Ireland Team for 1st France Test

roddersm wrote:

Notch wrote:

Oh yeah, but there's a lot of misinterpretation of statistics going on on this site. A tackle made/missed can only tell you so much for instance, I think funnyExiledScot made that point very well recently. Seeing how many passes a player made is fairly meaningless without knowing what those passes led to. And so on. And the stats on a site like ESPN scrum.com are nowhere near as accurate as the official statistics that aren't really in the public domain.

I've seen people make incredibly insightful points on forums without ever needing to refer to statitistics and I've seen people try and use statistics to justify ludicrous arguments. Don't get too hung up on stats. They are a useful resource, but if they are what you're using exclusively to make your mind up on the game then you're not get a clear picture of what's going on.

Well said Notch. A few stats to support a point or argument is one thing but you can't base an entire argument on a load of stats without any context. The stats on their own are meaningless especially if they are being cherrypicked to enforce a particular point of view.

You've lost me here! what entire argument.

I've used some stats in this thread to illustrate that on average, the backrow don't have to make any more tackles when ROG is OH than they would normally if Sexton was the OH.

Sin é wrote:

valjester wrote:

Sin é wrote:

valjester wrote:
Stats can be useful but people are making their comments based on what the see in games. SOB will have to cover defensively for rog. This might not be born out in the stats but people will be able to see it at defensive lineouts where sob will stand at 10. This is what wallace does for munster and ireland. If sexton was playing, he would stay at 10. This is a fact that stats won't back up because their is no detail in stats.

So whats the big deal about where SOB stands? He has to stand somewhere!

Yes he has to stand somewhere but instead he gets moved to accomodate rog. It also impacts on the speed a counter attack can be launched if Ireland manage to steal the lineout as instead of the ball being thrown to the outhalf it goes to a backrower, and as good a player as sob is, he isn't as good at passing the ball as rog.

First things first, secure the ball IF you manage to steal it in a defensive lineout.

Surely the ball would go to the scrumhalf anyway, who should be able to pass to O'Gara and so wouldn't be dependent on SOB's poor passing ability!

EDIT on second thoughts nevermind I couldn't be bothered arguing as I'm not going to get anywhere.

Havent had a chance to read over the thread yet lads but i like the cut of this team. Looks to me like Bowe, BOD, POC, Heaslip and Wallace will get the next two internationals.

the backline looks good and im glad we are tinkering with the centre options. Especially pleased to see Trimble retained. Cant wait for the game.

Sin é wrote:
You've lost me here! what entire argument.

I've used some stats in this thread to illustrate that on average, the backrow don't have to make any more tackles when ROG is OH than they would normally if Sexton was the OH.

No you've produced stats that show that the backrow in 4 games made roughly the same amount of tackles regardless of which fly half was on the pitch but that doesn't prove that they didn't have to make more tackles because ROG was on the pitch because the stats don't contain any reference to the relative minutes in possession, territory, weather conditions,opposition tactics and players, no of scrums and lineouts or any number of contextual factors which might influence how many tackles our back row might have to make in a given game.

This is one of the dumbest arguments I have ever come across about rugby, there are a multitude of variables in a game of rugby so looking at stats alone or in isolation is just plain dumb like sticking your hand in the fire or trying to breathe under water ....(sorry if that offends people). But so is arguing it either way for the last two pages (again sorry if that offends) ..... get a grip lads ffs

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:
You've lost me here! what entire argument.

I've used some stats in this thread to illustrate that on average, the backrow don't have to make any more tackles when ROG is OH than they would normally if Sexton was the OH.

No you've produced stats that show that the backrow in 4 games made roughly the same amount of tackles regardless of which fly half was on the pitch but that doesn't prove that they didn't have to make more tackles because ROG was on the pitch because the stats don't contain any reference to the relative minutes in possession, territory, weather conditions,opposition tactics and players, no of scrums and lineouts or any number of contextual factors which might influence how many tackles our back row might have to make in a given game.

