Ireland 10 vs Scotland

First topic message reminder :

Surely we can't persist with ROG if Sexton doesn't make it.

More than anything it isn't fair on ROG himself... he has had it and TBH should have (internationally) retired after WC 2011 as planned. His place kicking is his only remaining string to his originally short bow.

One or two alternatives need to get time in the side as Jonny isn't invincible, and i would say better late than never.

Madigan has been going well for Leinster, is a prodigious attacking talent with an excellent running and passing game with his kicking catching up. His percentage from the tee is fairly good this season ~80%

Keatley has IMO outperformed ROG at Munster this season, has been is good form from the tee... but does not seem to be high on Deccies list of candidates and seems unlikely to make 1st choice

Jackson seems to be above the two Ians in Deccies considerations, and whilst on his day possesses a very good all round game has been lacking consistency kicking from hand and tee.

Personally I would pick Madigan with Jackson on the Bench - nothing ventured...

Sin é wrote:

Kilcoyne, Zebo, O'Mahoy & Gilroy are risky calls (all very young). Up to recently Kidney was castigated for continuing to pick Murray who many supporters claimed he should be sent back to Munster to learn how to pass

Do we want the same for Jackson & Madigan?

We want consistency and more wins than losses. That's what we want....it's what supporters always want. We aren't getting it. Not now (even the Welsh game had it's second half), not last year, not the year before. We're not getting consistency of performance. Consistency means positive rugby that we all subscribe to even without a win. Rugby that's designed to win and falls short on chance and circumstnaces and opposition ability. That's what we want.

We're getting huge swathes of non-rugby passing itself off as super defending. These players, many of them, weren't designed to play a defensive game. Kearney is putrid in a defensive game, Sexton isn't much better. Zebo and Gilroy? Give them a game designed to get them into a game, designed to get them in the mood they want to play, that suits their talents better. We have them in the trenches helping out in the muck duties when we all know that so many of our players are more cavalry officers - mobile and hungry to play an attack game.

Don't blame the rain - the rain didn't preach plodding kick-away caution, the coaches did and players dutifully kicked ball away all day.

fly, Sexton tried to play an attacking game for the first 30 minutes he was on, on Saturday. No matter what game he tried to play, the execution by all the players was very very poor (dropped balls, knock-ons etc). Alan Quinlan described a game plan as doing all the simple things well. They didn't do that on Saturday.

Dan Carter would look poor last Saturday with the rate of mistakes everyone was making.

With regard to depth - I thought Kearney's putting his hand into touch was top class defending.

Kearney was at sea...like most of them....living off scraps and nothing there to turn the tide that really and genuinely wasn't really hitting them all that strongly. That wasn't the toughest game they've had in terms of opposition, not by a long shot - they made it so with the tactics they adopted. Just no coaching apparent at all in terms of having a number of plans ready to take pressure off. The players were on their own, a mishmash of Leinster/Munster instincts colliding and fluffing lines together. The English players are big and powerful but not supermen. They are being given a clear set of frameworks to work on...technically sound coaching. They don't just bluff it, they know their roles.

Ireland ain't working Sin é...it just ain't working. Something has to give.

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:

Sin é wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I'll double dare you, and make it easier for you one more time .

The IRFU don't pick the players, the IRFU give the contracts on advice from Coaches about who they think they'll be needing. Kidney is not commanded NOT to choose from non-centrally contracted players. He chooses and I repeat he chooses low risk names and fails to come in with the requisite high win count.

The policy of low risk isn't paying its way. Better the risk, the losses, the learning and the new hope of salvation into the future.

Kilcoyne, Zebo, O'Mahoy & Gilroy are risky calls (all very young). Up to recently Kidney was castigated for continuing to pick Murray who many supporters claimed he should be sent back to Munster to learn how to pass

Do we want the same for Jackson & Madigan?

It would also be interesting to know how much influence the provinces have in who is selected. It would be interesting to see how Leinster would fare without Sexton & Madigan over the next few games. We all saw what happened to Ulster last weekend and they had Pienaar (who is now injured). They could be down to Olding & Niall O'Connor in 2 weeks time and the U20s struggling with an inside centre playing as outhalf (though fair play, they managed the win against England).

Pienaar is back for Zebre. And Olding did well on Friday night. So I don't see that as a problem.

But the fact is they are calls in areas where we have a lot of depth. Back row for example you could pick from (if all fit): Ferris, Henry, O'Brien, McLaughlin, Heaslip, Wilson, O'Mahony, Henry plus all the younger lads like Ruddock, O'Donnell, Henderson etc Or wing: Bowe, Trimble, Zebo, Gilroy, Earls, McFadden, Fitzgerald plus a host more. Even Kilcoyne is in a position of strength!

He hasn't made the tough choices, like Sexton's understudy, or who replaces D'Arcy/BOD or who claims the 5 jersey when POC retires. McCarthy is the incumbent, but he hasn't given guys like Tuohy a good chance. Albeit injuries have paid way to some of those but it doesn't excuse not giving guys like Jackson or Madigan time in the past year. One of them could have gone to NZ and gotten some experience, but no Kidney stuck with Radge.......

Bottom line is that Ulster lost at home.

Surely it makes it more difficult when you have a lot of people to call from? Giving young players like O'Mahony & Henderson is not being conservative when you have players like Kilcoyne v Court. Is Court not the safe, conservative option?

Jackson wasn't available to go to the U20s this year (held back by Ulster), let alone tour with Ireland to NZ. There were 3 matches in the autumn - he got to play in one of them along with Ireland's first choice scrumhalf. We've played two games since then - v Wales & v England. Sexton played the full 80 minutes in the Welsh game. At what stage would you have given Jackson his opportunity in that match if he was on the bench? (or indeed the England game which apparently he was injured for anyway).

The IRFU refused to fund Madigan touring to NZ. Leinster haven't wanted to release him as they would be down to an academy player at outhalf.

