Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

sprucemoose

AdamD wrote: »

I am, but maybe I'm biased as I don't rate Chris Farrell whatsoever.

....well youre wrong

ec18

TRC10 wrote: »

Englands 2 backs on the bench at the WC were Slade and Joseph, no natural cover at 15. But those 2 were the best impact players

SA had no recognised 10 on the bench. Steyn was their best impact player, he was covering 10 in case of emergency.

My point is, you shouldn't pick a less impactful player because he covers more positions. Its a 23 man game. Pick the bench that offers the most impact and if you get injuries you get injuries. You don't need a player to cover 13, wing and 15 when you have Larmour on the pitch

what happens if larmour is the injury?

Yeah_Right wrote: »

He got embarrassed by Jonny May!! Well damn! Case closed. If you get embarrassed by Jonny May then your career as an international is over. I mean just look at Conrad Smith. May embarrassed him in the first 5 minutes of a match in Twickenham in 2014, Hansen dragged him from the field and he never played for the ABs again. Because he was clearly useless.

Johnny May was one of the best wingers is the world for a while....it's kinda like saying getting embarrassed by Kolbe.

sprucemoose wrote: »

....well youre wrong

I agree he is wrong

Richie_Rich89

I rate Farrell, but I think the balance is off in the centre partnership. If you want Farrell at 13 I think you probably ideally need a Giteau-style 12 to bring him into the game. I would have gone for Hume at 13, myself, with Farrell or McCloskey at 12.

If Harry Byrne is fully fit I really can't see the point in persevering with Burns in the XXIII.

The other selection I don't like is O'Mahony at 6. I don't think he has the physical tools for it, frankly. Never has. He's an openside, for me. You need a big boy with vicious physicality in there in the 6 jumper if you have plans to mix it with the likes of the Springboks.

sprucemoose

Richie_Rich89 wrote: »

I rate Farrell, but I think the balance is off in the centre partnership. If you want Farrell at 13 I think you probably ideally need a Giteau-style 12 to bring him into the game. I would have gone for Hume at 13, myself, with Farrell or McCloskey at 12.

have to agree. and as good as DDA and CF are i dont think the balance works too well there either unfortunately

Richie_Rich89 wrote: »

If Harry Byrne is fully fit I really can't see the point in persevering with Burns in the XXIII.

id have had ross tbh

TRC10

ec18 wrote: »

what happens if larmour is the injury?

You bring on Daly, Baloucoune whoever your sub is.....

?

bilston

awec wrote: »

Hume I am indifferent about, I am not sure he's really ready yet and wouldn't make an Ireland squad for tier 1 tests.

Hume was probably Ulster's best back last season.

He more than held his own against Ringrose and Henshaw last month.

I'd say he is as ready as any of the uncapped backs to be honest. But then none of them were selected so doesn't matter. We'll see if he gets a shot against the USA.

shootermacg

I think the way to beat japan is to keep the ball and hurt them. SA in the second half of their game, just kept the ball, played zero rugby and walked over them.

It'll be interesting to see what we do, personally I think the humidity is what beat us in the last game. I've never seen an Irish team looking so shagged.

What channel is japan game on?

TRC10

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What channel is japan game on?

RTE 2

Why is Daire "go easy" O'Brien not on RTE today?

TRC10

Golf Crazy Guy wrote: »

Why is Daire "go easy" O'Brien not on RTE today?

He didn't go easy

Beechwoodspark

You’d imagine we should notch up a fairly big score today

Beechwoodspark

TRC10 wrote: »

RTE 2

And channel 4 (Uk station)

Beechwoodspark

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

You’d imagine we should notch up a fairly big score today

I think it could go either way

sydthebeat

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

You’d imagine we should notch up a fairly big score today

If you thought that then you don't know the current state of Irish or Japanese rugby

Dave_The_Sheep

Not to mention we did notch up a fairly big score today. Trouble is, Japan did too.

Brief_Lives

get outside, breath of fresh air... lions game in a couple of hours... take the kids to the park

TRC10

I don't think it's too left field to say we're the most poorly coached tier 1 nation.

Cosmo Kramer

Is it too early to start a conversation about who Farrell's replacement will be yet? Very difficult to see him coaching the team at the next World Cup so the sooner the change is made, the better as far as I'm concerned.

molloyjh

Who do people think will take over? How are they going to do better exactly? I mean surely people realise that we have some real issues at LH and 10 in particular but also that while we have a good back row we don't have any proper world class talents like SOB or Ferris or Heaslip. We simply aren't as good a side as some people think we are.

We just beat a good first string Japanese side who've had a few games together with a mish mash team of guys who would get into the first choice 23 and guys who aren't within an asses roar of it having not played together in ages. And we probably should have won by more but for a few sloppy errors on our part that gifted Japan points.

