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

ClanofLams

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?

I’m having a go at players being played on reputation. Was my provincial bias relevant when I said O’Mahony should have been dropped for Ruddock/Conan? You tried to imply a while ago that Carty was the only problem against Japan, a moronic position to take.

Carty came in against Wales and played a large role in the only points Ireland got on the board in eighty minutes. He did that in the eight minutes he got.

He has absolutely struggled at times in this World Cup, he has also played well at times. When he has struggled it has been when all around him have struggled. Those same players who are far more experienced have been struggling in green for considerably longer yet you have repeatedly tried to place the blame on Carty alone. It’s idiotic.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

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.

I think he wanted Ryan and Henderson to gain more experience playing together but he had in mind that they would be first choice at the World Cup.

Are you planning to elaborate on what you think Schmidt got wrong?

Donnielighto

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?

Not much for or against, how many minutes has he had. He's been running a vibrant backline for connacht though. It seemed like Sexton was on the wane and players don't play into form on the international stage, that happens on a week in week out basis at the club.

Burkie1203

awec wrote: »

Inferior players?

Have you watched Ireland this year? We are brutal, and that's when we pick the supposed "top" players, and these are some of the worst offenders in terms of garbage performances.

How anyone can sit here and make excuses about not selecting alternative players after some of the hammerings we've taken this past 10 months, and some of the performances on show, is beyond me.

Schmidt took the risk, changed nothing and hoped they'd just return to form again. It didn't happen, they continued to play like drains, and criticism of that is entirely valid.

This. Times a thousand.

NZ sacrificed the tri nations/RC in last 3 RWC years. I think they are odds on to win 3 RWC in a row. They dumped half the team that lost to Ireland a year ago.

Joe needed to send a message in that Wales game that performances weren't good enough.

Murray playing like he was or Cooney? Cooney for me. He can hardly be any worse. We spend 4 years planning for the RWC QF but key players such as Murray were often on the field after 75 minutes. Pointless a lot of the time.

POM making his 1 tackle or Switch Stander to 6 and put Conan in? We hear some BS about leadership and lineout. We got stuffed out the gate and were very nearly nilled while Mr workrate went MIA.

This all breeds complacency into a team becoming more and more predictable. It doesn't need to be wholesale changes but just enough to wake a few players up and send a message to others


Jean Kleyn went to the RWC to clear a few rucks v Russia and Samoa. We planned for a QF v SA but ended up playing (well more realistically we ended up on the same pitch as) NZ.

irishbucsfan

Carty's performance against Japan is a really good example of why just changing your selection doesn't suddenly fix a general underlying performance problem.

I think he underperformed, but I think he's already much better than that. 300 extra minutes in similarly ****e performances against Wales/Englands over the last 2 years would not have magically fixed that.

He's a player I'd be really excited to see kick on now in the next year if given a bit of a chance under Farrell. I think he has a real chance of being number 1 when Sexton retires.

Donnielighto

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Carty's performance against Japan is a really good example of why just changing your selection doesn't suddenly fix a general underlying performance problem.

I think he underperformed, but I think he's already much better than that. 300 extra minutes in similarly ****e performances against Wales/Englands over the last 2 years would not have magically fixed that.

He's a player I'd be really excited to see kick on now in the next year if given a bit of a chance under Farrell. I think he has a real chance of being number 1 when Sexton retires.

If the whole team was under threat of underperforming means losing position then itd be reasonable. Look at your post, player has to retire to be dropped, that's the attitude of the irfu for decades now and it's ridiculous.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Carty's performance against Japan is a really good example of why just changing your selection doesn't suddenly fix a general underlying performance problem.

I think he underperformed, but I think he's already much better than that. 300 extra minutes in similarly ****e performances against Wales/Englands over the last 2 years would not have magically fixed that.

He's a player I'd be really excited to see kick on now in the next year if given a bit of a chance under Farrell. I think he has a real chance of being number 1 when Sexton retires.

I don’t think the suggestion was that he would have played infinitely better with experience, although it certainly wouldn’t have hurt. It was more about the harmful impact guaranteed positions in teams can have.

