Where now for Ireland?

First topic message reminder :

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.

For what it's worth, I'm getting bored of this merry go round too.

As far as I can tell, all the Irish posters (except possibly SinE) believe that the NZ tour was an unacceptably poor result.

Sin believes the team lost because the players are rubbish.

Most of the other Irish posters believe that the players aren't as bad as the results suggest, and ergo the problem lies with management.

And for the last 5 or 6 pages none of you have been able to persuade anyone to change their mind.

Thus far several posters have offered up some good suggestions, which have gotten mired in the Mexican (or Irish) stand off. How's about we get back to debating those

And by the way, Sin, I'm curious, what do you think Ireland rugby can do better over the next 3 years (seing as breeding better players is a little difficult in that time frame) - you've commented on multiple people's suggestions without offering anything of your own, so I'd suggest it's your turn. And if the answer is "nothing" why are you bothering debating?

Kiwi - great post, but you won't get an answer from Sin. He will continually move the goal posts over and over again. He thinks Ireland are fine where we are now and we just don't have the players. In other words, Kidney is doing the best he can.

Out of interest, you say nearly every poster has said this tour was unacceptable (and rightly so) but do you think Kidney feels that way? Seriously, his interview just makes it seem as if it was based on "small margins" yet again. He doesn't seem to realise we were absolutely thumped, and need dramatic improvement. The man is completely out of his depth, I honestly don't think he has a clue.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Out of interest, you say nearly every poster has said this tour was unacceptable (and rightly so) but do you think Kidney feels that way? Seriously, his interview just makes it seem as if it was based on "small margins" yet again. He doesn't seem to realise we were absolutely thumped, and need dramatic improvement. The man is completely out of his depth, I honestly don't think he has a clue.

Who do we get so, and it must be someone who's available................

Mike Ruddock or Joe Schmidt

I'm hoping Joe Schmidt. He seems to know how to create a team that can win.

And you certainly won't see him making any excuses or playing the underdog status. He will only care about the results.

Kiwireddevil wrote:For what it's worth, I'm getting bored of this merry go round too.

As far as I can tell, all the Irish posters (except possibly SinE) believe that the NZ tour was an unacceptably poor result.

Sin believes the team lost because the players are rubbish.

Most of the other Irish posters believe that the players aren't as bad as the results suggest, and ergo the problem lies with management.

And for the last 5 or 6 pages none of you have been able to persuade anyone to change their mind.

Thus far several posters have offered up some good suggestions, which have gotten mired in the Mexican (or Irish) stand off. How's about we get back to debating those

And by the way, Sin, I'm curious, what do you think Ireland rugby can do better over the next 3 years (seing as breeding better players is a little difficult in that time frame) - you've commented on multiple people's suggestions without offering anything of your own, so I'd suggest it's your turn. And if the answer is "nothing" why are you bothering debating?

My opinion is that the NZ was an expected poor result with the injuries Ireland were carrying - missing POC, Ferris, Luke Fitz & Bowe, Heaslip & D'Arcy. If we had them we might have had a chance. Added to that, the end of a long season and 2nd trip to NZ in the year didn't help either.

I don't think all the replacements are rubbish - they are just not as good as those who were missing. Most of them are just decent enough Club players and I think that the 2nd Test result was a phenomenal achievement (i.e., they really played above themselves).

As to what Ireland can do over the next 3 years - the fans can show a bit of patience and give the players a bit of space to gain experience and just be realistic as to where we are at the moment.

I don't think it is the irish fans on here who aren't being realistic. You seem to think we are expecting to become world beaters. We aren't. We are way below the standard we are capable of now though. The guy who needs to be realistic is Declan Kidney. He has not been doing a good job and his record over the past few years has been shocking. Excluding a few one off performances against Australia and England.

Sin é wrote:

Kiwireddevil wrote:For what it's worth, I'm getting bored of this merry go round too.

As far as I can tell, all the Irish posters (except possibly SinE) believe that the NZ tour was an unacceptably poor result.

Sin believes the team lost because the players are rubbish.

