Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

Options
11411421441461471190

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    molloyjh wrote: »
    We even saw against France on a number of occasions we created space on the edges but just failed to take advantage. That suggests that the overall plan itself has merits at least, and we are executing it well enough at times. Its just when it comes time to pull the trigger on it that we seem to struggle. Keenans poor pass that led to the Herring knock-on, Ringrose kicking when we had an overlap on the right etc.

    The whole "quietness" thing is something that Lancaster mentioned a numer of times before too. It seems Irish players as a whole, while intelligent rugby players, are less vocal than, say, English players. Less inclined to speak up in sessions or naturally take on leadership roles. Lancaster has even spoken about how he's had to push guys at Leinster to do the latter. I think Gatland made reference to it before too.

    In some ways we are probably more suited to a Joe Schmidt "here's what I want you to do, now go and do it" than Andy Farrells "here's the overall structure, but its up to you to play what's in front if you". The question now is whether we can adapt to the more heads up approach or not.

    But but but... that's exactly what was holding us back under Joe, wasn't it? That we were playing in shackles instead of playing rugby with smiles on our faces?

    The reality is that we're not as good as we would like to think we are, and we probably never were. Joe managed to get the best out of his players with his level of detail and coaching and for a good while, we were significantly more than the sum of our parts - but when Joe ran out of ideas, or the players stopped listening, or both, that's when we hit the skids.

    Now Farrell is here with a very average group of players, and whatever he is, the new Joe Schmidt he is not and I don't know if he can win things with this squad. It's going to be a lean couple of years I think. All the rage on here is about the omission of deeply, deeply average players who wouldn't have been within a country mile of the championship winning teams of the last 10 years, and that tells me that the solution does not lie within the personnel we have but are not being used.

    But I agree, it may be a case that the players need more prescriptive direction.


  • Subscribers Posts: 41,590 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    But but but... that's exactly what was holding us back under Joe, wasn't it? That we were playing in shackles instead of playing rugby with smiles on our faces?

    The reality is that we're not as good as we would like to think we are, and we probably never were. Joe managed to get the best out of his players with his level of detail and coaching and for a good while, we were significantly more than the sum of our parts - but when Joe ran out of ideas, or the players stopped listening, or both, that's when we hit the skids.

    Now Farrell is here with a very average group of players, and whatever he is, the new Joe Schmidt he is not and I don't know if he can win things with this squad. It's going to be a lean couple of years I think. All the rage on here is about the omission of deeply, deeply average players who wouldn't have been within a country mile of the championship winning teams of the last 10 years, and that tells me that the solution does not lie within the personnel we have but are not being used.

    But I agree, it may be a case that the players need more prescriptive direction.

    completely this.

    and this fact is amplified come RWC times when other teams get longer with squads to prepare.

    the question is always asked why cant we get to a RWC semi final.. and its not beyond the reams of plausibility to say that at RWC time we simply aren't one of the best 4 teams in the world.
    the peaks we hit between RWCs is as much caused by other teams changing their squads / ethos etc while we stay hard to the same course.


  • Registered Users Posts: 795 ✭✭✭CowboyTed


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    its just a case of 'provincial fan pimping provincial player'

    nothing new here, happens every six nations

    Na...

    I would actually pick Cooney before at least two of the SH on the Irish team too... If he got No. 1. I wouldn't object either...

    Casey is quite good and I said he should have been given a run out in November...

    Murray has been very slow for a good while now...

    JGP is a very average Scrum Half.... Journey man player who couldn't make the Hurricanes team.... JGP only beat McGrath and he has lost badly to Saracens twice... Still think McGrath has more to offer than JGP...

    Meanwhile Marmion has an excellent record for Ireland and is playing with Blade in his club. Connacht are a far more running & passing team than Ireland...


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,762 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    completely this.

    and this fact is amplified come RWC times when other teams get longer with squads to prepare.

    the question is always asked why cant we get to a RWC semi final.. and its not beyond the reams of plausibility to say that at RWC time we simply aren't one of the best 4 teams in the world.
    the peaks we hit between RWCs is as much caused by other teams changing their squads / ethos etc while we stay hard to the same course.

    I really don't think this is true tbh.