Yeah... it's fairly obvious.

On thing no-one has commented on is the choice of Captain. There would have been several candidates, with Rory Best and Ronan O'Gara having previously captained Ireland, but Kidney has chosen to stand by Cullen.

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:
You've lost me here! what entire argument.

I've used some stats in this thread to illustrate that on average, the backrow don't have to make any more tackles when ROG is OH than they would normally if Sexton was the OH.

No you've produced stats that show that the backrow in 4 games made roughly the same amount of tackles regardless of which fly half was on the pitch but that doesn't prove that they didn't have to make more tackles because ROG was on the pitch because the stats don't contain any reference to the relative minutes in possession, territory, weather conditions,opposition tactics and players, no of scrums and lineouts or any number of contextual factors which might influence how many tackles our back row might have to make in a given game.

The claim that O'Brien will have to make more tackles now that O'Gara is starting is based on exactly what then? You were happy to use these exact same stats to make your point that Paddy Wallace made most of his tackles and wouldn't accept my (and others) observations in that he gets driven back in the tackle (in much the same way as O'Gara is and who is considered to be a poor defender).

Weather, position etc. are not relevant tbh. What is relevant is how many extra tackles Ireland back row/SOB will have to make with O'Gara at OH so I've worked out the percentages for you.

Sexton v. Scotland: Ireland BR made 25% of the tackles. v France, BR made 26% of the tackles made.
O'Gara v. Scotland: Ireland BR made 23% of the tackles. v France, BR made 27% of the tackles made (and that was the game that Healy was in the bin for 10 minutes).

So, as you can see, statistically, the Ireland Backrow don't make any more tackles when O'Gara is OH. Thats the only point I'm making.

So if O'Gara and Sexton were playing at the same time, then the BR would 48% of the tackles versus Scotland and 53% of the tackles against France.

But if they were playing England, they'd just go ahead and win the match and not bother with tackles.

Sin é wrote:

The claim that O'Brien will have to make more tackles now that O'Gara is starting is based on exactly what then? You were happy to use these exact same stats to make your point that Paddy Wallace made most of his tackles and wouldn't accept my (and others) observations in that he gets driven back in the tackle (in much the same way as O'Gara is and who is considered to be a poor defender).

Weather, position etc. are not relevant tbh. What is relevant is how many extra tackles Ireland back row/SOB will have to make with O'Gara at OH so I've worked out the percentages for you.

Sexton v. Scotland: Ireland BR made 25% of the tackles. v France, BR made 26% of the tackles made.
O'Gara v. Scotland: Ireland BR made 23% of the tackles. v France, BR made 27% of the tackles made (and that was the game that Healy was in the bin for 10 minutes).

So, as you can see, statistically, the Ireland Backrow don't make any more tackles when O'Gara is OH. Thats the only point I'm making.

It was not me raised the point about O'Brien having to make more tackles. I am simply pointing out that I don't think your stats prove anything.

My view that Wallace is a solid defender are not based on stats but watching him play week in and weekout, I only used the stats to illustrate the point but again they don't prove or disprove the argument. He has a fairly powerful low physique and tends to do well against big players, often stopping them in their tracks and dump tackling them so I disagree he aften gets driven back although of course there are examples when he has.

It doesn't take a genious to work out that the opposition are going more likely to target the 10 channel with O'Gara there and regardless of whether or not statistically he makes his tackles, it is more than likely the opposition will get over the gainline if they do so, therefore the backrow will have to be more active in that channel and thus less active elsewhere.

Is it right to say the back row is where the increased tackles arise if people get over the gainline a little more often against ROG? I would have thought the primary targetting on ROG is off of set piece ball, so back row would usually be in the lineout or in the scrum and trying to catch up with play.

I don't usually think ROG is 'missing' his tackles, more that he gives up territory trying to take his opponent down. That usually allows for support to come in and assist. Nearest person to do that would be inside centre, and depending on the location on the field, possibly the winger?

