Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

sebdavis

molloyjh wrote: »

I know in many ways the number on the of the shirt doesn't quite matter so much these days, but personally I think Stander is a better 6 than he is an 8 from a more traditional standpoint. And at international level, Stander is, for my money, the best 6 we have. Ruddock can certainly challenge him at provincial level, but at Test level CJ has a long history of delivering to a high and consistent standard.

Doris at 8 brings a different carrying game to most of other options other than maybe Conan. It's something I think we need given how we want to play. Which is why I think the Scotland selection is going to be interesting. Do we start Conan at 8 or CJ. Beirne deserves to start but is he what we need? Either way, the idea of having that dynamism at 8 both in open play and off the back of the scrum is an attractive one.

So on that basis we effectively have Stander and Doris locked in at 6 and 8 respectfully. The bug question is who then starts at 7. I think POM has brought a lot to the table from there in the few games we've seen him play. He has the ability to be a really good link man (as that offload, albeit playing at 6, highlighted quite superbly). He's athletic as we saw in some of his wide involvements vs Scotland in Nov. He then obviously offers a line out option that none of his competition can match. And that doesn't even touch on his leadership abilities, something we've shown at times that we lack when guys like Sexton or Ryan aren't around.

Everyone said we need POM for the lineout. At the moment Ireland has the best lineout in the competition and did POM line up for a single one?

So that argument is gone.

TomsOnTheRoof

kilns wrote: »

This is like saying Murray and Sexton were great for Ireland and starting lions but time catches up with everyone the past is the past people need to move forwards and not look backwards

No doubt POM will be in and around squads but if Ireland want to improve and move forward POM is not the type of player to help with that

POM has been playing well so I don't understand this line of reasoning. In fact he has been one of the form back rowers in the country over the past few months. He had a downturn in form following the RWC. Name one player who has consistently been in form over the course of their career. O' Mahony is 31. He has 3 or 4 years left in him at this level. You want to discard him for Ruddock (a player of roughly the same age who's never been capable of taking the 6 Jersey from him), Doris (an 8) and Beirne (a second row who occasionally plays 6).

POM is playing 7 at Munster. He was the first choice 7 for Ireland at the start of the tournament. Before the Italy game a lot of fans were calling Connors limited and VdF too lightweight. O'Mahony has a very specific skillset and Ireland have been poorer without him in the past.

molloyjh

sebdavis wrote: »

Everyone said we need POM for the lineout. At the moment Ireland has the best lineout in the competition and did POM line up for a single one?

So that argument is gone.

Our line out is going well because we have played 2 poor teams and had 3 locks in 2 of them. It should be going well. Regardless though, I never said that POM is the difference between our line out functioning and not. If you'd care to make some effort to understand my post then you'd see that I was discussing POM vs his other options at 7, namely Connors and VDF. He does offer more than them at the line out and that is a factor that needs to be considered.

I know you just want to be right, but its okay to make an effort to understand posts and discuss them rather than just trying to find the thing to argue against in them.

kilns

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

POM has been playing well so I don't understand this line of reasoning. In fact he has been one of the form back rowers in the country over the past few months. He had a downturn in form following the RWC. Name one player who has consistently been in form over the course of their career. O' Mahony is 31. He has 3 or 4 years left in him at this level. You want to discard him for Ruddock (a player of roughly the same age who's never been capable of taking the 6 Jersey from him), Doris (an 8) and Beirne (a second row who occasionally plays 6).

POM is playing 7 at Munster. He was the first choice 7 for Ireland at the start of the tournament. Before the Italy game a lot of fans were calling Connors limited and VdF too lightweight. O'Mahony has a very specific skillset and Ireland have been poorer without him in the past.

He should be discarded at 6 for Stander who is a superior player who then would facilitate Doris and Conan to step into the 8 role.

El_Duderino 09

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The IRFU contracts are very strange at the moment. There used to be about 30 players on IRFU contracts pre 2008 recession. Then they dropped to 13 at one point. I'm not sure how many there are now. Now we have loads of players in the back row and they give a new IRFU contract to one of the players who isn't guaranteed his place in the team. Granted, he has been on good for recently. Do they ignore Bernie's form and pick POM because he is a centrally contracted player? Likewise they gave a contract to Healy who should be getting phased out. It seems more like a favour to Leinster and Munster to pay their wages rather than dump a high wage player on their books.

