Ireland Team Talk XI: Team of nervoUS MOD warning Post 1

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What do you mean? The blame is at the feet of the coaches and the players. They were absolutely ****e. That doesn't automatically mean there are better players in all their positions in Ireland, especially when we know that isn't the case in nearly every position.

I would have to dispute that Kieran Marmion is not better than 2019 Conor Murray.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't think you ever settle on a XV. I don't think any coach does and I doubt Schmidt ever did. I think there's an incredible level of misunderstanding going on there. Its a complete and utter myth.

We have a very similar XV right now than we did at the end of 2018 because there's very little variance in who the best players playing in Ireland are. However EVEN allowing for that, Jack McGrath and Devin Toner both beat New Zealand in 2018 and neither of them could even make our squad for this world cup. So they hardly picked their squad a year in advance and everyone knows that whether or not they want to admit it.

There are plenty of teams who settle on a pattern of selection for periods when they're confident they're the best players around. Who was introduced to the kiwi 23 before they won the 2015 world cup, was there anyone outside of Milner-Skudder? I don't think so... I'm not saying that justifies every one of our own selections, I'm saying in all likelihood they got other far more important things right (on the mental side of the game) that we still aren't capable of doing.

There are players in the team who gained the status of being ‘undroppable’ and in he half backs case, irreplaceable until seventy minutes plus has gone generally. Not all squad members no but it’s pretty clear that Schmidt had settled on his first XV a year ago. Injuries are the only thing that affected it. Form was irrelevant.

I said on here last March that leaving sexton on that long was complete nonsense. It was. Nonsense like that has an impact on teams. Making it clear certain guys can play way below standards, by standards I mean international not even sextons usual high quality standard, will never result in success.

Shefwedfan

awec wrote: »

I would have to dispute that Kieran Marmion is not better than 2019 Conor Murray.

Based on what? How many minutes at club or international level did Marmion play?

He was returning from injury as well....

awec

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Based on what? How many minutes at club or international level did Marmion play?



He was returning from injury as well?

Based on what we've seen of Kieran Marmion?

He has never been bad for Ireland. A solid, decent test player. He will never be as good as Murray in full flow, he'll never be a Lion, but Murray is not even close to hitting those levels at the moment.

Foxtrol

awec wrote: »

Calculated based on what?

Calculated based on the decades of experience of Joe and his assistants and having scouted and had Murray and Sexton, along with all their replacements, in games and training camps for 6 - 9 years.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

Schmidt settled on a XV when he refused to not only change things up between games, but to change things up in a game when it isn't working.

The message was sent loud and clear in the 6 nations. Few, if any players had much to worry about when it came to selection.

Bringing in inferior players would have done **** all to fix the problem. The problem happened for years under Schmidt at various times, despite the team changing up or going through good patches. It wasn't a selection problem. It was a performance problem. That's what needed fixing. It's just a much much harder problem to know how to solve when you don't know what you're talking about (referring to myself).

They didn't need different players, there aren't any available who are better. So if you bring in worse players all you're doing is putting less skilled individuals into the exact same environment that produced the problems. Like a bad driver saying "****ing hell my car keeps crashing, I need a different car."

I think, and I don't really know the discipline but it's been a clear differentiator for years imo, that they needed a mental skills coach. They needed some equivalent to New Zealand's Gilbert Enoka. What's quite frustrating is that Jason Barrett is a Dub who is down in New Zealand doing exactly that (last I heard) and I don't think any of our own provinces are investing in anything similar. Keith Earls clearly isn't dropping simple passes under pressure because he's lazy, complacent or inherently incompetent at basic rugby skills... I don't think Sexton strikes me as that sort either.

I think people just think its a selection thing because its one of the clearest and most obvious and easy things you can look at as a fan when judging a coach (in any sport). Its a selection bias thing rather than a selection thing.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Bringing in inferior players would have done **** all to fix the problem. The problem happened for years under Schmidt at various times, despite the team changing up or going through good patches. It wasn't a selection problem. It was a performance problem. That's what needed fixing. It's just a much much harder problem to know how to solve when you don't know what you're talking about (referring to myself).