Most of the other Irish posters believe that the players aren't as bad as the results suggest, and ergo the problem lies with management.

And for the last 5 or 6 pages none of you have been able to persuade anyone to change their mind.

Thus far several posters have offered up some good suggestions, which have gotten mired in the Mexican (or Irish) stand off. How's about we get back to debating those

And by the way, Sin, I'm curious, what do you think Ireland rugby can do better over the next 3 years (seing as breeding better players is a little difficult in that time frame) - you've commented on multiple people's suggestions without offering anything of your own, so I'd suggest it's your turn. And if the answer is "nothing" why are you bothering debating?

My opinion is that the NZ was an expected poor result with the injuries Ireland were carrying - missing POC, Ferris, Luke Fitz & Bowe, Heaslip & D'Arcy. If we had them we might have had a chance. Added to that, the end of a long season and 2nd trip to NZ in the year didn't help either.

I don't think all the replacements are rubbish - they are just not as good as those who were missing. Most of them are just decent enough Club players and I think that the 2nd Test result was a phenomenal achievement (i.e., they really played above themselves).

As to what Ireland can do over the next 3 years - the fans can show a bit of patience and give the players a bit of space to gain experience and just be realistic as to where we are at the moment.

So you think there's nothing the coaches or players can improve on for the next 3 years?

I think a lot can be learned from this tour. With the emergence of D Ryan at lock and the performances of SOB at 7, with POC, Ferris & Heaslip fit, I think we will have a fairly competitive pack. 23 man squads will also mean we won't have a day again like we had against England in the 6Ns.

Life for the backs will be a lot easier. Only major issue now is to find an inside centre and I think we can be reasonably competitive in next year's 6Ns (when we have France & England at home).

Making their life easier is all well and good, but if they don't know how to attack, then what difference will it make? At the very least we need a back coach first. I don't think any selection changes in any position will make a difference at this point.

Sin é wrote:I think a lot can be learned from this tour. With the emergence of D Ryan at lock and the performances of SOB at 7, with POC, Ferris & Heaslip fit, I think we will have a fairly competitive pack. 23 man squads will also mean we won't have a day again like we had against England in the 6Ns.

Life for the backs will be a lot easier. Only major issue now is to find an inside centre and I think we can be reasonably competitive in next year's 6Ns (when we have France & England at home).

That doesn't answer the question.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Making their life easier is all well and good, but if they don't know how to attack, then what difference will it make? At the very least we need a back coach first. I don't think any selection changes in any position will make a difference at this point.

Ireland were top try scorers in the last 6Ns.

Sin é wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Making their life easier is all well and good, but if they don't know how to attack, then what difference will it make? At the very least we need a back coach first. I don't think any selection changes in any position will make a difference at this point.

Ireland were top try scorers in the last 6Ns.

Gosh didnt we do well in the 6n

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Sin é wrote:I think a lot can be learned from this tour. With the emergence of D Ryan at lock and the performances of SOB at 7, with POC, Ferris & Heaslip fit, I think we will have a fairly competitive pack. 23 man squads will also mean we won't have a day again like we had against England in the 6Ns.

Life for the backs will be a lot easier. Only major issue now is to find an inside centre and I think we can be reasonably competitive in next year's 6Ns (when we have France & England at home).

That doesn't answer the question.

This question: So you think there's nothing the coaches or players can improve on for the next 3 years?

Improve the fitness/physicality of the players. More emphasis on skills development. Gametime at provincial level for the big games.

Edit: I'd add in stop playing players that are carrying injuries and let them recover fully. When I say gametime at provincial level, I mean for the likes of Zebo to be played on the wing and not dropped to facilitate Casey Laulula being played at 13 and moving Earls to the wing then.

And who scored the tries? Mostly forwards or backs or what? I can't remember any invention or creativity during the 6 nations. Most of our tries were against weaker opposition as well. Which isn't much to go by. Can you at least provide context with your statistics?

Excluding Bowe btw. He and Kearney were the only two guys to offer any real danger. Earls to a lesser extent. Yes, he made the most line breaks, but we have already had this conversation. D'Arcy himself made 4 line breaks against Italy..

