Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

arsebiscuits1

aloooof wrote: »

I made exactly the same point; up to and including the 6 Nations where Ntamack got his first cap, France's best finish in the 6 Nations in the previous 8 years had been one 3rd place finish.

This was dismissed as "reaching".

Because people are unable to change a narrative because there's a strange culture here that changing your opinion is some sort of crippling character flaw.

This place really does become a dumpster fire around international season.

mfceiling

theVersatile wrote: »

I would say Herring and CJ are substantially better than Kelleher and Conan. Once Kelleher hones in on his darts he'll be in a good position (I used to just think he was overrated but started to see what he can do in his open field play when he bowled over AWJ). Conan has been fairly average in green up until now.

I wouldn't agree that CJ or Herring are "substantially" better than Conan or Kelleher.

Conan is a fantastic athlete. He won't run at players all day like CJ but he has great feet and targets a weak shoulder better plus he is also a great link player, and seems to run decent trailing lines in close quarters.
Herring's darts are better than Kelleher's but Kelleher is athletic and powerful and you lose nothing that way by having him on the pitch.

crossman47

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Do you think Murray and Sexton are good enough to take us to a World Cup semi final?

As of now, that doesn't matter one little bit. The immediate task is to do as well as possible in the Six Nations. In any event, we won't win the WC so whether we get to the semis or quarters doesn't have any relevance. I can't stand this emphasis on a future tournament we won't win. We should always pick the best team and, if a younger player is good enough, he will come through.

aloooof

aloooof wrote: »

I made exactly the same point; up to and including the 6 Nations where Ntamack got his first cap, France's best finish in the 6 Nations in the previous 8 years had been one 3rd place finish.

This was dismissed as "reaching".

if you look back the points I've made it's that there are conditions in Ireland don't allow for development of 10's at a young age in Ireland

France have developed and produced 3 young international-class out-halves in the last number of years, all at the same time

Ireland have none developed at a similar age

France had abysmal coaches in the national set-up for a long period of time and this more than anything meant that they were poor internationally.

A fact that Ireland were able to profit from (in the 6 nations at least).

The fact that France didn't win the six nations didn't affect the development of these young players to a level where they were ready for international

It meant maybe that they got the last step - international selection yes

10's in Ireland are hindered

- poor quality league

- only 4 teams

- "lack of history" in trusting young 10's

- sub-factor of schools vs pro-setup

there should really be some sort of accelerated programme for this particular position because obviously the demands are different

particularly for a country like Ireland where there has been a reliance on the 10 position, integral to a regimented game plan, to make up for deficiencies in other areas (no confidence in playing a more open instinctive game)

TRC10

crossman47 wrote: »

As of now, that doesn't matter one little bit. The immediate task is to do as well as possible in the Six Nations. In any event, we won't win the WC so whether we get to the semis or quarters doesn't have any relevance. I can't stand this emphasis on a future tournament we won't win. We should always pick the best team and, if a younger player is good enough, he will come through.

Talk about a lack of ambition. What you're saying is "we'll never win a world cup, so let's forget about the tournament completely". Apologies if others aren't as content as you if we consistently fail on the world stage every 4 years and continue to be the laughing stock of world rugby who have the same best finish in a WC as Canada

LuckyLloyd

crossman47 wrote: »

As of now, that doesn't matter one little bit. The immediate task is to do as well as possible in the Six Nations. In any event, we won't win the WC so whether we get to the semis or quarters doesn't have any relevance. I can't stand this emphasis on a future tournament we won't win. We should always pick the best team and, if a younger player is good enough, he will come through.

Unfortunately your views seem to be accepted IRFU policy and it's why we'll always be also rans when it matters most.

thomond2006

They can't throw the tournament yet. Teams have won the Championship recently despite losing their first game: England in 2020 and Wales in 2013. If the Scotland-Wales match goes as expected with a home win and Ireland win on Sunday then the tournament is back in their hands.

