Madigan should tour NZ ahead of ROG

Well it's all there in the title. I think Ian Madigan should tour NZ with Ireland in the summer ahead of Ronan O'Gara.

ROG had a decnet season, dropping 2 goals to secure a clean sweep for Munster in the pool stages of the HC, but his international cameos are becoming less frequent, less sustained and less valuable.

Ian Madigan however, is a real talent for the future. Goal kicking (one of the few components of an OHs game that can be vastly improved with practise) aside he seems to be the real deal, his passing and distribution is the best in the country, he's quick, great eye for a gap, an excellent finisher and has great hands. He's by no means the finished article but at 23 he has plenty of time to improve on his weaknesses (touch finding in particular), and would benefit massively from international game time and training.

What do you think?

100% yes Madigan must tour. He's the second best fly half in the country and has the potential to be the best.

Could we bring them both if Sexton or Madigan can cover 12?

If its a straight choice the Madigan no doubt about it. Give ROG the summer with his family, we know what he can bring to the table if we need him next season.

Goal kicking could be a problem but we can manage. ROG won't be around forever anyways.

Yes he is playing better.

It is nothing to do with blooding or experimenting but I think he's playing better this year.

To be honest Rodders, I really don’t like the idea of moving either of them to 12, Kidney may have different opinions on that but personally I see it as a cop out. He has to bring ROG on but is afraid of the backlash if he takes Sexton off, so he brings off Darcy because the media are calling for his head anyway.

The ROG-Sexton 10-12 axis has never offered anything of value to the Irish team as far as I can see, zero. It’s just a sop.

If we bring only 2 OHs it has to be Sexton and Madigan, goalkicking could be an issue, but we have to start some time.

I agree with this and the NZ tour is a good time for him to get involved more often.

He is one of the best offensive backs we have and Kidney needs that kind of drastic shift to try and shift himself. Madigan and ROG are not polar opposites but they are pretty close style wise.

Ireland should be trying to play like the sterotypical Madigan not the sterotypical ROG.

He has HCUP exp now too, not much but it will definitely grow and will give Sexton fresh drive IMO.

Mickado wrote:To be honest Rodders, I really don’t like the idea of moving either of them to 12

No I don't either. We need at least 3 quality player in every position so messing players around is not a good idea, particularly with Sexton.

That said Dan Carter was brought through at 12 alongside Mehrtons for a few seasons and perhaps the same strategy could work with Sexton and Madigan. Both are fantastic players and relatively young.

Hopefully in a few season we'll be having the same debate about Madigan and Jackson/ Hanaran .

ROG isn't done in an Ireland jersey but the wheel in the sky keeps turning man......

I don't think its a cop out at all Mick. I think it has always done very well for us and I'd like to see Sexton at 12.

Lots of teams do it. Australia with Giteau, Flood with England, Carter with New Zealand,

red_stag wrote:I don't think its a cop out at all Mick. I think it has always done very well for us and I'd like to see Sexton at 12.

Lots of teams do it. Australia with Giteau, Flood with England, Carter with New Zealand,

Stag, I just don't see it. It's solid, it's a combination that doesn't not work, but it doesn't add any value to the team.

The Aussie and Kiwi examples you cite are where an attacking minded OH moves to center to allow another attacking OH to play. The English example is where an attacking OH goes outside a kicking OH and it's no conincdence that it's the least successful combination listed.

Mickado wrote:
The Aussie and Kiwi examples you cite are where an attacking minded OH moves to center to allow another attacking OH to play. The English example is where an attacking OH goes outside a kicking OH and it's no conincdence that it's the least successful combination listed.

Surely thats why Madigan and Sexton has the potential to work?

Whilst I agree with the point being made I think all 3 will tour

If the 10-12 axis was Madigan-Sexton, it would not be wise to play Earls at 13. BOD or Cave would need to play as we'd need a physical presence in midfield who could crash the ball up. Trimble would need to be used more and more also in this role.

Personally I'm against it, I don't think it has worked with ROG-Sexton I think that is just getting Darcy off the field rather than Sexton. It is generally used as two kicking options also and kicking the ball is not a tactic we should encourage Ireland to do further.

Sexton to start and Madigan to come into the game to add more pace and attacking ability but less game management

roddersm wrote:

Mickado wrote:
The Aussie and Kiwi examples you cite are where an attacking minded OH moves to center to allow another attacking OH to play. The English example is where an attacking OH goes outside a kicking OH and it's no conincdence that it's the least successful combination listed.

