Brian Odriscoll! !

First topic message reminder :

Does this years 6ns show that Odriscoll should retire from international rugby? and not even think about going on the Lions tour?

Dont get me wrong he has been a great ambassador for the game, his try scoring has been great when he is.has been on form one of the best player's of the game.

But today showed if any thing age, has finaly cought up with him. He and Ronan Ogara should both retire straight after the 6n from international rugby.

Do you agree or disagree?

100%beefy wrote:Good strategy stag...you should appply for Deccie's job

A poisoned chalice. There is no winning. Coach get accused of provincial bias from fans for any tight decisions. When the team does well the players get the credit. When the team loses it is your fault.

Kidney has done a very poor job but honestly there are people out there who blame Kidney for everything and anything that is wrong with Irish rugby.

red_stag wrote:O'Driscoll didnt play well against Scotland.

Whether Earls did or did not pass to him does not change that.

The bashing of individual players (Paddy Jackson and Keith Earls particularly) has been very sad to see.

Few Irish players did well against Scotland.

I think O'Driscoll is not the player he once was. For me a player like Manu Tuilagi offers much more. O'Driscoll should tour with the Lions but not necessarily as a starting player.

As for retiring internationally he won't do that. He would lose a bucket load of cash and Ireland have nobody to plug the hole that he would leave. In a coherent backline he still offers something but isn't the player he was. Let the likes of Simon Zebo and Luke Marshall grab the headlines - we can be working new options into the 13 jersey in the meantime.

Do you not think its fair enough to criticise Earls given that the mistake he made was quite bad for someone of his experience? Im sure he feels quite bad about it.

Same could be siad of SOB and his ridiculous penalty at ruck time. An under 12s player wouldnt have done that. Very poor.

I say this because both are exceptionally gifted so its fair to expect more from them.

On the whole I think Jackson had a good debut.

Guns - I think it is fair to criticise Earls. Of course I am not saying that is was ok to not look for passes.

But nearly every player was poor. What about Rory Bests awful lineout throwing? What about Rob Kearney being so poor? What about Sean O'Briens performance? What about Peter O'Mahony who was invisible? What about Tom Court and Mike Ross who folded in the scrums? What about Luke Marshall who knocked on the ball that ended the game and fluffed the vital pass to Gilroy? What about Jamie Heaslip who did not deliver in his duties as captain? What about Conor Murray who didnt control the tempo?

Long story short lots of players played very badly and there is a lot of scapegoating of individual players going on - namely Paddy Jackson and Keith Earls.

I've seen it suggested that Jackson be replaced by Madigan or have the kicking duties stripped from him after one match. How will that affect his development.

Earls to be dropped? Why? Because of one pass he didnt make? He did as well overall as any of our other shoddy players.

I would have the following team against France:

01 Tom Court (Healy if fit)
02 Rory Best
03 Mike Ross
04 Ian Henderson
05 Donnacha Ryan
06 Peter O'Mahony
07 Sean O'Brien
08 Jamie Heaslip (c)
09 Conor Murray
10 Paddy Jackson (Sexton if fit)
11 Keith Earls
12 Luke Marshall
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Craig Gilroy
15 Rob Kearney

16 Sean Cronin
17 Dave Kilcoyne
18 Declan Fitzpatrick
19 Donnacha O'Callaghan
20 James Coughlan/Tommy O'Donnell
21 Eoin Reddan
22 Ian Madigan (Jackson if Sexton is fit)
23 Luke Fitzgerald

O'Gara to come off the bench. O'Callaghan to be subbed for Henderson and a backrow to replace Devin Toner.

red_stag wrote:Guns - I think it is fair to criticise Earls. Of course I am not saying that is was ok to not look for passes.

But nearly every player was poor. What about Rory Bests awful lineout throwing? What about Rob Kearney being so poor? What about Sean O'Briens performance? What about Peter O'Mahony who was invisible? What about Tom Court and Mike Ross who folded in the scrums? What about Luke Marshall who knocked on the ball that ended the game and fluffed the vital pass to Gilroy? What about Jamie Heaslip who did not deliver in his duties as captain? What about Conor Murray who didnt control the tempo?

Long story short lots of players played very badly and there is a lot of scapegoating of individual players going on - namely Paddy Jackson and Keith Earls.

I've seen it suggested that Jackson be replaced by Madigan or have the kicking duties stripped from him after one match. How will that affect his development.

Earls to be dropped? Why? Because of one pass he didnt make? He did as well overall as any of our other shoddy players.

