with injuries in 2015 but with a clear bill of health we could have a good shot. Obviously it remains to be seen if we've addressed whatever issues dogged the 6Ns campaign.

Shefwedfan

joseywhales wrote: »

With Murray and Byrne I expect we will kick the leather off the ball.

Why?


Does Byrne "kick the leather off the ball" for Leinster?



Seems a very strange comment to make.....


Byrne is exceptional with a cross field kick to a winger to score tries and is more accurate compared to Sexton but Idoubt anyone would class that as "kicking the leather off the ball"


Carberry was doing a lot of kicks for Conway across the pitch so just wondering is that a tactic going forward?

99problems1

Carty as good as he has been for Connacht won't be deciding any matches if he had to come on in a world cup quarter final. He's at Connacht where he has the confidence to try things. If they come off, brilliant...if they don't, then at least he tried. For Ireland things HAVE to come off. Joes game is also too structured for Carty.

99problems1

molloyjh wrote: »

France lost to Tonga in the pools in 2011, went on to the final and should have won by all accounts. This is a knock out competition. Luck plays almost as much of a factor as anything else. Luck with the draw, with injuries etc. We played well in the pools in the last 2 RWCs and still crashed out in the quarters. We got horribly unlucky with injuries in 2015 but with a clear bill of health we could have a good shot. Obviously it remains to be seen if we've addressed whatever issues dogged the 6Ns campaign.

Our last pool was easy as ****.

Like the team acted like the France game was against the France of old. France are a mess and we expect to win every game against them now. It felt like that 2015 France win was the same as the 2003 Argentina win.

thebaz

99problems1 wrote: »

Our last pool was easy as ****.

Like the team acted like the France game was against the France of old. France are a mess and we expect to win every game against them now. It felt like that 2015 France win was the same as the 2003 Argentina win.

just not true - beating France was a big deal at a WC , France have a history of being world class , and have often beaten best in world , runners up in 2011 . and I am as critical as anyone of modern French rugby, which is awful compared to what it was , and Argentina didnt really come good until WC 2007.

Bazzo

99problems1 wrote: »

Carty as good as he has been for Connacht won't be deciding any matches if he had to come on in a world cup quarter final. He's at Connacht where he has the confidence to try things. If they come off, brilliant...if they don't, then at least he tried. For Ireland things HAVE to come off. Joes game is also too structured for Carty.

Could you give some specific examples of these high risk plays that haven't come off?

kingofthekong

kingofthekong wrote: »

England look very very strong, this may not be that competitive

I think our 23 is more than good enough. A significant chunk of the English team come from teams the Irish lads eat for Breakfast in the Champions cup.

I know that's not a reliable metric and Sarries are a fantastic albeit very hard to like club, but I think England are a mentally fragile team that have a limited game plan.

Farrell is the one of the few players I genuinely respect having disliked him early in his career. He's uncompromising and will provide a steady leadership in that mid field but to be honest, if we get through 30 minutes and stay within 10 we'll give England an awful time in the second half.

Either way, this is a warm up match - I've no doubt we will go out to win but there will also be elements of our game that our brought into play with the World Cup in mind and not with the specific purpose of putting scores on the English.

I'm going to relax and enjoy the game, hope Ross Byrne has a blinder.

Whoever wins or loses, at least Boris Johnson isn't our Taoiseach. Silver linings and all that.

Shefwedfan

Deleted User wrote: »

I think our 23 is more than good enough. A significant chunk of the English team come from teams the Irish lads eat for Breakfast in the Champions cup.

I know that's not a reliable metric and Sarries are a fantastic albeit very hard to like club, but I think England are a mentally fragile team that have a limited game plan.

Farrell is the one of the few players I genuinely respect having disliked him early in his career. He's uncompromising and will provide a steady leadership in that mid field but to be honest, if we get through 30 minutes and stay within 10 we'll give England an awful time in the second half.

Either way, this is a warm up match - I've no doubt we will go out to win but there will also be elements of our game that our brought into play with the World Cup in mind and not with the specific purpose of putting scores on the English.

I'm going to relax and enjoy the game, hope Ross Byrne has a blinder.

Whoever wins or loses, at least Boris Johnson isn't our Taoiseach. Silver linings and all that.

I agree with everything but really have you seen the clown running our country?? I would take Boris tomorrow

AbusesToilets

I'd like to see Joe give a more leinster heavy team a run against Wales, to see how effective those successful club pairings would work against a top team. I think our style of play is somewhat restricted by certain player choices.

