Where now for Ireland?

Is the question posed by the year we've had. I'm trying to take a long view of our entire season rather than focusing on the tragicomedy of that last disgraceful game. 2011-2012 has been an unusually long and exceptionally disappointing season of test rugby for Ireland. It started with a lot of pessimism around the Ireland team (losing all 4 RWC warm-up tests consecutively) and ended in a similarly distressing fashion (Ireland's worst ever result and performance in the Southern Hemisphere). The statistics tell a similar story; in the seventeen matches we've played we have won just six, having drawn one and suffered ten defeats.

Wins over Australia, Italy (x2), Scotland, the USA and Russia are all we have to show for this year. For many the win we had over Australia was a triumphant validation of Kidney, who had come under heavy criticism following a string of incoherent and error-strewn performances in the lead up to that game. But it's worth noting it was Irelands only win against a side in the Top 8 of the world rankings in the last 12 months.

On the other hand we've had defeats to Scotland, England (x2), Wales (x2), France (x2) and New Zealand (x3). And one draw against France. It's distressing reading for any Irish fan. Putting the All Blacks series aside, since around 2005 we have always aimed to compete at the top end of the Six Nations table. But now the stats show that not only are we losing out to France, England and Wales- they've been fairly consistent and well practiced at beating us as well. We look comfortably a bottom three side in the NH rather than a top 3 team based on these results.

So my question is; how do we get back to the standard that is now demanded and expected of Ireland on the international stage i.e. being one of the top European sides? Can we even do that? Are we in for feast and famine over the next five years? What new ideas need to come into the set-up- could a clear out of senior players such as the one that led to Hayes, Horgan, Stringer, BOD and ROG getting capped in 2000 benefit us come the autumn? Do we need to make a break with the current coaching regime? Or is it just a case of fine tuning- a few new faces working under Kidney in the coaching set-up, a few new players coming in... gradual evolution of the sort Kidney has been trying so hard to make work.

What do you think 606v2? I am at a loss.

I am also at a loss. Kidney has had 4 years to create a team and he has probably did the opposite. Irish rugby is in chaos, and suddenly the HEC final which involved two irish teams doesn't mean much right now. The players don't even look like they want to play.

Ultimately, I do think it comes down to Kidney. I think it was you Notch who pointed out that he is a motivator. Well, he has shown no evidence of it so far. He has had 4 years to create a team, and he hasn't. I struggle to see what he has done.

Total clear out of the coaching staff. Hopefully the new staff will have new ideas and freshen up the squad with new faces. The tight five looks ok to me. Back row is so missing Ferris. We lack a physicallity without him. Scrum half and centre are my biggest concern.

The obvious answer is he's won a Grand Slam. However if you look at his winning ratio since then it's a case of slow deterioration.

I pointed out that his reputation is as a motivator and selector. He's never been renowned as a great technical coach and relies on others to help fine tune the details. But unfortunately that motivation and self-belief which ran through the core 2009 team has been slowly bleeding out since then. He hasn't shown much signs of being able to motivate players to a high standard for every test.

The thing I am most positive about, is our young players available to us at the provinces. I think the claim that we don't have players as good as BOD/POC etc is a load of crap. We have some players who have tremendous potential. We shouldn't even compare them anyway, they will be different players with different strengths and weaknesses.

We now need to look at our options, develop them to their full potential, and create a TEAM. We need to have structure, organisation in both attack and defence, and a flipping game plan of some sort. Whether we play to kill the game for the opposition, or play to our strengths and play a fast expansive game, we have to do something.

A grand slam that happened in his first year, where he didn't have the chance to change much perhaps. He hasn't been able to adapt since.

Notch wrote: we've had defeats to Scotland, England (x2), Wales (x2), France (x2) and New Zealand (x3). And one draw against France.

Zoiks. That's terrible. How have we managed to cling on to eighth?

Ireland are hopeless internationally.

There is a misconception that because their provinces do well that their international team should follow. But the advantages they enjoy at provincial level simply arent there internationally.

The popular theory is to blame to Kidney but their squad of players is overrated - especially in the pack and thir backline is now both physically not able to cope at international level and just not up to the job. Wallace, Earls, D'Arcy, McFadden, Trimble, Murray - all very average and easily outmuscled. Even O'Driscoll is now beginning to show his age. He tries to play a dynamic offloading game in a side that is just not good enough or strong enough to pull it off. How many turnovers does O'Driscoll concede a game trying his one handed offloads in a misfiring backline?