Surely thats why Madigan and Sexton has the potential to work?

There is precedent for a combo of Madigan and Sexton working, but not ROG and Sexton. Honestly i'd prefer to see Madigan tried at 9 with Sexton at 10, rather than putting one of them in the center.

Mickado wrote:

roddersm wrote:

Mickado wrote:
The Aussie and Kiwi examples you cite are where an attacking minded OH moves to center to allow another attacking OH to play. The English example is where an attacking OH goes outside a kicking OH and it's no conincdence that it's the least successful combination listed.

Surely thats why Madigan and Sexton has the potential to work?

There is precedent for a combo of Madigan and Sexton working, but not ROG and Sexton. Honestly i'd prefer to see Madigan tried at 9 with Sexton at 10, rather than putting one of them in the center.

Agree with the first statement but not the second.

Scrum half is specialist position and totally different to 10. If Madigan hasn't played there before then its too late to learn at this level and if we want him to be the next Ireland fly half then he needs to stay at 10 or learn his trade in the 3/4s' ideally at 12 before moving back inside.

Before anyone mentions the french players moving between 9 an 10, its totally different over there because 9 is the pivotal position, not 10.

Definitely, but he won't tour over ROG. I have read that people don't see this as experimenting, but for Kidney to bring Madigan on in any of the tests, that would be a huge leap for him. A massive risk in his eyes i'm sure.

roddersm wrote:

Mickado wrote:

roddersm wrote:

Mickado wrote:
The Aussie and Kiwi examples you cite are where an attacking minded OH moves to center to allow another attacking OH to play. The English example is where an attacking OH goes outside a kicking OH and it's no conincdence that it's the least successful combination listed.

Surely thats why Madigan and Sexton has the potential to work?

There is precedent for a combo of Madigan and Sexton working, but not ROG and Sexton. Honestly i'd prefer to see Madigan tried at 9 with Sexton at 10, rather than putting one of them in the center.

Agree with the first statement but not the second.

Scrum half is specialist position and totally different to 10. If Madigan hasn't played there before then its too late to learn at this level and if we want him to be the next Ireland fly half then he needs to stay at 10 or learn his trade in the 3/4s' ideally at 12 before moving back inside.

Before anyone mentions the french players moving between 9 an 10, its totally different over there because 9 is the pivotal position, not 10.

"Scrum half is specialist position and totally different to 10. If Madigan hasn't played there before then its too late to learn at this level and if we want him to be the next Ireland fly half then he needs to stay at 10 or learn his trade in the 3/4s' ideally at 12 before moving back inside."

I agree with this. I think you need to be a general-type player for 9 and 10 to be interchangable some can do it but I think game management is one of Madigan's weaker traits. I think the guy is great and if he and Sexton form a partnership great, but having those two in the team makes a big impact on selecting the rest of the backs.

It would also mean you'd need the scrumhalf with the quickest pass and service!
Those two are running passing threats and with both on the pitch you'd need that quick service to exploit the space and a 13 who can fix the defence and/or a winger who can and will truck it up the middle so that drift defences don't kill us.

They are great players and we don't have a great 12.
Neither Madigan or Sexton are 12's though

I said i'd prefer. Ideally both of them would stay at 10.

My backs for the tour

Murray, Reddan, Marshall, Sexton, ROG, Madigan, McFadden, BOD, Cave, Earls, Fitzgerald, Spence, Trimble, Bowe, Kearney snr, Jones and one of Gilroy/Zebo/Kearney jr (select according to your province )

17 - I am assuming a party of 38. If less then some triming required.

Geoff I'm guessing your view is:

09 - Murray, Reddan, Marshall

10 - Sexton, O'Gara, Madigan

12 - McFadden and O'Driscoll

13 - Cave and Spence

11 /14 - Fitzgerald, Trimble, Bowe, Gilroy

15 - R.Kearney and Earls

Stag dont forget Jones af 15.

Yes I was thinking BOD at 12.

Fitzgerald, Spence and Earls would provided the ability to play in multiple positions. The first 2 across the three quarter line (although 12 is, I believe, the weakest position, of the 4, for both) and Earls for 13 and the back three.

Ah I didn't see him your selection makes far more sense.

Anyway for what its worth I agree ODriscoll MUST play 12. He simply must. It allows us to develop new 13s and stall for time as we search for a top 12 - maybe L.Marhsall or Hanrahan in the future.