I thought they should be using the IRFU contracts to make sure to keep young players who could be stars for the next number of years. POM is playing great recently, but so is Bernie. You could argue about which one to play but you won't lose much by picking one over the other.

I don't think i understand what IRFU contracts are for.

How do you imagine this is written in the contract

sebdavis

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

POM has been playing well so I don't understand this line of reasoning. In fact he has been one of the form back rowers in the country over the past few months. He had a downturn in form following the RWC. Name one player who has consistently been in form over the course of their career. O' Mahony is 31. He has 3 or 4 years left in him at this level. You want to discard him for Ruddock (a player of roughly the same age who's never been capable of taking the 6 Jersey from him), Doris (an 8) and Beirne (a second row who occasionally plays 6).

POM is playing 7 at Munster. He was the first choice 7 for Ireland at the start of the tournament. Before the Italy game a lot of fans were calling Connors limited and VdF too lightweight. O'Mahony has a very specific skillset and Ireland have been poorer without him in the past.

I didn't hear anyone say that, who was saying that?

Podge_irl

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

POM is playing 7 at Munster. He was the first choice 7 for Ireland at the start of the tournament.

He literally started the first game at 6.

theVersatile

sebdavis wrote: »

I didn't hear anyone say that, who was saying that?

The VDF one sounds like nonsense, but Connors has definitely been called out for not offering much going forward. That's something I still agree with even after the Italian game.

TomsOnTheRoof

kilns wrote: »

He should be discarded at 6 for Stander who is a superior player who then would facilitate Doris and Conan to step into the 8 role.

He's playing 7 for Ireland and even if he's not starting at 6 he'll either start at 7 or cover 6 and 7 from the bench with 8 being covered by Stander and Doris. Discarding him would be irresponsible, undeserved and self defeating.

TomsOnTheRoof

I've not called VDF lightweight but I've seen people on here criticise his ability to carry and his general physicality at international level. People were saying that a backrow containing him and POM wasn't combatative enough to go up against England and some of the bigger packs.

aloooof

kilns wrote: »

He should be discarded at 6 for Stander who is a superior player who then would facilitate Doris and Conan to step into the 8 role.

This is exactly what was happening in the ANC and exactly what I expect would have happened but for Doris' injury; i.e. 6. Stander, 7 POM, 8 Doris.

kilns

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

He's playing 7 for Ireland and even if he's not starting at 6 he'll either start at 7 or cover 6 and 7 from the bench with 8 being covered by Stander and Doris. Discarding him would be irresponsible, undeserved and self defeating.

How many times has he started at 7 for Ireland?? Even the most ardent of his supporters will admit he is not an international standard 7

aloooof

Podge_irl wrote: »

He literally started the first game at 6.

That was due to Doris' injury, which caused a re-shuffle.

I think a larger point here is people often call for 1 player versus another (Ruddock vs POM is often brought up on here) but the coaches are always going to look for a balance across back-row and pack etc.

aloooof

kilns wrote: »

How many times has he started at 7 for Ireland?? Even the most ardent of his supporters will admit he is not an international standard 7

Would you not agree he was excellent there during the ANC?

kilns

aloooof wrote: »

This is exactly what was happening in the ANC and exactly what I expect would have happened but for Doris' injury; i.e. 6. Stander, 7 POM, 8 Doris.

Pom is not an open side end of

TomsOnTheRoof

Podge_irl wrote: »

He literally started the first game at 6.

I was talking about prior to Doris' injury but yeah you're right.

aloooof

kilns wrote: »

Pom is not an open side end of

Then why have international and provincial coaches selected him there recently??

thomond2006

David Wallace is not an open-side flanker.

kilns

aloooof wrote: »

Then why have international and provincial coaches selected him there recently??

He is a stop gap and he has played 6 all his life and suddenly an upgrade comes and he gets shoved out of the 6 jersey, he gets shoe horned into 7 due to lack of current alternatives, it does not mean he is an international standard 7. When they are available he will fall down the pecking order

Former Former Former

If he'd got a 2-year extension on a provincial contract, no-one would bat an eyelid.