I cant see any coach in the world being able to work miracles with the team. Especially the backline.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:A grand slam that happened in his first year, where he didn't have the chance to change much perhaps. He hasn't been able to adapt since.

In his first year, the Grand Slam year, he very much changed our style. Kick the ball, chase it, win the subsequent collision, don't miss tackles and dominate the breakdown. Let ROG kick the points. Thats a world away from the way Eddie O'Sullivan was trying to get us to play.

At the end of 2009 the zeitgeist moved away from kick and chase to favour more enterprising rugby and we've been all at sea since then trying to develop a new style we have no idea how to implement. It's just the fact it's been three years of having no real coherent or effective gameplan that bothers me. The games we've played best in have been from our pack causing mayhem for the opposition and reducing the game to a scrap. Once a team gets any kind of parity with us up front, we generally lose.

Gordy wrote:Ireland are hopeless internationally.

There is a misconception that because their provinces do well that their international team should follow. But the advantages they enjoy at provincial level simply arent there internationally.

The popular theory is to blame to Kidney but their squad of players is overrated - especially in the pack and thir backline is now both physically not able to cope at international level and just not up to the job. Wallace, Earls, D'Arcy, McFadden, Trimble, Murray - all very average and easily outmuscled. Even O'Driscoll is now beginning to show his age. He tries to play a dynamic offloading game in a side that is just not good enough or strong enough to pull it off. How many turnovers does O'Driscoll concede a game trying his one handed offloads in a misfiring backline?

I cant see any coach in the world being able to work miracles with the team. Especially the backline.

your as bad as awop with the amont of bull you talk

the les kiss reappointment really put the nail in the coffin

He has a point about our backline but I wonder how much of this is due to poor coaching. Obviously the major problem for us is 12 and our failure to develop alternatives to two guys whose time has come. But there is still genuine talent in our backs.

We have Sexton, Bowe and Kearney who are obvious contenders for the Lions test team; top class players coming into their prime. There is the aging but still classy Brian O'Driscoll who should be an asset to any test nation with his nous and experience. We then have impressive young talents like Madigan, Gilroy, Zebo etc. looking close to a breakthrough.

I just feel then there is a middle tier of players like Keith Earls, Luke Fitzgerald, Andrew Trimble and Fergus McFadden who are good but scream unfulfilled potential. They have all been messed around positionally and look low on confidence in all positions at test level rather than confident everywhere as was the intent. They are playing well below what they are capable of in a green jersey

Gordy wrote:Ireland are hopeless internationally.

There is a misconception that because their provinces do well that their international team should follow. But the advantages they enjoy at provincial level simply arent there internationally.

The popular theory is to blame to Kidney but their squad of players is overrated - especially in the pack and thir backline is now both physically not able to cope at international level and just not up to the job. Wallace, Earls, D'Arcy, McFadden, Trimble, Murray - all very average and easily outmuscled. Even O'Driscoll is now beginning to show his age. He tries to play a dynamic offloading game in a side that is just not good enough or strong enough to pull it off. How many turnovers does O'Driscoll concede a game trying his one handed offloads in a misfiring backline?

I cant see any coach in the world being able to work miracles with the team. Especially the backline.

Every time you say this, and I ask you to tell me what the advantages are at provincial level. You never respond.

JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

McFadden, Earls, Trimble, Fitzgerald, Murray, Reddan, Wallace, D'Arcy are just average players. Their is no unfulfullied potential about them.

The Irish dont seem to grasp the concept that club rugby and international rugby are alot different. The above names do well at provincial level, in big strong club sides. Internationally the playing field is levelled and these players are actually just average. They get run over and bullied and frankly look out of their depth most of the time. They are just mediocre. The sooner the Irish realise this the better because they seem to expect Leinster like success against international sides.

Why are they "a lot" different? In what way is the playing field levelled? You aren't explaining anything here. Just spouting rubbish without any substance. If you can tell me why there is such a step up, and why the provinces apparently have an advantage in club rugby, then I might take your comments seriously.

Gordy wrote:McFadden, Earls, Trimble, Fitzgerald, Murray, Reddan, Wallace, D'Arcy are just average players. Their is no unfulfullied potential about them.

The Irish dont seem to grasp the concept that club rugby and international rugby are alot different. The above names do well at provincial level, in big strong club sides. Internationally the playing field is levelled and these players are actually just average. They get run over and bullied and frankly look out of their depth most of the time. They are just mediocre. The sooner the Irish realise this the better because they seem to expect Leinster like success against international sides.

im guessing your trying to wind us up or something? Or are you just fishing for an arguement because your bored...

