Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lions Tour 2017 Rugby Discussion Thread

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Brenny
    replied
    I'm a bit surprised, I initially thought that the lions would be hammered the very notion of sending a composite team to NZ would be ridiculed and was, in spite of myself, impressed with Gatland. O'Brien's comments do play into my anti-Gatland instincts and reinforces my view that he overtrains and has no grasp of attacking play.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hugged Rugger
    replied
    The British and Irish Lions could have whitewashed world champions New Zealand 3-0 had they been better coached, says flanker Sean O'Brien.


    The Irishman started all three Tests of the 1-1 drawn series.


    But he believes poor coaching prevented the Lions securing a historic victory.


    "If we had a little more structure during the weeks, and more of an attack gameplan, driven way earlier in the tour, I think we could have won 3-0," O'Brien said.


    "With the players we had, we should have won the series."

    As well as criticising the preparation before the first and third Test matches by Warren Gatland and his staff, O'Brien was especially critical of attack coach Rob Howley.


    The 30-year-old said the midfield pairing of Johnny Sexton and Owen Farrell were "running our attack shape" by the end of the tour.


    "The coaches have a lot to answer for in terms of our attack rather than Johnny and Faz trying to drive it," said O'Brien.


    "If I was being critical of any coach it would be the fact that I think Rob struggled with the group in terms of his attributes of trying to get stuff across whereas Johnny and Owen drove everything the second week, for instance, in our attack and had a better plan in place.


    "So I don't know if it was people not buying into what he was about or whatever else.


    "That's the hard thing about a Lions tour as well; getting everyone to listen to a coach that was probably set in his ways."

    Leave a comment:


  • The Last Stand
    replied
    No harm.

    Leave a comment:


  • the plastic paddy
    replied
    What a complete nonsense. I imagine Green and Gold is getting it's knickers into a Gwlad level twist.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

    Leave a comment:


  • neill_m
    replied
    Originally posted by Cowboy View Post
    Sonny Bill cleared because his lawyers successfully argued that Counties Manuaku A versus Manuaku B was a meaningful game that he missed.


    There seems to be a workaround for every situation with NZ

    Sent from my SM-T560 using Tapatalk
    Total jokeshop situation.

    Williams had his independent hearing result confirmed on Thursday, which decided that his four-week suspension would include New Zealand's “match” against Counties Manukau and Taranaki on August 11. The All Blacks will play 40 minutes against each team, and the panel decided that it constitutes an official match and counts towards his ban.

    Any ban at International level should be served at International/Super Rugby/Pro 14/Champions Cup level minimum.
    Last edited by neill_m; 4th-August-2017, 08:58.

    Leave a comment:


  • i_like_cake
    replied
    I was just reading this..

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news...ectid=11890891

    The Weekend Herald can also reveal a potential complicating factor in Williams' situation is that he is registered with the tiny Puni Rugby Club, between Waiuku and Pukekohe, which has only two teams - an under-eights and a Premier 3 team, who happen be involved in a playoff match today and could have selected Williams but for the ban. That playoff could become part of Williams' ban.



    Leave a comment:


  • Cowboy
    replied
    Sonny Bill cleared because his lawyers successfully argued that Counties Manuaku A versus Manuaku B was a meaningful game that he missed.


    There seems to be a workaround for every situation with NZ

    Sent from my SM-T560 using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • Spiffy
    replied
    Originally posted by Munsterboy View Post
    If he doesn't have the awareness or decision making ability to play at 13 he definitely doesn't have it for 12. The requirements are greater, unless the remit is simply to do planned moves off first phase and just truck it up thereafter.
    I am an admirer of Henshaw with regard to his attitude, comittment, power etc. He is a great team man, always gives 100% and always plays to a good standard. But to be honest, I am disappointed with his development as a midfield rugby player. I do not think he has come on in the last couple of seasons. He seems to have lost a bit of pace and has been used poorly by Schmidt as quite a one-dimensional bosher (playing to orders - not necessarily his fault). He has scored a couple of good tries, and though he is steady as a rock, has not done anything outstanding in attack. I agree with those who would like to see more of a footballing/distributing 12. Luke Marshall could fit the bill on a good day but has consistency problems (he actually has a decent turn of pace for a chunky guy.) Scannell has a long way to go.
    I'd quite like to see Henshaw revert to his old slot of fullback, where he could be effective running on to the ball from deep and at pace. The problem is that Zebo, TOH, Payne and Conway are all good FB's now too and all probably faster, though smaller.
    My feeling is that Schmidt will stick with Henshaw at 12, which limits the team tactics in attack, and it will take a lot to move him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Munsterboy
    replied
    Originally posted by whimpersnap View Post
    I don't think Henshaw ever really had the awareness or decision-making ability to play 13 at a high level. That might have improved in time had he not been moved, but it's a moot point now.
    If he doesn't have the awareness or decision making ability to play at 13 he definitely doesn't have it for 12. The requirements are greater, unless the remit is simply to do planned moves off first phase and just truck it up thereafter.