Any thoughts on what Schmidt got wrong this year then? I hope you’re not suggesting that a mental skills expert would have solved all given: (a) Enda McNulty was involved in that role and (b) anyone with any knowledge of the area would tell you it’s laughable to suggest a mental skills expert will not be the difference between getting hammered out the gate and winning.

irishbucsfan

Burkie1203 wrote: »

NZ sacrificed the tri nations/RC in last 3 RWC years. I think they are odds on to win 3 RWC in a row.

They "sacrificed" the tri nations in 2015 by losing one game in Sydney with the following starting team:

Woodcock, Coles, Franks, Retallick, Romano, Kaino, McCaw, Read;
Smith, Carter, Savea, SBW, Smith, NMS, Smith

Annabella1

Don’t think that the Irish side playing at their peak would have beaten the AB’s on Saturday but we might have run them close
Japan were easily the weakest team in QF -that’s our real disappointment
Boks had them worked out by 39 mins and blew them away
Japan has moments of passing brilliance but ultimately were poor at set pieces and front 8
Poor poor loss

Donnielighto

irishbucsfan wrote: »

They "sacrificed" the tri nations in 2015 by losing one game in Sydney with the following starting team:

Woodcock, Coles, Franks, Retallick, Romano, Kaino, McCaw, Read;
Smith, Carter, Savea, SBW, Smith, NMS, Smith

It's no coincidence that they won the non WC years and didn't in the WC years. Throw out smileys if ya want but the point was valid.

irishbucsfan

ClanofLams wrote: »

I don’t think the suggestion was that he would have played infinitely better with experience, although it certainly wouldn’t have hurt. It was more about the harmful impact guaranteed positions in teams can have.

Any thoughts on what Schmidt got wrong this year then? I hope you’re not suggesting that a mental skills expert would have solved all given: (a) Enda McNulty was involved in that role and (b) anyone with any knowledge of the area would tell you it’s laughable to suggest a mental skills expert will not be the difference between getting hammered out the gate and winning.

I've written out what I have problems with Schmidt's approach for Ireland multiple times. It's across many areas. I'm sort of over it now so I don't really write it out any more, posts from before and after we just about squeaked past France in 2018 are probably where to look. I do however think a general performance problem is by far our biggest problem and I don't know how that's solved (as I've said here already).

I don't know which of the things that I say are laughable, I'd say a good portion, or maybe all of the things I say are laughable to nearly every experienced professional coach at the world cup. But I don't think you have more experience than me when it comes to high performance. So I'd give your laughter no notice whatsoever to be honest.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

They "sacrificed" the tri nations in 2015 by losing one game in Sydney with the following starting team:

Woodcock, Coles, Franks, Retallick, Romano, Kaino, McCaw, Read;
Smith, Carter, Savea, SBW, Smith, NMS, Smith

They gave debuts to five guys in the three games, three of them away in South Africa and Sydney. I think they wanted to win it naturally but it wasn’t the priority for the year. Their aim was to win the World Cup.

Shefwedfan

ClanofLams wrote: »

I’m having a go at players being played on reputation. Was my provincial bias relevant when I said O’Mahony should have been dropped for Ruddock/Conan? You tried to imply a while ago that Carty was the only problem against Japan, a moronic position to take.

Carty came in against Wales and played a large role in the only points Ireland got on the board in eighty minutes. He did that in the eight minutes he got.

He has absolutely struggled at times in this World Cup, he has also played well at times. When he has struggled it has been when all around him have struggled. Those same players who are far more experienced have been struggling in green for considerably longer yet you have repeatedly tried to place the blame on Carty alone. It’s idiotic.

Wales had won the slam and didn’t give a s**t....

Sorry but he got chances in 6 nations and done nothing, came on against Italy and killed the game. Disappeared against Wales after a ok start.

Japan after 20 mins he replicated the Welsh performance, was terrible for majority of Russia half he got.

If he was a Leinster player the knives would be out from you.