I know people want to see amazing rugby and convincing wins all the time, but we aren't entitled to that all the time. Our talent pool isn't where we would like it to be. We're going through a slight trough in that regard. That is always going to tell in performances and results. Sacking the coach won't change any of that.

EDIT: Also, Japan were good today. Heaven forbid some people give them the credit they deserve.

Downlinz

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

Is it too early to start a conversation about who Farrell's replacement will be yet? Very difficult to see him coaching the team at the next World Cup so the sooner the change is made, the better as far as I'm concerned.

It's too late imo. The 2 year RWC cycle has already begun and they realistically aren't going to sack him after a summer or autumn series, by the time the next 6N is concluded there'll only be about 10 games left before the RWC warm ups.

The best we can hope for is that the IRFU don't once again renew the head coaches contract before a world cup and he actually has to earn it by delivering a semi final or better.

molloyjh wrote: »

Who do people think will take over? How are they going to do better exactly? I mean surely people realise that we have some real issues at LH and 10 in particular but also that while we have a good back row we don't have any proper world class talents like SOB or Ferris or Heaslip. We simply aren't as good a side as some people think we are.

I mean part of the problem is we've made very little effort to try alternatives at those positions. Sexton still being flogged when he's nearly 36 and a shadow of the player he once was is actually appalling. It's the kind of desperation you'd associate with a tier 2 nation with a very weak player pool.

We have the 4 best teams in the Pro 12 last season and IQ players are in 1 and 10 across them all, the idea that none of them could replace struggling veterans if given a few games to integrate first is actually ridiculous.

Cosmo Kramer

molloyjh wrote: »

I know people want to see amazing rugby and convincing wins all the time, but we aren't entitled to that all the time. Our talent pool isn't where we would like it to be. We're going through a slight trough in that regard. That is always going to tell in performances and results. Sacking the coach won't change any of that.

I think that's overstating what people might expect to be honest. Obviously it's what we would all like to see, but that's a different thing.

Looking at the group of players available to us at this point in time I see the makings of a good forward pack as well as strengths and weaknesses across the back line. Certainly a lack of strength at 10 and on the wing can't be denied given the continued reliance on Sexton and Earls.

But even allowing for that I think a minimum expectation for us should be that we are well organised throughout the team, strong in defence and strong on set pieces. It would also be nice to see some effort at implementing a slightly more expansive approach in attack, but at the same time we probably need to be realistic about this given that our current players are more suited to a structured style and don't seem overly suited to heads up, off the cuff attacking play.

Really though, most of what I've seen since AF took over is regression in terms of our structure, defence and set piece play. I haven't seen any notable improvements in other areas to compensate for this. Our provinces are dominant relative to our celtic counterparts at least, but the same players seem to underperform relative to their counterparts at international level.

Ultimately the question of who would replace the current coach is perhaps not particularly relevant to this discussion at the moment, in spite of my previous post. The job would be in demand and I can think of a few obvious candidates but that's maybe not the point at this stage.

The questions perhaps need to be, are Andy Farrell and his coaching team getting the best out of the players available to us and is he the man to coach us at the next World Cup?

For me the answer to both of those questions at this point is no.

ersatz

molloyjh wrote: »

I know people want to see amazing rugby and convincing wins all the time, but we aren't entitled to that all the time. Our talent pool isn't where we would like it to be. We're going through a slight trough in that regard. That is always going to tell in performances and results. Sacking the coach won't change any of that.

EDIT: Also, Japan were good today. Heaven forbid some people give them the credit they deserve.

Japan are a good side and would give a lot of top teams a run for their money, and Ireland put up a good score and beat them. That's in no way a bad result.

And I agree that we don't have more than one or two really outstanding talents to pick from, but there are a lot of very good players in the Ireland squad. 3 or 4 of them are likely Lions starters for example, maybe more. We can see what AF is doing at this stage, the honeymoon is over, it's conventional and fairly conservative and it's not unreasonable to conclude that given the player limitations we aren't going very far in the 6N, never mind the WC, with that gameplan and approach. Added to that the basics haven't really been buttoned up. The lineout improved a lot last year but defense is iffy and in attack, other than kicking us up the field and hoping for forwards to bundle us over the line, no-one is quite sure what the attacking strategy is. JS inspired a lot of confidence in fans and players even if he never developed any kind of expansive gameplan to get us to the next level, but with AF there's not a sense that we are going somewhere. It's all a bit 2008 crash politics, we are where we are...

stephen_n

Downlinz wrote: »

I mean part of the problem is we've made very little effort to try alternatives at those positions. Sexton still being flogged when he's nearly 36 and a shadow of the player he once was is actually appalling. It's the kind of desperation you'd associate with a tier 2 nation with a very weak player pool.

We have the 4 best teams in the Pro 12 last season and IQ players are in 1 and 10 across them all, the idea that none of them could replace struggling veterans if given a few games to integrate first is actually ridiculous.

