Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

AbusesToilets

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Andy Farrell saying after the draw we go to NZ for a 3 test tour in 2022
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/ireland-set-for-three-test-tour-of-new-zealand-in-2022/

That's tasty, been far too long since we've gone down there

awec

molloyjh wrote: »

Why? There's measurable reasons for it. If we don't make the final we still play that weekend. For what? Who remembers that 3rd place game? Ever? Losing a QF means its done and over with. Losing a SF means staying on an extra week for that nothing game. Theres nothing to be gained from it. Whereas the provinces lose guys for an extra week (2 vs a lost QF).

I'm not talking about wanting to lose QFs by the way, I did say I want us to talk about getting to finals as opposed to talk about getting to SFs. I dont want SFs to be as far as our ambition goes. Theres no point in making a SF unless you're trying to make the final. So let's talk about that.

But sure why not just say there's no point in entering if you aren't going to win it?

Getting to a WC semi final would be huge progress for Irish Rugby. Maybe even one of the greatest, if not the greatest achievements.

It would move us beyond the making-up-the-numbers status we currently have.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

But sure why not just say there's no point in entering if you aren't going to win it?

Getting to a WC semi final would be huge progress for Irish Rugby. Maybe even one of the greatest, if not the greatest achievements.

It would move us beyond the making-up-the-numbers status we currently have.

I dont think you understand my point. I'm talking about our ambitions. We spend so much time talking about making a SF. What's our route to a SF? What do we have to do to make a SF? We should be asking about our route to the final. Making a SF is a nothing. Without looking it up, could you tell me who the 2 other teams that made the 2007 SFs were other than the finalists? What about 2003? Who came 3rd those years?

Thinking about anything other than the final as an endpoint is making up the numbers in some way. If we're happy to go out at any stage then what else are we doing, regardless if thats the pools or the QFs or the SFs? So let's talk about paths to the final and stop half assing it.

Anyway, a KO competition is not what anyone should hang their hat on in terms of determining our position in the rugby world. The luck of the draw plays a huge role. Northampton made the KOs in Europe last season. Are they better than Munster? Of course not. That's not to say you ignore the RWC, but you don't put this enormous focus on it the way some do. It isnt a definitive indication of everything. The idea that a SF would be the peak of our achievements is crazy. A final would be, but a SF wouldn't. 2018 surpasses a SF entirely.

Podge_irl

molloyjh wrote: »

I dont think you understand my point. I'm talking about our ambitions. We spend so much time talking about making a SF. What's our route to a SF? What do we have to do to make a SF? We should be asking about our route to the final. Making a SF is a nothing. Without looking it up, could you tell me who the 2 other teams that made the 2007 SFs were other than the finalists? What about 2003? Who came 3rd those years?

I bet plenty of people can tell you who the only Tier 1 nation never to win a QF is though.

Also it was Argentina and France. Arg came third. A much better result than we have ever gotten.

Bazzo

molloyjh wrote: »

I dont think you understand my point. I'm talking about our ambitions. We spend so much time talking about making a SF. What's our route to a SF? What do we have to do to make a SF? We should be asking about our route to the final. Making a SF is a nothing. Without looking it up, could you tell me who the 2 other teams that made the 2007 SFs were other than the finalists? What about 2003? Who came 3rd those years?

Thinking about anything other than the final as an endpoint is making up the numbers in some way. If we're happy to go out at any stage then what else are we doing, regardless if thats the pools or the QFs or the SFs? So let's talk about paths to the final and stop half assing it.

Anyway, a KO competition is not what anyone should hang their hat on in terms of determining our position in the rugby world. The luck of the draw plays a huge role. Northampton made the KOs in Europe last season. Are they better than Munster? Of course not. That's not to say you ignore the RWC, but you don't put this enormous focus on it the way some do. It isnt a definitive indication of everything. The idea that a SF would be the peak of our achievements is crazy. A final would be, but a SF wouldn't. 2018 surpasses a SF entirely.