SecretFly wrote:Kearney was at sea...like most of them....living off scraps and nothing there to turn the tide that really and genuinely wasn't really hitting them all that strongly. That wasn't the toughest game they've had in terms of opposition, not by a long shot - they made it so with the tactics they adopted. Just no coaching apparent at all in terms of having a number of plans ready to take pressure off. The players were on their own, a mishmash of Leinster/Munster instincts colliding and fluffing lines together. The English players are big and powerful but not supermen. They are being given a clear set of frameworks to work on...technically sound coaching. They don't just bluff it, they know their roles.

Ireland ain't working Sin é...it just ain't working. Something has to give.

Kearney's form is poor (which maybe down to the fact that he has had little gametime this year. I'd give him a few more games to get his form back).

Sexton didn't kick in the first 30 minutes - they tried to run the ball and spent most of that time in Ireland's half (close enough so that Ford could get a good shot at kicking the penalties that were given away).

England worked off scraps and turnover ball which happened a lot as the Irish error rate was very high.

Sin é wrote:

Bottom line is that Ulster lost at home.

Surely it makes it more difficult when you have a lot of people to call from? Giving young players like O'Mahony & Henderson is not being conservative when you have players like Kilcoyne v Court. Is Court not the safe, conservative option?

Jackson wasn't available to go to the U20s this year (held back by Ulster), let alone tour with Ireland to NZ. There were 3 matches in the autumn - he got to play in one of them along with Ireland's first choice scrumhalf. We've played two games since then - v Wales & v England. Sexton played the full 80 minutes in the Welsh game. At what stage would you have given Jackson his opportunity in that match if he was on the bench? (or indeed the England game which apparently he was injured for anyway).

The IRFU refused to fund Madigan touring to NZ. Leinster haven't wanted to release him as they would be down to an academy player at outhalf.

Ulster lost because of the forwards, not because of Olding's youth. Or Pienaar's injury.

And if Ireland had asked him to be released for the NZ tour he would have been. Senior team > Provinces > U20 > Club How it's always worked...

The biggest debate with Kilcoyne was why he was picked ahead of Court. But he's done well, and both are in form. Similarly with O'Mahony/Henderson/Henry.

So why does O'Gara vs Jackson or Madigan not get the same debate? If we're going to go with youth over experience in the front row, why not the same at 10? Why should O'Gara get to come on for 20 minutes and kick ball away vs Argentina after not playing for weeks before when a guy like Paddy Jackson, who'd made a good effort vs Fiji, and is playing regular rugby with a top side in his preferred position, gets sent home. Why shouldn't form come into the equation? Jackson and Madigan are the guys in form, O'Gara is not. Doesn't that make sense?

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:

Ulster lost because of the forwards, not because of Olding's youth. Or Pienaar's injury.

From the match reports it sounds like Ulster spent the whole match defending.

And if Ireland had asked him to be released for the NZ tour he would have been. Senior team > Provinces > U20 > Club How it's always worked...

Have you any proof of this (bearing in mind Kidney wanted to bring Madigan who was yet to take on kicking duty responsibility) and Paul Marshall went on the tour.

The biggest debate with Kilcoyne was why he was picked ahead of Court. But he's done well, and both are in form. Similarly with O'Mahony/Henderson/Henry.

Bearing in mind that Ulster had to use Tom Court as a tighthead against the Ospreys, its just as well that Kilcoyne has what it takes.

So why does O'Gara vs Jackson or Madigan not get the same debate? If we're going to go with youth over experience in the front row, why not the same at 10? Why should O'Gara get to come on for 20 minutes and kick ball away vs Argentina after not playing for weeks before when a guy like Paddy Jackson, who'd made a good effort vs Fiji, and is playing regular rugby with a top side in his preferred position, gets sent home. Why shouldn't form come into the equation? Jackson and Madigan are the guys in form, O'Gara is not. Doesn't that make sense?

In fairness to Kilcoyne (& O'Gara for that matter), Killer has overtaken two looseheads to be the Munster starter, a team that achieved as much as Ulster did in the Heineken Cup this season (i.e., an away QF). At least Munster won all their home HCup games despite missing our best player and leader, Paul O'Connell.

In case you haven't noticed, Leinster are in the Amlin. Performing poorly against the Chiefs and Scarlets was what undone them - not losing to Clermont.

Can't believe Leinster wouldn't want Madigan to get Test experience. Sexton is leaving and IM will have to step up - so the sooner the better. Surely Schmidt won't be as short termist as Kidney and block future prospects?

The Great Aukster wrote:Can't believe Leinster wouldn't want Madigan to get Test experience. Sexton is leaving and IM will have to step up - so the sooner the better. Surely Schmidt won't be as short termist as Kidney and block future prospects?

I'd say Leinster want to give Madigan as much time as possible playing at 10 and the more experience he has in that position the better Leinster chances are of making the playoffs of the Rabo & Amlin (rather than sitting on the bench for Ireland). Its not as if Leinster have a rake of outhalfs to start in the Rabo.

Sin é wrote:

In fairness to Kilcoyne (& O'Gara for that matter), Killer has overtaken two looseheads to be the Munster starter, a team that achieved as much as Ulster did in the Heineken Cup this season (i.e., an away QF). At least Munster won all their home HCup games despite missing our best player and leader, Paul O'Connell.

In case you haven't noticed, Leinster are in the Amlin. Performing poorly against the Chiefs and Scarlets was what undone them - not losing to Clermont.

What has that got to do with whether Jackson or Madigan should get a chance this 6N?

And Ulster didn't miss Muller in the second Saints game or Bowe or half their second rows in the Glasgow/Castres games?

Jesus! I did say Kilcoyne deserved his chance, but what does Tom Court having to play TH have to do with it? We just happened to have injuries to our reserve TH and would have played an Academy prop if Court was unavailable!