    Look at 2007. We did badly that gear because our coaches made some (in hindsight at least) very stupid decisions about our prep. But we were just PD away from a 6Ns title that year that a quality French side won. We were in good nick prior to the daft prep.

    In 2011 I do think Kidney was struggling with the way that the game was evolving. The starting half backs in our 2 best performances and 2 best results that year (England in the 6Ns and Australia in the RWC) were not the starting half backs in the QF. I've never understood that decision. We probably weren't quite in the top 4 that year, but it was pretty competitive to be fair. England won the 6Ns that year, France were hit and miss but still made the RWC final, Australia beat SA and finished 3rd, Wales were unlucky not to make the SFs and went on to win a GS the following year. So it was a very competitive competition.

    In 2015 we just picked up way too many injuries as well as SOBs suspension. I'm not sure any team could have handled that. But we'd just come off back to back 6Ns titles, our record at that stage vs South Africa and Australia was very good. We had every reason to view ourselves as top 4 material.

    In 2019 we underperformed hugely so it's hard to tell where we sat talent wise among the others. New Zealand, South Africa and England were all very good and Wales had just won a GS. So like 2011 we may have been just outside the top 4, but its hard to say.

    Ultimately I don't think our RWC record proves much of anything given the fact that we had different issues each tournament.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭UAEguy2020


    The issue with Farrell’s method and Ireland at the minute is it’s the equivalent of a man breaking his leg in a car accident and then the doctor comes in and tells the patient to walk, yes in the long run it’s not a bad idea but before we can do that we have issue that need to be sorted, the backline in this analogy is the broken leg and until that’s fixed we won’t be able to walk anytime soon never mind run.

    Until we fix the backline play we are going nowhere fast.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭dublin49


    O Sullivan,Kidney and to a lesser extent Schimdt all soared initially only to be caught by the gravitational pull of our natural position in the European rugby universe.
    That is above Scotland/Italy,comparable with Wales and below England & France.We have done well in the last 20 years to move above Scotland who we hardly ever beat in the previous 20 years.We as supporters have had our expectations raised by some wonderful highlights this century but we should not let these cloud our judgement when it comes to expectations for the future.My view is we are slightly weaker as a team than we were recently and the coach is probably not as good as the best coach we have ever had.Not a disaster ,we are competitive in nearly every game we play and might have to wait another while for our turn but those of us who have been watching since the seventies know things turn for and against your team very quickly in international rugby.Just as I don't expect BOD's successor to be as good as him I don't expect Farrell to be as successful as Schmidt.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,301 ✭✭✭theVersatile


    UAEguy2020 wrote: »
    The issue with Farrell’s method and Ireland at the minute is it’s the equivalent of a man breaking his leg in a car accident and then the doctor comes in and tells the patient to walk, yes in the long run it’s not a bad idea but before we can do that we have issue that need to be sorted, the backline in this analogy is the broken leg and until that’s fixed we won’t be able to walk anytime soon never mind run.

    Until we fix the backline play we are going nowhere fast.

    This sounds like a first draft of one of Eddie O'Sullivan's one liners.


  • Registered Users Posts: 795 ✭✭✭CowboyTed


    VANG1 wrote: »
    Interesting that nearly all international pundits picked jgp for their team of the weekend after last round. You seem very biased against him, no.1 at Leinster also. Marmion is no. 2 at Connacht.

    I just checked that:

    https://www.rugbyworld.com/tournaments/six-nations-2021/six-nations-team-of-round-two-120426

    https://www.planetrugby.com/team-of-the-week-six-nations-round-two-3/


    https://www.ruck.co.uk/six-nations-team-of-the-week-round-two-2021/2/


    Marmion and Blade are very close and probably both deserve a shot... Marmion has had 7 starts for Ireland and has beaten England, NZ and Wales while No.1 in those starts.
    Marmion has a great all round game and is a better kicker from hand than Blade... If we moved to an out and out passing game Blade probably gets the nod above any player in Ireland.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭UAEguy2020


    dublin49 wrote: »
    O Sullivan,Kidney and to a lesser extent Schimdt all soared initially only to be caught by the gravitational pull of our natural position in the European rugby universe.
    That is above Scotland/Italy,comparable with Wales and below England & France.We have done well in the last 20 years to move above Scotland who we hardly ever beat in the previous 20 years.We as supporters have had our expectations raised by some wonderful highlights this century but we should not let these cloud our judgement when it comes to expectations for the future.My view is we are slightly weaker as a team than we were recently and the coach is probably not as good as the best coach we have ever had.Not a disaster ,we are competitive in nearly every game we play and might have to wait another while for our turn but those of us who have been watching since the seventies know things turn for and against your team very quickly in international rugby.Just as I don't expect BOD's successor to be as good as him I don't expect Farrell to be as successful as Schmidt.