In broken play when the defensive line is being reset/formed I don't usually see the backrow setting themselves up beside ROG to make his tackles for him. If anything, our defensive line might (and I only say might) take a step closer to ROG either side so they can help out in that channel if that is where the opposition attack.

The final one I'd say is all opposition will run at 10 often during any game. Even if they are a good tackler, you still tire one of the key decision makers on the opposition, rough him up and maybe that goes in your advantage in the final 10 minutes of a game. Wilkinson still makes tackles in every game he plays, everyone knows he is a great tackler and you are very unlikely to make ground down that channel, but all teams will still do it.

Fair points bad wagon. You've argued Sin's point better than Sin and not a stat in sight

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:

The claim that O'Brien will have to make more tackles now that O'Gara is starting is based on exactly what then? You were happy to use these exact same stats to make your point that Paddy Wallace made most of his tackles and wouldn't accept my (and others) observations in that he gets driven back in the tackle (in much the same way as O'Gara is and who is considered to be a poor defender).

Weather, position etc. are not relevant tbh. What is relevant is how many extra tackles Ireland back row/SOB will have to make with O'Gara at OH so I've worked out the percentages for you.

Sexton v. Scotland: Ireland BR made 25% of the tackles. v France, BR made 26% of the tackles made.
O'Gara v. Scotland: Ireland BR made 23% of the tackles. v France, BR made 27% of the tackles made (and that was the game that Healy was in the bin for 10 minutes).

So, as you can see, statistically, the Ireland Backrow don't make any more tackles when O'Gara is OH. Thats the only point I'm making.

It was not me raised the point about O'Brien having to make more tackles. I am simply pointing out that I don't think your stats prove anything.

My view that Wallace is a solid defender are not based on stats but watching him play week in and weekout, I only used the stats to illustrate the point but again they don't prove or disprove the argument. He has a fairly powerful low physique and tends to do well against big players, often stopping them in their tracks and dump tackling them so I disagree he aften gets driven back although of course there are examples when he has.

It doesn't take a genious to work out that the opposition are going more likely to target the 10 channel with O'Gara there and regardless of whether or not statistically he makes his tackles, it is more than likely the opposition will get over the gainline if they do so, therefore the backrow will have to be more active in that channel and thus less active elsewhere.

I never claimed you raised the point about O'Brien having to make more tackles. Thomond did.

Your last point about backrow being active in O'Gara channel? Why would they be anywhere else but where the ball is? Their main job is to win the ball. They ain't going to win the ball fannying around on the wing if the ball is infield.

roddersm wrote:Fair points bad wagon. You've argued Sin's point better than Sin and not a stat in sight

I've frequently argued that those points without using the stats/facts to make the point that Bandwagon makes. I've even quoted Les Kiss in other treads saying that it suits Ireland that ROG gets targetted because a) he can take a battering and keep his head and b) the opposition's attack is more predictable. Teams (like France) who don't tend to target O'Gara tend to win as well. Wales & England always try it and they usually lose.

Sorry Sin E but your statistics are rubbish. The 3rd man joining a tackle is credited with a tackle, even though they aren't doing much.

Also, how many yards over the gain-line do attackers get when tackled by ROG? Id say a fair amount.

Have a look at the statistics for players being bumped. You probably dont have that one handy, do you?

Fact is, and you said it well yourself, that playing with ROG is a bit like playing with your little sister.

He needs to be minded all the time.

I largely agree with Sin, I don't think O'Garas defence has had much of an impact on our chances over the years. There have been a few lapses, but overall I'm seriously struggling to find a game where it's cost us big time and to O'Garas credit I can't really think of a game where he's been rattled enough to cost us the game.

Maybe that's a lapse in my memory, i don't know. But it's not a big issue in my mind.