They didn't need different players, there aren't any available who are better. So if you bring in worse players all you're doing is putting less skilled individuals into the exact same environment that produced the problems. Like a bad driver saying "****ing hell my car keeps crashing, I need a different car."

I think, and I don't really know the discipline but it's been a clear differentiator for years imo, that they needed a mental skills coach. They needed some equivalent to New Zealand's Gilbert Enoka. What's quite frustrating is that Jason Barrett is a Dub who is down in New Zealand doing exactly that (last I heard) and I don't think any of our own provinces are investing in anything similar. Keith Earls clearly isn't dropping simple passes under pressure because he's lazy, complacent or inherently incompetent at basic rugby skills... I don't think Sexton strikes me as that sort either.

I think people just think its a selection thing because its one of the clearest and most obvious and easy things you can look at as a fan when judging a coach (in any sport). Its a selection bias thing rather than a selection thing.

People keep saying inferior players, as if the replacements are crap and guaranteed to be a huge step down.

Yes, they are not the same level of player when everyone is in top form, but there is not much difference between them and a very out of form incumbent.

We're talking about selecting form players over players who are not just slightly out of form, but who haven't shown anything resembling form for an entire year. The idea that this would not improve things does not wash with me.

Foxtrol

ClanofLams wrote: »

There are players in the team who gained the status of being ‘undroppable’ and in he half backs case, irreplaceable until seventy minutes plus has gone generally. Not all squad members no but it’s pretty clear that Schmidt had settled on his first XV a year ago. Injuries are the only thing that affected it. Form was irrelevant.

I said on here last March that leaving sexton on that long was complete nonsense. It was. Nonsense like that has an impact on teams. Making it clear certain guys can play way below standards, by standards I mean international not even sextons usual high quality standard, will never result in success.

You really have to get over those 25 minutes extra Sexton played in that game more than you believed he should have.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Bringing in inferior players would have done **** all to fix the problem. The problem happened for years under Schmidt at various times, despite the team changing up or going through good patches. It wasn't a selection problem. It was a performance problem. That's what needed fixing. It's just a much much harder problem to know how to solve when you don't know what you're talking about (referring to myself).

They didn't need different players, there aren't any available who are better. So if you bring in worse players all you're doing is putting less skilled individuals into the exact same environment that produced the problems. Like a bad driver saying "****ing hell my car keeps crashing, I need a different car."

I think, and I don't really know the discipline but it's been a clear differentiator for years imo, that they needed a mental skills coach. They needed some equivalent to New Zealand's Gilbert Enoka. What's quite frustrating is that Jason Barrett is a Dub who is down in New Zealand doing exactly that (last I heard) and I don't think any of our own provinces are investing in anything similar. Keith Earls clearly isn't dropping simple passes under pressure because he's lazy, complacent or inherently incompetent at basic rugby skills... I don't think Sexton strikes me as that sort either.

I think people just think its a selection thing because its one of the clearest and most obvious and easy things you can look at as a fan when judging a coach (in any sport). Its a selection bias thing rather than a selection thing.

A mental skills consultant may have helped. But I don’t believe anyone looking at Ireland over the last year could argue in good faith that Schmidt hadn’t pretty much settled on his XV last November.

I don’t believe anyone who has been involved in any team at any level could genuinely argue that’s a good approach. If you need to make a hard decision you make it, you don’t leave the worst player on the field on for seventy minutes thereby implying such a performance is acceptable.

ClanofLams

Foxtrol wrote: »

You really have to get over those 25 minutes extra Sexton played in that game more than you believed he should have.

It’s just the most obvious indicator of Schmidt’s guaranteed spots. Sexton was deserving world player of the year in 2018, our greatest ten ever etc

It’s hard to overstate how poor he was that day. His performance wouldn’t have been bad at Celtic Cup level.

Foxtrol

awec wrote: »

People keep saying inferior players, as if the replacements are crap and guaranteed to be a huge step down.

Yes, they are not the same level of player when everyone is in top form, but there is not much difference between them and a very out of form incumbent.

We're talking about selecting form players over players who are not just slightly out of form, but who haven't shown anything resembling form for an entire year. The idea that this would not improve things does not wash with me.