Theres no way Id drop Earls, hes too good. look at the break he made it was sensational. He glides into space so well. Id give him a big root in the hole and tell him work on his awareness though and not mess up again.

Didnt think our scrum was that bad, we won a handfull of pens and frees at the scrum as well as getting steamrolled a few times ourselves.

Best wasnt great alright but he had a tough time trying to avoid two giant Scots. Our stats there werent terrible though.

Thought Marshall was excellent. Cant blame him for the knock on. It was a bad pass to him.

Murray as usual is too slow. Does he always need to take a couple of steps?

Guns I agree with you by and large. But my point is that every player makes mistakes at some stage. People are not blaming Earls for him whole performance. They are completely focused on one incident which has been blown massively out of proportion. However there are LOADS of calls to drop him for McFadden and let McFadden take the kicks ahead of Jackson.

red_stag wrote:O'Driscoll didnt play well against Scotland.

Whether Earls did or did not pass to him does not change that.

The bashing of individual players (Paddy Jackson and Keith Earls particularly) has been very sad to see.

Few Irish players did well against Scotland.

I think O'Driscoll is not the player he once was. For me a player like Manu Tuilagi offers much more. O'Driscoll should tour with the Lions but not necessarily as a starting player.

As for retiring internationally he won't do that. He would lose a bucket load of cash and Ireland have nobody to plug the hole that he would leave. In a coherent backline he still offers something but isn't the player he was. Let the likes of Simon Zebo and Luke Marshall grab the headlines - we can be working new options into the 13 jersey in the meantime.

Since I'm the one who gave the most direct statement about what I think Earls engaged in, I assume I'm the main 'basher' of him?

Don't accuse me of bashing anyone Stag, or if you do, please at least back it up with evidence. Or if I'm not your target in his case, please don't write the bashing comment directly after I've spoken. Implication by close association and all that.

Certainly don't do it unless you read all of me, and the complete quotes I give. If people bash Earls here and say he should be nowhere near the squad - I'm not one of them...as proved by the words I use when I type here.

So don't get dragged into Sin's emotional blackmail by using snippets of comments. Just read me.

I directly and purposefully criticised Earls for running out of space and options when the possibility of a real try was on. It wasn't certain, it was a real possibility if he had contained his whiteline fever. I criticised him for it and if I see him or any other player do it again so blatantly, I'll criticise them - directly. I've so often in the past defended O'Gara on these pages against the guys who sneered him. I've constantly supported him through his career when he got flack... but this week I'm saying he's spent, he shouldn't be anywhere near an Irish team. Is that bashing him or just seeing what I see and directly stating so rather than doing the shifty politics on it and trying to say something without saying it.

All players on the team will get criticed by me for things that I see them doing wrongly. Heaslip has gotten it, Kearney gets it, O'Driscoll has gotten it. It's discussion, not bashing. I said Earls is the kind of player Ireland needs making those explosive breaks...we need him and players like him...more of them, not less of him. But he needs to be taught disciplin with it.

I highlighted your O'Driscoll bits to show you how a player can be talked about in a critical way without it being a bashing exercise. Someone else might accuse you of bashing a player who no longer needs to prove himself to anyone and is STILL our best 13... limited and all as he's become (which doesn't say a lot for our glorified academy systems). Some could accuse you of bashing him...I wouldn't be one that would; because I know what you're saying and I know why you're saying it.

Don't get sucked in by Sin's tears. If Sin asks me to say I didn't mean exactly what I said again, he'll get the same accusation repeated. I won't change my opinions because I'm being termed a 'basher'.

Staggy - I like your team but who will kick the goals for Ireland?

That team really should beat France.

Such a pity about Henry - he'd be made to get stuck into Dusautoir.

red_stag wrote:Guns I agree with you by and large. But my point is that every player makes mistakes at some stage. People are not blaming Earls for him whole performance. They are completely focused on one incident which has been blown massively out of proportion. However there are LOADS of calls to drop him for McFadden and let McFadden take the kicks ahead of Jackson.

I would possibly sub off or drop Earls or Gilroy for McFadden if only to take pressure of PJ. I dont think either deserve to be dropped but it would make sense as a tactical decision. We should always have two kickers on the field.

Kearney should be made do kicking practice too.

Stag do you not think it makes sense to have another kicker in the team in case Jackson carries on missing his kicks? This way he wont have to be taken off and we wont have to deal with ROG coming on?