You bring up Sexton but we can’t discuss Carty? How does that work? So is it one rule for some players and another rule for others?

Not sure why you need to start calling names and insults because I mention Carty, he was supposed to be the back up to allow Sexton to miss games, anytime Sexton wasn’t on the pitch it was a disaster till Joey returned.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I've written out what I have problems with Schmidt's approach for Ireland multiple times. It's across many areas. I'm sort of over it now so I don't really write it out any more, posts from before and after we just about squeaked past France in 2018 are probably where to look. I do however think a general performance problem is by far our biggest problem and I don't know how that's solved (as I've said here already).

I don't know which of the things that I say are laughable, I'd say a good portion, or maybe all of the things I say are laughable to nearly every experienced professional coach at the world cup. But I don't think you have more experience than me when it comes to high performance. So I'd give your laughter no notice whatsoever to be honest.

Right it’s a general performance problem, good to know. That you seem to have suggested tonight a ‘mental skills expert’ will solve. So simple, if only Ireland thought of that! We could have won it

irishbucsfan

Donnielighto wrote: »

It's no coincidence that they won the non WC years and didn't in the WC years. Throw out smileys if ya want but the point was valid.

Fair enough, I disagree. If New Zealand were throwing the rugby championship in order to develop alternatives at all costs, I don't think they would be starting Dan Carter, Kieran Reid and Richie McCaw at home to Argentina.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Carty's performance against Japan is a really good example of why just changing your selection doesn't suddenly fix a general underlying performance problem.

I think he underperformed, but I think he's already much better than that. 300 extra minutes in similarly ****e performances against Wales/Englands over the last 2 years would not have magically fixed that.

He's a player I'd be really excited to see kick on now in the next year if given a bit of a chance under Farrell. I think he has a real chance of being number 1 when Sexton retires.

Why do you think he can kick on now under Farrell, but wouldn't have kicked on under Schmidt if given a bit of a chance in 2019?

irishbucsfan

ClanofLams wrote: »

Right it’s a general performance problem, good to know. That you seem to have suggested tonight a ‘mental skills expert’ will solve. So simple, if only Ireland thought of that! We could have won it

Either you know my posts didn't say that and your post holds absolutely no value whatsover, or you don't understand that I didn't say that and your opinion does.

awec

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Wales had won the slam and didn’t give a s**t....

Sorry but he got chances in 6 nations and done nothing, came on against Italy and killed the game. Disappeared against Wales after a ok start.

Japan after 20 mins he replicated the Welsh performance, was terrible for majority of Russia half he got.

If he was a Leinster player the knives would be out from you.

You bring up Sexton but we can’t discuss Carty? How does that work? So is it one rule for some players and another rule for others?

Not sure why you need to start calling names and insults because I mention Carty, he was supposed to be the back up to allow Sexton to miss games, anytime Sexton wasn’t on the pitch it was a disaster till Joey returned.

How many minutes did Carty get in total in the 6N?

Donnielighto

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Fair enough, I disagree. If New Zealand were throwing the rugby championship in order to develop alternatives at all costs, I don't think they would be starting Dan Carter, Kieran Reid and Richie McCaw at home to Argentina.

It doesn't have to be throwing it away just prioritising the big one. I doubt any of those 3 underperforming in the run up to the Argentina game. At any rate we didn't drop anyone.

ClanofLams

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Wales had won the slam and didn’t give a s**t....

Sorry but he got chances in 6 nations and done nothing, came on against Italy and killed the game. Disappeared against Wales after a ok start.

Japan after 20 mins he replicated the Welsh performance, was terrible for majority of Russia half he got.

If he was a Leinster player the knives would be out from you.

You bring up Sexton but we can’t discuss Carty? How does that work? So is it one rule for some players and another rule for others?

Not sure why you need to start calling names and insults because I mention Carty, he was supposed to be the back up to allow Sexton to miss games, anytime Sexton wasn’t on the pitch it was a disaster till Joey returned.