Rory_Gallagher wrote:And who scored the tries? Mostly forwards or backs or what? I can't remember any invention or creativity during the 6 nations. Most of our tries were against weaker opposition as well. Which isn't much to go by. Can you at least provide context with your statistics?

The other teams would have had the same weaker opposition and didn't manage to score as many!

Anyway:

Bowe x 5 (including 2 against France and 1 against Wales)
Earls x 1
Trimble x 1
Best x 1
Court x 1

Backs x 7. Forwards x 2.

I said excluding Bowe. His individual performances were the only thing that made our attack look decent. Along with Kearney. Trimble scored an interception try, so nothing creative there. In fact the most inventive team try I can think of in the whole tournament was by O'Mahony and Best off the line out..

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I said excluding Bowe. His individual performances were the only thing that made our attack look decent. Along with Kearney. Trimble scored an interception try, so nothing creative there. In fact the most inventive team try I can think of in the whole tournament was by O'Mahony and Best off the line out..

Bowe scored a nice try against Wales but I think they were down to 14 men at the time,not sure on that though.

edit:I agree with your point that despite the number of tries scored we don't look like a creative team when we come up against a half decent defense.

The thing that sums up Kidneys tenure for me is the only area he has improved the team.This year is the first that I can remember under Kidney post 2009 where we haven't struggled against Scotland and Italy,isn't that sad.

I would like to see how many tries we would have scored had Bowe been injured. Lets not cover up the fact our back play is woeful.

Btw ASLS that was directed at Sin that last part. Just incase you thought I was saying that to you!

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I said excluding Bowe. His individual performances were the only thing that made our attack look decent. Along with Kearney. Trimble scored an interception try, so nothing creative there. In fact the most inventive team try I can think of in the whole tournament was by O'Mahony and Best off the line out..

You want it all your own way, don't you Rory

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I would like to see how many tries we would have scored had Bowe been injured. Lets not cover up the fact our back play is woeful.

... or god forbid that Bowe is a better winger than McFadden!

The reason I asked you to exclude Bowe, is because he scored nearly all of Ireland's tries through individual brilliance and his excellent finishing ability. Using him as an example of Ireland having good back play, is ridiculous. How many of those tries were a result of clever back play? Seriously, go find a stat or something.

So our backs play well when Bowe is there to do something creative for a change? That is hardly inspiring. Do you genuinely believe our back play has been good this year? Give me a simple yes or no please. Don't try and wriggle out of the question, just answer.

Rory, a few posts above you couldn't rememeber who scored the tries (backs or forwards), now you claim that it was all down to Bowe's individual brilliance.

For the record, I seem to remember D'Arcy dropping an awful lot of balls which might have killed any creativity in the backs.

How do you rate Wales' creativity against France? Cuthbert scored one try.

Sin é wrote:
Well the fact that Ireland have moved up to No. 7 in the world rankings will really urine you off then

1(1) NZLNEW ZEALAND 91.43
2(2) AUSAUSTRALIA 87.05
3(3) RSASOUTH AFRICA 84.87
4(5) ENGENGLAND 83.09
5(7) FRAFRANCE 83.03
6(4) WALWALES 82.26
7(8) IREIRELAND 79.85
8(6) ARGARGENTINA 79.25
9(10) SCOSCOTLAND 77.97
10(9) SAMSAMOA 76.23

Yeah I was checking that out a few hours back before I had to leave, sorry about the delay in response.

So we're up to 7th? Wonderful. Maybe next time we'll try going up because of something we did on the field rather than getting a leg up because of other performances. On the peed off bit - nope, its you who argue you're content with our overall position (for now, with hopes for a future upswing in fortunes obviously) I'm the one that's impatient in my annoying, juvenile, verbose way. So up one spot to 7th without deserving the rise is a bonus to me...almost worth the trip

Sin é wrote:Rory, a few posts above you couldn't rememeber who scored the tries (backs or forwards), now you claim that it was all down to Bowe's individual brilliance.

For the record, I seem to remember D'Arcy dropping an awful lot of balls which might have killed any creativity in the backs.