    Gravitational pull...

    **** me

    In the last decade the number of 6N titles are

    Ireland - 3
    Wales - 3
    England - 4
    France - 0
    Scotland - 0
    Italy - 0


  • Registered Users Posts: 795 ✭✭✭CowboyTed


    I don't understand people saying theFarrell is not as good as Schmidt so it is OK....

    It is pretty obvious that our 1st choice half backs while brilliant in there day are suffering from Age & Injury... They haven't the same pace or recovery as there younger years...

    Farrell has persisted in picking a few very average half backs who despite given a number of chances are just not better than some players in other provinces...


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭UAEguy2020


    CowboyTed wrote: »
    I don't understand people saying theFarrell is not as good as Schmidt so it is OK....

    It is pretty obvious that our 1st choice half backs while brilliant in there day are suffering from Age & Injury... They haven't the same pace or recovery as there younger years...

    Farrell has persisted in picking a few very average half backs who despite given a number of chances are just not better than some players in other provinces...

    They haven’t been given half the chances the likes of Madigan or Jackson got, it’s just a “chance” with the “ needing to be stressed. The problem is the main issues for Ireland haven’t been fixed namely the back play and because of that it’s hard to play the heads up rugby the coaches want.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,762 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    UAEguy2020 wrote: »
    The issue with Farrell’s method and Ireland at the minute is it’s the equivalent of a man breaking his leg in a car accident and then the doctor comes in and tells the patient to walk, yes in the long run it’s not a bad idea but before we can do that we have issue that need to be sorted, the backline in this analogy is the broken leg and until that’s fixed we won’t be able to walk anytime soon never mind run.

    Until we fix the backline play we are going nowhere fast.

    Is this not a bit simplistic? If we are creating space (which we are) then the 15 players on the pitch have all contributed to that. We are utilising the full width of the pitch with the intent of stretching the opposition to create gaps or mismatches in the line. That requires all 15 to play their part. The problem is that we don't seem to know when or how to take advantage of that once we've created them. Part of that could be communication for example. Part of it could just be poor decision making. It's hard to know from the TV.

    Take the below, where Burns goes for the pre-planned up and under when we have space and numbers to go through the hands (this is a turnover off line out so we didn't create the space or numbers here). Given his position it may be hard for him to see that. The guys outside him need to be calling it. They don't look to be though. They need to be on to Burns before he gets that, calling the space.

    ?width=630&version=5354734


    The Ringrose example below where we have a possible 2 or 3 on 1 with JGP running a support line. This is a genuine try scoring opportunity from inside our own half. But Ringrose elects to kick. Is he getting the call from outside? Is he aware himself of whats on? JGP certainly is, so Ringrose should be too. So his decision to kick must surely be on him? That's not an issue with our backline play. We've created the opportunity and we're set up to take advantage. But an individual error costs us the opportunity.

    ?width=480&version=5354749


    Similar here at the end of the game. We've created the space and the numbers but is Ringrose just not calling it? Is Henshaw making a poor decision? We don't know, but it is almost certainly individual error here again. This is a probable 2 on 1 and again JGP is keeping the option to support the break open again. Not as clear cut a try scoring opportunity given how Dulin is covering across, but it's certainly an opportunity to get in behind their defensive line.

    ?width=480&version=5354780


    Our attacking gameplan is what created these opportunities. It was poor communication and/or execution at the key moments that cost us.