Madigan/Jackson/Keatley all deserve the chance to play for the full team, with the 'big boys'... See what they can do. Like Sexton did, like Radge did, like BOD did, like Ferris did......We won't know if they have the temperament to play in these games if we don't play them!!!!

[quote="UlstermaninGlasgow"]

What has that got to do with whether Jackson or Madigan should get a chance this 6N?

Internatioinal rugby is a step up from what they have been doing and Madigan hasn't been playing 12. ROG/Keatley or Madigan don't have Pienaar to hold their hand for them.

And Ulster didn't miss Muller in the second Saints game or Bowe or half their second rows in the Glasgow/Castres games?

They have. But considering how they are lauded here, you'd think that Ulster had won a home QF.

Jesus! I did say Kilcoyne deserved his chance, but what does Tom Court having to play TH have to do with it? We just happened to have injuries to our reserve TH and would have played an Academy prop if Court was unavailable

!

Tom Court was needed to play TH for Ulster because you let your only other fit TH go home to NZ for a break. Afoa has played more than any other TH in Ireland this year and the fact that you had Tom Court playing th at the weekend suggests that the thight head press is bare in the Ulster academy.

Madigan/Jackson/Keatley all deserve the chance to play for the full team, with the 'big boys'... See what they can do. Like Sexton did, like Radge did, like BOD did, like Ferris did......We won't know if they have the temperament to play in these games if we don't play them!!!!

They deserve nothing. They have to earn it. Sexton is only beginning to come to terms with international rugby and he is streets ahead of the other two. Then you have Murray who is only getting to grips with being an international scrumhalf and you want to launch two inexperienced outhalfs to partner him in a competition that Ireland need to do well in if Ulster are to be maintained in the style they have become accustomed to, not to mention that Jackson has been carrying an injury.

Their day will come on the tour to the US & Canada.

Zebo has a great temperment, but the fact that he was held back in Munster so that he worked on some aspects of his game have meant that he is all the better for it.

Sin é wrote:

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:

Ulster lost because of the forwards, not because of Olding's youth. Or Pienaar's injury.

From the match reports it sounds like Ulster spent the whole match defending.

From actually being there and seeing it they lost because the backrow was atrocious and there was a massive lack of ballcarriers among the forwards. Olding didn't do much but he was fine. Luke Marshall was the best player on the pitch by a distance, so given that he looked to be fit again it'll be interesting to see if he's involved again with the Ireland squad.

If any of those votes for Ogara came from an Irish fan rather than a cheeky scot, they have completely lost the plot.

This ulster fan thinks Madigan could do the job rightly, or at least a lot, lot, lot better than poor old RoG

My team would be

1 Kilcoyne
2 Best
3 Ross
4 Ryan
5 McCarthy
6 SOB
7 Henry
8 POM

9 Murray
10 Madigan
11 Luke Fitz
12 Luke Marshall
13 BOD
14 Gilroy
15 Earls

More ball carriers, more talent in the backs and a dangerous back 3. Take the game to the opposition and go for tries.

I would be very close to starting Henderson too.

So the gist of the thread seems to be crystallising into several segments:
1. - It's ok for a young Munster forward to start ahead of an older player irrespective of form or experience.
- it's not ok for a young non-Munster back to start ahead of an older player because he won't have the experience. (Not really much wonder Munster produce forwards and few backs).
BTW - It's always ok for an old Munster forward to play irrespective of form or ability because they're ligind.

2. Leinster shouldn't provide any players to the Ireland team because they're only in the Amlin

3. HEC form shouldn't count towards Test selection as it is a step below.

4. Provinces should put the Rabo ahead of Ireland and flatly refuse to release them for Ireland duty.

5. Irrespective of how many neutral fans point out how poorly O'Gara is playing, the stats (can be manipulated to) show he is still the best in the world - for the past three years...

Not going to rehash Sins arguments but the overall point has been made concerning where the contenders are in terms of their current playing abilities. I would personally like to see Madigan involved. I think the best option is still ROG. The only player that is playing consistently at hc level is Jackson and with Pienaar and Wallace babysitting him then throwing him at the deep end would not be great.

As a Munster fan the notion that keatley has been better than ROG is hilarious, we would not be in the qf if keatley was starting and an armchair ride against racing when Zebo took more ball as first receiver says it all. Last weekend we only got going when jj took over.

Lastly..watching the game last weekend I actually felt sorry for heaslip. Also what we could do with a james Coughlan type for getting over the gain line (oh wait we do have one).

A backrow of sob pom and jc would be three effective ball carriers...

Just to note George hook has been excommunicated from Cork and his passport has been revoked...he is a boorish obnoxious know it all like every self respecting Corkman should be....

DOD wrote:Not going to rehash Sins arguments but the overall point has been made concerning where the contenders are in terms of their current playing abilities. I would personally like to see Madigan involved. I think the best option is still ROG. The only player that is playing consistently at hc level is Jackson and with Pienaar and Wallace babysitting him then throwing him at the deep end would not be great.

As a Munster fan the notion that keatley has been better than ROG is hilarious, we would not be in the qf if keatley was starting and an armchair ride against racing when Zebo took more ball as first receiver says it all. Last weekend we only got going when jj took over.

Lastly..watching the game last weekend I actually felt sorry for heaslip. Also what we could do with a james Coughlan type for getting over the gain line (oh wait we do have one).

A backrow of sob pom and jc would be three effective ball carriers...

Pienaar and Wallace are hardly babysitting Jackson. They're doing their jobs and offering options to him. He plays flat and on the gainline for Ulster and so they've scored more tries than anyone else in the competition this season. He's playing well and has earned the right to be in the squad and challenge for the 10 jersey, or 22... But at the minute, after seeing the way O'Gara played on sunday, I'd rather Jacko was at 10 vs Scotland than Radge!

