Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

It's mad that every single year this rubbish conversation around Garry Ringrose takes place despite the fact he is the best in his position.

It's genuinely mad. It was suggested he would be dropped to move Henshaw to 13 and play Aki at 12, then McCloskey, and now all of a sudden Robbie Henshaw is best at 12 and James Hume should play at 13 instead and Ringrose should probably make way, again.

We don't deserve any of the talent we have at our disposal. There's always a handful of players that are completely sh*t on for no reason whatsoever.

You're not even thinking outside of the box though, you're making absolute rubbish suggestions

Why should one of POM or VDF be dropped to accommodate Beirne in the back row? What's the actual purpose of it? Only a mad man would drop one of the best players in World Rugby this year for the sake of playing somebody else. It's sheer lunacy and it seems you're suggesting it for no other reason other than the pre-conceived notion that we have to do something outside the box.

Your excuse for Cooney coming back into the side was that he has perhaps 'matured' a bit in the last two years. He's 32. If he was of any use to the coaching ticket he'd be one of the leaders right now but, he's not. And those petulant remarks he made as a 30 year old suggest that there is a bigger attitude problem at play here. Good riddance.

Now the entire second/back row needs a shake up. Why? Also, why can't Beirne be the one to come off the bench and make an impact? Why should it be the best player we have had in the last 12 months to play the last 20 minutes?

There's a bang of that video of the bloke in Dublin who claimed he was a big Pats fan talking about 'keeping the good men on the bench and then bam, Bob's your uncle, Mary's your aunty', from that suggestion. It isn't backed up by anything and is purely kite-flying.

It's not a massive over-reaction. Everytime we get close to international windows and talking about potential, Ringrose has to make way either for the latest flavour of the month or people just outright lie about perceived 'average form' from him to make some weird excuse around why he should be dropped.

You could go all the way back to 2018, when so many here were saying Chris f*cking Farrell should have the 13 jersey because he played well in one game while Ringrose was out injured and Ringrose came back into the side against Scotland and put all of those nay-sayers back in their box. Ever since then there has been a weird idea that Ringrose isn't good enough and that Aki/McCloskey/Hume/whoever would be a better option alongside Henshaw when there is zero evidence to back up the idea that there is a better pairing than the Henshaw/Ringrose tandem.

You can gaslight me all you want (like you tend to do) by saying I'm over-reacting or pretending that these conversations never happen here, but they do. Moving Ringrose out to the wing to accommodate someone else has been suggested more than once now.

When this conversation about dropping/moving Ringrose happens nearly every international window since 2018, it goes from being 'inconsequential' to being completely disrespectful. I stand by that.

Don't tell me this is anything else. It's been going on for far too long when there is nothing to show for it other than an odd dislike for the man.

There's your bad faith again.

When a conversation about dropping/moving a player to accommodate another flavour of the month consistently happens, it's outright disrespect. You can dress it up whatever way you want but you and I have had this conversation more than once and everytime you try to gaslight me on it. So with the greatest of respect, either debate properly or don't debate at all.