    And yes, I shamelessly stole this from MK, but the point remains. There are signs that the way the coaches want us to play does and can work. But we need the guys on the pitch to deliver on that better.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,762 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    dublin49 wrote: »
    O Sullivan,Kidney and to a lesser extent Schimdt all soared initially only to be caught by the gravitational pull of our natural position in the European rugby universe.
    That is above Scotland/Italy,comparable with Wales and below England & France.We have done well in the last 20 years to move above Scotland who we hardly ever beat in the previous 20 years.We as supporters have had our expectations raised by some wonderful highlights this century but we should not let these cloud our judgement when it comes to expectations for the future.My view is we are slightly weaker as a team than we were recently and the coach is probably not as good as the best coach we have ever had.Not a disaster ,we are competitive in nearly every game we play and might have to wait another while for our turn but those of us who have been watching since the seventies know things turn for and against your team very quickly in international rugby.Just as I don't expect BOD's successor to be as good as him I don't expect Farrell to be as successful as Schmidt.

    Yeah agree with a lot of this. I posted a few times last year that we might need to adjust our expectations for the short term. England are still strong (despite their poor form in this tournament) and France are a coming force, something which is long, long overdue. It's not shame that we fall back behind them for a while given the fact that they are simply far, far better resourced than we will ever be. We simply can't have the best coaches and the best players forever. We'll have our peaks and troughs. We should look to enjoy the peaks as much as possible and manage our expectations through the troughs. It's been a long time since we underperformed for a decade in the way that France have, so it's always worth maintaining that perspective.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,169 ✭✭✭✭Sangre


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Take the below, where Burns goes for the pre-planned up and under when we have space and numbers to go through the hands (this is a turnover off line out so we didn't create the space or numbers here). Given his position it may be hard for him to see that. The guys outside him need to be calling it. They don't look to be though. They need to be on to Burns before he gets that, calling the space.

    [

    Sorry, this might be me being a bit slow but if this ball is off a line-out turnover then how can the up and under be a pre-planned move? Are you saying that our planned attack off a lineout turnover is an up and under? If so, surely that is poor ambition/structure?

    Should the coaches not be telling the players that on a turnover ball on the halfway then they should always be looking to go through the hands.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,762 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Sangre wrote: »
    Sorry, this might be me being a bit slow but if this ball is off a line-out turnover then how can the up and under be a pre-planned move? Are you saying that our planned attack off a lineout turnover is an up and under? If so, surely that is poor ambition/structure?

    Should the coaches not be telling the players that on a turnover ball on the halfway then they should always be looking to go through the hands.

    I think there was just a plan there to kick generally. We did kick a lot more against France than we did against Wales. And the kicks were generally good too. My guess is that the plan was to use contestable up and unders to keep them covering the back field (they generally seemed to have 2 in the back field) and ensure less in the line for when we chose to run it. That was one of the things that helped create the space on the edges. It's easier to create that vs 13 men than 14. If we weren't kicking very often then they may have moved 1 man up into the line more.

    But I'm only guessing there.....

    EDIT: Sorry, so what I meant earlier was that Burns knew that we were looking to mix it up between kicking and running. And at this early stage in the game his focus was on getting that kicking game going. And then this, plus the probable lack of communication outside, is what drove the decision to kick then rather than run.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭UAEguy2020


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Is this not a bit simplistic? If we are creating space (which we are) then the 15 players on the pitch have all contributed to that. We are utilising the full width of the pitch with the intent of stretching the opposition to create gaps or mismatches in the line. That requires all 15 to play their part. The problem is that we don't seem to know when or how to take advantage of that once we've created them. Part of that could be communication for example. Part of it could just be poor decision making. It's hard to know from the TV.

    Take the below, where Burns goes for the pre-planned up and under when we have space and numbers to go through the hands (this is a turnover off line out so we didn't create the space or numbers here). Given his position it may be hard for him to see that. The guys outside him need to be calling it. They don't look to be though. They need to be on to Burns before he gets that, calling the space.

    ?width=630&version=5354734


    The Ringrose example below where we have a possible 2 or 3 on 1 with JGP running a support line. This is a genuine try scoring opportunity from inside our own half. But Ringrose elects to kick. Is he getting the call from outside? Is he aware himself of whats on? JGP certainly is, so Ringrose should be too. So his decision to kick must surely be on him? That's not an issue with our backline play. We've created the opportunity and we're set up to take advantage. But an individual error costs us the opportunity.

