Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What now? Ireland 2015.

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

  • The Last Stand
    replied
    Originally posted by whimpersnap View Post
    I wouldn't be surprised if SOB's return sees him move to 6 and POM to the bench.
    It would be wrong but it would not surprise me at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ratbastard
    replied
    Balla Boy, so full of definitive statements like "What I can't let stand unchallenged is the notion that there's some quality bar in place that Zebo, O'Donnell, Jackson fell short of but that Kearney sailed over despite errors that anyone with eyes could see. and "His (Kearney) doubling up on the runner vs England was an U-16 error" and "he was hugely at fault for the Care try, he was at fault for the French try from the aerial tap back and he did nothing" So lets's look at these throwaway comments and the quality of sight...

    Here is a snapshot of Kearney just as Browne is bearing down and appears to be in danger of breaking free (or if he hasn't actually broken free of his R. Kearney's tackle. Only then does he move toward Browne. Was it an error? He got it wrong as Rob had just made the tackle, but certainly not so clear cut that it measures anywhere close to your hyperbolic "u16 error". I don't think it's even close.



    Then let's look at the French try "when he did nothing"


    Above, the ball is just about to be moved to Talles. There is Kearney right inside the right upright, with BOD and then D'Arcy inside him. France clearly have the numbers on Ireland with Huget out of picture on the right wing marked by Rob Kearney. D'Arcy has moved toward the threat posed by Basteraud's run with Pape behind him, and Talles yet again, and so BOD and D. Kearney have at least 3 players they have to account for if the ball goes behind the foremost French player to Talles and he spreads it. Bottom line, the French have the numbers.



    Roll forward and the kick has just been made. We can see more clearly that BOD, Kearney had to number up on the two inside French players (of the 3) leaving Dulin to the outside. So, the French clearly had the numbers and now, with the ball in the air, Kearney has to scramble to his left and has a lot of ground to cover given that he had to first take care of his primary defensive responsibilities (if the French had moved it through the hands effectively, they would likely have scored). Dulin clearly has the edge in getting to any ball. Kearney gets there to make the tackle just short of the line but Dulin's momentum carries him over.



    So, while you are very adamant that the fault for this try lies with D. Kearney, and that he "did nothing", it just doesn't hold up to even the most basic analysis whatsoever. It's actually a bit like some of your other statements like "there were three french players who'd have beaten him to a ball" that always had a chance of coming loose given that there were two men competing in mid air for it". So, given that Kearney hit Dulin as soon as he gathered the ball, please tell what three players are these?

    In your words, "all horse****, I'm afraid.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Outlaw
    replied
    Originally posted by jeepers View Post
    Except that Jamie played every minute of every game. POM played 8 during the summer tour and New Zealand when Jamie got injured.

    Chris Henry played a fair bit at 8 for Ulster (when Roger Wilson headed off to Northampton).

    Both have played more there than Jordi Murphy has.
    Just have to accept JS thinks Jordi is quite good

    Leave a comment:


  • Cowboy
    replied
    pom or henry at 8 don't count for much outside of the Schmidthouse.

    Leave a comment:


  • jeepers
    replied
    Originally posted by Cowboy View Post
    He's got ample coverage at 6&7 nobody to cover for Jamie. Jordi or Copeland gonna need to step up for the rwc
    Except that Jamie played every minute of every game. POM played 8 during the summer tour and New Zealand when Jamie got injured.

    Chris Henry played a fair bit at 8 for Ulster (when Roger Wilson headed off to Northampton).

    Both have played more there than Jordi Murphy has.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Outlaw
    replied
    Originally posted by Cowboy View Post
    He's got ample coverage at 6&7 nobody to cover for Jamie. Jordi or Copeland gonna need to step up for the rwc
    I doubt it will Copeland he's way off Schimdt's type of game.

    Leave a comment:


  • sewa
    replied
    Originally posted by The Outlaw View Post
    Maybe he just thinks rightly or wrongly that Murphy is better then TOD.

    Seems the obvious explanation to me. Its hardly rocket science
    I agree, Jordi must be great in training

    Leave a comment:


  • Cowboy
    replied
    Originally posted by The Outlaw View Post
    Maybe he just thinks rightly or wrongly that Murphy is better then TOD.

    Seems the obvious explanation to me. Its hardly rocket science
    He's got ample coverage at 6&7 nobody to cover for Jamie. Jordi or Copeland gonna need to step up for the rwc

    Leave a comment:


  • The Outlaw
    replied
    Originally posted by HenryFitz View Post
    Henderson covered 6, so only positions 7 and 8 were in question. Murphy doesn't cover 7, as he showed in the Castres match, and O'Donnell doesn't cover 8. O'Mahony and Henry cover all the positions. How much versatility did he need?
    Maybe he just thinks rightly or wrongly that Murphy is better then TOD.

    Seems the obvious explanation to me. Its hardly rocket science

    Leave a comment:


  • <BM>
    replied
    Originally posted by mr chips View Post
    As has TOD. He was back & forth on either flank for a fair while (as was POM) before finally settling into 7, but he has played a lot at 6 and I'm pretty sure he had a couple of games at 8 too.
    Indeed TOD has played right across the back row for Munster. I think the more likely reason for TOD benching in the first place was to cover Henry, who JS had most concern about playing at this level. When Henry acquitted himself quite nicely in the first few games, Murphy was introduced. I suspect that Murphy may have been there from the start had SOB been fit.