This is a bit of a strange to bizarre take on things. It's obviously not possible to tell how far you'll get in a competition without progressing through it first so the first step is to win the quarter final. If that happens and then we lose in a semi I doubt you'll be in good company saying I wish we'd lost the quarter instead.

irishbucsfan

I really don't care about making it to a SF. I don't really see it as an achievement. We should be aiming to win the competition, and we should be aiming to be in a place where we have a viable plan to beat any other team in the competition. Building up a SF as an achievement seems like a loser's strategy to me.

molloyjh

Bazzo wrote: »

This is a bit of a strange to bizarre take on things. It's obviously not possible to tell how far you'll get in a competition without progressing through it first so the first step is to win the quarter final. If that happens and then we lose in a semi I doubt you'll be in good company saying I wish we'd lost the quarter instead.

The first step is to win the QF. The overall goal isn't to win the QF. That's the point.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I really don't care about making it to a SF. I don't really see it as an achievement. We should be aiming to win the competition, and we should be aiming to be in a place where we have a viable plan to beat any other team in the competition. Building up a SF as an achievement seems like a loser's strategy to me.

This.

Podge_irl

Making a semi-final isn't much of an achievement. But you would have to be fairly deliberately obstinate to not acknowledge that people will obviously be keen to break the record of always losing the quarter final. It is a uniquely awful track record and these things can matter. Getting to a SF wouldn't be an achievement but it would be a relief.

irishbucsfan

Podge_irl wrote: »

Making a semi-final isn't much of an achievement. But you would have to be fairly deliberately obstinate to not acknowledge that people will obviously be keen to break the record of always losing the quarter final. It is a uniquely awful track record and these things can matter. Getting to a SF wouldn't be an achievement but it would be a relief.

What difference does it make? Would it be any better if we had made it to a semi final every single one of those years and lost there and just had a record for losing semi finals instead?

I don't think so. I think this whole myth around the quarter final is just a product of the team underperforming, losses breeding that losing mentality. Making a semi final ultimately means absolutely nothing and shouldn't be celebrated any more than a quarter final loss, unless it leads to a trophy.

Any tier one nation should have one single goal when planning for the world cup. It would be totally embarrassing if they were aiming for anything less.

aloooof

My take is that winning a QF, even if we were to then lose the SF, would at least serve to get the monkey off our back. If part of our under-performances in QF's is even partially down to the pressure of not having won one previously, that that would at least be beneficial.

I don't think it's a coincidence that we beat NZ for a second time in such close proximity to our first win over them, for example.

Bazzo

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What difference does it make? Would it be any better if we had made it to a semi final every single one of those years and lost there and just had a record for losing semi finals instead?

I don't think so. I think this whole myth around the quarter final is just a product of the team underperforming, losses breeding that losing mentality. Making a semi final ultimately means absolutely nothing and shouldn't be celebrated any more than a quarter final loss, unless it leads to a trophy.

Any tier one nation should have one single goal when planning for the world cup. It would be totally embarrassing if they were aiming for anything less.

Of course they're aiming to win. Every step further away from that is a bigger failure.

The Lost Sheep

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What difference does it make? Would it be any better if we had made it to a semi final every single one of those years and lost there and just had a record for losing semi finals instead?

I don't think so. I think this whole myth around the quarter final is just a product of the team underperforming, losses breeding that losing mentality. Making a semi final ultimately means absolutely nothing and shouldn't be celebrated any more than a quarter final loss, unless it leads to a trophy.

Any tier one nation should have one single goal when planning for the world cup. It would be totally embarrassing if they were aiming for anything less.

Of course it would be better. That would show consistently that we can win knock out matches in a world cup. It would be far better.
Making a semi final does ultimately mean very little but means far more than never having won a knockout game in any world cup

The Lost Sheep

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What difference does it make? Would it be any better if we had made it to a semi final every single one of those years and lost there and just had a record for losing semi finals instead?

I don't think so. I think this whole myth around the quarter final is just a product of the team underperforming, losses breeding that losing mentality. Making a semi final ultimately means absolutely nothing and shouldn't be celebrated any more than a quarter final loss, unless it leads to a trophy.