We're talking about 7 months before the tournament when people are saying they should be benched. Murray and Sexton are two of the most experienced players in the squad and on form are the best in their positions in the world. At that stage you have to go all in on one of the replacements if you wanted them to be ready for the WC. The replacements aren't of comparative experience or quality, you cant just chop and change them in and out for the rest of the build up as the form winds blow.

That is a huge call to make that far out.

Danthemanhere

ClanofLams wrote: »

It’s just the most obvious indicator of Schmidt’s guaranteed spots. Sexton was deserving world player of the year in 2018, our greatest ten ever etc

It’s hard to overstate how poor he was that day. His performance wouldn’t have been bad at Celtic Cup level.

Again it's in retrospect but Sexton had a great 2018 when other teams were building for the world cup. During 2018, we dominated possession against teams, any 10 would have looked good with the service that was given. Not to say he didn't have some very good games, it's just this year with less dominance up front, he's looked very ordinary and against New Zealand, he had a nightmare.

awec

Foxtrol wrote: »

We're talking about 7 months before the tournament when people are saying they should be benched. Murray and Sexton are two of the most experienced players in the squad and on form are the best in their positions in the world. At that stage you have to go all in on one of the replacements if you wanted them to be ready for the WC. The replacements aren't of comparative experience or quality, you cant just chop and change them in and out for the rest of the build up as the form winds blow.

That is a huge call to make that far out.

No you don't.

You do need to give them more than a token 10 minutes at the end of games that are over.

You don't need to suddenly throw the baby out with the bathwater and give every minute to the likes of Marmion and Carbery.

There is a happy medium between what we did, and going to the other extreme.

ClanofLams

I find it astonishing that people are arguing, even with the benefit of hindsight, that Schmidt got his approach spot on. We played three competitive games against top tier teams all year and got beaten out the gate three times. We lost to Japan, who despite their improvements, shouldn’t be within ten points of Ireland. Jesus I’m just glad Schmidt got nothing wrong otherwise this World Cup could have been even worse.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

People keep saying inferior players, as if the replacements are crap and guaranteed to be a huge step down.

Yes, they are not the same level of player when everyone is in top form, but there is not much difference between them and a very out of form incumbent.

We're talking about selecting form players over players who are not just slightly out of form, but who haven't shown anything resembling form for an entire year. The idea that this would not improve things does not wash with me.

I don't believe in the same form that you seem to.

I don't believe in some magical force that just makes some players play above their level and others below their level. I've explained my thoughts on this here before, but form is just a word to describe some combination of things like fitness/confidence/tactical comfort/luck etc. It's surely just an abstraction, in my opinion. There might be some young winger playing brilliantly in the Pro 14, but I think you put him in the same environment as Keith Earls (for example) and you just end up with a slightly less experienced/skilled person under the exact same circumstances making similar mistakes.

JRant

Foxtrol wrote: »

I'm basing it off their full body of work as players.

What is more likely a 29 year old returning from a neck injury regaining their peak performance level or a 27 year old making a large jump to levels that are well above anything they've ever played before?

Considering how hard those particular neck injuries are to successfully rehab and come back from then I would have said go with the fit 27 year old.

I would also question why a clearly injured Sexton was played. He played little to no rugby before the WC due to injury and looked to be seriously struggling in nearly every game he played. Add in the fact that the backup 10 was also injured for most of the warmups and had no fitness (by his own account) during the WC.

There are 5 meaningful games a season (9 this year) for these internationals. This is not the time to play someone in to form. Of 4 meaningful games we've played this year we got are ass handed to us by Japan and humiliated by NZ. Add in the hidings England and Wales gave us in the 6 nation's then it adds up to an extremely poor return, especially considering the amount of resources and time with the team Joe was afforded.

Also, whoever signed off on playing England then Wales twice as the warm up games needs to be seriously looked at.

irishbucsfan

ClanofLams wrote: »

I find it astonishing that people are arguing, even with the benefit of hindsight, that Schmidt got his approach spot on. We played three competitive games against top tier teams all year and got beaten out the gate three times. We lost to Japan, who despite their improvements, shouldn’t be within ten points of Ireland. Jesus I’m just glad Schmidt got nothing wrong otherwise this World Cup could have been even worse.

