Irish Lions Centre Pairing

First topic message reminder :

In 2009 the British and Irish Lions played a centre combination against the Cheetahs of:

12 Luke Fitzgerald
13 Keith Earls

For Ireland I think we have never seen this pairing.

I see lots of suggestions from posters who are unhappy with Darcy at 12 but I rarely if ever see this combination suggested. Would Irish posters be happy to see it. What would fans of other teams think of it.

Personally I feel we have better options but would be interested to hear what people think about this.

I agree that Earls had a great 6 nations plus Drico should have to fight to earn the jersey back. I think he might though as he was very good v Munster and looks like there is plenty of life in the old dog yet.

Jeebus I wish I saw what you lads did!

I thought Earls had a mixed 6N. Defensively he was solid and showed pace in attack but generally I thought our midfield lacked creativity and he still showed the lack of awareness to offload to support runners and the ability to create things for his teammates.

BOD I thought looked well off the pace and struggled in attack and defence against Munster. On current form I wouldn't even take him on tour let alone start him for Ireland. Physically he has a long way to go.

How about some some sort of shoot out

Darcy/McFadden and Earls

v

Wallace and Cave

v

Downey and Bowe

haven't mentioned Spence or O/Malley or even Whitten (he has two caps and two tries?)

Loads of Options - unlike tighthead -

Spence is never an option at 12! He would make a better winger (which he played firstly) than a 12. He is a 13 though.

As for Earls during the 6 nations, I thought he was good, but not great. Once again, he made some good clean breaks, but he did it much more in the back three. His strengths are not being used at centre. He is a good option, nothing more.

Anyone else suspect that unless he decides to go himself, we will still be playing BOD when he's the second best 13 in Ireland?

Don I think as long as BOD is playing he will be picked.

I'd still take a match fit BOD ahead of Cave,O'Malley or Earls.. just. The legs are going but his skills and game reading are still a cut above and we've missed his leadership and organisational skills badly.

Can he get back to full fitness though?

Good interview with BOD there on the BBC website.

Sounds like hes not planning to hang up the boots just yet. Would love to see him find top form and play for another few seasons.

Maybe a 5th RWC isn't out of the question?

roddersm wrote:
I don't accept, like some, that Whitten and Faloon were surplus to requirements, I think they were fundimental to our squad and losing them for Wilson is a bad piece of business but hey ho...... we can't have everything.

Wilson isn't instead of Faloon or Whitten though that is a false analysis. We simply have to sign another 6/8 as we are very short in that area. We are still short with Wannenberg leaving.

Its:
Whitten - Marshall
Faloon - Birch

Geoff I wasn't suggesting that Wilson was a direct replacement for Faloon just that that I'd have rather kept Faloon and/or Whitten, if wages and finance was an issue .

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote: But is that enough of a reason just to discard him when we have keep McComish and Diack for example? I am so-so on Roger Wilson and can't help but feel he is an average player probably past his peak. The criticism re: Whitten is more about the IRFU than the Ulster branch. You might say he is nothing special, and you might be right, but he has been in better form this season than the 12s at Leinster and Munster. There is something fundamentally wrong about shifting him off to Exeter and Munster bringing in Downey, a player never more than average at best. I would also add a degree of mismanagement to Luke Marshall as well. Agreed on Spence. Pick his best position and play him there. I saw a young Ulster team go to Leinster and put up a brave fight and get hammered in the end. But I look at that team and I don't see many players of genuine potential. Farrell for sure, Gaston perhaps, and Birch I think will be a big plus and probably a reason why Faloon is off west.

Where to start.

McCormish is on peanuts compared to Diack and Faloon.
Diack cover 6/8 - Faloon does not. 6/8 is our weakest position with respect to depth.
Whitten goes to Exter, Downey goes to Munster - take that up with Munster they chose not to offer Whitten a contract.
You want to play Spence in his best position - are you saying we should drop Cave ?

I disagree about Wilson he is a much better player than when he left
I disagree about the team against Leinster I think there are a number of players there who have what it takes

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote: The treatment of McLaughlin was simply appalling, and to my mind blatant lies were told by Logan and Humphrys over the appointment of a 'big name' and 'experienced coach' to replace him. If that were true then we would have appointed someone with a reputation......

I am not a fan of their recruitment policy. For sure, Pienaar, Wanneberg, Muller and Afoa have been brilliant players. But do we need to spend so much money on big name imports to the detriment of younger upcoming Ulstermen? And we seem to be very quick to cut young, talented players go like Faloon and Whitten rather than sticking with them.

When did Ulster say they were going to sign a 'big name' - dont believe everything you read in the papers.
McLaughlin was never promised the job beyond this year.

Who are the IQ players being held back by NIQ players - certaintly not Faloon or Whitten.
I honestly don't think there are any.

Also Diack is IQ - whether you agree with the rules or not.