Portsalon

Bazzo wrote: »

I'd take Owens ahead of Peyper any day of the week

I would have too, until he robbed Treviso down in Thomond last May.

Mind you, having said that, Peyper probably would have done the exact same!

Shefwedfan

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I agree with everything but really have you seen the clown running our country?? I would take Boris tomorrow

Not getting into a political discussion, but I'd take a qualified surgeon over some upper class idiot who's been sacked twice for lying any and every day of the week.

UK an utter shambles at the moment.

AbusesToilets

R U G B Y

AdamD

**** off with the politics

shootermacg

AbusesToilets wrote: »

I'd like to see Joe give a more leinster heavy team a run against Wales, to see how effective those successful club pairings would work against a top team. I think our style of play is somewhat restricted by certain player choices.

Wales would eat Leinster for breakfast every day and twice on Tuesday.

Shefwedfan

shootermacg wrote: »

Wales would eat Leinster for breakfast every day and twice on Tuesday.

I don’t think you got what the poster was saying....

Shefwedfan

AbusesToilets wrote: »

I'd like to see Joe give a more leinster heavy team a run against Wales, to see how effective those successful club pairings would work against a top team. I think our style of play is somewhat restricted by certain player choices.

I would like to see Cronin get a chance with Toner and Ryan on the pitch...he got hammered for a game against Italy when the whole line out malfunctioned all game

Would be interesting how he would do when throwing to his club mates

shootermacg

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I don’t think you got what the poster was saying....

Oh OK so, bring in Dave Kearney stat!

shootermacg

shootermacg wrote: »

Oh OK so, bring in Dave Kearney stat!

Dave Kearney had a quietly excellent season and had some really great tries/assists (including with Byrne).

aloooof

AbusesToilets wrote: »

I'd like to see Joe give a more leinster heavy team a run against Wales, to see how effective those successful club pairings would work against a top team. I think our style of play is somewhat restricted by certain player choices.

What players choices specifically, for what style of play?

aloooof

Is it just me or is Ger Gilroy talking absolute nonsense here?

Beechwoodspark

Tomorrow will be a tough one.

stephen_n

aloooof wrote: »

Is it just me or is Ger Gilroy talking absolute nonsense here?

Yep!

Does he not get the inherent contradiction in saying Sexton is injured all the time but no other outhalf has got game time. How the hell could that happen?

sydthebeat

All they have to do is look across the water and see a 32 year old scrum half get named in the squad, as vice captain! with one international cap to his name which he got last week, in a position England don't actually have an injury crisis in.

If carty and Byrne, our theoretical 3rd and 4th choice out halves go into the RWC with 15 caps betten them then it's quite hard to argue that's bad planning.

errlloyd

Ah to be fair. Sexton does get wrapped up for Leinster a lot. Just because he makes his Irish games doesn't mean his injury profile is perfect. There is some merit in asking why Ross Byrne didn't play against Aus once.

I think they're a little harsh on Joe because PJ did get good time and in reality we've only had two seasons to try and fill in that gap.

Beechwoodspark

Re the clip posted

Gilroy has a point

There’s a sense that Carberys injury has caused a bit of a panic

We just have to motor on now

R Byrne hopefully has a good game tomorr

molloyjh

aloooof wrote: »

Is it just me or is Ger Gilroy talking absolute nonsense here?

He is. And not for the first time. Sexton hasn't been regularly injured in years for starters. And it only goes downhill from there. Byrne and Carbery only came onto the scene at senior level in 2016-17. At that stage Paddy Jackson was still in the frame and he played for Ireland in Japan in June 2017 while Carbery played vs USA. So by that point we had 3 out halves being developed. However once the issues with Jackson developed it was clear that we needed to focus on getting Carbery up to speed as Sextons back up so he had to dominate the minutes thereafter that Sexton wasnt playing. Could we have gone to Australia without Sexton in order to give Byrne more time? Sure. But how many other teams actually do stuff like that? And just how much of a difference would it really have made? The game we lost on that tour was the game that Sexton didnt start. So had we gone 0 from 3 on that tour the knives would have been out then. And how would that have affected Joey's confidence or the teams for that matter?

But sure this is the guy that is still banging on about Simon Zebo, who didn't want to play the way that the coaches directed him to and so f-ed off to France knowing what that meant. He was never going to be part of this squad, but sure he'll keep bringing it up anyway.

aloooof

stephen_n wrote: »

Does he not get the inherent contradiction in saying Sexton is injured all the time but no other outhalf has got game time. How the hell could that happen?