    Leave a comment:


  • Munsterboy
    replied
    Originally posted by Omerta View Post
    The only person suggesting that the centre pairing is 'sacrosanct' is you. I was merely pointing out that Henshaw/ Ringrose are the currently the best combination Ireland have and therefore would represent a strong bet to be starting at RWC 2019. I would be equally confident that Furlong will start at tighthead and Murray will start at nine. I don't see anyone else pushing them close at the moment.

    What you are essentially advocating is moving Henshaw to 13 and dropping Ringrose to develop a new centre partnership pairing of Henshaw and A.N Other, which I think makes little sense as Ringrose is probably the most exciting young player in the country right now. Left as is, the Henrose/Ringshaw combination should be a worthwhile attacking partnership in 2 years time.

    Suggesting that Ireland won't compete at RWC 2019 because Robbie is going to be rubbish at 12 is also a bit of a leap. It's an exciting time in Irish rugby with a lot of talented young players on the fringes pushing for places. Ireland will most definitely compete at the World cup, whether they win it or not is another matter.
    What you said is "that's the 2019 WC centre pairing, injury permitting". Not "is likely to be", or "may be". Your mind is made up two years out despite our lack of cutting edge and the failure of either centre to get close to a Lions test spot (unlike your other certainties: three time test starters Furlong and Murray). That's effectively saying you are no longer willing to consider alternatives i.e. that pairing is sacrosanct to you.

    I said "why can't we consider having two contrasting options at OC?". Not "why can't we drop Ringrose for Henshaw?". Let them compete for the position and/or use them on a horses for courses basis. We need more than one international class 13 anyway.

    If you think the lack of a playmaking 12 won't prevent us challenging for silverware you haven't watched any successful teams of late. The days of the big but limited crash ball IC are long gone. Even Gatland has worked that out. Too easy to handle with a rush defence.

    You can have the best outside backs in the world but you'll get nothing out of them if your 12 can't distribute under pressure. Robbie cannot.

    Leave a comment:


  • Omerta
    replied
    Originally posted by Munsterboy View Post
    More than two years out from the RWC you've decided our centre pairing, despite the fact that our backs play one dimensional rugby that a committed rush defence and competent back three can handle fairly easily. That's the problem in a nutshell. Most other positions are considered up for grabs, but for some reason the Henshaw/Ringrose partnership is sacrosanct, even though it's not very effective. I don't get it.

    Henshaw went on the Lions tour and made zero impact. Ringrose didn't even get the call up. That's hardly a ringing endorsement.

    Henshaw may be the biggest, most defensively strong 12 in the country. However, he cannot distribute or kick well (Olding, Marshall and Scannell are all better at both of those things) and he doesn't have particularly quick feet either which is why he was behind Te'o, who's another bosher but can actually step people, for the Lions.

    The lack of penetration and playmaking skills at 12 will prevent us challenging at the RWC. Our attack is currently limited to bashing away with the forwards or playing kick chase, and that's simply not going to cut it.

    Robbie is far better in wider channels where he can use his size and speed to better effect.

    The only person suggesting that the centre pairing is 'sacrosanct' is you. I was merely pointing out that Henshaw/ Ringrose are the currently the best combination Ireland have and therefore would represent a strong bet to be starting at RWC 2019. I would be equally confident that Furlong will start at tighthead and Murray will start at nine. I don't see anyone else pushing them close at the moment.

    What you are essentially advocating is moving Henshaw to 13 and dropping Ringrose to develop a new centre partnership pairing of Henshaw and A.N Other, which I think makes little sense as Ringrose is probably the most exciting young player in the country right now. Left as is, the Henrose/Ringshaw combination should be a worthwhile attacking partnership in 2 years time.

