Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Swap Keatley with JJ?

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

    Swap Keatley with JJ?

    This has been done before but I think it is worth another look in light of the last two games. First thing I should say is that I am very glad that Keatley is a Munster player and we are fortunate to have him. On top form he is a quality OH. However, Munster fans have very high ambitions, lofty you could say.

    I felt watching the game on Sunday that Keatley was a large reason why we lost the game, but was instrumental in us winning the LBP. That might sound harsh and contradictory but aside from his placekicking, which was outstanding, he failed to really put a stamp on the game. His tactical kicking was extremely poor, and with ball in hand he mixed the good with the bad. JJ was the only one to put a decent tactical kick through that bounced out, and didn't result in a quick lineout.

    My choice would be JJ to 10 and Keatley to 12. And that shouldn't be seen as a demotion because I think he has the making of a quality 12, possibly even international standard, who knows. I'd be interested to hear what others think.
    26
    Keatley 10 with JJ 12
    34.62%
    9
    JJ 10 with Keatley 12
    57.69%
    15
    Matt Williams 10 and 12
    7.69%
    2

    The poll is expired.


    #2
    JJ 10 Keatley 12 is what I would like to see.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by the plastic paddy View Post
      JJ 10 Keatley 12 is what I would like to see.
      You need JJ at 12 currently more than you do at 10. He's a better 12 then Keatley.
      I always knew Madigan was a closet Scrum Half. Ignore All things that suggest Continuity.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by The Outlaw View Post
        You need JJ at 12 currently more than you do at 10. He's a better 12 then Keatley.
        10 is a far more important position that 12 though, especially with the gameplan we are trying to implement.

        Comment


          #5
          Completely agree, it's what I'd like to see (at the very least as an experiment in a run of pro 12 games.)

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Sketchy View Post
            ..
            I felt watching the game on Sunday that Keatley was a large reason why we lost the game, Pure Rubbish

            but was instrumental in us winning the LBP. That might sound harsh and contradictory but aside from his placekicking, which was outstanding, he failed to really put a stamp on the game. His tactical kicking was extremely poor, and with ball in hand he mixed the good with the bad. JJ was the only one to put a decent tactical kick through that bounced out, and didn't result in a quick lineout. He also put a couple of poor kicks too, but you don't mention that

            ...
            JJ ain't the saviour people make him up to be, he's a talented player but he doesn't walk on water
            Nulla semper amicus, servivit mihi, in iniuriam mihi neminem quem non persolvi

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Sketchy View Post
              10 is a far more important position that 12 though, especially with the gameplan we are trying to implement.
              Unless Foley is prepared to compromise his style of trying to beat teams up with a forward pack who can't do it I don't see puttng him to 10 as changing a whole lot to be honest.
              I always knew Madigan was a closet Scrum Half. Ignore All things that suggest Continuity.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Sulla View Post
                JJ ain't the saviour people make him up to be, he's a talented player but he doesn't walk on water

                Very emotive response. How would you rate Keatley's tactical game?

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by The Outlaw View Post
                  Unless Foley is prepared to compromise his style of trying to beat teams up with a forward pack who can't do it I don't see puttng him to 10 as changing a whole lot to be honest.
                  I don't agree. If you play the 10 man game, which seems to be Plan A, then you need a tactical kicking OH that can relieve the pressure off the pack if things aren't going their way in the tight. Keatley tried a number of times on Sunday to take the pressure off the pack and he ended up giving away cheap possession to a very dangerous back three. JJ has a much better range of kicks in his arsenal that Keatley, and especially when it comes to pinging the corners.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Sketchy View Post
                    Very emotive response. How would you rate Keatley's tactical game?
                    Better than JJ's anyway.
                    Nulla semper amicus, servivit mihi, in iniuriam mihi neminem quem non persolvi

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Keatley's defence isn't good enough for 80 mins at 12 IMO.
                      He's a guy who gets up at six o'clock in the morning regardless of what time it is.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        If you don't get some sort of go forward ball, it doesn't matter who is 10. In the last 2 games we saw precious little go forward ball.
                        Anybody who sees a psychiatrist would want their head examined.*&nb sp;Henry Ford

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Sketchy View Post
                          I don't agree. If you play the 10 man game, which seems to be Plan A, then you need a tactical kicking OH that can relieve the pressure off the pack if things aren't going their way in the tight. Keatley tried a number of times on Sunday to take the pressure off the pack and he ended up giving away cheap possession to a very dangerous back three. JJ has a much better range of kicks in his arsenal that Keatley, and especially when it comes to pinging the corners.
                          The best tactical kicker in the world isn't going to change anything with a forward pack that's going backwards. All it is is a stay of execution.

                          What I'm proposing is a complete change of style. To accept the fact that getting into bicep wrestles with Clermont who have bigger biceps isn't a recipe for success.

                          Having JJ at 12 chajnges the point of contact to wider channels instead of having POC hitting brick walls as a one off runner the net result being a pass to an outhalf standing five yards behind the gainline. You've nothing to lose IMO- you can't win games through the pack anymore becasue you haven't the players .
                          I always knew Madigan was a closet Scrum Half. Ignore All things that suggest Continuity.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by The Outlaw View Post
                            The best tactical kicker in the world isn't going to change anything with a forward pack that's going backwards. All it is is a stay of execution.

                            What I'm proposing is a complete change of style. To accept the fact that getting into bicep wrestles with Clermont who have bigger biceps isn't a recipe for success.

                            Having JJ at 12 chajnges the point of contact to wider channels instead of having POC hitting brick walls as a one off runner the net result being a pass to an outhalf standing five yards behind the gainline. You've nothing to lose IMO- you can't win games through the pack anymore becasue you haven't the players .
                            And we wont win games if the pack don't provide front foot ball......simple as that.
                            Anybody who sees a psychiatrist would want their head examined.*&nb sp;Henry Ford

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by The Outlaw View Post
                              The best tactical kicker in the world isn't going to change anything with a forward pack that's going backwards. All it is is a stay of execution.

                              What I'm proposing is a complete change of style. To accept the fact that getting into bicep wrestles with Clermont who have bigger biceps isn't a recipe for success.

                              Having JJ at 12 chajnges the point of contact to wider channels instead of having POC hitting brick walls as a one off runner the net result being a pass to an outhalf standing five yards behind the gainline. You've nothing to lose IMO- you can't win games through the pack anymore becasue you haven't the players .
                              Munster didn't always beat up every pack. There were days when ROG was called upon to tactically kick all day because we couldn't get go forward ball. Not much point in shovelling ball out to the backs if the pack aren't winning the arm wrestle.

                              Last weekend we struggled with territory. It felt like we were playing just inside our own half for long periods and then we would cough up possession. Away from home in a cauldron like Clermont you need to get as much territory as you can and that is where we failed badly I thought.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X