I had the exact same thought.

molloyjh wrote: »

Byrne and Carbery only came onto the scene at senior level in 2016-17. At that stage Paddy Jackson was still in the frame and he played for Ireland in Japan in June 2017 while Carbery played vs USA.

Completely agree. PJ had also started all 3 Tests against SA and performed very well so was getting quality exposure. For practically half of this cycle he was our back-up 10, and they can't have legislated for what happened.

One other thing he mentions:

Ger Gilroy:
It’s your 3rd and 4th choice players who are going to be playing in semi final and final just by virtue the injury profile of teams that win the World Cup. With the exception of Dan Carter who played brilliantly in the final in 2015.

Is that actually true? I'd like to see some stats on that tbh. To my mind, Stephen Donald in 2011 gets mentioned so often because he's the exception that proves the rule.

sydthebeat

as a little expansion on this...

Anscombe misses the world cup, and wales give their 3rd choice out half his debut last week against england...
so their 3rd and 4th choice out halves will have a max total of 15 caps between them.... one who hasnt played for wales in a year.

scotlands 3rd choice out half has 4 caps

molloyjh

Looking at the last 4 finals:

2015 - Carter and Foley started at 10, both first choice.

2011 - Cruden and Parra started at 10. Cruden due to injury but Parra was first choice for France at the time despite himself & Trinh-Duc trading starts in the pool stages.

2007 - James & Wilkinson started at 10, both first choice.

2003 - Wilkinson & Larkham starter at 10, both first choice.

Shefwedfan

Sexton is not injury prone.....

Jesus people really need to get that out of their head.

Every player in the World Cup is an injury risk, nobody is talking about the lack of 9's but Murray is a bigger concern to me. At least Sexton showed form for Leinster last season. Murray was playing like a drain all season

Marmion or McGrath are not rolling in caps either

AdamD

sydthebeat wrote: »

as a little expansion on this...

Anscombe misses the world cup, and wales give their 3rd choice out half his debut last week against england...
so their 3rd and 4th choice out halves will have a max total of 15 caps between them.... one who hasnt played for wales in a year.

scotlands 3rd choice out half has 4 caps

NZ haven't given any game time to their third choice 10 either. England aren't even bringing a third choice 10.

Shefwedfan

molloyjh wrote: »

Looking at the last 4 finals:

2015 - Carter and Foley started at 10, both first choice.

2011 - Cruden and Parra started at 10. Cruden due to injury but Parra was first choice for France at the time despite himself & Trinh-Duc trading starts in the pool stages.

2007 - James & Wilkinson started at 10, both first choice.

2003 - Wilkinson & Larkham starter at 10, both first choice.

Wilkinson was more injury prone than Sexton ever is or was


England where lucky that tournament and Wilkonson got on injury.



If Ireland are lucky and get no injuries to key players then we are in with a shot, same as every other team in the competition.



Not one single team can lose critical players and then expect to win, NZ included

aloooof

molloyjh wrote: »

Looking at the last 4 finals:

2015 - Carter and Foley started at 10, both first choice.

2011 - Cruden and Parra started at 10. Cruden due to injury but Parra was first choice for France at the time despite himself & Trinh-Duc trading starts in the pool stages.

2007 - James & Wilkinson started at 10, both first choice.

2003 - Wilkinson & Larkham starter at 10, both first choice.

Even allowing for Parra vs Trinh-Duc, that's still 1st vs 2nd choice. So it looks like the 3rd or 4th choice 10 playing has only happened once out of 8 players in the last 4 finals?

P.Walnuts

Any word on Conan at all? Surely he travels?

Shefwedfan

What would be more interesting

Of the last few WC finals, how many of the starting 15 on both sides would have been expected to be starting anyway if they got to a final?

How many players did they lose to injury over the course of the tournament?

aloooof

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Sexton is not injury prone.....

Jesus people really need to get that out of their head.

Every player in the World Cup is an injury risk, nobody is talking about the lack of 9's but Murray is a bigger concern to me. At least Sexton showed form for Leinster last season. Murray was playing like a drain all season

Marmion or McGrath are not rolling in caps either

To be fair, he was injured for almost half of the season. And even in amidst the poor form, he had some very good performances too (Gloucester away comes to mind).