It feels like some are underrating Six Nations wins because Ireland have won so many in the last decade. It's a big deal if Ireland could win the tournament from this position.

prawnsambo

glasso wrote: »

but at least in Smith England have a young player ready to step up.

Ireland hasn't developed one in that age bracket to do so.

Plus it's not as if Ford and Farrell (two decent options) are in obvious decline

England haven't had to resort to pulling in average-level 10's into their squad or team.

Smith has one cap from way back in 2017. How is he ready to step up? Harry Byrne has at least been recently in training squads, his brother has 11 caps and Billy Burns is going to start against France. Nobody outside Ford and Farrell has been looked at in any meaningful way and two injuries or a suspension and an injury could have them at a loss for a replacement.

TRC10

prawnsambo wrote: »

Smith has one cap from way back in 2017..

No he doesn't

molloyjh

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Unfortunately your views seem to be accepted IRFU policy and it's why we'll always be also rans when it matters most.

Which is totally fine, because the IRFUs job isn't to pander to people like you. They have a responsibility to the game at every level in this country and finances are a crucial part to that (duh!). So prioritising a competition that is central to financing the game as a whole in Ireland is just the sensible and, ultimately, the right thing to do.

But then thats the bigger picture, perspective and all that other good stuff that is woefully lacking here during international windows. Yes, let's stop being like Ireland who have won 3 6Ns in the last several years and be more like France who, despite far more resources, only look set to win their first in over a decade. We should def look to emulate that and not our own successes.

TRC10

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Unfortunately your views seem to be accepted IRFU policy and it's why we'll always be also rans when it matters most.

It's small nation mentality. Winning a world cup quarter final is more important than winning a 6 nations. I'd take 4 wooden spoons if it meant getting past the last 8 in a tournament that only 4 teams have ever won.

Rugby4568

arsebiscuits1 wrote: »

This.

People can fawn on about French developing younger players but the inescapable fact is France have had nothing but **** 10s for a decade before these lads came along.

They didn't have a choice but to play them.

They had no one else and nothing to lose.

The scenarios of developing players in this context is totally different.

If France had 2 even moderately decent 10s who were in their mid 20s a few years back, Jalibert and Ntamack would have gotten a fraction of the amount of caps.

Regarding being ready too - what's the schooling system like in France? In Ireland as long as people are in school full time until they're 18, they're unlikely to be ready for the top level until they're 20 at least

Camille Lopez is pretty good. They’ve had decent 10s throughout the years they just chose to drop them for younger players. They did the same for the scrumhalves they’ve had very good scrumhalves throughout the years such as Morgan Parra and Dimitri Yachville. Morgan Parra (who can also play 10) is still available but they don’t pick him.

AdamD

England have 2 top 10s in Ford and Farrell both at their prime ages. Its not a comparable situation at all..

Rugby4568

TRC10 wrote: »

It's small nation mentality. Winning a world cup quarter final is more important than winning a 6 nations. I'd take 4 wooden spoons if it meant getting past the last 8 in a tournament that only 4 teams have ever won.

Facts

Squidgy Black

prawnsambo wrote: »

Smith has one cap from way back in 2017. How is he ready to step up? Harry Byrne has at least been recently in training squads, his brother has 11 caps and Billy Burns is going to start against France. Nobody outside Ford and Farrell has been looked at in any meaningful way and two injuries or a suspension and an injury could have them at a loss for a replacement.

Smith technically doesn't have any caps for England seniors, the only game he played was against the Barbarians in 2019 which the RFU didn't count as a capped game.

prawnsambo

Responding in line below. Can't be arsed multi-quoting.

glasso wrote: »

10's in Ireland are hindered

- poor quality league - Agreed. Not much can be done about that, but at least there's European games and the SA super rugby teams coming in.

- only 4 teams - Again, nothing can be done about this.

- "lack of history" in trusting young 10's - Joey Carbery coming on against NZ two months after his Leinster debut would tend to contradict this. Also Paddy Jackson got his first start at 21.