He is known to be a WUM at this point. I am giving him a chance to actually say something credible.

International rugby is more about size than skill. Gaps are so tight in international games that its just better to crash it up every time. Some teams with extreme skill are exceptions, all blacks, aus, france to an extent, but they play a different game, centered around great backs coaching. The game Ireland try and play is one suited to bigger backs, and unsurprisingly, we are rubbish at it.

kunu wrote: International rugby is more about size than skill. Gaps are so tight in international games that its just better to crash it up every time. Some teams with extreme skill are exceptions, all blacks, aus, france to an extent, but they play a different game, centered around great backs coaching. The game Ireland try and play is one suited to bigger backs, and unsurprisingly, we are rubbish at it.

There are no players in the world big enough to play the type of rugby we play..

I don't agree. NZ aren't that big compared to other sides, but they are almost always on the front foot. They have some big men like SBW/Nonu but even Read isn't huge. He has both pace and power, and he takes the ball at pace. If NZ played as static as we do, they wouldn't be half as effective. Just look at the game last week.

I do think you need a bit of bulk in your team, both in the pack and in the back line, but there is a balance. Plus, it means nothing if you have no game plan, and can't operate as a team. Or play with any pace whatsoever.

Not to mention the fact that the welsh back line completely dwarfs the Aussie back line. Yet the welsh have struggled to contain them!

Well, we have the players we have. The thing you must do is develop a gameplan to get the best out of the players you have. Which is why we need a really good backs coach. To come up with an innovative plan to work around any lack of power we may have in the centres. Instead we use Paddy Wallace on the crash ball.

Again, there is very clearly unfulfilled potential there.

Yes I know rory, read my post again. I said the Ab's Australia and France were exceptions, as they devote as much time to backs as to anything else. Which makes them dangerous, despite their smaller size. Ireland on the other hand, similar in size, seem to spend very little time developing their backline, and therefore revert to playing the simple game suited to bigger players, not the more fluid one that they could really thrive in.

Let go of the past and move into the future. But there will be more dark days between the two!

Sorry but there is a true.

kunu wrote:Yes I know rory, read my post again. I said the Ab's Australia and France were exceptions, as they devote as much time to backs as to anything else. Which makes them dangerous, despite their smaller size. Ireland on the other hand, similar in size, seem to spend very little time developing their backline, and therefore revert to playing the simple game suited to bigger players, not the more fluid one that they could really thrive in.

Doesn't that suggest to you that size isn't more important then? It is important, but there must be balance.

Thomond is going to be in here to yap at me in a second..

anotherworldofpain wrote:
Sorry but there is a true.

there is some odd grammar bro

kunu wrote:JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

Nominated at 10, not 12.

Rory yeah size isnt massively important if you can coach backs well - nz are obvious example. But good backs coaches are few and far between. So most teams go physical route, but that just isnt an option for ireland.

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

Nominated at 10, not 12.

I realise that, but the nature of u20 games allows you to pick a centre at 10, theres much much more space. JJ is a 12 no doubt

Anyone listen to Richie McCaw's comments last week after the match? First thing he said was that some of their (AB) young players now realises that international rugby is a step up from Super Rugby!

What did NZ do to rectify the situation?

They dropped the Young World Player of the Year of 2 years ago and brought in a bit of experience (and muscle).

kunu wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

Nominated at 10, not 12.

I realise that, but the nature of u20 games allows you to pick a centre at 10, theres much much more space. JJ is a 12 no doubt

Will he have the physicality at 12 though? Paddy Wallace is a tidy footballer, but he isn't physical enough to play 12 at international level.

edit: No doubt? He played 10 at schools level and still does for his AIL Club UL Bohs. It seemingly is only for Ireland he gets to play 12.

I see no future for Irish rugby under Kidney. I have never been a fan even with his success at Munster due to the style of play incorporated. As indicated by his results, there has been no improvement on the international scene and very little or no development of new talent.

It would appear his game plan has been since his introduction to play an outdated game plan with little or no success. Ireland had a wonderful opportunity post world cup to develop young talent for 2015; instead due to poor results Kidney has continued to pick players who are at the end of their international career.

As other posters have indicated there is a lot of young talented players at schools and provincial level which is evidenced by the under 20s success in the IRB tournament. One of the main issues the IRFU has to address is the development of these players in their provincial sides. Statistically speaking only a few of these players will be provided with full time professional contracts.