    ?width=480&version=5354749


    Similar here at the end of the game. We've created the space and the numbers but is Ringrose just not calling it? Is Henshaw making a poor decision? We don't know, but it is almost certainly individual error here again. This is a probable 2 on 1 and again JGP is keeping the option to support the break open again. Not as clear cut a try scoring opportunity given how Dulin is covering across, but it's certainly an opportunity to get in behind their defensive line.

    ?width=480&version=5354780


    Our attacking gameplan is what created these opportunities. It was poor communication and/or execution at the key moments that cost us.

    And yes, I shamelessly stole this from MK, but the point remains. There are signs that the way the coaches want us to play does and can work. But we need the guys on the pitch to deliver on that better.

    Creating the space hasn’t been the issue, the problem is we never take advantage of it. You see in the Ringrose clip, we should be put a player in the hole on the right that has been created but instead he just kicks the ball away. They players just have it ingrained in them to not take risks and it’s stifling our attack.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,154 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    I'm still not entirely convinced the coaching setup want players in one-on-one situations out wide, away from support, where risk of turnover increases. Those two examples above are such dreadful decisions/omissions, the players can only be following the coaching instructions. The alternative explanation is that the programming from the previous administration needs a lot longer to overwrite, but given how both players in question are capable of good decisions at provincial level, I lean more toward the over coaching hypothesis.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭UAEguy2020


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Yeah agree with a lot of this. I posted a few times last year that we might need to adjust our expectations for the short term. England are still strong (despite their poor form in this tournament) and France are a coming force, something which is long, long overdue. It's not shame that we fall back behind them for a while given the fact that they are simply far, far better resourced than we will ever be. We simply can't have the best coaches and the best players forever. We'll have our peaks and troughs. We should look to enjoy the peaks as much as possible and manage our expectations through the troughs. It's been a long time since we underperformed for a decade in the way that France have, so it's always worth maintaining that perspective.

    If it was down to resources why haven’t any of them ever dominated the 6N for years then. It’s this sort of mentality that leads us to under performing at RWC’s.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭UAEguy2020


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    I'm still not entirely convinced the coaching setup want players in one-on-one situations out wide, away from support, where risk of turnover increases. Those two examples above are such dreadful decisions/omissions, the players can only be following the coaching instructions. The alternative explanation is that the programming from the previous administration needs a lot longer to overwrite, but given how both players in question are capable of good decisions at provincial level, I lean more toward the over coaching hypothesis.

    That’s the problem, we need to be willing to risk getting turned over every now and then if it means we increase our chances of scoring a try. Ringrose kicking the ball away sums it up and even Burns up and under, they would never do this for their province but have it ingrained in the at test level to not take risks.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,762 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Neil3030 wrote: »
    I'm still not entirely convinced the coaching setup want players in one-on-one situations out wide, away from support, where risk of turnover increases. Those two examples above are such dreadful decisions/omissions, the players can only be following the coaching instructions. The alternative explanation is that the programming from the previous administration needs a lot longer to overwrite, but given how both players in question are capable of good decisions at provincial level, I lean more toward the over coaching hypothesis.

    Let's not forget that Ringrose made a very similar error vs Saracens in the 2019 HEC final. I think there's possibly a few things going on.

    The previous set-up may still be having an impact in terms of individual decision making, but we're nearly 18 months on from that so I'm not sure we can fall back on that excuse for much longer.

    We've heard from a number of coaches now that Irish players often lack the kind of on-field decision making and communication that other countries seem to have. Whether that's a confidence thing or a programming thing it's hard to say. But Lancaster has spoken in some depth about it from a Leinster perspective, so it isn't a phenomenon limited just to the national side. And I'm pretty sure Gatland mentioned it a few years back too. Maybe we're not as comfortable being forceful about it or something, I don't know. But if Farrell, Catt, Lancaster and Gatland have all referenced it in different contexts and at different times, there must be something to it.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,762 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    UAEguy2020 wrote: »
    If it was down to resources why haven’t any of them ever dominated the 6N for years then. It’s this sort of mentality that leads us to under performing at RWC’s.

    Becasue its sport. Resources guarantee you nothing. But over time the benefit of 3+ times the player pool should average out in some way. Or at least should provide periods of dominance. If they don't then the country concerned is doing something very, very wrong. As France have been for about a decade now.