Who is this? I hope its not aimed at me.

Obviously Schmidt didn't get his approach spot on. Schmidt has had extremely flawed years with Ireland. Go back in time to before the 2018 6 Nations and you'll see I was arguing against the tide here that there'd be a chance he'd have to go if there was a repeat of the previous year (turns out it was a grand slam in the end, we tended to get one extreme or the other!)

irishbucsfan

ClanofLams wrote: »

could argue in good faith that Schmidt hadn’t pretty much settled on his XV last November.

Again. McGrath and Toner didn't even travel. Both are fit.

If someone is trying to say the squad was picked during the previous AIs, with the benefit of a few seconds to think about that, then I'd have to question whether they'd had some sort of recent brain trauma.

Foxtrol

ClanofLams wrote: »

It’s just the most obvious indicator of Schmidt’s guaranteed spots. Sexton was deserving world player of the year in 2018, our greatest ten ever etc

It’s hard to overstate how poor he was that day. His performance wouldn’t have been bad at Celtic Cup level.

What you see as guaranteed spots, I see as giving a chance to a player who has pulled out magic in games while playing poorly when the other option was turning to a player who was untested and even since then hasn't really hinted that he is anything special at international level.

It was a conservative call, which didn't work out, but hardly something to keep bringing up.

Donnielighto

Schmidt had his team picked in the main. We all knew the first choice pack bar 7 given everyone fit in 2018 6N, same with the half backs and back 3. The only question mark about starting over that period was two of 3 in centre and the openside.

Toner was dropped from the squad with kleyn in but other than that there was no movement in players.

Healy best furlong
Ryan toner
Pom stander 7
Murray Sexton
2 from 3
Stockdale Kearney Earls

We all knew that was Joe's team. So did everyone else. Once leavy went down 7 was answered. Toner is the only selection surprise since the 2018 tournament and we suffered for that. Players perform better when there is a fire under them. It's the same stuff going back to when I started watching rugby in the 90s that you have to retire to get dropped.

We haven't got a huge player pool but we have enough to give rotation a chance and keep the team fresh.

Porter scannell Porter
Hendo beirne
Beirne Conan 7
Marmion/Cooney/blade/McGrath
Carberry Byrne carty
2 farrells
Conway Addison larmour

We could have spread games around based on form. Give form an input into the selection at least or the incumbents know they have the jersey.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Who is this? I hope its not aimed at me.

Obviously Schmidt didn't get his approach spot on. Schmidt has had extremely flawed years with Ireland. Go back in time to before the 2018 6 Nations and you'll see I was arguing against the tide here that there'd be a chance he'd have to go if there was a repeat of the previous year (turns out it was a grand slam in the end, we tended to get one extreme or the other!)

So what do you think he got wrong then? With respect, having some knowledge of the work of mental health experts/sports psychologists, they are not a transformative influence. They can assist for sure but their presence won’t be the difference between getting hammered and winning. Also I believe Enda McNulty was involved with Ireland in this respect.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't believe in the same form that you seem to.

I don't believe in some magical force that just makes some players play above their level and others below their level. I've explained my thoughts on this here before, but form is just a word to describe some combination of things like fitness/confidence/tactical comfort/luck etc. It's surely just an abstraction, in my opinion. There might be some young winger playing brilliantly in the Pro 14, but I think you put him in the same environment as Keith Earls (for example) and you just end up with a slightly less experienced/skilled person under the exact same circumstances making similar mistakes.

Nobody is talking about dropping in some random player from the Pro14. The Pro14 is such a tin pot competition that there's only so much you can take from it.

We're talking about playing capped Irish internationals, and not the guys who picked up their caps at home to the likes of Tonga either. Guys who have shown they are good before. They're not excellent, but they're good.

These guys deserve a chance when the incumbent isn't cutting it.

On another point, and to avoid looking like I view Schmidt entirely negatively when it comes to his squad, Schmidt deserves huge credit for the emergence of James Ryan. Straight into the team, no dicking about with systems or having to saunter around in the Pro14 for a year. He gave him his chance over others and we have a gem on our hands now.