Faloon is going because they believe Birch is his equal
Whitten is going because the club believe Wallace and Marshall are better players

Goingback to Ireland the best combination I have seen below full international level was McFadden - Cave in 2 'A' internationals we shoudl give it a go.

Earls to me remains, at his best, a back three player

roddersm wrote:Geoff I wasn't suggesting that Wilson was a direct replacement for Faloon just that that I'd have rather kept Faloon and/or Whitten, if wages and finance was an issue .

But if you keep Whitten or Faloon who do you let go instead ?

Also if you accept they are not quite International standard would not Whitten be holding back Marshall or Faloon Birch ?

For the record I am far more comfortable with Whitten going , because I believe in Marshall, than I am with Faloon. We are still far to light in the back row.

geoff998rugby wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote: The treatment of McLaughlin was simply appalling, and to my mind blatant lies were told by Logan and Humphrys over the appointment of a 'big name' and 'experienced coach' to replace him. If that were true then we would have appointed someone with a reputation......

I am not a fan of their recruitment policy. For sure, Pienaar, Wanneberg, Muller and Afoa have been brilliant players. But do we need to spend so much money on big name imports to the detriment of younger upcoming Ulstermen? And we seem to be very quick to cut young, talented players go like Faloon and Whitten rather than sticking with them.

So in reality you would prefer, at best, a middle of the table team who would continually do battle with Connacht for a HC place and then make no impact at all in Europe.

I know what I prefer. Having been to a HC Quarter Final and a Magners league Semi-final last season and what is ahead of us this season I think the policy is working quite fine.
If I was a young player learning my trade I would much prefer to be part of a winning team feared by opponents than one where the only consideration is "will we get enough losing points to keep ahead of Connacht". Unless your memory has gone, that is what it was like for a long period before the current policy.

Of course there is the other point

If you talk to Court, Macklin, McAllister, Fitzpatrick they will tell you Botha and Afoa have made them better palyers.

If you talk to Marshall he will say Pienaer has done the same for him.

I give you another key fact - if these players had not have joined Ferris would have left. He only stayed because he believed Ulster were going to improve.

Rava wrote:
So in reality you would prefer, at best, a middle of the table team who would continually do battle with Connacht for a HC place and then make no impact at all in Europe.

I know what I prefer. Having been to a HC Quarter Final and a Magners league Semi-final last season and what is ahead of us this season I think the policy is working quite fine.
If I was a young player learning my trade I would much prefer to be part of a winning team feared by opponents than one where the only consideration is "will we get enough losing points to keep ahead of Connacht". Unless your memory has gone, that is what it was like for a long period before the current policy.

Agree with all of this Rava but surely you would have to admit that if we are relying on marquee signings to get us into these HC and Rabo positions then that is unsustainable in the long term?

Signing Pienaar, Muller and co has been a quick fix to give us a boot up the backside and a bit of steel and ambition but ultimately that steel and ambition will need to come, almost exclusively, from within in a few seasons time.

Agree that its easier to bring young guys through in a winning side and hopefully that is what will happen over the next few seasons but we are seeing a few guys leave and others careers stall which is not good for the future.

I think what we have now is a very good set up for the next few seasons but beyond that there are question marks as to what will be left once Pienaar, Afoa etc are gone.

Rodders, the idea is that you use the time you have these guys to win trophies, be successful, get in more fans, improve your facilities, develop younger players who have learnt a new style of rugby from outsiders.

red_stag wrote:Rodders, the idea is that you use the time you have these guys to win trophies, be successful, get in more fans, improve your facilities, develop younger players who have learnt a new style of rugby from outsiders.

I agree. I'm happy, never said I wasn't but the next season or two will be crucial in terms of bring players through.

red_stag wrote:Rodders, the idea is that you use the time you have these guys to win trophies, be successful, get in more fans, improve your facilities, develop younger players who have learnt a new style of rugby from outsiders.

Exactly Stag, nail on the head.
Also what Geoff has said. There is no way Bowe and Wilson would be back at Ulster but for our success on the pitch. Can you imagine what the fallout would have been if Ferris had left?

Sometimes we are guilty of not looking at the big picture. Ulster Rugby are a commercial organisation. The decision makers have to make commercial decisions to have bums on seats. That is the bottom line. The fans are obviously a factor but if some were allowed to influence Management then we wouldn't have a player on the team that didn't enter this world in one of our underperforming hospitals.

The Plan is that it is a quick fix that the youngsters will be able to do the business and NIQ will not be necessary.

Will it work - in some areas yes - in some no.
Time will tell.

I dont think anyone would be more delighted than Logan or Humphreys if Ulster were able to field a team like this, in some games, in three years -

McAllister, Annett, Macklin, Tuohy, Henderson, Ferris, Henry, Birch, Marshall, Jackson, Gilroy, Marshall, Spence, Trimble, Nelson

The reality is one of two wont make it but if most do we will be looking good.
I can see our NIE numbers dropping to 2/3 players in a couple of years IF the youngsters are good enough.