Spence can also cover wing. In fact I hope to see him play wing a lot more for Ulster next season.

Nothing to be gained by bringing ROG but I'll be shocked if kidney doesn't in which case I hope he gets fired. Don't believe in the mindless switching of positions. Best way to turn a good player into a journey man. Sexton is an outhalf whos defense is strong enough to play centre. Why switch him though when he is the best 10 in Ireland. Let's give the likes of McFadden and co some time at 12.

Leinster,

I think that Madigan could be a better 10 than Sexton is.

I think that Sexton could be a better 12 than McFadden who I think will end up as the Shane Jennings of the backline.

He'll be 26 next month. Still not starting for his province. Still not starting for his country. Still not even an established 13 with a lot of game time coming at wing and outside centre.

I too think Spence should be considered as a wing - for me he is a 11/13/14 rather than a 12/13.

If you dont take ROG you would have to take Wallace or Keatley.
Wallace is another not for the future and Keatley hasn't play anywhere near well enough to be selected.

You cannot go on one of these tours with only 2 10's.

Wallace should tour at 12 on merit, he can cover 10 if there's an injury.

Totally agree with the OP.

Reddan, Sexton, Macfadden, O'Driscoll, Fitzgerald, Bowe and Kearney starting. With Murray, Madigan, Cave, Spence, Trimble, Zebo and Felix in the wider squad.

Wallace is playing very, very well but I wouldn't take him unless there are injuries.

I want to see McFadden, O'Driscoll or even Cave at 12. As has been discussed Sexton and Madigan are options too.

If Wallace is playing fore well then why leave him at home?

I'm not advocating Madigan ahead of ROG because we need to build for the future or whatever, i'm advocating him because he's the second best out half in the country on form. Wallace deserves a spot on the plane.

Mickado wrote:If Wallace is playing fore well then why leave him at home?

I'm not advocating Madigan ahead of ROG because we need to build for the future or whatever, i'm advocating him because he's the second best out half in the country on form. Wallace deserves a spot on the plane.

So am I.

In terms of Wallace I'm not convinced he can replicate his Ulster form in NZ and I don't think its necessary to take him and McFadden.

I have no problem with it, Wallace is playing very well I just think there are better combinations available in the centre.

I would take Wallace ahead of D'arcy though.

red_stag wrote:Ah I didn't see him your selection makes far more sense.

Anyway for what its worth I agree ODriscoll MUST play 12. He simply must. It allows us to develop new 13s and stall for time as we search for a top 12 - maybe L.Marhsall or Hanrahan in the future.

Think this point is crucial.

We have lots of 13s coming through and very few 12s
We have one of if not the best centres of the modern age in our team again and can play him at 12 or 13.

Why play him at 13 when we don't have talent at 12 and do at 13?
Sense it makes not.

Put in BOD at 12 (he can do well there) and let him help a young guy make the 13 position his own

AND

that idea strengthens the team too

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:
We have lots of 13s coming through and very few 12s

I actually don't accept that and I'll tell you why.

12 and 13 are not different positions. Its a bit like saying we have lots of 11's but no 14's. Centre is not a specialist position.

The vast majority of centres should be able to play either, the exception being the 2nd 5/8th type inside centre that so few teams use now.

The most important thing is that there is a balance to the 3/4 line and that the centre combination has a good understanding and compliment each others strengths and weaknesses.

I see no reason why Earls and Cave for example couldn't play together or Earls play inside BOD - or outside. Its just about finding which combination works best- in attack and defence.

People forget that BOD used to play inside D'arcy for example.

I disagree with you there Rodders (can't remember the last time I said that ) typical example is McFadden.

He is not a 13 it has been shown so many times that he doesn't have the defensive eye for a 13 and the ability to read the man/zone marking needed when you could have a 13, 15 and either winger running at you or better put "towards you" ie Dummy lines.

By the same token how many times has Spence played well at 12? Very few. He needs the space that you do not get at 12 and his distribution can be exposed.

Roles:

12- Be able to distribute the ball very well and see space for himself and others and deal with big runners in his channel.

13- Be able to read the attack particularily with the possibility of blind side wingers and fullbacks joining the line.

Both need to be able to take the ball into contact and do a fair job of getting over the gainline.

Pete those are just rigid examples of the role of a 12 and 13. I could cite you loads of examples of exceptions. It depends on the team and tactics.

Re McFadden: Schmidt obviously thinks he can play 13? I agree he is better at 12 but thats mainly because he has defensive frailties that get exposed more in the wide channels.