So genuine question for anyone who is unhappy about this; what difference does it make if he's provincial or central?

Tomtom364

kilns wrote: »

Pom is not an open side end of

Kilns is not a rugby expert end of.


Well folks no point having that discussion anymore as I have stated the above as a fact. That's how this works right?

phily2002

aloooof wrote: »

Would you not agree he was excellent there during the ANC?

I wouldn't say he was excellent, leading into the ANC his form was terrible and he wasnt selected on form. He got used out wide where he had some success but also some pretty bad stuff too.
The one against Wales where he fell into the winger and knocked on, getting pushed into touch against Scotland where he had all the room in the world. I'd say any other back row would be more effective in the wide channels.

Penny at the weekend had something like 22 tackles and 22 carries. Coombes also has huge numbers when he's playing. We have brilliant talent coming through but we got to reward them rather than picking on reputation.

aloooof

kilns wrote: »

He is a stop gap and he has played 6 all his life and suddenly an upgrade comes and he gets shoved out of the 6 jersey, he gets shoe horned into 7 due to lack of current alternatives, it does not mean he is an international standard 7. When they are available he will fall down the pecking order

VdF and Connors have been available and we saw him get picked ahead of them. If you mean Leavy, that's not a lack of alternatives, that's a lack of one player who is long-term injured.

If everyone was fit I'd have Stander, Leavy (if he can regain pre-injury form) and Doris starting with POM on the bench. But everyone isn't fit. And POM is deservedly in the conversation and a live option at 7.

kilns

kilns wrote: »

Pom is not an open side end of

Lads I don't know why you are still discussing this, kilns said "end of"

sebdavis

Former Former Former wrote: »

If he'd got a 2-year extension on a provincial contract, no-one would bat an eyelid.

So genuine question for anyone who is unhappy about this; what difference does it make if he's provincial or central?

A huge difference. The IRFU have restricted the amount of central contracts and people on central contracts of course get a lot more money

Are we really saying POM is one of the best players in Ireland and will be a guaranteed starter for Ireland if fit over the next 2 years?

Teferi

POM stunk the place out of it all through 2019. Doris was preferred ahead of him in the 2020 six nations but in fairness to POM he played himself back into a lovely run of form through the autumn and into this year. His skill set is such that, for me, he either starts or doesn’t play at all. Overall a bit of a whelming decision if a central contract is a limited resource.

Former Former Former

sebdavis wrote: »

A huge difference. The IRFU have restricted the amount of central contracts and people on central contracts of course get a lot more money

Are we really saying POM is one of the best players in Ireland and will be a guaranteed starter for Ireland if fit over the next 2 years?

He is not a guaranteed starter now, nor will he be. Just ask Bundee Aki what a central contract means, or indeed ask Garry Ringrose if being on a provincial deal is holding him back.

Or indeed ask Peter O'Mahony, who started last season's 6N on the bench behind the very-much-provincially contracted Caelan Doris.

So again, what's the difference?

SPOILER ALERT: there is none.

sebdavis

Former Former Former wrote: »

He is not a guaranteed starter now, nor will he be. Just ask Bundee Aki what a central contract means, or indeed ask Garry Ringrose if being on a provincial deal is holding him back.

Or indeed ask Peter O'Mahony, who started last season's 6N on the bench behind the very-much-provincially contracted Caelan Doris.

So again, what's the difference?

SPOILER ALERT: there is none.

Not sure what your point is?
What do you think Central contracts are for?

irelandrover

sebdavis wrote: »

Not sure what your point is?
What do you think Central contracts are for?

I always thought they were a benefit for the province. The players likely to start for Ireland would be unavailable to the province. Hence the IRFU paid their contract rather than having it on the books of the provinces.

Former Former Former

sebdavis wrote: »

Not sure what your point is?
What do you think Central contracts are for?

TBH,I think they're a bit of a relic from a bygone era and that's why they've steadily reduced in number these last few years.

In 2021, they're a nice status symbol but from a practical perspective, there is no difference. I don't care which bank account POM's salary comes from.