Not resorting to name calling you, just your analysis, which is moronic. You can of course bring up Carty, implying he was the only problem against Japan, as you did is ridiculous hence ‘moronic’. The pack was terrible, Murray was terrible. He made errors but the only good things in the game came from him and ringrose.

There wasn’t any improvement when Carberry came on that day. You felt qualified to comment on his inclusion in the six nations squad when you had admittedly seen him play two games, more moronic analysis. You insisted he was terrible in Connacht v Leinster when Leinster won 20-3, when it was pointed out by posters and reports he played quite well you replied with the very incisive analysis that he couldn’t have played that well given the score.

You banged on about team winning percentages as it that was the be all and end all. Aaron Wainwright was man of the match in the World Cup quarter final yesterday. He plays for Dragons, his win rate is probably around 15%.


Done nothing in the six nations? Big part in the only points Ireland got against Wales in the eight minutes he got on the field. Played well against France with some nice kicks and half breaks. Done fine in the ten minutes or so he got against Italy.

More insightful analysis from you.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

Why do you think he can kick on now under Farrell, but wouldn't have kicked on under Schmidt if given a bit of a chance in 2019?

I think a few reasons. I think there's always a natural bounce under a new coach. I think he's more likely to be given a chance if Farrell decides to clean the slate a bit. I think/hope Farrell is naturally capable of producing big performances given some of his best victories were built on pretty great defensive performances from England/Lions/Ireland. I think we're going to go at this 6 Nations very hard while our biggest rivals might take their foot off the pedal depending on the rest of the world cup. And I am hoping, without a huge amount to base it on, Catt will come in with some ideas to improve our attack in open play in the opposition half.

irishbucsfan

Donnielighto wrote: »

It doesn't have to be throwing it away just prioritising the big one. I doubt any of those 3 underperforming in the run up to the Argentina game. At any rate we didn't drop anyone.

Sure. And maybe dropping someone might have changed something. I just don't think it would have fixed problems that were running far deeper than that, for years.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Either you know my posts didn't say that and your post holds absolutely no value whatsover, or you don't understand that I didn't say that and your opinion does.

I mean that’s all you have said tonight. That and the suggestion that I should trawl through your however many thousand posts to find your thoughts on Schmidt’s approach because you are ‘over’ talking about it.

You’re here defending Schmidt’s approach this year or certain aspects of it at least, insulted by the notion you are saying Schmidt got nothing wrong but refusing to comment on anything he got wrong.

If you think that’s a good faith way to approach a debate, then there is absolutely no point talking to you.

Donnielighto

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Sure. And maybe dropping someone might have changed something. I just don't think it would have fixed problems that were running far deeper than that, for years.

The team had it's best year in 2018. The issue was not keeping players on their toes.

Aside, had a look at the squad from 2015 aus NZ game and nms was a debut in that one. Class player but you don't get an allblacks debut without being very good. I think that NZ were changing game plan at that time as well weren't they, speeding stuff up.

irishbucsfan

ClanofLams wrote: »

I mean that’s all you have said tonight. That and the suggestion that I should trawl through your however many thousand posts to find your thoughts on Schmidt’s approach because you are ‘over’ talking about it.

You’re here defending Schmidt’s approach this year or certain aspects of it at least, insulted by the notion you are saying Schmidt got nothing wrong but refusing to comment on anything he got wrong.

If you think that’s a good faith way to approach a debate, then there is absolutely no point talking to you.

I haven't defended anyone involved with Ireland this year, bar Carty maybe as a side point (and I guess Farrell by saying I am hopeful he'll improve things).

You're mistaking me thinking your opinion is flawed for a defense of someone else's. I have never once said that Schmidt is right. I just don't think his approach to selection was the primary reason for our failure, or even that much of a contributing factor at all. Again, I'm saying you are wrong. You being wrong would not automatically make Schmidt right. Somehow you have magically invented me defending Schmidt's approach this year out of thin air, if you can understand this you'll understand why I'm not going to regurgitate my other thoughts on-demand.

irishbucsfan

Donnielighto wrote: »

The team had it's best year in 2018. The issue was not keeping players on their toes.