Any tier one nation should have one single goal when planning for the world cup. It would be totally embarrassing if they were aiming for anything less.

Of course it would be better. That would show consistently that we can win knock out matches in a world cup. It would be far better.
Making a semi final does ultimately mean very little but means far more than never having won a knockout game in any world cup

irishbucsfan

Bazzo wrote: »

Of course they're aiming to win. Every step further away from that is a bigger failure.

It's really not any bigger a failure unless finishing 3rd/4th is something anyone REALLY cared about. In reality, its not. Losing finalist is probably a little different.

Hypothetically, if we got to a quarter final against a much weaker opponent and then lost a semi final against another weaker opponent, that should automatically be celebrated as an achievement over losing to a much better team in a quarter final? Of course not.

The only reason people care about the quarter final is because we lose them, because the team has put in inept performances in world cups previously. That doesn't mean its actually something worth achieving, it's miles below where our targets should be.

Bazzo

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's really not any bigger a failure unless finishing 3rd/4th is something anyone REALLY cared about. In reality, its not. Losing finalist is probably a little different.

Hypothetically, if we got to a quarter final against a much weaker opponent and then lost a semi final against another weaker opponent, that should automatically be celebrated as an achievement over losing to a much better team in a quarter final? Of course not.

The only reason people care about the quarter final is because we lose them, because the team has put in inept performances in world cups previously. That doesn't mean its actually something worth achieving, it's miles below where our targets should be.

If you can't see how progressing to the final 4 over the final 8 is objectively a bigger achievement I don't think there's any point continuing the conversation.

The Lost Sheep

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's really not any bigger a failure unless finishing 3rd/4th is something anyone REALLY cared about. In reality, its not. Losing finalist is probably a little different.

Hypothetically, if we got to a quarter final against a much weaker opponent and then lost a semi final against another weaker opponent, that should automatically be celebrated as an achievement over losing to a much better team in a quarter final? Of course not.

The only reason people care about the quarter final is because we lose them, because the team has put in inept performances in world cups previously. That doesn't mean its actually something worth achieving, it's miles below where our targets should be.

It does mean its something worth achieving considering how much we have messed up. Its a bit much to be going on saying our targets should be finals/champions when we are yet to win a single knock out game.

irishbucsfan

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Of course it would be better. That would show consistently that we can win knock out matches in a world cup. It would be far better.
Making a semi final does ultimately mean very little but means far more than never having won a knockout game in any world cup

It would show we can win one knock out match in a world cup before then immediately losing a knock out match and ultimately achieving nothing. And the team would come under the exact same criticism from the same people.

When Clermont picked up a similar reputation for being chokers domestically and in Europe, was that because they never won knockout matches? Nope.

irishbucsfan

Bazzo wrote: »

If you can't see how progressing to the final 4 over the final 8 is objectively a bigger achievement I don't think there's any point continuing the conversation.

What sort of medal do they give out for that? Or is it a plate?

I hope we make a semi final for you next time around anyway

irishbucsfan

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

It does mean its something worth achieving considering how much we have messed up. Its a bit much to be going on saying our targets should be finals/champions when we are yet to win a single knock out game.

You do realise the rugby world cup is the exact same sport that is played between the competitions, where we are capable of winning grand slams and defeating absolutely every single one of these teams, right?

We were ranked top in the world going into the last competition, but we should have had a target of making the top 4? That's fairly pathetic to me.

Bazzo

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What sort of medal do they give out for that? Or is it a plate?

I hope we make a semi final for you next time around anyway

Me too, along with almost everyone else I'd imagine.

The Lost Sheep

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It would show we can win one knock out match in a world cup before then immediately losing a knock out match and ultimately achieving nothing. And the team would come under the exact same criticism from the same people.

When Clermont picked up a similar reputation for being chokers domestically and in Europe, was that because they never won knockout matches? Nope.