And a back row of Coughlan, O'Brien and O'Mahony would be mullered at the breakdown... I don't get it. If Healy doesn't play then we need an actual openside vs Scotland as Best won't be able to do it by himself!!! He's good but not that good!

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:

DOD wrote:Not going to rehash Sins arguments but the overall point has been made concerning where the contenders are in terms of their current playing abilities. I would personally like to see Madigan involved. I think the best option is still ROG. The only player that is playing consistently at hc level is Jackson and with Pienaar and Wallace babysitting him then throwing him at the deep end would not be great.

As a Munster fan the notion that keatley has been better than ROG is hilarious, we would not be in the qf if keatley was starting and an armchair ride against racing when Zebo took more ball as first receiver says it all. Last weekend we only got going when jj took over.

Lastly..watching the game last weekend I actually felt sorry for heaslip. Also what we could do with a james Coughlan type for getting over the gain line (oh wait we do have one).

A backrow of sob pom and jc would be three effective ball carriers...

Pienaar and Wallace are hardly babysitting Jackson. They're doing their jobs and offering options to him. He plays flat and on the gainline for Ulster and so they've scored more tries than anyone else in the competition this season. He's playing well and has earned the right to be in the squad and challenge for the 10 jersey, or 22... But at the minute, after seeing the way O'Gara played on sunday, I'd rather Jacko was at 10 vs Scotland than Radge!

And a back row of Coughlan, O'Brien and O'Mahony would be mullered at the breakdown... I don't get it. If Healy doesn't play then we need an actual openside vs Scotland as Best won't be able to do it by himself!!! He's good but not that good!

Oh yes of course because the other option has played 45 mins of int'l rugby over the last two weeks and has turned over loads right?

The current openside is playing quite well, overall two thirds of the backrow have been impressive over the two games, the breakdown hasn't been a major issue,... but suddenly it will be because Healy is out

The Great Aukster wrote:So the gist of the thread seems to be crystallising into several segments:
1. - It's ok for a young Munster forward to start ahead of an older player irrespective of form or experience.

If that player is first choice for his province, has captained every team he has ever played for and served his time on the bench for Ireland before actually starting a game, yea. There are exceptions to the rule of course. Cian Healy got picked ahead of Tom Court and Healy isn't from Munster.

- it's not ok for a young non-Munster back to start ahead of an older player because he won't have the experience. (Not really much wonder Munster produce forwards and few backs).
BTW - It's always ok for an old Munster forward to play irrespective of form or ability because they're ligind.

You might get away with carrying an inexperienced backrow, you won't get away with carrying an inexperienced outhalf. Ever wonder why Leinster fans are really annoyed that Sexton is going to France bearing in mind they have Madigan ready and waiting to fill in (and quite a few are expressing the hope that Leinster will sign a top class international OH).

2. Leinster shouldn't provide any players to the Ireland team because they're only in the Amlin

Ulsterman in Glasgow made the point that Ulster were a top team and so by right, their outhalf must be international class. I made the point that they have not achieved much more than Munster (who I don't consider to be a top team at the moment) and Leinster got themselves knocked out of the Hcup.

3. HEC form shouldn't count towards Test selection as it is a step below.

It should count - but why has Pienaar got the kicking duties? Madigan is playing at fullback for Leinster in their HCup.

4. Provinces should put the Rabo ahead of Ireland and flatly refuse to release them for Ireland duty.

I don't agree with this - but if Leinster don't have Madigan at OH, there is every chance they won't make the playoffs because their back-up OH is very inexperienced.

5. Irrespective of how many neutral fans point out how poorly O'Gara is playing, the stats (can be manipulated to) show he is still the best in the world - for the past three years...

Its just a bit too soon for Jackson & Madigan & I don't think Keatley will ever make it.

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:

Pienaar and Wallace are hardly babysitting Jackson. They're doing their jobs and offering options to him. He plays flat and on the gainline for Ulster and so they've scored more tries than anyone else in the competition this season. He's playing well and has earned the right to be in the squad and challenge for the 10 jersey, or 22... But at the minute, after seeing the way O'Gara played on sunday, I'd rather Jacko was at 10 vs Scotland than Radge!

And a back row of Coughlan, O'Brien and O'Mahony would be mullered at the breakdown... I don't get it. If Healy doesn't play then we need an actual openside vs Scotland as Best won't be able to do it by himself!!! He's good but not that good!

Wallace is a secondary playmaker pressure (probably why Luke Marshall is being held back) and Pienaar is the main playmaker and does his kicking for him. Then you have Jared Payne who has probably created most of Ulster tries this year. Jackson hasn't carried the full OH responsibilities since early in the season.

Isn't Jacko injured? (He was according to Kidney last week and probably why he didn't go back to Ulster to play at the weekend). As I've said before, I have nothing against Henry starting, but to say that he is far superior to SOB is just laughable. How many turnovers did Henry secure when he was on in the two games?

btw, You seem to have missed BOD & D'Arcy's work at the breakdown!

Sin é wrote:

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:

Pienaar and Wallace are hardly babysitting Jackson. They're doing their jobs and offering options to him. He plays flat and on the gainline for Ulster and so they've scored more tries than anyone else in the competition this season. He's playing well and has earned the right to be in the squad and challenge for the 10 jersey, or 22... But at the minute, after seeing the way O'Gara played on sunday, I'd rather Jacko was at 10 vs Scotland than Radge!

And a back row of Coughlan, O'Brien and O'Mahony would be mullered at the breakdown... I don't get it. If Healy doesn't play then we need an actual openside vs Scotland as Best won't be able to do it by himself!!! He's good but not that good!

Wallace is a secondary playmaker pressure (probably why Luke Marshall is being held back) and Pienaar is the main playmaker and does his kicking for him. Then you have Jared Payne who has probably created most of Ulster tries this year. Jackson hasn't carried the full OH responsibilities since early in the season.