P.S. it's even more frustrating that we have to accept the Pro14 being such a half arsed competition so that Ireland can be competitive, and then Ireland go and get pumped anyway. But that's an argument for another day.

Foxtrol

ClanofLams wrote: »

I find it astonishing that people are arguing, even with the benefit of hindsight, that Schmidt got his approach spot on. We played three competitive games against top tier teams all year and got beaten out the gate three times. We lost to Japan, who despite their improvements, shouldn’t be within ten points of Ireland. Jesus I’m just glad Schmidt got nothing wrong otherwise this World Cup could have been even worse.

Absolute strawman there.

No one is saying that.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Again. McGrath and Toner didn't even travel. Both are fit.

If someone is trying to say the squad was picked during the previous AIs, with the benefit of a few seconds to think about that, then I'd have to question whether they'd had some sort of recent brain trauma.

Nor did Marmion btw. I don’t think the squad was settled on fully but I think the first XV was close to nailed on at that stage and Schmidt was intending to go with Ryan Henderson. I certainly think there was five or six squad spots up for debate but the team was more or less chosen.

Donnielighto

Foxtrol wrote: »

What you see as guaranteed spots, I see as giving a chance to a player who has pulled out magic in games while playing poorly when the other option was turning to a player who was untested and even since then hasn't really hinted that he is anything special at international level.

It was a conservative call, which didn't work out, but hardly something to keep bringing up.

Is there any scenario you would have dropped Sexton or Murray based on their own performances.

Best should have been sidelined too.

ClanofLams

Foxtrol wrote: »

Absolute strawman there.

No one is saying that.

Would you like to elaborate on any errors you think he made? Other than POM being retained?

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

Nobody is talking about dropping in some random player from the Pro14. The Pro14 is such a tin pot competition that there's only so much you can take from it.

We're talking about playing capped Irish internationals, and not guys who picked up their caps at home to the likes of Tonga. Guys who have shown they are good before. They're not excellent, but they're good.

These guys deserve a chance when the incumbent isn't cutting it.

On another point, and to avoid looking like I view Schmidt entirely negatively when it comes to his squad, Schmidt deserves huge credit for the emergence of James Ryan. Straight into the team, no dicking about with systems or having to saunter around in the Pro14 for a year. He gave him his chance over others and we have a gem on our hands now.

James Ryan isn't the only one who got that treatment. Over the entirety of his career there were quite a few. Henshaw, Ringrose, Stockdale, Porter (to the bench). Henderson was pretty young as well I think. Turns out, we don't produce international standard guys straight out of school all that often.

As for this supposed failure in selection, if the incumbent isn't cutting it because of something that is being caused by the team's preparation or approach, which I think there is far far more evidence of, then dropping in some other player is not the answer. Even, perhaps, if that other player is marginally better anyway.

Shefwedfan

ClanofLams wrote: »

It’s just the most obvious indicator of Schmidt’s guaranteed spots. Sexton was deserving world player of the year in 2018, our greatest ten ever etc

It’s hard to overstate how poor he was that day. His performance wouldn’t have been bad at Celtic Cup level.

You keep having a go at Sexton

The option against Wales was to bring on Carty....

Now try leave your bias for once out of it, based on what you have seen from Carty at international level was he a good option to bring on?

awec

Shefwedfan wrote: »

You keep having a go at Sexton

The option against Wales was to bring on Carty....

Now try leave your bias for once out of it, based on what you have seen from Carty at international level was he a good option to bring on?

Yes. It would have been difficult to be worse than Sexton that day.

irishbucsfan

ClanofLams wrote: »

Nor did Marmion btw. I don’t think the squad was settled on fully but I think the first XV was close to nailed on at that stage and Schmidt was intending to go with Ryan Henderson. I certainly think there was five or six squad spots up for debate but the team was more or less chosen.

Well it clearly wasn't nailed on to be Ryan and Henderson from a year out given Toner started and Henderson benched against the world champs.

I don't think there's any evidence for this at all that isn't circumstancial. I think Schmidt is pretty pragmatic and wouldn't have an issue dropping anyone if a better alternative arrived out of the blue. I just think the same pragmatism means he takes a pretty consistent approach to how he wants to set up against top opposition and that leads him to pick a pretty consistent team.