How do you rate Wales' creativity against France? Cuthbert scored one try.

I said "excluding Bowe" immediately after in my next post as I wasn't sure who else scored apart from him. Yet again though, you have diverted the argument and fail to answer a simple question. I asked you to give a simple yes or no. Do you seriously think our back play is good?

Ignore Wales, this has absolutely nothing to do with them so why are you bringing them up? Answer the question about Ireland for goodness sake.

No Rory, you are the one who keeps moving the goalposts so that you can get the answer you want. Tommy Bowe is a back and someone created an opportunity for him to score a try. Considering D'Arcy dropped every ball that went through his hands its hardly surprising that there were few opportunities for anyone on that side of the pitch.

Still, great offload from Earls to Bowe to score that try against France, wouldn't you think?

So to answer, Ireland did create opportunities - pity the handling skills were not up to finishing them and moves invariable broke down.

Kiwireddevil wrote:For what it's worth, I'm getting bored of this merry go round too.

As far as I can tell, all the Irish posters (except possibly SinE) believe that the NZ tour was an unacceptably poor result.

Sin believes the team lost because the players are rubbish.

Most of the other Irish posters believe that the players aren't as bad as the results suggest, and ergo the problem lies with management

I actually think the truth is somewhere in the middle. The reality is our players aren't good enough to compete with NZ right now, at least not over 3 tests.

The frustration with Sin is that he point blank refuses to lay any blame on Declan Kidney whatsoever, therefore all blame must lie with the players, in particular those from Leinster and Ulster.

I actually don't think the tour went too badly overall, we had one below par performance, one fantastic one and one appalling performance. In the process we've seen quite a few good individual displays and some inexperienced, younger players get valuable experience.

The players do need to take a look at themselves because they haven't delivered and there are problems in Ireland with player development, we are clearly lacking depth and quality in a few positions.... but we do have enough quality players to be doing a fair bet better than we are, and have been for 3 seasons.

Declan Kidney and Gert Smal are very poor coaches for sure, certainly they are the wrong coaches in the wrong job at the wrong time. Getting a new coaching team won't solve all our problems but it would help a lot in my opinion.

Rodders - I think any players would look bad under Kidney though, that is the problem. That isn't a way to excuse the players, but seriously, what can they do when they aren't even playing like a team? What is Kidney trying to do with them? Surely it is the coaches job to create the team and the tactics. I don't know what his game plan is or what he is trying to do with the team. Every now and then we see glimpses of brilliance from individuals, but we never get a full 15 man team performance. Sometimes the pack will do well, and we get on the front foot, but do flip all with our chances. It is such a waste.

When we scored a lot of our tries in the Spring it was because our forwards committed the opposition and generated some quick ball... and our opponents simply weren't quick enough to reorganise. We were fortunate in the Six Nations Tommy Bowe was in ruthless form in terms of exploiting that space. World class finisher. If we're talking attack, it definitely should be pointed out that at times we've shown an aptitude for capitalising on the opposition being at sixes and sevens.

...but very rarely does our backline look like they know how to attack an organised defence. Thats why we've been able to rack up the tries against lower level opponents but look like we have no ideas against half-decent sides.

I don't think anyone can look at some of the crazy hail mary behind the man offloads our centres have been throwing and the flowing backs moves that go across the pitch but only forward a few yards and think we are being well coached in attack.

But it's all so painfully obvious now, so obvious to everyone, I can't for the life of me fathom how this is actually up for argument. Any of it.

I mean here is the Scotland game highlights; we scored four tries. But there's precious little evidence of a good offloading game or any kind incisive backplay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukb2HwDOydk

This is how Kidney wants us to play; take the ball through multiple phases quickly enough to create gaps. Creating tries hinges more on intensity, the speed of the clearout and how long it takes the opposition to reorganise. We rely on them not hitting the breakdown hard enough, not reorganising quickly enough.

Unfortunately there are many teams who can match and better our intensity so it's not a winning tactic right now. And when we come up against these teams? Our lack of nous in attack is exposed. However many tries we score against Italy and Scotland at home doesn't change that.