I would far rather have someone like Stuart Lancaster in charge; a coach who has made a bold decision to select a young squad of players with a clear and definitive plan to build these players towards 2015. The benefits of this move will serve England well and I predict evidence of this will be seen in next years 6 nations.

I would ask the question as to how much influence the powers that be within the IRFU have on the selection of Irish centralised contracted players. Does the head coach have sole responsibility of this or do the men behind the scenes pull more strings than required. If this is the case and they have more power then it could be argued that the Irish head coach has some limitations to who he can select.

That being said, Kidney must go otherwise Ireland will continue down a very dark road of rugby wilderness and may have real difficulties in finding its way back.

I for one do not wish for this to happen.

ah not sure really they lost some size too with read gone, and some experience with carter gone.

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

Nominated at 10, not 12.

I realise that, but the nature of u20 games allows you to pick a centre at 10, theres much much more space. JJ is a 12 no doubt

Will he have the physicality at 12 though? Paddy Wallace is a tidy footballer, but he isn't physical enough to play 12 at international level.

edit: No doubt? He played 10 at schools level and still does for his AIL Club UL Bohs. It seemingly is only for Ireland he gets to play 12.

Just like sexton only gets to play centre for ireland

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

Nominated at 10, not 12.

I realise that, but the nature of u20 games allows you to pick a centre at 10, theres much much more space. JJ is a 12 no doubt

Will he have the physicality at 12 though? Paddy Wallace is a tidy footballer, but he isn't physical enough to play 12 at international level.

edit: No doubt? He played 10 at schools level and still does for his AIL Club UL Bohs. It seemingly is only for Ireland he gets to play 12.

Just like sexton only gets to play centre for ireland

he would make a better 12 yep , too good a runner to waste at 10 + we've already got enough 10s

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

Nominated at 10, not 12.

I realise that, but the nature of u20 games allows you to pick a centre at 10, theres much much more space. JJ is a 12 no doubt

Will he have the physicality at 12 though? Paddy Wallace is a tidy footballer, but he isn't physical enough to play 12 at international level.

edit: No doubt? He played 10 at schools level and still does for his AIL Club UL Bohs. It seemingly is only for Ireland he gets to play 12.

Just like sexton only gets to play centre for ireland

... and ?

Was Sexton nominated at 12 for Junior International Player of the year and Ireland are playing him at 10?

Sin é wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

Nominated at 10, not 12.

I realise that, but the nature of u20 games allows you to pick a centre at 10, theres much much more space. JJ is a 12 no doubt

Will he have the physicality at 12 though? Paddy Wallace is a tidy footballer, but he isn't physical enough to play 12 at international level.

edit: No doubt? He played 10 at schools level and still does for his AIL Club UL Bohs. It seemingly is only for Ireland he gets to play 12.

Just like sexton only gets to play centre for ireland

... and ?

Was Sexton nominated at 12 for Junior International Player of the year and Ireland are playing him at 10?

Hmm you mist my point...oh well

I think you miss mine. JJ has played a lot at 12 for Ireland prior to this tournament and didn't get any player nominations. As soon as he moves to 10, Ireland start really doing well and winning the big ones.

If I was him, I'd be sticking at 10 - he will be worth more there which will no doubt be very obvious to the self proclaimed 'businessman'.

Lots of players have been sacrified like this (moved around) because there is someone better than they are (D'Arcy for example). I don't see anyone of the obvious talent of BOD in JJ's way.

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

Nominated at 10, not 12.

I realise that, but the nature of u20 games allows you to pick a centre at 10, theres much much more space. JJ is a 12 no doubt

Will he have the physicality at 12 though? Paddy Wallace is a tidy footballer, but he isn't physical enough to play 12 at international level.

edit: No doubt? He played 10 at schools level and still does for his AIL Club UL Bohs. It seemingly is only for Ireland he gets to play 12.

O'Driscoll played 10 at school. I saw Hanrahan at Rockwell and thought back then he is definitely a 12. Talking about his physicality, he is a decent defender and with players like Farrell, Spence or Macken most likely to be his midfield partner, they cover that aspect pretty well.

Sin do you think he will get gametime at 12 with munster?

LeinsterFan4life wrote:Sin do you think he will get gametime at 12 with munster?

I do. Penney was around for Dan Carter being brought through, but I think he will end up at 10.

MBTGOG wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:

Sin é wrote:

kunu wrote:JJ Hanaran nominated for junior player of year. hopefully solves 12 for us

Nominated at 10, not 12.