- sub-factor of schools vs pro-setup - Not sure what this means. If saying there's a gap, that would seem to be contradicted by the likes of Ryan, Larmour, Porter and Carbery to name a few.

there should really be some sort of accelerated programme for this particular position because obviously the demands are different

particularly for a country like Ireland where there has been a reliance on the 10 position, integral to a regimented game plan, to make up for deficiencies in other areas (no confidence in playing a more open instinctive game)

molloyjh

TRC10 wrote: »

It's small nation mentality. Winning a world cup quarter final is more important than winning a 6 nations. I'd take 4 wooden spoons if it meant getting past the last 8 in a tournament that only 4 teams have ever won.

We are a small nation. We need to maximise our earnings for the good of the game overall here as we dont have huge TV revenues to subsidise the game here.

Also, the only NH team to win the RWC did so off the back of a GS. Success outside the RWC is far, far more heavily linked to success in it than many seem to make out here.

irelandrover

glasso wrote: »

if you look back the points I've made it's that there are conditions in Ireland don't allow for development of 10's at a young age in Ireland

France have developed and produced 3 young international-class out-halves in the last number of years, all at the same time

Ireland have none developed at a similar age

France had abysmal coaches in the national set-up for a long period of time and this more than anything meant that they were poor internationally.

A fact that Ireland were able to profit from (in the 6 nations at least).

The fact that France didn't win the six nations didn't affect the development of these young players to a level where they were ready for international

It meant maybe that they got the last step - international selection yes

10's in Ireland are hindered

- poor quality league

- only 4 teams

- "lack of history" in trusting young 10's

- sub-factor of schools vs pro-setup

there should really be some sort of accelerated programme for this particular position because obviously the demands are different

particularly for a country like Ireland where there has been a reliance on the 10 position, integral to a regimented game plan, to make up for deficiencies in other areas (no confidence in playing a more open instinctive game)

Ireland developed a lot of 10s.

Holland retired early due to injury. Carbery is constantly injured. Mckinley had a freak accident. Jackson was hounded out of Ireland. They are realistically the guys that should be currently competing at 10.

Then we have a lot of guys in the 19 to 23 bracket who look very promising.

France currently have a wealth of talent but in the 10 years previous to that had a poor choice. These things go in cycles.

TRC10

TRC10 wrote: »

It's small nation mentality. Winning a world cup quarter final is more important than winning a 6 nations. I'd take 4 wooden spoons if it meant getting past the last 8 in a tournament that only 4 teams have ever won.

Rugby4568 wrote: »

Facts

Ah lads. This is just satire now.

If we came last in the six nations 4 times in a row we'd be Italy. Are Italy going to win a world cup anytime soon?

We'd also have lost a small fortune in prize money which would limit the provinces in developing talent.

Facts my absolute hole, ye are on another planet - will leave you to it.

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

Smith has one cap from way back in 2017. How is he ready to step up? Harry Byrne has at least been recently in training squads, his brother has 11 caps and Billy Burns is going to start against France. Nobody outside Ford and Farrell has been looked at in any meaningful way and two injuries or a suspension and an injury could have them at a loss for a replacement.

Smith has 95 caps in the Premiership and Champions Cup

He is sought-after by premiership and top 14 clubs

Harry Byrne at the same age has 18 games in poor-quality Pro 14 games

Now obviously Smith is infinitely more developed and qualified to step up

Ross Byrne and Burns are not in the conversation of the point of young 10 development - besides their opportunities so far have only come in mostly ill-judged games, or as subs and due to injury to a declined and injury prone Sexton

Ross Byrne - 11 caps - 2 starts isn't it? pfff

lawrencesummers

crossman47 wrote: »

As of now, that doesn't matter one little bit. The immediate task is to do as well as possible in the Six Nations. In any event, we won't win the WC so whether we get to the semis or quarters doesn't have any relevance. I can't stand this emphasis on a future tournament we won't win. We should always pick the best team and, if a younger player is good enough, he will come through.