The problems in coaching are there for everyone to see. Leinster would beat Ireland comfortably so that probably tells you all you need to know about the coaching.

Regarding the players theres also clear problems. D'Arcy, DOC and ROG are 3 players who have been declining for years now but still guaranteed their places in the 23 man squad. Theres 2 reasons for that. Few challengers have come through and its almost impossible for young players to make it onto the team in their first 3 years of pro rugby. Mike Ross is the most valuable player to the squad. He wasn't wanted by Munster years ago and had to go to England to prove his worth.

Looking ahead there are positive signs of replacements coming through. The academies are starting to produce quality players and more quantity too. In 3 years time we'll have a much stronger squad, not doubt about that.

The big problem for Ireland is the provinces are not acting in the interest of Ireland. Leinster for example have one of the best academies in Europe and have won the HEC 3 of the last 4 times but still they're bringing in a few foreigners every year. Some to sit on the bench. Munster, Ulster and Connacht are no better. The IRFU want to change this but there was a big backlash to their proposed changes a few months back. I still think they'll push ahead with the changes especially now after the 60 - 0 humiliation at the weekend.

Notch wrote:I mean here is the Scotland game highlights; we scored four tries. But there's precious little evidence of a good offloading game or any kind incisive backplay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukb2HwDOydk

This is how Kidney wants us to play; take the ball through multiple phases quickly enough to create gaps. Creating tries hinges more on intensity, the speed of the clearout and how long it takes the opposition to reorganise. We rely on them not hitting the breakdown hard enough, not reorganising quickly enough.

Unfortunately there are many teams who can match and better our intensity so it's not a winning tactic right now. And when we come up against these teams? Our lack of nous in attack is exposed. However many tries we score against Italy and Scotland at home doesn't change that.

Notch - I entirely disagree with you, if you think that is how Kidney is trying to get this Ireland team to play. There has been no evidence of that. Why do you think that is his game plan? We don't play with speed, we don't get through any phases quickly, we use the old ruck and run to try and create space and any decent defence just organises itself immediately. If he was trying to play a game that relied on pace, he would surely know then that taking the ball static, and taking an age to ship the ball out isn't the way to do it.

Lads, you’re arguing with someone who doesn’t know the difference between a back playing well, and good backs play.

Pishing in the wind!

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Notch - I entirely disagree with you, if you think that is how Kidney is trying to get this Ireland team to play. There has been no evidence of that. Why do you think that is his game plan? We don't play with speed, we don't get through any phases quickly, we use the old ruck and run to try and create space and any decent defence just organises itself immediately. If he was trying to play a game that relied on pace, he would surely know then that taking the ball static, and taking an age to ship the ball out isn't the way to do it.

I didn't say it was working Rory. In fact we're falling disastrously short of making it work. Once in a blue moon we reach the level of intensity required to make it work.

As for your last sentence; yeah, you'd think so!

Notch wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Notch - I entirely disagree with you, if you think that is how Kidney is trying to get this Ireland team to play. There has been no evidence of that. Why do you think that is his game plan? We don't play with speed, we don't get through any phases quickly, we use the old ruck and run to try and create space and any decent defence just organises itself immediately. If he was trying to play a game that relied on pace, he would surely know then that taking the ball static, and taking an age to ship the ball out isn't the way to do it.

I didn't say it was working Rory. In fact we're falling disastrously short of making it work. Once in a blue moon we reach the level of intensity required to make it work.

As for your last sentence; yeah, you'd think so!

In the case of That scotland match, it was more Scotlands weaknesses that allowed the tries than our intensity. Also, did anyone notice Kearney doing a Paddy Wallace and not giving the pass? Thankfully trimble got in past some shocking Scottish tackling moments later.

Yeah, our gameplan really doesn't work Clive. I mean, at all. It might work in the head of the coaches but not on the field. And never for 80 minutes. It works against sides who are to slow to reorganise or not able to contest the breakdown. Thats not many sides in the Top 8 of the rankings.