Isn't Jacko injured? (He was according to Kidney last week and probably why he didn't go back to Ulster to play at the weekend). As I've said before, I have nothing against Henry starting, but to say that he is far superior to SOB is just laughable. How many turnovers did Henry secure when he was on in the two games?

btw, You seem to have missed BOD & D'Arcy's work at the breakdown!

In what way is Marshall being held back? He's only just broken into the set up this year and was starting ahead of Wallace before he got injured before the 6 nations.

It doesn't matter how good your centres are at the breakdown, they aren't going to be defending around the fringes. Between them they might secure one ruck turnover per game. Yes they are both strong in that area, but you don't want them to be around the rucks, they should be defending against the backline. By the way, Henry has made more tackles in 45 minutes than O'Mahony has in over 130 minutes the 6 nations so far. You know what that means? It means he's around the ruck, a lot. Even when he's not winning turnovers he's making a general nuisance of himself. Unlike the members of our current backrow, Henry isn't getting annoyed and grabbing people by the collar, he's the one annoying and frustrating the opposition, and maybe that's what Ireland need.

I don't know the players involved as well as I would like, but if you're dead set against O'Gara being given another chance (can't see Deccie being that brave), surely Keatley would be a better option than ROG?

I agree that it might be too early for Madigan but surely Jackson is worth a punt on? He's been very consistent this season.

What are the odds DK will stick Paddy Wallace on the bench against Scotland?!

Ian Madigan should be given the 10 jumper with Jackson on the bench or the other way round. No brainer really.

Mickado wrote:What are the odds DK will stick Paddy Wallace on the bench against Scotland?!

Sure why wouldn't he. He's the form 12 in Europe.

It is a bit ironic that some Munster fans would rather ROG humiliated himself in the Test Arena a few more times to protect the shrinking violet tens of the other provinces.

What I don't understand is that Leinster and Ulster can't afford for their fledgling outhalves to be involved at Test level, yet Munster can release ROG with impunity, (especially as Keatley will never make it)? Either Munster don't care about the Rabo or they don't actually need an outhalf at all!
... come to think of it Munster only use their 10 as a place kicker, who only gets involved when a field goal is to be taken - ROG has certainly brought his roots to bear.

Sin, I did not mention that I thought Jackson was international class did I? I only mentioned that he was playing well for a top team. Not THE top team, but A top team, as in one of the top teams in Europe at the minute. And only because he is playing at such a level, the same one as Ronan O'Gara, did I think it was worthy to mention him as an option for Ireland in the Scotland game. Not because he's "international class".

And JmD made the point already but before the 6N Luke Marshall was the starting 12 for Ulster, and had he not injured his hand he would probably have played all our games since.

Oh and so what if Ulster play with a secondary playmaker, plenty of teams do! What about the Crusaders who play Tom Taylor at 10 and Dan Carter at 12... Does that make them a lesser side? Oh and before you say it there's other teams that do it too. Glasgow, Waratahs, Gloucester...

This season I've seen Conor Murray play more like Ruan Pienaar as well. Controlling the game, directing his 10 and the backs. Wonder why he has to do that when Radge is on the pitch? Is it because O'Gara's famed game management has gone?

I don't think anyone can say Jackson is or isn't international class until he plays international rugby.

On the evidence of the one test he did play, and it was a test, against Fiji the evidence certainly points to the possibility that he is but he needs more opportunities to prove it.

By contrast the recent evidence of ROG performances very much indicates that not only is he not international class, hes not provincial class anymore either.

Unfortunately the money men and sponsors won't see it that way so its a pointless debate.

ROG will start and he'll play somewhere between pants and average and no doubt get MOTM.

Not sure what "money men and sponsors" have to do with ROG getting selected. Really hope thats not the case anyway.

We all know he is sh1t now so cant work out why he is still getting picked. I'd even rather Ian Humphries at 10.

The breakdown is a problem as it is, and the fact that it is a massive problem with Healy likely to be out for the rest of the championship (totally deservedly) is a real indictment of Kidney gameplan. Ireland are so easy to defend against if the opposition a) slow the ball down, and b) get the defence up quickly. It sounds so easy because it is. It is so easy to slow the ball down because we lack players consistently competing at the breakdown. The fact that we rely on a prop, hooker and two centres to do the breakdown work of the backrow is just boneheadedly moronic tactically. The front row aren't going to get to every ruck or maul as quickly as the opposition. The centres will only get to a handful a match. If you only rely on two players (POM and SOB) to carry the ball as Kidney has this championship then you are removing them from the equation far too often. We badly need to see someone competent replace Ross so we actually have 8 members of the pack not 7. That doesn't appear to be on the horizon. Our second rows work very hard but they are poor ball carriers. Heaslip is so far off his game and has been for four years. No one can doubt his effort but his carrying is poor and he was never that good at the breakdown at his best. Yet Kidney rewards long term mediocrity with the captaincy making him undroppable. Utterly moronic.

On the other hand POM carried the ball very effectively against Wales, beat defenders and opened up room for others to excel. Then he missed a tackle that led to a Welsh breakaway and almost a try and went off. All in the midst of Justin Tipuric, a 7 merely going about his game and doing his job, utterly dominating the Irish backrow. SOB who worked hard but was largely ineffective in his carrying and at the breakdown was reduced to being a glorified tackler. When Henry came on it took him around 5 minutes to get to the pace of the game, but Tipuric was notably quieter for the rest of the game. Why? Because we had a specialist doing his job properly.

Against England Wood and Robshaw utterly dominated POM, Heaslip and SOB all while doing next to zero ball carrying. Murray tried his best to get quick ball away- he has had a pretty good championship so far. But he can't do anything with slow ball presented to him. If POM spent as much time doing his job as pushing players and looking for fights he would be a good international. Right now he is spending more of is time looking for Hollywood ball carrying and standing out on the wing. But merely selecting Henry, the form 7 in the northern hemisphere according to most of the British and indeed even a couple of French papers, will not change much. It needs a tactical shift as well. The backrow is unbalanced, but the whole pack is unbalanced. The tactics employed make no sense.

errr hookie...this is the fly-half thread.....

rodders wrote:errr hookie...this is the fly-half thread.....