This might come as a surprise to you, but we are not going to win the 6N, and international rugby rarely goes well for players who don’t have a few caps.

DOC described it brilliant once when he said (something like) your first 5 caps are a write off, it’s whirlwind helter skelter stuff that nothing can prepare you for, you only take a breath and find your feet after 5 caps or so.

prawnsambo

glasso wrote: »

Smith has 95 caps in the Premiership and Champions Cup

He is sought-after by premiership and pro 14 clubs

Harry Byrne at the same age has 18 games in poor-quality Pro 14 games

Now obviously Smith is infinitely more developed and qualified to step up

Ross Byrne and Burns are not in the conversation of the point of young 10 development - besides their opportunities so far have only come in mostly ill-judged games, or as subs and due to injury to a declined and injury prone Sexton

Ross Byrne - 11 caps - 2 starts isn't it? pfff

You can't get past the fact that England have all their out-half eggs in two baskets. However many club games Marcus Smith has, he's behind two Irish lads (albeit older) in terms of international experience. You've identified one of the reasons why we can't develop players as fast as England and France; because we have only four pro teams, yet can't seem to recognise that with a lot more pro teams England have only developed two and France have played pin the tail on the donkey for many years before finally getting it right.

aloooof

Rugby4568 wrote: »

Camille Lopez is pretty good. They’ve had decent 10s throughout the years they just chose to drop them for younger players. They did the same for the scrumhalves they’ve had very good scrumhalves throughout the years such as Morgan Parra and Dimitri Yachville. Morgan Parra (who can also play 10) is still available but they don’t pick him.

It amazes me that Parra is still only 32.

lawrencesummers

molloyjh wrote: »

We are a small nation. We need to maximise our earnings for the good of the game overall here as we dont have huge TV revenues to subsidise the game here.

Also, the only NH team to win the RWC did so off the back of a GS. Success outside the RWC is far, far more heavily linked to success in it than many seem to make out here.

Mediocrity in the 6N will lead to mediocrity in the RWC.

Build a team that can win the 6 nations and you can challenge at the World Cup.

France are doing it for 2023
England did it going into RWC 2019

The team we currently have isn’t good enough to win a 6 nations, so that’s a good enough reason to bring in a fresh approach even if you take the world cup out of it.

Italy have recognised the need to rebuild and showed some green shoots against France. That Italian team will come good.

We have more in common with Wales than France at this stage.

TRC10

molloyjh wrote: »

We are a small nation. We need to maximise our earnings for the good of the game overall here as we dont have huge TV revenues to subsidise the game here.

Also, the only NH team to win the RWC did so off the back of a GS. Success outside the RWC is far, far more heavily linked to success in it than many seem to make out here.

If Wales can get to a semi final in 2 of the last 3 world cups, theres no excuse for us. We would actually win more 6 nations if we targeted world cups, because we'd be quicker to replace players who were clearly not good enough anymore, and thus we'd actually be fielding stronger teams.

lawrencesummers

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Mediocrity in the 6N will lead to mediocrity in the RWC.

Build a team that can win the 6 nations and you can challenge at the World Cup.

France are doing it for 2023
England did it going into RWC 2019

The team we currently have isn’t good enough to win a 6 nations, so that’s a good enough reason to bring in a fresh approach even if you take the world cup out of it.

Italy have recognised the need to rebuild and showed some green shoots against France. That Italian team will come good.

We have more in common with Wales than France at this stage.

Ireland won a grand slam and a six nations between 2015 and 2019. England won a grand slam and a six nations in the same period with our Grand Slam coming later than their last title.

New Zealand won every tri nations for a decade until 2019 when South Africa won one and then the World Cup having been worse than mediocre for a number of years. I would weight far more on that final year than anything else and peaking at the right time, with the right squad and the right coaching ticket.