    We have done well over the last 10-20 years generally. It's okay to be happy about that. Right now we're not as strong as we were and others are stronger than they were. It is also okay to recognise the reality that this happens in sport all the time. It seems somewhat ridiculous and pointless to me to have unrealistic expectations of consistent levels of performance and success. Has any sports team in any sport anywhere in the world ever had that?

    The problem with the way you are framing things and putting things forward, is that it is an impossible level for anyone to consistently acheive. And so by creating unrealistic expectations, all you succeed in doing is frustrating yourself. Nothing else.

    It's okay for us to accept that we won't be great all the time. Because we won't be.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭dublin49


    UAEguy2020 wrote: »
    Gravitational pull...

    **** me

    In the last decade the number of 6N titles are

    Ireland - 3
    Wales - 3
    England - 4
    France - 0
    Scotland - 0
    Italy - 0

    I agree France have been woeful in past 10 years but I would still feel overall by most measures they are a stronger Rugby power than ourselves.They make World cup finals ,their league is stronger,their players are more naturally talented and they have massive numbers on their side.I think we have over achieved during the same period and my point being we should not expect that level of success to be maintained and I was giving my view of where I think our expectations should be while always hoping we exceed them.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,597 Mod ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    UAEguy2020 wrote: »
    If it was down to resources why haven’t any of them ever dominated the 6N for years then. It’s this sort of mentality that leads us to under performing at RWC’s.

    You mentioned it's Ireland 3, Wales 3 and England 4 over the last decade. But take the previous 11 years since it became the 6 Nations.

    France: 5
    England: 3
    Wales: 2
    Ireland: 1

    I would say 8 out of 11 tournaments for England and France is pretty dominant tbh.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,561 ✭✭✭Dubinusa


    Right now, we are barely capable of getting to a world cup qf, imo. I wouldn't bet on this side to beat Scotland, it would be a 50/50. But, plenty of time to get it together. It's probably good that we are struggling a little and hopefully, we start an upward trajectory going forward.
    I think the summer tour is vital for us. I hope it goes ahead. Losing more opportunities to bed new lads and play the systems would be awful. The amount of matches until the rwc is less than 20? Not too bad, to try new players and prepare a deep squad.
    No idea what Catt is on about in the interview. Wouldn't it be his job to set the players up as to the way he wants them to play. If they're making poor decisions, it's up to him to fix it. The back line looks unsure and a little low on confidence. To me, that reflects on him. He's been involved for a while and the lads look like they just met up during "Ireland's Call"


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,066 ✭✭✭Richie_Rich89


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    completely this.

    and this fact is amplified come RWC times when other teams get longer with squads to prepare.

    the question is always asked why cant we get to a RWC semi final.. and its not beyond the reams of plausibility to say that at RWC time we simply aren't one of the best 4 teams in the world.
    the peaks we hit between RWCs is as much caused by other teams changing their squads / ethos etc while we stay hard to the same course.

    Ireland's results over their history would back up this point of view, I think. It seems to take Ireland loads of goes and decades of failure before they finally manage to break new ground. The first Grand Slam didn't arrive till 1948. Compare that to Wales first winning a Slam in 1908, England in 1913 and Scotland in 1925 (France didn't win one till 1968, somewhat surprisingly). Then of course there's the famed 61 year wait to the second GS.

    Ireland have never won back to back Slams, unlike Wales (1908 and 1909), England (1913 and 1914, 1923 and 1924, 1991 and 1992) and France (1997 and 1998)

    Then it took until Ireland's 7th World Cup to earn a win over a major rugby nation (Australia in 2011) and top their RWC pool for the first time.

    Nine World Cups and counting with Ireland failing to make the semis. Maybe it'll take 12 or 15 of 20 to finally get there. Just need to keep plugging away.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,053 ✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Becasue its sport. Resources guarantee you nothing. But over time the benefit of 3+ times the player pool should average out in some way. Or at least should provide periods of dominance. If they don't then the country concerned is doing something very, very wrong. As France have been for about a decade now.

    We have done well over the last 10-20 years generally. It's okay to be happy about that. Right now we're not as strong as we were and others are stronger than they were. It is also okay to recognise the reality that this happens in sport all the time. It seems somewhat ridiculous and pointless to me to have unrealistic expectations of consistent levels of performance and success. Has any sports team in any sport anywhere in the world ever had that?