It's probably his first dip in form since he's started getting international caps.

sydthebeat

AdamD wrote: »

NZ haven't given any game time to their third choice 10 either. England aren't even bringing a third choice 10.

England are bringing Francis as the 3rd 10

New Zealand wont travel with a 3rd 10 now that mckenzie is out, so it would be interesting to see what happens if one of mounga or Bb goes down with an injury.

ioane to be called up??

aloooof

sydthebeat wrote: »

England are bringing Francis as the 3rd 10

I initially thought this was a strange one for England, particularly as their first choice 10 is getting a start at 12 this weekend.

They seemed to be pretty settled with Farrell, Tuilagi, Slade as 10-12-13 with Ford on the bench during the 6 Nations. But if they're considering a Ford-Farrell 10-12 at some point during the WC, I'd imagine you'd see a centre in the 22 jersey. Daly as well gives them lots of versatility in case of any injuries. So it kinda makes sense.

arsebiscuits1

The point of depth at 10 and injury concerns does seem quite overstated for us.

I had thought about this last year and posted to Reddit about countries and their depth options at 10.

The reality of it is every country in the World (even New Zealand now that McKenzie is injured) would have valid concerns about their 3rd choice 10 and most of their 3rd choices would be going into this World Cup completely cold and inexperienced.

We can bemoan and worry and be convinced we are unprepared having to potentially rely on Byrne as 3rd choice. But given he is a player whose played a lot of high level minutes for Leinster last season we are in a position of envy to a lot of countries

errlloyd

aloooof wrote: »

I initially thought this was a strange one for England, particularly as their first choice 10 is getting a start at 12 this weekend.

They seemed to be pretty settled with Farrell, Tuilagi, Slade as 10-12-13 with Ford on the bench during the 6 Nations. But if they're considering a Ford-Farrell 10-12 at some point during the WC, I'd imagine you'd see a centre in the 22 jersey. Daly as well gives them lots of versatility in case of any injuries. So it kinda makes sense.

For me the fact they might play Farrell at 12 means the decision makes EVEN LESS sense.

Firstly it doubles the chance of at least one of their "out and out" tens getting injured at some point. Secondly it creates a situation where an injury to Ford doesn't just need a replacement it needs a reshuffle. Finally the versatility offered by Farrell is actually the perfect reason why you can bring another 10.

Never mind all that, Ford is actually third cover for 9 as well! Now to be fair, both Francis and Slade can play 10.

Suppose Farrell gets a 2 week injury in the final group game against France. They don't want to replace him, because he'll be fit again for the final. Are they going to play Wales or Aus with Ford and no cover? Especially given that when Ford is 10, Farrell does most of the work for him anyway?

They should have brought Golden wrists.

arsebiscuits1

errlloyd wrote: »

For me the fact they might play Farrell at 12 means the decision makes EVEN LESS sense.

Firstly it doubles the chance of at least one of their "out and out" tens getting injured at some point. Secondly it creates a situation where an injury to Ford doesn't just need a replacement it needs a reshuffle. Finally the versatility offered by Farrell is actually the perfect reason why you can bring another 10.

Never mind all that, Ford is actually third cover for 9 as well! Now to be fair, both Francis and Slade can play 10.

Suppose Farrell gets a 2 week injury in the final group game against France. They don't want to replace him, because he'll be fit again for the final. Are they going to play Wales or Aus with Ford and no cover? Especially given that when Ford is 10, Farrell does most of the work for him anyway?

They should have brought Golden wrists.

All you're doing here is making more and more of a case for Andy Goode to make his comeback. And I'm finding it very hard to disagree :pac:

AdamD

I really don't buy that any country is happy considering a non-specialist 9 or 10 as their cover. May as well consider there to be no 3rd choice cover tbh. Can't see any teams winning a knock out game if they had to play the majority of the game with a non specialist 9 or 10. They're just taking the risk they don't cop 2 injuries.

errlloyd

Side note, I kind of wish Andy Goode had retired a legend and disappeared. His current political persona is ruining my enjoyment of his onfield unsuitability.

errlloyd

AdamD wrote: »

Can't see any teams winning a knock out game if they had to play the majority of the game with a non specialist 9 or 10. They're just taking the risk they don't cop 2 injuries.

Racing won the top14 final in 2015 with Machenaud Red carded in the 19th minute. And in the biggest display of "I have no trust in your whatsoever" the sub scrum half was never brought on. Imhoff played 9 for the whole game.