Sure if centres make backrowers then props can make fly halfs. Let every fat little 12 year old rejoice!

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:Sin, I did not mention that I thought Jackson was international class did I? I only mentioned that he was playing well for a top team. Not THE top team, but A top team, as in one of the top teams in Europe at the minute. And only because he is playing at such a level, the same one as Ronan O'Gara, did I think it was worthy to mention him as an option for Ireland in the Scotland game. Not because he's "international class".

I never claimed you said that Ulster were THE top team. I said that Ulster were A top team. My point is that Keatley has started a few games for Munster who most people don't rate as a top team (myself included), yet Munster achieved exactly the same as Ulster did.

And JmD made the point already but before the 6N Luke Marshall was the starting 12 for Ulster, and had he not injured his hand he would probably have played all our games since.

No he wasn't - he was on the bench for Ulster two Heineken Cup games just before Christmas. Starting one or two Rabo games after christmas doesn't make him the starting 12 for Ulster.

Oh and so what if Ulster play with a secondary playmaker, plenty of teams do! What about the Crusaders who play Tom Taylor at 10 and Dan Carter at 12... Does that make them a lesser side? Oh and before you say it there's other teams that do it too. Glasgow, Waratahs, Gloucester...

Of course it doesn't make them a lesser side. Its just that Ireland don't have a second playmaker at 12 to take the burden off Jackson.

This season I've seen Conor Murray play more like Ruan Pienaar as well. Controlling the game, directing his 10 and the backs. Wonder why he has to do that when Radge is on the pitch? Is it because O'Gara's famed game management has gone?

I'd say it has more to do with Penney looking to the future (Keatley) and Murray's ability - though JJ is well able to take the game by the scruff of the neck which we saw last weekend.

rodders wrote:I don't think anyone can say Jackson is or isn't international class until he plays international rugby.

On the evidence of the one test he did play, and it was a test, against Fiji the evidence certainly points to the possibility that he is but he needs more opportunities to prove it.

By contrast the recent evidence of ROG performances very much indicates that not only is he not international class, hes not provincial class anymore either.

Unfortunately the money men and sponsors won't see it that way so its a pointless debate.

ROG will start and he'll play somewhere between pants and average and no doubt get MOTM.

Pity Jackson picked up a leg injury in the Saxon's game then.

He isn't fit to play for Ulster this weekend, but should be able to make Ireland training according to the IT today.

But he's been released for the Ulster game vs Zebre and is expected to play and probably start...

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:The breakdown is a problem as it is, and the fact that it is a massive problem with Healy likely to be out for the rest of the championship (totally deservedly) is a real indictment of Kidney gameplan. Ireland are so easy to defend against if the opposition a) slow the ball down, and b) get the defence up quickly. It sounds so easy because it is. It is so easy to slow the ball down because we lack players consistently competing at the breakdown. The fact that we rely on a prop, hooker and two centres to do the breakdown work of the backrow is just boneheadedly moronic tactically. The front row aren't going to get to every ruck or maul as quickly as the opposition. The centres will only get to a handful a match. If you only rely on two players (POM and SOB) to carry the ball as Kidney has this championship then you are removing them from the equation far too often. We badly need to see someone competent replace Ross so we actually have 8 members of the pack not 7. That doesn't appear to be on the horizon. Our second rows work very hard but they are poor ball carriers. Heaslip is so far off his game and has been for four years. No one can doubt his effort but his carrying is poor and he was never that good at the breakdown at his best. Yet Kidney rewards long term mediocrity with the captaincy making him undroppable. Utterly moronic.

On the other hand POM carried the ball very effectively against Wales, beat defenders and opened up room for others to excel. Then he missed a tackle that led to a Welsh breakaway and almost a try and went off. All in the midst of Justin Tipuric, a 7 merely going about his game and doing his job, utterly dominating the Irish backrow. SOB who worked hard but was largely ineffective in his carrying and at the breakdown was reduced to being a glorified tackler. When Henry came on it took him around 5 minutes to get to the pace of the game, but Tipuric was notably quieter for the rest of the game. Why? Because we had a specialist doing his job properly.

Against England Wood and Robshaw utterly dominated POM, Heaslip and SOB all while doing next to zero ball carrying. Murray tried his best to get quick ball away- he has had a pretty good championship so far. But he can't do anything with slow ball presented to him. If POM spent as much time doing his job as pushing players and looking for fights he would be a good international. Right now he is spending more of is time looking for Hollywood ball carrying and standing out on the wing. But merely selecting Henry, the form 7 in the northern hemisphere according to most of the British and indeed even a couple of French papers, will not change much. It needs a tactical shift as well. The backrow is unbalanced, but the whole pack is unbalanced. The tactics employed make no sense.

Henry 45 intls mins = no turnover (plenty of opportunity against wales in the time he was on...in 15 mins against England he was er...completely anonymous.

SOB/POM = again top ball carriers in the forwards against England and POM was fourth effective ball carrier with 30metres apparently after Earls 49, SOB and Gilroy 34 each.

Again I will defer to an Ulsterman in Philip Matthews who has had POM as one of our best players over the last two games. In addition to numerous others....

That is all....please climb back in your box...

Oh yeah..considering he was concussed for about five mins before he went off against wales just shows the small minded nature of your limited yet entertaining arguement.

DOD wrote:
Henry 45 intls mins = no turnover (plenty of opportunity against wales in the time he was on...in 15 mins against England he was er...completely anonymous.

...or was he doing unseen work like Donners and Leamy.......