    The problem with the way you are framing things and putting things forward, is that it is an impossible level for anyone to consistently acheive. And so by creating unrealistic expectations, all you succeed in doing is frustrating yourself. Nothing else.

    It's okay for us to accept that we won't be great all the time. Because we won't be.

    When you look at our overall record, our success in last 10-20 years is miles ahead of nearly all other time frames. We were bound to slightly slip off that level at some stage.
    Totally agree.
    Dubinusa wrote: »
    Right now, we are barely capable of getting to a world cup qf, imo. I wouldn't bet on this side to beat Scotland, it would be a 50/50. But, plenty of time to get it together. It's probably good that we are struggling a little and hopefully, we start an upward trajectory going forward.
    I think the summer tour is vital for us. I hope it goes ahead. Losing more opportunities to bed new lads and play the systems would be awful. The amount of matches until the rwc is less than 20? Not too bad, to try new players and prepare a deep squad.
    No idea what Catt is on about in the interview. Wouldn't it be his job to set the players up as to the way he wants them to play. If they're making poor decisions, it's up to him to fix it. The back line looks unsure and a little low on confidence. To me, that reflects on him. He's been involved for a while and the lads look like they just met up during "Ireland's Call"

    Thats not true at all. Look at our draw in 2023. We are not at all barely capable of beating 3 from South Africa, Scotland, Tonga/Samoa, Romania/Russia.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,224 ✭✭✭ClanofLams


    People lose the run of themselves talking about RWC semis. The last four times are the only times at the start of the year when you would have thought Ireland were potentially in the top four teams in the world.

    07 - They apparently focused on physical conditioning.
    11 - Came up against excellent welsh team with great coach
    15 - Would be confident Irish team would have beaten Argentina with full selection or close to it, no team bar perhaps NZ has depth to overcome losing six starters
    19 - wheels came off entirely after great year, coaching team didn’t adjust

    Four is a small sample size but you have lads going on about mental blocks and all sorts. Way OTT


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,612 ✭✭✭✭Beechwoodspark


    Something has rattled Johnny

    Only a few weeks ago he was praising Tom Brady and talking about how he was a role model for him in terms of longevity

    And now he's hinting he wants to retire next year.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,268 ✭✭✭Thrashssacre


    Something has rattled Johnny

    Only a few weeks ago he was praising Tom Brady and talking about how he was a role model for him in terms of longevity

    And now he's hinting he wants to retire next year.

    It's the spotlights the 10s have been under lately, best he just makes it clear now.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭UAEguy2020


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Becasue its sport. Resources guarantee you nothing. But over time the benefit of 3+ times the player pool should average out in some way. Or at least should provide periods of dominance. If they don't then the country concerned is doing something very, very wrong. As France have been for about a decade now.

    We have done well over the last 10-20 years generally. It's okay to be happy about that. Right now we're not as strong as we were and others are stronger than they were. It is also okay to recognise the reality that this happens in sport all the time. It seems somewhat ridiculous and pointless to me to have unrealistic expectations of consistent levels of performance and success. Has any sports team in any sport anywhere in the world ever had that?

    The problem with the way you are framing things and putting things forward, is that it is an impossible level for anyone to consistently acheive. And so by creating unrealistic expectations, all you succeed in doing is frustrating yourself. Nothing else.

    It's okay for us to accept that we won't be great all the time. Because we won't be.

    Well the evidence of the 6N for as long as it’s been around tells you that this isn’t true. It’s about being the best TEAM as it’s always has been. There have been no periods of dominance from anyone in the championship ever which again debunks this theory, yes you might have a team win the championship more often than others but the reality is the vast majority of games in the 6N bar Italy are one score matches. In the end of the day it’s 23 v 23 not 70 million v 7 million...

    We’ve done well if you are happy being a mediocre middle of the road team with afew good spells, if you have any ambition of doing well at 6N consistently or world cups than we should always be looking to get better, if we take any backward steps you get what happened in 2019 and we learnt what happens when you stop trying to evolve and rest on you’re laurels.

    It’s not impossible as we have done it already. You should be frustrated with yourself as you should always be looking to get better and be the best you can be, any talk of settling for less is a loser mentality. We should be aiming to be great all the time, that’s the point and I would be seriously worried if that was the aim for the players and staff...


Advertisement