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
17157167187207211190

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,240 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    i suppose its which side of the trade-off is seen as more important. id think playing someone like RB at 10 and having first choice players outside him would be a better option than playing Carty at 10 and putting Carbery at 15 to goal kick, for example, but i can see why it wouldnt be the worst idea.

    McFadden was an interesting one, there was a while where he seemed to be second choice goalkicker at leinster and that part of his game kinda went away after a while. He was pretty solid from what i remember and he did the job for the ireland 19s a bit. interestingly rob kearney was the main one for that team but apart from his first season and maybe the odd emergency i dont think i remember him kicking for leinster



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


    The back three operate with such an integrated fluency, I can't see Farrell disrupting it to accommodate a goal kicker. If, for whatever reason, we have to play a non-kicking 10, it'd be Murray or Ringrose taking shots at goal, imo. But I just can't see it ever happening.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,240 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    i wasnt suggesting it as a good option, i was just using it as an example to show there would be a trade off if there was a non-goalkicking 10 playing

    as ive said already, murray and ringrose arent regular goalkickers so they would most likely be no better than carty (or burns)



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,599 ✭✭✭✭CIARAN_BOYLE


    I think McFadden cut down his kicking practice when he became a regular international.


    He wasn't playing the games where the internationals were being rested. This meant that he wasn't kicking enough in games to justify extra regular placekicking sessions.


    I think he always practiced somewhat but that went from 2-3 sessions a week when he was focusing on it to a session a month when he was maintaining a degree of competency as an emergency option.


    I suppose its a question on how many players want to dedicate hours a week to practice something that might never be needed.


    I vaguely recall and interview with Kearney about place kicking where he said that he trained it for a year 1-2 hours a session 3 times a week but wasn't being called on so he dropped it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,544 ✭✭✭ulsteru20s


    God agree with this so much. Much easier to stand out as a sub.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 22,420 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    I never said we should bring an injured Henshaw to the RWC. There are potentially 7 knockout games between now and the end of the regular season where Henshaw and Ringrose will be expected to play the full 80...

    There could easily be an injury to GR or RH before the RWC. We should have an experienced specialist 13 on retainer to step in in case they are needed.

    The alternative is to bring in either a utility player or some youngster who has not been properly tested at a high level.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Yes, if we end up on our third choice 13 it will be unfortunate. If we end up with our third choice in any position it will be unfortunate.

    You could also argue that it is important that our third choice within the squad (Aki clearly) gets experience at the position as he may need to cover it during the RWC.

    There is only so many games to go round and they are busy trying to win a GS.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,987 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    The only player who fits the description is Hume and his form hasn't been great for a while, but Farrell is very familiar with him so he could get back in with a few good displays for Ulster.

    But again, there just aren't enough games left.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,169 ✭✭✭✭Clegg


    I know Farrell likes finding the positives in adversity, but we really need our injury list to clear up.




  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Sexton back would be enough difference to beat Scotland. Ringrose for sure would be a massive positive, but Henshaw back training offsets that somewhat. Can make do without the other three.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,988 ✭✭✭leakyboots


    Do we though? I trust the next cabs off the rank. James Lowe would be starting the game but we got on absolutely fine without him in November, I don't have much daylight between him and others.

    Healy's all but finished I think. McCloskey can be replaced by Aki or JOB/Osbourne with Aki at 13, would be good to have a look at new blood in a game like this longer term.

    Ringrose would be the biggest loss by far but looks like he'll be fit.

    Better to have these things happen us now than in October.

    There was more good news than bad in that announcement



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,987 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Healy looks to have trained today. Either that or he did a John Terry on it.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I think there is a big silver lining in a world cup year to consistently win despite huge disruption. Having said that - World cups are still generally won by teams that suffer minimal disruption so how big a silver lining could be debated.

    I also think Ringrose has a big question mark on him and this is just giving nothing away. Scotland, much like Italy are an unstructured and unpredictable attacking team and Scotland are better at it than Italy. I'd be concerned without Ringrose and whilst Henshaw would ease the blow, is he good to start?

    Yeah we'll have that bit more shape in attack with Sexton that I think we'll outscore the Scots as a result, but without Ringrose I think they'll put more on us also.