TRC10 wrote: »

If Wales can get to a semi final in 2 of the last 3 world cups, theres no excuse for us. We would actually win more 6 nations if we targeted world cups, because we'd be quicker to replace players who were clearly not good enough anymore, and thus we'd actually be fielding stronger teams.

Schmidt handed out a lot more new caps than Gatland did over the same time period.

lawrencesummers

Deleted User wrote: »

I think they have at one stage if not now nor potentially in 2023 shown a sufficient ceiling to be world cup winners. Both are Lions test starters.

I think unless Burns or Byrne show a substantially higher ceiling than they have previously, neither player will ever tour with the Lions and if starting outhalves for Ireland will rely on an utterly dominant pack to deliver silverware at a World cup.

About the only argument in favour of either of those players starting this weekend is that they might be back up for the RWC.

But that is an inferior argument to building a winning culture, winning the tournament and playing an overall higher standard of rugby with better halves at the helm.

Certainly - those two conflicting arguments (even if you think they should be the other way around), really should draw better commentary than 'it's a bonus for Ireland and Sexton should never start again'.

In terms of being competitive at the pinnacle of world rugby it is a bonus that somebody else gets to wear the Irish 10 jersey this Sunday.

In terms of our chances of beating France on Sunday and winning the second most important international trophy our Chances have diminished considerably with Sexton unavailable. I would say they have for from a 20 % chance to a .05% chance.

I just happen to think that winning the biggest competition is a better goal than the secondary competition.

This Irish team is not competitive in the 6N. We are not at the same level as England / France and we are somewhere in the mix with Wales & Scotland.

To be competitive with France and England requires change.

I see scope for change in on field selections. The powers that be have identified scope for change in the Coaching and have brought in Paulie.

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

You can't get past the fact that England have all their out-half eggs in two baskets. However many club games Marcus Smith has, he's behind two Irish lads (albeit older) in terms of international experience. You've identified one of the reasons why we can't develop players as fast as England and France; because we have only four pro teams, yet can't seem to recognise that with a lot more pro teams England have only developed two and France have played pin the tail on the donkey for many years before finally getting it right.

yes that's my main point.

that the odds are against young 10's in Ireland in terms of getting development compared to other countries

I was responding to the point of Smith vs Harry Byrne from the other poster

Smith is behind Burns and Ross Byrne in international experience - eh yes but it's going to be a big surprise if either Burns or Ross Byrne (in particular) reverses trajectory at this point and turns out to be an international-class 10. by 25/26 players are what they are mostly (particularly mentally / under pressure)

England have 2 good 10's in place and a good option or two to come in and step up.

Ireland have a rickety and declining 10 as first choice and ( by international std) mediocre options that they are now forced to use

aloooof

lawrencesummers wrote: »

I see scope for change in on field selections. The powers that be have identified scope for change in the Coaching and have brought in Paulie.

The powers that be have identified scope for change in the on-field selections also, but they just don't happen to be in the positions you would like.

prawnsambo

glasso wrote: »

yes that's my main point.

that the odds are against young 10's in Ireland in terms of getting development compared to other countries

I was responding to the point of Smith vs Harry Byrne from the other poster

Smith is behind Burns and Ross Byrne in international experience - eh yes but it's going to be a big surprise if either Burns or Ross Byrne (in particular) reverses trajectory at this point and turns out to be an international-class 10. by 25/26 players are what they are mostly (particularly mentally / under pressure)

England have 2 good 10's in place and a good option or two to come in and step up.

Ireland have a rickety and declining 10 as first choice and ( by international std) mediocre options that they are now forced to use

That's not a situation that's going to change any time soon. In reality, we've been extremely lucky to have had two world class players in the position for twenty years. If Carbery wasn't a perpetual sick note, we'd possibly be looking forward to a continuation of that run. As it is, we are where we are in that department and have to dig into the next step down to keep going. I believe it's more a numbers game than a developmental issue.