Here's the Italy highlights;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEfPelJyD5w

Again, most of the tries came from Ireland going through the phases too quickly for the Italy defence to reorganise. There's one lovely piece of improvised backs play with Sexton finding Bowe with a delightful pass. When the game breaks up Trimble pounces on a turnover to score.

Now, this worked well against Italy. But you just have to look at what happens when we come up against a team that can compete with us and better us at the breakdown, whose defence can reorganise quickly. New Zealand on Saturday did both of those things. Ireland had more possession and more territory than the All Blacks. But did we threaten the scoreboard? Did we hell.

That is why we are a poor team in attack.

rodders wrote:
The frustration with Sin is that he point blank refuses to lay any blame on Declan Kidney whatsoever, therefore all blame must lie with the players, in particular those from Leinster and Ulster.

I find it frustrating that most of the posters here think that the defeat last Saturday is down entirely to Kidney (and incidentally, the good performance the week before is down to the players).

And that is rubbish that I think the poor performance is down to the Leinster & Ulster players. Maybe you are a tad oversensitive to the criticism as there are more Leinster & Ulster players on the team. Not that many Munster players to criticise (which probably why you all concentrate on Kidney).

1. Healy - Excellent overall. Great tour. Just very heavily targetted on last test.
2. Best - Excellent overall.
3. Ross - okish.
4. D Ryan - excellent performance
5. D Touhy - okish to poor.
6. Kev McLaughlin - great 2nd test. tried in 3rd. Wouldn't fault him on effort.
7. SOB - Outstanding.
8. POM - okish - has a lot to learn.
9. Murray - mixed.
10. Sexton. Good defence. Didn't step up though at 10. Looked better in 2nd test when at 12.
11. Earls - okish.
12. Paddy Wallace (out of his depth). Targetted.
13. Brian O'Driscoll. Very poor in 3rd test.
14. McFadden. Just not a winger or international class.
15. Kearney - decent enough.

Others: D'Arcy & Heislip really missed in 3rd test.

Nobody said that the second test was all down to the players.

I gave Kidney credit for it as did most posters. But if a coach cannot get consistant performances out of his team then there is a problem.

Sin, it's not all down to Kidney. The lads underperformed last Saturday, bad knockons missed tackles etc. Yet I would have said our tactics looked poor and the plaayers lacked motivation. It's Kidney's job to get them up for the game. He didn't do it.

Sin é wrote:

rodders wrote:
The frustration with Sin is that he point blank refuses to lay any blame on Declan Kidney whatsoever, therefore all blame must lie with the players, in particular those from Leinster and Ulster.

I find it frustrating that most of the posters here think that the defeat last Saturday is down entirely to Kidney (and incidentally, the good performance the week before is down to the players).

And that is rubbish that I think the poor performance is down to the Leinster & Ulster players. Maybe you are a tad oversensitive to the criticism as there are more Leinster & Ulster players on the team. Not that many Munster players to criticise (which probably why you all concentrate on Kidney).

1. Healy - Excellent overall. Great tour. Just very heavily targetted on last test.
2. Best - Excellent overall.
3. Ross - okish.
4. D Ryan - excellent performance
5. D Touhy - okish to poor.
6. Kev McLaughlin - great 2nd test. tried in 3rd. Wouldn't fault him on effort.
7. SOB - Outstanding.
8. POM - okish - has a lot to learn.
9. Murray - mixed.
10. Sexton. Good defence. Didn't step up though at 10. Looked better in 2nd test when at 12.
11. Earls - okish.
12. Paddy Wallace (out of his depth). Targetted.
13. Brian O'Driscoll. Very poor in 3rd test.
14. McFadden. Just not a winger or international class.
15. Kearney - decent enough.

Others: D'Arcy & Heislip really missed in 3rd test.

The bolded part is completely false,we all gave huge credit to the management for the performance the week before but we said it would count for nothing unless they could get the team to back it up.The one consistent thing about Ireland under Kidney is that one good performance is followed by 4 or 5 poor ones like night follows day.

Sin é wrote:And that is rubbish that I think the poor performance is down to the Leinster & Ulster players. Maybe you are a tad oversensitive to the criticism as there are more Leinster & Ulster players on the team. Not that many Munster players to criticise (which probably why you all concentrate on Kidney).