Jackson has been injured but he, may, play some part in the Zebre game

rodders wrote:

DOD wrote:
Henry 45 intls mins = no turnover (plenty of opportunity against wales in the time he was on...in 15 mins against England he was er...completely anonymous.

...or was he doing unseen work like Donners and Leamy.......

He seemed to be doing a lot of very seen talking and stuff in the huddle.
(P.S - Leamy's work was always obvious and he broke his body doing it).

Ah lads this is ridiculous.

All I can see is Ulster vs Munster vs Leinster when discussing Ireland. If you can't see past your own province then its hard to take you seriously.

If you're unable to see the good in other teams players or the bad in your own team's players, people will stop taking you seriously.

DOD wrote:Henry 45 intls mins = no turnover (plenty of opportunity against wales in the time he was on...in 15 mins against England he was er...completely anonymous.

SOB/POM = again top ball carriers in the forwards against England and POM was fourth effective ball carrier with 30metres apparently after Earls 49, SOB and Gilroy 34 each.

Again I will defer to an Ulsterman in Philip Matthews who has had POM as one of our best players over the last two games. In addition to numerous others....

That is all....please climb back in your box...

Oh yeah..considering he was concussed for about five mins before he went off against wales just shows the small minded nature of your limited yet entertaining arguement.

That is unbelievably simplistic. Henry carried for more yards that POM in the autumn internationals yet I remember a certain poster telling me that the stats in themselves were meaningless as it didn't tell the full picture. Oh DOD you scallywag, that was you. And now the same standards should be applied to your beloved liginds as you appear to hold everyone else too. Its sad, I know.

Being 'effective' does not merely mean who carried the most. SOB was pretty ineffective against Wales despite carrying the ball for the second highest yards (behind POM who, as I said, was excellent for 40 minutes of the 55 or so he played). Almost half of those yards were made in one barnstorming run where he ran straight at Halfpenny who hit him low, felled him like a tree and SOB lost us a penalty, key momentum as the game swung away from us, and valuable territory. So yards gained does not equal effectiveness. Anyway, POM was excellent carrying in the first half. He beat players, offloaded in the tackle and generally did very well. But he did get an armchair ride against the Welsh backrow. When Tipuric came he was totally ineffective until he went off.

Also, was POM actually concussed? I thought if he was concussed we would have to sit out for three weeks. Thats just a question. I'm not sure what the guidelines are but from refereeing junior rugby that seems to be the standard.

In the England match are you actually going to say that Gilroy carried the ball effectively? I thought he had a poor match and I wasn't impressed against Wales. He isn't near international standard yet and Kidney isn't even playing a tactical game that would use his strengths anyway. POM and SOB carried the ball alot and were ineffective. POM was more interested in picking fights, just like Healy. They just displayed a real lack of maturity and leadership on the pitch.

POM isn't great at the breakdown and as good sites like WoC have pointed out his tackling, while not to O'Gara standards, is not a strongpoint. He needs someone to allow him to play. SOB set high standards for himself at 7 outplaying McCaw. He is an absolute country mile away from that standard as hard as he is working to get there. Can anyone suggest right now what Heaslip adds to the side? Why not bring in the form Irish backrow player who performed well alongside POM in the autumn, you know, cause they complement each other. It might allow SOB to play to his strengths too. POM, Heaslip and SOB do not work together. The only tactical way they work is a match of all out aggression and fevered clearing out like England 2011 and Australia in the World Cup. However that backrow had Ferris who is such a superior player to POM. Its unbalanced and it doesn't work. Some fans know it, but sure as hell our opponents know it. Three loses in a row to England with the sides they have had? Dreadful. Three defeats out of four to Wales? Not acceptable.

On another point everyone should check out Demented Mole on the comparative kicking games of Ireland and England.

http://dementedmole.com/2013/02/12/ireland-vs-england-match-reaction/

I can't get as excited about Chris Henry vs Peter O'Mahony as I have previous debates about Ulster players and Munster players when they are evenly matched.

I mean those two ARE evenly matched. I don't think we necessarily lose anything by rotating them. And they are exactly the kind of selfless, hard working backrowers that endear themselves to fans.

But let's be honest; there's no one out there in the Six Nations who isn't Irish who is worrying about them. They are potential Lions candidates in that they might be dirt trackers at best. They are fine players in two senses of the word fine;

1) Satisfactory; acceptable
2) Trained to the highest degree of physical efficiency:

They are both admirable rugby players, who I have a lot of time for. Good enough the pair of them to do a job but there's little doubt in my mind if we get Stephen Ferris back fit and on the pitch in the next couple of weeks he takes the disputed jersey anyway. He's not a fine player- he's a great player.

Notch wrote:
1) Satisfactory; acceptable
2) Trained to the highest degree of physical efficiency:

Jeesus Notch they're a bitter better than that sir!

Satisfactory is what you call someone who gets a C- in their GCSE or scrapes through their driving test, not someone playing elite level professional sport!

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote: When Tipuric came he was totally ineffective until he went off.

Tipuric and POM share the pitch for 6 minutes (when POM got a knock and was taken off).

Henry came on at 51 minutes - he was on the pitch for 29 minutes with Tipuric.

Also, was POM actually concussed? I thought if he was concussed we would have to sit out for three weeks. Thats just a question. I'm not sure what the guidelines are but from refereeing junior rugby that seems to be the standard.

They said he got a knock and he was under observation (according to IRB Guidelines). They said a couple of days later he was ok to play against England.

In the England match are you actually going to say that Gilroy carried the ball effectively? I thought he had a poor match and I wasn't impressed against Wales. He isn't near international standard yet and Kidney isn't even playing a tactical game that would use his strengths anyway. POM and SOB carried the ball alot and were ineffective. POM was more interested in picking fights, just like Healy. They just displayed a real lack of maturity and leadership on the pitch.