We have tried Byrne, Burns, Carty and now Carberry. None have been better than a waning Sexton. So do you believe if we just keep playing them, they will miraculously become good enough. While we are losing games. People are calling for Farrell’s head, while we are winning games. I can only imagine how Loud that shouting would become if we were losing more games.

4 best teams in the Pro 12, well whoopdy doo. We should have the best international team in the world on that basis. Despite the fact 2 of those teams couldn’t even make it out of the European Pools.

Former Former Former

Downlinz wrote: »

I mean part of the problem is we've made very little effort to try alternatives at those positions. Sexton still being flogged when he's nearly 36 and a shadow of the player he once was is actually appalling. It's the kind of desperation you'd associate with a tier 2 nation with a very weak player pool.

We have the 4 best teams in the Pro 12 last season and IQ players are in 1 and 10 across them all, the idea that none of them could replace struggling veterans if given a few games to integrate first is actually ridiculous.

This is the problem.

There is an assumption that playing for a province means you're a test level player. That's just not the case.

Like, the reason Sexton is still first choice is because no one is remotely near him, even at 36. He's missed plenty of games through injury the last few years and absolutely no one, Carbery incuded, has looked halfway capable of taking over. You can make the same point for most other positions in which an older player is still first choice.

We spend so long bickering about whether player A is better than player B, we lose sight of the possibility that neither are good enough. I think we're in that situation for a lot of the wider squad.

I don't think Farrell is getting the most out of them either BTW but we are looking at a lean few years I think.

Downlinz

stephen_n wrote: »

We have tried Byrne, Burns, Carty and now Carberry. None have been better than a waning Sexton. So do you believe if we just keep playing them, they will miraculously become good enough. While we are losing games. People are calling for Farrell’s head, while we are winning games. I can only imagine how Loud that shouting would become if we were losing more games.

4 best teams in the Pro 12, well whoopdy doo. We should have the best international team in the world on that basis. Despite the fact 2 of those teams couldn’t even make it out of the European Pools.

I don't think you can judge a player's capability from a game here and there, someone needs to be backed for a run of games as the starting 10 and take it from there. It appears to be Carberry now and I hope that continues into the autumn and next 6 nations.

I don't believe any of the options could be worse than a 36 year old Sexton and the kind of performances and durability he has been putting in lately so we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

aloooof

Former Former Former wrote: »

This is the problem.

There is an assumption that playing for a province means you're a test level player. That's just not the case.

Like, the reason Sexton is still first choice is because no one is remotely near him, even at 36. He's missed plenty of games through injury the last few years and absolutely no one, Carbery incuded, has looked halfway capable of taking over. You can make the same point for most other positions in which an older player is still first choice.

We spend so long bickering about whether player A is better than player B, we lose sight of the possibility that neither are good enough. I think we're in that situation for a lot of the wider squad.

I don't think Farrell is getting the most out of them either BTW but we are looking at a lean few years I think.

Very much agree with this, tbh. 10 is such a pivotal position, and when you think of the succession we’ve had over the last 20 years with Humphrey’s -> O’Gara -> Sexton, I don’t think any of the current crop are currently near that calibre, unfortunately.

aloooof

Downlinz wrote: »

I don't think you can judge a player's capability from a game here and there, someone needs to be backed for a run of games as the starting 10 and take it from there. It appears to be Carberry now and I hope that continues into the autumn and next 6 nations.

I don't believe any of the options could be worse than a 36 year old Sexton and the kind of performances and durability he has been putting in lately so we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

You might have a point with durability but I disagree entirely in terms of performance. When fit, Sexton is still producing at a much higher level than we’ve seen from any of replacements, imo.

molloyjh

It's worth noting that we are also trying to get a look at Harry Byrne too, if he'd actually manage to stay fit long enough to actually get capped. So Farrell will have had a good look at Sexton, Carbery, Burns, Byrne Snr and Byrne Jnr by next week, or at least tried to look at them. There's very few guys that have been available and worth a call up that haven't gotten one.

I've been banging this drum for a while now, but our talent pool isn't good enough to live up to the 2014 to 2018 period. It just isn't. We're due a few lean years in that regard. Every team has them. Its just the nature of things.

TRC10

aloooof wrote: »

You might have a point with durability but I disagree entirely in terms of performance. When fit, Sexton is still producing at a much higher level than we’ve seen from any of replacements, imo.

For now....

But he's 36 now, he can't string 3 games together, and sooner or later his performances won't be any better than what we have, at which point we'll have to start bedding in a new 10 from scratch.

Carbery is the next best. And he needs to be backed from here on out IMO, with Sexton on the bench and H.Byrne getting minutes here and there. Carbery could potentially have 6 starts under his belt before the start of the 6N and Murray playing inside him. That's not bad at all.

But he needs time. He seems to be playing within himself but that's natural as he's been out for so long. But he needs consistent games to rebuild his confidence.