    Suggesting that Ireland won't compete at RWC 2019 because Robbie is going to be rubbish at 12 is also a bit of a leap. It's an exciting time in Irish rugby with a lot of talented young players on the fringes pushing for places. Ireland will most definitely compete at the World cup, whether they win it or not is another matter.

    Leave a comment:


  • whimpersnap
    replied
    Originally posted by Munsterboy View Post
    Well, Henshaw's not a very good 12. He's a big lad doing a job.

    No idea whether Ringrose is better option or not. Personally I'd like to see them both playing in their best position: 13.
    I don't think Henshaw ever really had the awareness or decision-making ability to play 13 at a high level. That might have improved in time had he not been moved, but it's a moot point now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Munsterboy
    replied
    Originally posted by Spiffy View Post
    I think that the Ringrose reputation in defence is a bit of a myth and a something of a hangover from when he first appeared on the scene as a tall, gangly lad and it was just assumed that someone with that build could not tackle. I think he's OK as a defender now, but will miss the odd tackle here and there just like everyone else. Ball in hand, he is actually quite a strong runner and hard to pull down. He is an athetlic lad with good pace. I hope he does not go down the hyperbulk route and end up as a plodding Henshaw Mark II.
    Ringrose is turning into a very good defender at 13 because he often uses his pace and timing to shoot up and stop an opposition attack in its tracks. He also has increasingly good positioning and the pace to prevent outside breaks.

    Defending at 12 is a different kind of challenge though. Not sure he'd be as effective there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spiffy
    replied
    Originally posted by Daithi View Post
    hmmm , i can't agree with a lot of that Spiffy. Sure Fofana has some speed and great footballing skills, but he also has serious, serious power and packs a huge punch. Just looking at him, his power to weight ratio looks similar to BOD in his prime i.e. stratospheric for his height and weight.

    also young Ringrose is undoubtedly a very fine player going forward, but he is still lacking power IMHO and too regularly gets steamrolled still in midfield, and probably needs another preseason or 2 to reach parity with most (or any) international centres.

    Jackson at 12 , yeah maybe, a fine distributor, footballer and decent tackler for a 10, but again would he have the power &/or defence required of a 12 at international level!?

    ..... as Scotty may have said once or twice 'not so sure there captain..... I canno give you no more power'
    I think that the Ringrose reputation in defence is a bit of a myth and a something of a hangover from when he first appeared on the scene as a tall, gangly lad and it was just assumed that someone with that build could not tackle. I think he's OK as a defender now, but will miss the odd tackle here and there just like everyone else. Ball in hand, he is actually quite a strong runner and hard to pull down. He is an athetlic lad with good pace. I hope he does not go down the hyperbulk route and end up as a plodding Henshaw Mark II.

    Leave a comment:


  • Munsterboy
    replied
    Originally posted by Omerta View Post
    Whether Henshaw is a 12 or 13 is irrelevant really. The point now is that he is by a fair distance the best 12 in the country, hence his Lions selection, and fella's like Marshell, Scannell, Stuart Mc are a long way off suggesting that they are ever going to hold down an international jersey, let alone get a Lions call-up. It's hardly worthwhile dropping either of Ireland's two outstanding young talents to try out different options at 12. That's the 2019 WC centre pairing, injury permitting.

    If Joe Schmidt thought Ireland would get more from Henshaw and Ringrose with their roles reversed, then he'd do it, no reason not to. He cant play both at 13. Maybe Aki will add some options to the mix.
    More than two years out from the RWC you've decided our centre pairing, despite the fact that our backs play one dimensional rugby that a committed rush defence and competent back three can handle fairly easily. That's the problem in a nutshell. Most other positions are considered up for grabs, but for some reason the Henshaw/Ringrose partnership is sacrosanct, even though it's not very effective. I don't get it.

    Henshaw went on the Lions tour and made zero impact. Ringrose didn't even get the call up. That's hardly a ringing endorsement.

    Henshaw may be the biggest, most defensively strong 12 in the country. However, he cannot distribute or kick well (Olding, Marshall and Scannell are all better at both of those things) and he doesn't have particularly quick feet either which is why he was behind Te'o, who's another bosher but can actually step people, for the Lions.

    The lack of penetration and playmaking skills at 12 will prevent us challenging at the RWC. Our attack is currently limited to bashing away with the forwards or playing kick chase, and that's simply not going to cut it.

    Robbie is far better in wider channels where he can use his size and speed to better effect.
    Last edited by Munsterboy; 27th-July-2017, 22:01.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X