I realise that, but the nature of u20 games allows you to pick a centre at 10, theres much much more space. JJ is a 12 no doubt

Will he have the physicality at 12 though? Paddy Wallace is a tidy footballer, but he isn't physical enough to play 12 at international level.

edit: No doubt? He played 10 at schools level and still does for his AIL Club UL Bohs. It seemingly is only for Ireland he gets to play 12.

O'Driscoll played 10 at school. I saw Hanrahan at Rockwell and thought back then he is definitely a 12. Talking about his physicality, he is a decent defender and with players like Farrell, Spence or Macken most likely to be his midfield partner, they cover that aspect pretty well.

O'Driscoll famously didn't make the first team for Blackrock at 10. He said he himself owes everything to his coach at UCD who moved him to centre.

The judges obviously were impressed with him at 10.

This could all depend on how Luke Marshall develops at 12 as well. If he goes well and progresses like we hope he will then I can see Hanrahan going to 10 unless Madigan makes that position his own.

The IRFU have a lot to answer. Didn't they give Kidney a new contract before the world cup?

Kidney has to go. Most wanted him gone before the world cup and even more wanted him gone after it. But I can remember people on this board were willing to give him one more shot if he got Ireland playing to their strengths in the 6 nations. We wanted to see a new innovative backs coach to try and compliment Smal and Kiss's work. Instead Kiss is now doubling up as defence and backs coach. We wanted to see the development of new players, not just picking players because they've been there before. Ryan and POM are the only ones we integrated and that was down to Kidneys hand being forced because of injuries. Our 6 nations was an embarrassment. Hoofing the ball in the air and chasing it when we have so much quality in the backs.

Kidney had another shot at redemption this series. He picked an attacking and somewhat fresh team for the first test against the AB's. This is all well and good when you see the names on the team sheet but when you still implement the same archaic game plan the results are going to be the same, or in this case worse. The fact that our wingers barely touched the ball or even made any line breaks tells it's own story. We look like a disjointed team. We're absolutely clueless at times and the players seem disheartened, so much for Kidneys motivational qualities.

For me, Kidney has to go for Ireland to start to talk about change, only then can we start.

I think Ireland need to understand why their running out of momentum in competitions, you were smashed in the 6 nations last game by England, soundly beaten by Wales in the World Cup, now in the final game of your June tour you were beaten off the park.

Why is it when the Irish lads get to the end of a competiton do they suddenly collapse?

What a disgrace Ireland were. They are a pathetic excuse of a team. In the end of the game I was rooting for New Zealand. Something drastic has to be done now with the team or with the coach. We need to adopt a different game plan. A really dark day for Irish Rugby.

RugbyFan182 wrote:What a disgrace Ireland were. They are a pathetic excuse of a team. In the end of the game I was rooting for New Zealand. Something drastic has to be done now with the team or with the coach. We need to adopt a different game plan. A really dark day for Irish Rugby.

These things happen to most countries Wales have lost 96-13 in South Africa and 63-6 out in Australia, I won't even go into some of the hammerings New Zealand have dished out to us in their own back yard.

The bottom line is the Irish players were not prepared to put in the determined effort and ferocity they put in last week. They were scared going out onto the pitch and none of them wanted to fight for their country, you can't blame Kidney for that, it is the fault of each individual player not showing pride in Ireland. Sacking the coach solves nothing if the boys on the field are frightened of the opposition.

RugbyFan182 wrote:What a disgrace Ireland were. They are a pathetic excuse of a team. In the end of the game I was rooting for New Zealand. Something drastic has to be done now with the team or with the coach. We need to adopt a different game plan. A really dark day for Irish Rugby.

It was pretty dark if you thought supporting New Zealand is an okay thing to do.

When teams have a good side and have been competitive over a number of years, when they start to lose more regularly you obviously start to ask questions.

For me and I say this with much respect for the IRE team, they are not a side who can replace quality with quality. If first choice players go down, if players are unavailable it becomes an uphill battle.

I myself think only NZ, SA & FRA can do this. ENG & AUS seem to have reasonable depth also, but less so then the above 3.

Not saying that IRE are going to go downhill but with guys like POC, BOD etc winding down I think its going to be very difficult to see who will replace them.... I mean BOD has almost single handed won at least 2 games a season for IRE for 10+ years. Earls doesn't even deserve to be the great man's boot boy.

Perhaps a new coach would help but I doubt it.