I'm not saying some players won't have a preference but generally speaking the requirements of both are the same.

Jamie Roberts, Jon Davies, Mike Tindall, SBW, Nonu, James Hook have all switched between 12 and 13 at international level without much fuss recently. We are fixated over here with the numbers on players shirts.

In the past there was a bigger requirement for the 12 to be able to kick well, but since the interpretation changes that is not the case anymore. The 12 has more space and time now and the tackle rules favour the attacking side which means they are in a better position to run with the ball.

I haven't watched too much rugby this season but has Madigan really been that good? How many of Leinster's H Cup games has he played in? Did he play for the Wolfhounds?

Just wondering really as I haven't seen him play this season but had in seasons past and he didn't look like he'd make the step up to the pro game at that stage let alone full Test status.

Yes Munsty hes been sensational man. He's electric with the ball in hand and has a great array of skills. His pace really terrifies defences and his decision making has been very good generally. Only minus is he's not taking the place kicks.

If he keeps it up he'll be putting serious pressure on Sexton, who to be fair is playing very well himself.

So has he started in the H Cup?

Started against Montpellier Munsty, has come on in 3 or 4 games, bagged a try or two as well. His form in the league has been good though, plays 80 mins most weeks, 7 tries 7 assists and generally running the show.

Rodders, I agree with Pete on that one, McFadden is a fine 12 but not so good at 13, there are obvious exceptions but the players at our disposal are largely specialised. BOD aside.

Some highlights from his last game...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjcYtA93AbE&feature=youtube_gdata_player

roddersm wrote:100% yes Madigan must tour. He's the second best fly half in the country and has the potential to be the best.

.

If thats the case then surely he should be starting ahead of Sexton as Sexton is then the third best fly half in the country

Isn't Madigan one of the top try scorers in the Rabo? I think a heard a commentator say that.


I'd love to see this guy in an international but part of me wonders if on tour in New Zealand is the best place to throw someone in for their first cap. It would be seriously intimidating and I don't want to see his confidence crushed.

NZ is the perfect place. Confidence crushed yer @rse, throw him to the sharks and see he if he can swim. Players need to be exposed to extreme pressure and tested against the best as early as possible in their careers. The chaf will fall away and the real talents will flourish.

If he can't handle a pasting by the AB's then he won't last long in professional rugby.......... and if he's is good as I believe he is then he will more than hold his own in NZ.

Against the ABs is a perfect introduction as he will have no pressure. No one expects Ireland to do anything down there so it is perfect for young players development.

Madigan looks to be far too attacking minded to make a great flyhalf. That may change with experience but right now I'd play him at 12 with Sexton inside him. I'd even play him outside ROG, so in answer to the OP I'd take both.

It don't matter who shows up but rather how we play. I keep saying it, and it's still true.

Madigan will not necessarily play like Madigan if he turns up in New Zealand in an Irish shirt. The changes needed are in Irish coaching mentality. It's too easy to say Madigan would bring more to the table than either Sexton or O'Gara.... if his player companions have conflicting rules of engagement, and he has his own orders from on high, then he won't.

I agree Madigan should go...but instead of Sexton.

Fly....if theres one thing Kidney doesnt do its to proscribe how players should play as nearly all the players and teams he has coached have testified to...

try another arguement...

DOD are you happy with how ROG is playing for Munster

Stag, ROG has hardly played for Munster since January. He was playing fine for Munster prior to the 6Ns (which he spent warming the bench). Kidney didn't do Munster (or ROG) any service by the way he treated O'Gara for the 6Ns. How can he be expected to perform with about 40 mins of rugby in 2 months?

TBH, looks like he was injured for the QF now as he is still suffering from a dead leg.

There is a bit of talk at the moment about the Crusaders playing Carter at 12 and Tom Taylor at 10 at the moment.

ROG will be travelling. Pretty sure the NZ rugby union will want to fill a few stadiums and if its seen as a development tour they wont. The IRFU will have had to guarantee that its big names will be touring.

Didn't some of the NZ posters say ROG is seen as a bit of a joke over there?

I can't think of an Irish player who isn't regarded as a joke over there (though they were impressed with Tony Buckley the last time).

The Lions / BOD / Umaga thing has made Irish players very unpopular over there.

They specifically said ROG and that they would enjoy watching him play against them.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:They specifically said ROG and that they would enjoy watching him play against them.

So they want to see ROG play then, not Madigan? They will probably want to see Heislip as well!