I dunno, was it? And would just randomly dropping players be the answer there? Or is it something much more difficult to achieve than that?

As I said, I think this selection thing is just selection bias. I think fans just see selection as a big problem because its their biggest window into a sports team. And when the only thing you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I may be wrong of course.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I haven't defended anyone involved with Ireland this year, bar Carty maybe as a side point (and I guess Farrell by saying I am hopeful he'll improve things).

You're mistaking me thinking your opinion is flawed for a defense of someone else's. I have never once said that Schmidt is right. I just don't think his approach to selection was the primary reason for our failure, or even that much of a contributing factor at all. Again, I'm saying you are wrong. You being wrong would not automatically make Schmidt right. Somehow you have magically invented me defending Schmidt's approach this year out of thin air, if you can understand this you'll understand why I'm not going to regurgitate my other thoughts on-demand.

You have defended his selection policy which is a substantial part of the remit of a couch. You aren’t saying his approach was spot on, in fact are insulted by that suggestion, but you are refusing to state what you think he got wrong. One should trawl through your thousands of posts to find that, if it can be found that is.

Condescending waffle talk is what you have brought to the table.

ClanofLams

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I think a few reasons. I think there's always a natural bounce under a new coach. I think he's more likely to be given a chance if Farrell decides to clean the slate a bit. I think/hope Farrell is naturally capable of producing big performances given some of his best victories were built on pretty great defensive performances from England/Lions/Ireland. I think we're going to go at this 6 Nations very hard while our biggest rivals might take their foot off the pedal depending on the rest of the world cup. And I am hoping, without a huge amount to base it on, Catt will come in with some ideas to improve our attack in open play in the opposition half.

Andy Farrell has never been a head coach in his life. Good assistant coaches don’t necessarily make good head coaches. There’s a lot of hope in that post alright.

irishbucsfan

ClanofLams wrote: »

You have defended his selection policy which is a substantial part of the remit of a couch.

This sentence is all I really need to respond to here because the rest is ****e.

I haven't defended his selection policy. I am saying I think it wasn't the problem. I'm not saying it was a positive. I think it was grand, I think he was slow to bring on half backs for sure. I would have liked to have seen someone else at 9 more often in the 6 Nations. At the same time I think it was better than 2015 when it was a complete mess that left us completely bereft of experience and quality against Argentina. So not good, but not as bad as it was before.

What you're not understanding here is that I'm saying it wasn't the problem. I'm not saying it was right, I'm saying it wasn't the cause for our complete and utter failure to perform. I think there are other deep factors at play that a couple of changes in selection here and there would have made absolutely no impact in changing. The performance against New Zealand was a new depth of poor that I don't think can be explained by some stale selections.

On multiple occasions against New Zealand we gave up huge field position and handed over either direct tries or first phase deep in our half due to errors that wouldn't be acceptable from guys at pro 14 level. They were errors that were several levels below the guys who were making them. Whether its guys losing the ball in contact because they're making poor decisions, or its guys making simple mistakes in the kicking game they wouldn't normally. I think general performance levels had dropped massively and I think that is something that should have not been allowed to happen by the coaching team, and I think a lot of those areas were in the remit of Joe Schmidt himself as a technical coach (or maybe Richie Murphy). I just don't agree with the hypothesis that a stale selection policy was responsible for those types of errors. These guys were hardly unmotivated going into the biggest game of their careers because they started a 6 Nations game against Italy 7 months before.

Donnielighto

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I dunno, was it? And would just randomly dropping players be the answer there? Or is it something much more difficult to achieve than that?

As I said, I think this selection thing is just selection bias. I think fans just see selection as a big problem because its their biggest window into a sports team. And when the only thing you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I may be wrong of course.

It's a tool that wasn't used and who said random. Players were out of form, drop em. Not all at once but at least have them know they can't just coast by owning the jersey. Larmour or Conway should have had starts ahead of Kearney. Ah should have come in. Conan should have got a start ahead of stander. These aren't just ah well pick and number and replace them form players weren't getting game time. What's the incentive to perform.