Bit like last week, when Wallace was targeted. Scotland gained nothing by the tactic. When it came, their try was through a break in a wider channel. Now Wallace is a much more robust head on tackler than O'Gara, but I think sides who overuse the crash ball from 12 without much variation (12 qas dummy runners, good support lines, good offloading game etc.) are fairly easy to predict and therefore nullify regardless of personnel.

Boyne wrote:Sorry Sin E but your statistics are rubbish. The 3rd man joining a tackle is credited with a tackle, even though they aren't doing much.

Also, how many yards over the gain-line do attackers get when tackled by ROG? Id say a fair amount.

Have a look at the statistics for players being bumped. You probably dont have that one handy, do you?

Fact is, and you said it well yourself, that playing with ROG is a bit like playing with your little sister.

He needs to be minded all the time.

I like that description of ROG.

What are peoples thoughts on the 13 jersey? Does Earls being given the start effectively put McFadden out of the world cup squad? I'd argue that Wallace has shown he can cover 12 and everyone has him as emergency 10 if four horseman ride out onto the field. That mean't McFadden needed to show his utility at both centre positions and wing cover. He was ok at 13 the last day but not great and didn't really have a highlight moment (which a possible squad player like him needs to get to get into the final squad). We all know Bowe can take the 13 jersey if needed and Earls being given this shot, to me looks like there might be more concern about BOD than camp is letting on and McF didn't take his chance.

Boyne wrote:Sorry Sin E but your statistics are rubbish. The 3rd man joining a tackle is credited with a tackle, even though they aren't doing much.

Also, how many yards over the gain-line do attackers get when tackled by ROG? Id say a fair amount.

Have a look at the statistics for players being bumped. You probably dont have that one handy, do you?

Fact is, and you said it well yourself, that playing with ROG is a bit like playing with your little sister.

He needs to be minded all the time.

Doesn't matter who is credited with the tackle for this argument. The backrow make a similar no. of tackles for both O'Gara & Sexton.

It doesn't tend to matter how many yards over the gain-line is lost in the opposition's 22. Its a really worry though if your OH can't get you out of your own 22. Just as well Sexton is a good defender

thebandwagonsociety wrote:
What are peoples thoughts on the 13 jersey? Does Earls being given the start effectively put McFadden out of the world cup squad? I'd argue that Wallace has shown he can cover 12 and everyone has him as emergency 10 if four horseman ride out onto the field. That mean't McFadden needed to show his utility at both centre positions and wing cover. He was ok at 13 the last day but not great and didn't really have a highlight moment (which a possible squad player like him needs to get to get into the final squad). We all know Bowe can take the 13 jersey if needed and Earls being given this shot, to me looks like there might be more concern about BOD than camp is letting on and McF didn't take his chance.

My thoughts are pretty much the same as yours. I don't think McFadden is totally out of the picture but I think he is certainly down the pecking order a bit. depending on what happens with D'arcy he could still be on the plane though.

I think most people are excited about seeing Earls in the 13 jersey. He looked good along side BOD against Wales in 2010. I don't think he's the long term successor to BOD but in the short/ medium term he's our best back up I think.

On O'Gara. I'm not concerned about his defence either but I am a little concerned about ROG, Wallace and Earls as a unit and it's ability to stop France on the gainline and imagine the French will attack this trio a lot.

It will be interesting anyway,this would have been an ideal game for Ferris if he were fit. After a couple of bruising hits down the 10 channel I doubt they would come back!

I'm not sure that defence at this level plays as big a role as people seem to think, especially on an individual level. Defeats a think are more likely to be attributed to poor ball retention, knock ons, poor support play and lack of creativity.

clivemcl wrote: Defeats a think are more likely to be attributed to poor ball retention, knock ons, poor support play and lack of creativity.

Thats just because we've got a good defence!

Clive defence can be a big part in the game. It's what kept us in touch last week. While our lack of creativity was our downfall we could have won that game due to our defence. If you have a very good defence you will always be in with a chance as you probably will be within a score of the oppostition.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

Boyne wrote:Sorry Sin E but your statistics are rubbish. The 3rd man joining a tackle is credited with a tackle, even though they aren't doing much.