    I think we did suffer in November without Lowe to be honest, more so from the deterioration in our kicking but in general play making also. Balacoune was a bit of non entity against South Africa for example, unless you are completely blinkered about Lowe (and I'm not suggesting that you are) it's unrealistic to imply he wouldn't have added a lot more on the day based on recent form and his performances in NZ over the Summer.

    Healy similarly, is obviously not the player he was but then he isn't a starter. I'd still play him ahead of Kilcoyne.

    Personally I think Aki probably raised questioned about his ability to play 13 against Italy. McCloskey has never been more in the frame at 12 than he is now, in the form of his life. He and Bealham have been my two outstanding improvers this six nations.



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




  • Registered Users Posts: 8,574 ✭✭✭Dubinusa


    If we bring Furlong in cold along with Henshaw, I think we'll lose. Bealham out is big! O'Toole could start but, our scrum could be mullered. Scotland have a better scrum, imo. We are in a bind.

    Sexton back certainly helps. If Ringrose is out, I'd go for O'Brien. This match could be an ugly one for us. I reckon a lot of people are underestimating Scotland.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,987 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    according to Murray Kinsella, he did a John Terry

    Seems both Healy and McCloskey did train, just didn't take a full part.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,920 ✭✭✭✭stephen_n


    James Lowe would be starting the game but we got on absolutely fine without him in November, I don't have much daylight between him and others.

    Did we? Our attack was notably blunted in November without Lowe.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,764 ✭✭✭✭Pudsy33


    Lowe has the 2nd highest metres made in the tournament, losing that definitely has an impact.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    We got less reward from our kicking game against South Africa and Baloucoune never really got into the game so yes - Lowe was a noticeable loss here.

    Our attack was blunted against Aus because Crowley was in way over his depth and we had no cohesion across the backs as a result. Usual caveat - I rate Crowley, see a lot of potential at 10 or 12 but he was put in an impossible situation and struggled. Not sure how much of a difference Lowe would have made that day, our pack did the hard yards and were the narrow difference, by rights we should have lost that one.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    If Furlong starts and gets hurt, O'Toole can come on and we can be reasonably confident he will last the game. If O'Toole comes off and Furlong subsequently gets hurt we're in trouble. I'd rather start the one of the two more likely to need to come off.

    Not quite the same situation as Henshaw as we could have multiple options to replace him.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    If Furlong is fit he's going to start. And its certainly not going to be to the detriment of the team.



  • Administrators Posts: 53,829 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    We're still over a week away from the game, and I guess training during rest weeks is mostly about continuity and recovery rather than game prep, so I don't think I'd read much in to who did or didn't train.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,920 ✭✭✭✭stephen_n


    I think having Lowe stepping in at first receiver would definitely have helped Crowley.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,240 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    furlong has come into the team cold previously and done really well though



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Absolutely - but in reality how many times a game does he do that.

    You could visibly see the confusion and indecision upon receipt of a few of Crowleys deliveries.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,483 ✭✭✭BoardsMember




  • Registered Users Posts: 12,920 ✭✭✭✭stephen_n


    I think even his presence on the pitch makes defenses hold for a second in there decisions though. Even when he doesn’t take the ball. He is creating space or time for the 10.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,240 ✭✭✭sprucemoose


    absolutely, but there are other options in the centre even if not ideal ones, TH is a bit of a different scenario



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,544 ✭✭✭ulsteru20s


    He might have been in way over his head but in fairness to him, JGP consistently skipped him in the first half. WAY more than is normal. He looked not that bad when he got the ball in the second half.

    I thought the ten minutes or so Casey and Crowley were on together is when he looked at his best, and Casey consistently passed it to him.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,024 ✭✭✭Cosmo Kramer


    The biggest concern in the entire squad for me ahead of the autumn is something that rarely gets a mention, but it's touched on in that post - we are one injury away from either Healy or Kilcoyne being our starting loosehead at the World Cup.

    I suppose, if we had a full quota at tighthead, Bealham could shift across. But it's got to be a concern for management and it's not really fixable.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


Advertisement