WRT the number of "marquee" players, I don't understand why the current situation isn't sustainable? If the provinces are to be competitive they will need to offer their top players contracts commensurate with ability or expect to lose them whether they are NIQ or IQ.

Guys like Whitten and Faloon who are in their mid twenties are rightly looking to step up their careers, but haven't been good enough to do so at Ulster in the first team - that says a lot about the strength Ulster have and are developing. These players know they need to make a mark now if they have higher ambition and they can look back on their rugby with no regrets about playing second fiddle for too long.

With regards to the thread title, it is slightly misleading as the discussion is really on whether Fitzgerald is a viable option at 12. If Luke was ever going to be a Test centre should he not have been already playing there regularly? There are two significant marquee names ahead of him and just like Kieran Lewis before him, he may leave it too late to move to another team if he really wants to become a Test centre.

This situation is exactly why young players should expand the Ireland playing pool by displacing NIQs at other provinces or moving to other teams outside Ireland. For example Whitten's move has enhanced his own prospects and those of Luke Marshall so that's bound to be good for Ireland, with both playing at a higher level?

By far Ireland's biggest problem with the midfield is how the coach is asking them to play - perming different players doesn't address that fundamental.

The Great Aukster wrote:WRT the number of "marquee" players, I don't understand why the current situation isn't sustainable? If the provinces are to be competitive they will need to offer their top players contracts commensurate with ability or expect to lose them whether they are NIQ or IQ.

The provinces are subsidised by the IRFU and ultimately they call the shots with regards recruitment. The new rules will make it hard to sign top overseas players as the IRFU clamp down on NIE's. It won't be so easy to go out and sign the Pienaars and Afoas to strengthen the side.

In the future I believe more of the key players will have to come from the academy than they do at present.

Things are very good for the next couple of seasons but the real challenge will come beyond that as we promote academy player to replace the likes of Muller Afoa, Pienaar etc and maybe even Ferris, Wallace, Best.

There needs to be a big emphasis on player development over the next 2 seasons imo.

Thats why you need to be getting the fans through the door now. From now until May 2013 is IMO the most important for this group of Ulster players.

10000 + against Aironi wasn't a bad start.

Brand new ground inside 2 years as well

All good stuff.

The thinness of our squad means the kids will be getting pretty of opportunity next year.

I don't know why you're complaining rodders- David Humphreys has made all the points you're making in interviews. There's a short term strategy and a long term strategy and decision makers in Ulster Rugby have basically outlined the long term strategy as being something similar to what you're driving at.

Hence the fanfare over McLaughlins move to the Academy, the increased investment in the Academy the moving aside of some guys who are good squad players so young talented guys with more potential can come through next season- whats not too like?

roddersm wrote:The provinces are subsidised by the IRFU and ultimately they call the shots with regards recruitment. The new rules will make it hard to sign top overseas players as the IRFU clamp down on NIE's. It won't be so easy to go out and sign the Pienaars and Afoas to strengthen the side.

I agree. Therefore Ulster will get weaker. In turn supplying even less players to Ireland - is that really what the IRFU want?

This is a great debate here lads, though really nothing to do with the Irish centres!

Geoff and Rava, I was commenting from an Irish perspective and using Ulster as an example as they are my side. Some of the same things I was saying about Ulster could equally be said about Munster. For example, who are their best two props? How does that help Ireland? Remember when Kidney was still Munster coach and BOD was out of form, the best two centres in Ireland were the Munster partnership of Mafi and Tipoki, so where were the alternatives for the national side? I will be interest to see how many NIQ platters are named in the side against Munster.

Geoff, Logan himself said in an interview shown at half time on the BBC coverage in the aftermath of the McLaughlin story being broken that they were going for an experienced big name. You might have been at Ravenhill that night, unfortunately I wasn't but saw the game on television. I don't read the Belfast Telegraph nor the News Letter thanks. The Tele especially is sub tabloid garbage. I'd probably rather read the Daily Mail if I had to!

It's all very well saying 'we have a long term strategy'- thats what every team has ever said. Looking to experience foreign players for short term gains to bring in the crowds etc etc etc is all well and good. I'll just point towards the Blues and Ospreys as examples of where this has worked as well as imagined, and their supporters said the same things you are saying 3 or 4 years ago. Perhaps the historical foundations of Irish provincial rugby will hold us in better stead.

Hi Rava - Wilson was always coming back to Ulster - I don't know about Bowe but given the options open to him I imagine the fact that Ulster are on the up counted for a lot

Notch wrote:I don't know why you're complaining rodders- David Humphreys has made all the points you're making in interviews. There's a short term strategy and a long term strategy and decision makers in Ulster Rugby have basically outlined the long term strategy as being something similar to what you're driving at.

Hence the fanfare over McLaughlins move to the Academy, the increased investment in the Academy the moving aside of some guys who are good squad players so young talented guys with more potential can come through next season- whats not too like?

I'm not complaining. I'm happy