Also, how many yards over the gain-line do attackers get when tackled by ROG? Id say a fair amount.

Have a look at the statistics for players being bumped. You probably dont have that one handy, do you?

Fact is, and you said it well yourself, that playing with ROG is a bit like playing with your little sister.

He needs to be minded all the time.

I like that description of ROG.

What are peoples thoughts on the 13 jersey? Does Earls being given the start effectively put McFadden out of the world cup squad? I'd argue that Wallace has shown he can cover 12 and everyone has him as emergency 10 if four horseman ride out onto the field. That mean't McFadden needed to show his utility at both centre positions and wing cover. He was ok at 13 the last day but not great and didn't really have a highlight moment (which a possible squad player like him needs to get to get into the final squad). We all know Bowe can take the 13 jersey if needed and Earls being given this shot, to me looks like there might be more concern about BOD than camp is letting on and McF didn't take his chance.

I think its sink or swim for a few players with a serious test:
Donncha Ryan is nearly there as the 2nd row/backrow utility cover. (POC, DOC, Cullen & Ryan)
If Sean O'Brien can cover for David Wallace, Jennings won't be on the plane. (SoB will be 6 & 7 starter/cover)
Denis Leamy is cover for 6 & 8. (Backrow will be Ferris, SOB, Wallace, Heaslip, Leamy then)
Earls is viewed at the moment as BOD's long term replacement (Kidney said as much in paper today). I still wouldn't rule McFadden out as the utility back - Earls could still end up covering FB as well as playing wing.
Kidney needs to know now if Wallace is up to being D'Arcy's replacement with a stern test.
ROG needs gametime with Reddan - and we need to see how Reddan copes with a pack that won't be all having its own way.

It will be sink or swim for Conor Murray as it will be for Felix Jones.

if Jones travels, McFadden could be in trouble though.

Earls won't fear the Marty/Mermoz centre pairing as they were the Perpignam centre partnership that was destroyed down there by Munster two years ago. Denis Leamy had a suberb game as well (and where he picked up a knee injury that put him out for a year).

Sin you talk much more sense when you go easier on the stats .

Is that not another stat Rodders? Or is it a fact?

Notch wrote:I largely agree with Sin, I don't think O'Garas defence has had much of an impact on our chances over the years. There have been a few lapses, but overall I'm seriously struggling to find a game where it's cost us big time and to O'Garas credit I can't really think of a game where he's been rattled enough to cost us the game.

The only one I can think of is in one of the AB matches in 2006 when he missed a tackle late on that let them in to close out the game.

Statistically everyone is bound to miss some tackles if they make enough of them, so I agree it's not an issue.

However in the 2006 6N game with Wales, it was a fairly obvious tactic that Jones was targetting the ROG channel and while he was being tackled, he still made a lot of ground and had Ireland on the back foot. Think Wally crunched finally Jones and he had to go off after the first quarter and Henson wasn't able to continue the tactic.

ROG has been trying to play further up of late so it'll also be interesting to see how many tackles are made on him.

Thomond wrote:Is that not another stat Rodders? Or is it a fact?

No that one is just opinion, although I'm sure Sin could provide some stats to prove that this is not the case .

I duno, McFadden rushing up wasn't all that bad a call. On another day the rush defence could have got man and ball and we would have been praising his vision.

And yea Paddy was blocked, and ultimatly himself and kearney and Jones all went for the same man leaving ansbro free on the wing.

But truth is, that is just part of rugby. That kind of try gets scored week in week out and against every standard of team.

Watching Super15 there are a huge amount of mistakes due to the high risk brand of rugby the southern hemisphere plays.

Truth is, the mistakes arent lambasted like we up north would. The game continues and its the most creative in attack who ultimatly wins.

If we honestly had anything to give creativly, we wouldnt always be so hung up on who our weak tacklers are.