Jesus wept.

Notch wrote:

Sin é wrote:And that is rubbish that I think the poor performance is down to the Leinster & Ulster players. Maybe you are a tad oversensitive to the criticism as there are more Leinster & Ulster players on the team. Not that many Munster players to criticise (which probably why you all concentrate on Kidney).

Jesus wept.

How he reconciles the fact that plenty of Munster fans think Kidney is a major part (not all) of the problem is beyond me.

It would be foolish to lay all the blame on Kidney. But he's clearly run out of answers and the questions keep getting harder and harder.

Notch wrote:When we scored a lot of our tries in the Spring it was because our forwards committed the opposition and generated some quick ball... and our opponents simply weren't quick enough to reorganise. We were fortunate in the Six Nations Tommy Bowe was in ruthless form in terms of exploiting that space. World class finisher. If we're talking attack, it definitely should be pointed out that at times we've shown an aptitude for capitalising on the opposition being at sixes and sevens.

Tommy's form wasn't great in the 6Ns despite the tries (which may have been down to his illness). The two best backs were Kearney & Earls.

...but very rarely does our backline look like they know how to attack an organised defence. Thats why we've been able to rack up the tries against lower level opponents but look like we have no ideas against half-decent sides.

I don't think anyone can look at some of the crazy hail mary behind the man offloads our centres have been throwing and the flowing backs moves that go across the pitch but only forward a few yards and think we are being well coached in attack.

But it's all so painfully obvious now, so obvious to everyone, I can't for the life of me fathom how this is actually up for argument. Any of it.

No matter what kind of a spin you put on it, Ireland scored more tries than all the other teams in the 6Ns so their attack is at least on a par with most other teams in the NH. A couple of key incidents in the tournament and Ireland could have won the tournament.

1. Wrong ref decision for penalty against Ferris.
2. Match in Paris being called off & having to play 4 in a row.
3. Not getting a drop goal to win in Paris with both O'Gara & Sexton on the pitch.
4. Losing POC & Murray to injury.
5. Mike Ross getting injured and England dropping balls all day so they could win a penalty from the scrum.

Sin é wrote:

rodders wrote:
The frustration with Sin is that he point blank refuses to lay any blame on Declan Kidney whatsoever, therefore all blame must lie with the players, in particular those from Leinster and Ulster.

I find it frustrating that most of the posters here think that the defeat last Saturday is down entirely to Kidney (and incidentally, the good performance the week before is down to the players).

And that is rubbish that I think the poor performance is down to the Leinster & Ulster players. Maybe you are a tad oversensitive to the criticism as there are more Leinster & Ulster players on the team. Not that many Munster players to criticise (which probably why you all concentrate on Kidney).

1. Healy - Excellent overall. Great tour. Just very heavily targetted on last test.
2. Best - Excellent overall.
3. Ross - okish.
4. D Ryan - excellent performance
5. D Touhy - okish to poor.
6. Kev McLaughlin - great 2nd test. tried in 3rd. Wouldn't fault him on effort.
7. SOB - Outstanding.
8. POM - okish - has a lot to learn.
9. Murray - mixed.
10. Sexton. Good defence. Didn't step up though at 10. Looked better in 2nd test when at 12.
11. Earls - okish.
12. Paddy Wallace (out of his depth). Targetted.
13. Brian O'Driscoll. Very poor in 3rd test.
14. McFadden. Just not a winger or international class.
15. Kearney - decent enough.

Others: D'Arcy & Heislip really missed in 3rd test.

Hahahahahaha

Paddy Wallace's performance was because he was out of his depth, and no other reason. You dont make any mention to the month off away from training, or the long haul flights, or the stay over by himself in a city for over a day. Ha, Sin, you are an absolute gag!



In your attempt to prove your impartiality, you couldnt even control your own inner bias for the sake of winning your own arguement!

LOVE THIS

You guys amaze me, the test series is done and dusted and you guys are still at it.

In 72 hours time and we will be back into Super xv.