POM has yet to lose the rag and generally manages to stays on the good side of the ref. His discipline is generally very good, rarely giving away penalties or yellow cards (2 YC in about 40 games for Munster- none this year). He always remains in control. Healy, McCarthy & Heislip were very pumped though.

POM isn't great at the breakdown and as good sites like WoC have pointed out his tackling, while not to O'Gara standards, is not a strongpoint. He needs someone to allow him to play.

POM tackling stats were fine in the autumn.
Against SA (POM 6/1, Henry 6/0, Heaslip 2/0).
Against Argentina (POM 9/1, Henry 7/0, Heaslip 9/0).

WoC is run by an Ulster & Leinster supporters and thats the market they appeal to. Their key selling point is bashing Munster and their players.

enjoy it!

I would rather have average players do their jobs efficiently than some of the selections Kidney continues to go with. Ireland is a machine and they need small cogs to drive the big wheels in the side. If they don't perform the main players can't perform. For example, DOD is absolute right in one regard. Is Coughlan a better player than Heaslip? Of course not. Is he in better form than Heaslip? Arguably yes. If Coughlan came in and did the job of an 8, worked hard, carried well and allowed his partners in the backrow to function more effectively then thats what we need. Kidney tries to pick the best individual players rather than the best units and best team. The backrow is the worst example of this.

Ferris is world class. SOB is world class at what he does. Heaslip was world class four years ago, and though out of form has it in him to excel. Did that unit work? No. Picking Henry is picking a different type of player. Indeed, Henry and POM worked well together in the autumn as they complemented each other. All Kidney has tried to do is replace Ferris with POM. It's laughable. POM isn't near the class of Ferris. That's not a knock against him, but if the same tactics with a far better player failed time and time again why stick with it with an inferior player? On form the Irish backrow should be POM/SOB/Henry. Allow those players to excel at what they are good at to allow the backrow unit as a whole to excel.

Kidney never learns. Wales beat us convincingly time and time again by exploiting us at the breakdown, slowing the ball down and rushing the defence out. England did exactly the same on Sunday. England put in a disciplined shift and defended well, but lets be honest, did they really have to work that hard to beat us? Thats the disappointing thing. Personally I would rather go back to the amateur era of going out and giving it a lash and losing than the passive, insipid performances under Kidney.

rodders wrote:

Notch wrote:
1) Satisfactory; acceptable
2) Trained to the highest degree of physical efficiency:

Jeesus Notch they're a bitter better than that sir!

Satisfactory is what you call someone who gets a C- in their GCSE or scrapes through their driving test, not someone playing elite level professional sport!

TRUE. I don't mean to be disrespectful so I'll explain what is I meant- satisfactory at elite test level. Were they to play AIL rugby they would be the outstanding players on the pitch. At provincial level they are excellent and valuable players, nailed on starters for their provinces. Were they to play for the All Blacks, we'd probably have angry Kiwis saying they were rubbish. It's all relative, see?

For a team with realistic ambitions of winning the Six Nations, they are satisfactory. Good enough to be molded into a very effective weapon if their coach is canny enough, not quite good enough to be winning man of the match plaudits in your big test matches regardless of whether or not the coach is out of his depth like Ferris or O'Brien at his best.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:I would rather have average players do their jobs efficiently than some of the selections Kidney continues to go with. Ireland is a machine and they need small cogs to drive the big wheels in the side. If they don't perform the main players can't perform. For example, DOD is absolute right in one regard. Is Coughlan a better player than Heaslip? Of course not. Is he in better form than Heaslip? Arguably yes. If Coughlan came in and did the job of an 8, worked hard, carried well and allowed his partners in the backrow to function more effectively then thats what we need. Kidney tries to pick the best individual players rather than the best units and best team. The backrow is the worst example of this.

Ferris is world class. SOB is world class at what he does. Heaslip was world class four years ago, and though out of form has it in him to excel. Did that unit work? No. Picking Henry is picking a different type of player. Indeed, Henry and POM worked well together in the autumn as they complemented each other. All Kidney has tried to do is replace Ferris with POM. It's laughable. POM isn't near the class of Ferris. That's not a knock against him, but if the same tactics with a far better player failed time and time again why stick with it with an inferior player? On form the Irish backrow should be POM/SOB/Henry. Allow those players to excel at what they are good at to allow the backrow unit as a whole to excel.

Kidney never learns. Wales beat us convincingly time and time again by exploiting us at the breakdown, slowing the ball down and rushing the defence out. England did exactly the same on Sunday. England put in a disciplined shift and defended well, but lets be honest, did they really have to work that hard to beat us? Thats the disappointing thing. Personally I would rather go back to the amateur era of going out and giving it a lash and losing than the passive, insipid performances under Kidney.

The thing is, Kidney needs world class players to go out and do what they do. Because we're short on tactical nous other than that.

A lot of our tactics when things go wrong is give it to one player and hope he does something to get us back on the front foot. Thats it. And how can we ever forget the RWC quarter-final... ahh sure Ferris and O'Brien will run over them. Thats all we really need in the way of a gameplan.

On the subject of that game, Lydiate was the star. Lydiate is a perfect example of a player who is similar in talent and current ability to Henry and O'Mahony. He was one of the stars of last years Six Nations because his coach found a tactical niche for him into which he fitted perfectly. Put Lydiate in our team and he'd look fairly average.

Sin é wrote:
WoC is run by an Ulster & Leinster supporters and thats the market they appeal to. Their key selling point is bashing Munster and their players.

Look thats unfair man. They are clearly going for the more cerebral Irish rugby fan, the ones who like to think critically and debate matters of Irish Rugby in much greater depth than the print media allows. The ones who value originality and independence of thought, reason over rhetoric and the greater good over petty selection politics. Their key demographic is intelligent, urbane, educated and handsome.

Sorry, I take it back. They are DEFINITELY targeting Leinster and Ulster fans