We wouldn't be focusing on how our defence failed in helping us to only just edge out a win against an average side.

The Great Aukster wrote:

Notch wrote:I largely agree with Sin, I don't think O'Garas defence has had much of an impact on our chances over the years. There have been a few lapses, but overall I'm seriously struggling to find a game where it's cost us big time and to O'Garas credit I can't really think of a game where he's been rattled enough to cost us the game.

The only one I can think of is in one of the AB matches in 2006 when he missed a tackle late on that let them in to close out the game.

Statistically everyone is bound to miss some tackles if they make enough of them, so I agree it's not an issue.

Yeah, thats true. You can't make a massive case out of one incident of course. Okay, defence is one reason why you might prefer Sexton but for me it's not a big enough factor to drop O'Gara.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:
What are peoples thoughts on the 13 jersey? Does Earls being given the start effectively put McFadden out of the world cup squad? I'd argue that Wallace has shown he can cover 12 and everyone has him as emergency 10 if four horseman ride out onto the field.

I don't think McFadden will make the final squad in an ideal world where there are no injuries. Injuries are part of the game obviously, so we'll see where we are after the England match!

But yeah, I think Wallace is probably on the plane, O'Driscoll and D'Arcy are certainties if fit and I can't see the versatile and experienced Keith Earls missing out. So that's the centres covered, and Fitzgerald, Kearney and Trimble are being given a vote of confidence at the moment in the back three and you'd think Bowe will be there. That's 8 outside backs already. I'd say we'll take nine and it's cover at fullback we need...

Notch wrote:
But yeah, I think Wallace is probably on the plane, O'Driscoll and D'Arcy are certainties if fit and I can't see the versatile and experienced Keith Earls missing out. So that's the centres covered, and Fitzgerald, Kearney and Trimble are being given a vote of confidence at the moment in the back three and you'd think Bowe will be there. That's 8 outside backs already. I'd say we'll take nine and it's cover at fullback we need...

Thats interesting Notch. I agree on the guys mentioned being on the plane already. That suggests that the final spot, if there is one, will be between Murphy, Jones and McFadden?

Clive I think McFaddens error was a bad one but no one is lambasting him. The attack and ball retention is where we need to improve but our defence is one of our strongest areas and has saved our bacon on numerous occaisions. We'll need much more than a strong defence against France though.

It's an error you make early season when you are acclimatising to entirely new defensive systems and responsibilities rodders.

People don't understand that this is what's meant by experience, or what I mean by it anyway when I talk about experienced players. That was his first game as a centre for Ireland under the defensive stewardship of Les Kiss. Who's more likely to make a mistake- the guy who's been working with those defensive systems for the last two years or the guy who's just learning his role?

I actually think all things considered McFadden did very well in defence last weekend and I'm encouraged by the aptitude in that part of his game. I think he did very well but we were caught out in that move.

The shooter from 13 that we like to use is very effective when it works, but it's not an easy skill. It did backfire on us then, but all in all a learning experience for McFadden. I'm not going to patronise him any more. He's a talented player who did himself no harm.

I think this is a bit too soon for him still, I don't think he will travel, but it's not the last you'll see of him in an Ireland jersey if he doesn't make the cut thats for sure.

Notch wrote:
I actually think all things considered McFadden did very well in defence last weekend and I'm encouraged by the aptitude in that part of his game.

Me too, why have I suggested otherwise?

The mistake was a bad one but otherwise his defence was excellent. No complaints there from me and he'll learn from the experience.

No, I was just giving my opinion. Didn't make any reference to anyone else

And so it begins

Conor Murray is f***ing huge for a scrumhalf isn't he, hes the same height as buckley for gods sake.
la marseillaise is so much better than irelands call.

There's one thing I will say. I've disagreed with many of you on this forum over the years on issues concerning the Ireland Rugby Team, but no poster I've come across is as mis-informed and useless as George Hook.

Whats eating you Notch?

Already Ireland are under massive pressure