Its far better to actually get to a semi final than quarter final in any metric. We would come under pressure from same people but its far better to have made a semi final and won a knockout match than to not have done it all.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You do realise the rugby world cup is the exact same sport that is played between the competitions, where we are capable of winning grand slams and defeating absolutely every single one of these teams, right?

We were ranked top in the world going into the last competition, but we should have had a target of making the top 4? That's fairly pathetic to me.

We should have a target of at least making the top 4. I never said that just making the top 4 should be the aim.

awec

Unless we get really lucky we aren't going to go from never winning a QF to winning 3 knockout games in a row and winning it. Of course nobody will complain if we win it.

But realistically, we need to build toward that. Step one is breaking the mental block we have around winning knockout games.

Win a QF is progress. If we win the SF in the same year that's exceptional. If we won it overall it would be beyond anyone's wildest dreams. But if we got knocked out in a SF it is still progress and something to build upon. We'd have the experience at least of playing in a WC SF.

aloooof

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's really not any bigger a failure unless finishing 3rd/4th is something anyone REALLY cared about. In reality, its not. Losing finalist is probably a little different.

Hypothetically, if we got to a quarter final against a much weaker opponent and then lost a semi final against another weaker opponent, that should automatically be celebrated as an achievement over losing to a much better team in a quarter final? Of course not.

The only reason people care about the quarter final is because we lose them, because the team has put in inept performances in world cups previously. That doesn't mean its actually something worth achieving, it's miles below where our targets should be.

I kinda see where you're coming, IBS; you still don't get any silverware, so objectively doesn't change anything.

But do you think the impact of having not won a QF previously has impacted our performance (even marginally) in subsequent QF's? If the answer to that is yes, then surely there's merit to getting to a SF? Just from a psychological point of view for future tournaments.

I've given the example of Ireland getting their first win vs NZ then following it up with the 2nd win pretty soon after.

Even NZ themselves were considered chokers until 2011 (albeit at a different stage of the tournament). After winning in 2011, they went on to win relatively comfortably in 2015.

sydthebeat

aloooof wrote: »

I kinda see where you're coming, IBS; ......

IBS



love it !!!!

:D:D:D:D

thebaz

awec wrote: »

This is madness.

especially since we never actually won a QF and apart from '91 never been close to winning

UAEguy2020

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I really don't care about making it to a SF. I don't really see it as an achievement. We should be aiming to win the competition, and we should be aiming to be in a place where we have a viable plan to beat any other team in the competition. Building up a SF as an achievement seems like a loser's strategy to me.

Overall goal is to win the RWC but we need to have some targets set that can be seen as an acceptable result which for me is a semi final, anything less than a semi final is a failure.

UAEguy2020

What makes these QF defeats even worse is the spineless performance that comes with it, thankfully I don’t think we could be more spineless than the 2019 team so hopefully they at least improve on that.

When you see how Scotland performed v Australia in 2015 and Wales in 2015 & 2019 it really puts our QF performances to shame.

thebaz

irishbucsfan wrote: »

We were ranked top in the world going into the last competition, but we should have had a target of making the top 4? That's fairly pathetic to me.

Well I could say what is pathetic is we didn't actually make it to the top 4 (again)

ionadnapokot

awec wrote: »

Unless we get really lucky we aren't going to go from never winning a QF to winning 3 knockout games in a row and winning it. Of course nobody will complain if we win it.

But realistically, we need to build toward that. Step one is breaking the mental block we have around winning knockout games.

Win a QF is progress. If we win the SF in the same year that's exceptional. If we won it overall it would be beyond anyone's wildest dreams. But if we got knocked out in a SF it is still progress and something to build upon. We'd have the experience at least of playing in a WC SF.

Don’t think it’s a mental block. It’s a not good enough block!

87’ Australia 1/4. Thumped
91’ Robbed!
95’ France 1/4. Thumped
99’ Didn’t even get to 1/4
03’ France 1/4. Thumped
07’ Group
11’ Wales 1/4. Brain Dead
15’ Argentina 1/4. Thumped
19’ Nz 1/4. Thumped
23’ Thumped again