    Leave a comment:


  • ustix
    replied
    Originally posted by Red Hand Hero View Post
    Two very big statements there. I would make the connection between the two that you are citing the dropping of O'Donnell, an out and out openside, for Murphy and the non-dropping of Daverage for his defensive howler against England as a baffling inconsistency with Schmidt's approach?

    I would take your point that Dave's double up on Brown was quite an elementary error, that and getting caught by a lock, were two moments in the Championship I am sure he would rather forget. If you look at the macro rather than the micro, or simply the English game versus French game, you could make a fairly decent argument that the mistakes cancelled each other out. No doubt Dave was wrong against England but his contribution to rush Pape was of equal significance in the Championship standings. If he had nailed Care but slightly missed the rush on Pape would we be having this argument? Perhaps, perhaps not. My personal take would be the shoot on Pape was as impressive as the double up on Brown was careless so he's back to evens.

    When I say that the selections ultimately vindicate Schmidt's selections, for HenryFitz's attention, it doesn't mean that if we lost he was biased it means that if we lost his selections would have come under more scrutiny as is generally the case in any team sport. There could have been speculation if Zebo had been picked he might have gassed Launchesbury in the final few minutes at Twickers or that had we lost in France that bringing on O'Donnell and Ryan for say Henry and Toner might have won the day out but ultimately it is all speculation.

    The facts on the table are that a Schmidt coached and selected Ireland won the 6N Championship. Players he didn't 'know' Best, POC, O'Mahony, Henry, Murray and Trimble played fairly influential roles in this as did a number of those he 'knew'. The obvious contenders such as Healy, Heaslip, BOD and Kearney delivered as expected. Crucially however the maligned Ross, Toner, D'Arcy and Daverage also put in some very good performances.

    Beyond the starters Cronin doesn't look out of his depth at this level any more, McGrath is a pretty decent prospect, Moore did well Debaty aside, Henderson made serious impact in every match, Reddan looked capable, Jackson did well when called upon, Madigan held his nerve in Paris and McFadden did what was required of him at 12, 13 and 14.

    Now I am sure you could argue we missed an opportunity to give Kilcyone, for example, more exposure but I fully expect that is what Argentina will be used for that. It is in nobody's best interest to have a very narrow pool of players many of whom are inexperienced but in terms of injury, and DK's previous selections, we are not in a position where we are likely to have to call in complete green-horns like Marshall/Jackson were last season with 0 test experience.

    I would be very surprised if there was any player selected in the Irish RWC squad that had 0 test caps with perhaps the exception of Hanrahan. In every other position we are in a position of, at least, acceptable strenght in depth.

    As I have opined elsewhere would you have believed, 12 months ago, that we would genuinely be debating where we were going to slot a fit O'Brien and Ferris into an Irish backrow such was the levels of Henry and O'Mahony?

    There is no guarantee to success but I personally think we are in a pretty good place. We have a great opportunity to introduce more players into the squad environment down in Argentina including previous certs in the form of Earls, Bowe, Ryan and Ferris who have seen limited game time this season. We have an AI series to further build towards another tilt at a 6N title where we have |England and France at home whilst travelling to a Wales team that will almost certainly in transition, and a Scots and Italian side that will probably be poor enough again.

    After that? The RWC and we all know what Ustix and PP are gunning for there.
    ustix, RHH, ustix.
    Accuracy is all on the march to ultimate glory in Twickers.

    Leave a comment:


  • whimpersnap
    replied
    Originally posted by HenryFitz View Post
    I wouldn't be surprised if Ferris's return sees Henry left out of the squad altogether. SOB's performance against the ABs was better than any performance by any Irish flanker this season. At 7, which is his club position, and has been for 3 seasons now.
    I don't know, I think Schmidt has a lot of time for Henry and sees him as the kind of player who enables those around him to play with more freedom.

    Leave a comment:


  • Balla Boy
    replied
    Originally posted by Ratbastard View Post
    Strawman arguments. Schmidt simply wanted more utility on the bench, period. Madigan got the nod not because he is a better 10 (Schmidt said Jackson would start if Sexton were unavailable), but because Madigan also covers 12, 15. Jordi Murphy has played all 3 back-row positions as a pro.
    Do you know what a straw man is?

    Assuming that Schmidt was a late convert to utility having overlooked Madigan for earlier games, then flexibility is a perfectly valid reason for drafting Madigan in.


    But we keep being told, by yourself and others, that the selection decisions were driven by Joe's preference for guys who can execute his game plan, don't make errors and get the basics right. That's what we were told Kearney's selection was based on.

    And that is, quite specifically, the contention that I'm objecting to. There's no straw man involved.

    Leave a comment:


  • HenryFitz
    replied
    Originally posted by whimpersnap View Post
    I wouldn't be surprised if SOB's return sees him move to 6 and POM to the bench.
    I wouldn't be surprised if Ferris's return sees Henry left out of the squad altogether. SOB's performance against the ABs was better than any performance by any Irish flanker this season. At 7, which is his club position, and has been for 3 seasons now.

    Leave a comment:


  • HenryFitz
    replied
    Originally posted by Ratbastard View Post
    Given that Henry has been the starting 7 all tournament and will probably make way for SOB upon is return, we agree that the argument is about a bench spot, right? Schmidt places a high value on utility on the bench. So, it comes down to who can cover the positions to a satisfactory level, knows the positions and has done their work (on and off the field) so that it is clear that they really know their roles if called upon.
    SOB is irrelevant. I think you must have copy-pasted the last bit about five times now. You haven't a clue why he changed the bench. Nothing changed between week 2 and week 3 that we know about. Unless you've got some insider knowledge to share.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X