Funny - 77% possession and lots of territory and yet everyone played badly. Just from the outside it looks like the failure was at the cutting edge - i.e inability to score points/take points on offer, and decision making in general. Somebody must have been playing well the rest of the time - unless Scotland were mostly hopeless

Secret - chillax pal. Im not directing anything at you. You are not my 'target' and I'm sorry if it came across as such.

I agree with you that Earls should have passed and did not play well. You and me are both on this forum long enough to know difference between bashing and between criticism.

I'm speaking in general. On Facebook, Twitter, rugby blogs and other threads on this forum to some extent. Many posters I know ramp up the Earls criticism to try annoy Sin E. I work in the rugby industry and deal with rugby fans on a daily basis who often make small talk about their opinions on the game.

I dont read Sin Es comments. I believe him to be a very talented wum and he is on my ignore list. I didnt quote, him, you or anyone. Just speaking in general regarding the game and the treatment that some players are getting in what was a shoddy game by the whole team.

Guns and Golden,

I would accept McFadden starting over Earls/Gilroy provided that Jackson still took the kicks.

I think that even though he ain't great he needs to be retained as goal kicker against France.

lostinwales wrote:Funny - 77% possession and lots of territory and yet everyone played badly. Just from the outside it looks like the failure was at the cutting edge - i.e inability to score points/take points on offer, and decision making in general. Somebody must have been playing well the rest of the time - unless Scotland were mostly hopeless

I actually think this is a poor Scottish team. They have been dominated in both territory and possession by Italy, Ireland and England. We played very poorly but still could/should have won the game.

That Scotland team is not the benchmark we should judge ourselves against.

I can see both Wales and particularly a resurgent France really putting them to the sword like England did leaving the Scots to ponder exactly where they are at.

lostinwales wrote:Funny - 77% possession and lots of territory and yet everyone played badly. Just from the outside it looks like the failure was at the cutting edge - i.e inability to score points/take points on offer, and decision making in general. Somebody must have been playing well the rest of the time - unless Scotland were mostly hopeless

I actually think Scotland were fairly hopeless except in the set piece.

Our forwards did well at the breakdown. I think most our players played quite well but a lot of them managed to do one or two really stupid things too. Earls and SOB in particular.

For example around the 7th minute Marshall made a great break and spun a long pass to Earls who cut inside very nicely and got tackled near the Scotland line. As he got tackled he turned and two support players Drico and someone else came charging after. All Earls had to do was offload in the tackle and it was a certain try.

Same with his blistering break later in the half. If he linked with Drico it was a certain try and Earls would have been contender for man of the match because he did lots of things very well. I think he will be kicking himself to be honest.

red_stag wrote:Guns and Golden,

I would accept McFadden starting over Earls/Gilroy provided that Jackson still took the kicks.

I think that even though he ain't great he needs to be retained as goal kicker against France.

Definitely. I would give him the kicks and have McFadden take them only if required.

GunsGerms wrote:

red_stag wrote:Guns and Golden,

I would accept McFadden starting over Earls/Gilroy provided that Jackson still took the kicks.

I think that even though he ain't great he needs to be retained as goal kicker against France.

Definitely. I would give him the kicks and have McFadden take them only if required.

Not a bad way of doing things. I think that Ireland needed to show a bit more faith in Jackson. Remember the first penalty we got in the game. In the Scottish 22? Heaslip tells Jackson to kick it into the corner. We lose the lineout and get nothing. Should have been showing Jackson that we all have faith in him to land a penalty and get the score board starting to move.

fa0019 wrote:
Don't underestimate his new role as a da either. As a father myself I can state that it changes you and your priorities. I expect his career was firmly number 1 for him... That will all change now, quality time is what we all crave and long trips away from the family are gut wrenching... Does he want to miss out on his kids first few years???

It's not just about priorities. I think the posters on here either haven't had children or have forgotten what the first few weeks are like! Seriously folks, he turned up to the England game hours after his first sprog was born. He probably hadn't slept all night, and was more than likely in still in an emotional daze. He probably hasn't had much sleep since either. I'd be amazed if he could fully focus on a game. A week before sprog arrived he was the difference between Ireland winning and Ireland losing, give him a couple of months to get some kind of sleep/normality back and he'll probably be back at that level. His days may be numbered but they're not over yet.

SecretFly wrote:Sin................ Earls was going for glory. I'll repeat it as often as you call me up on it. So if you want the matter to die down, don't keep trying to get a confession out of me that I'm wrong. On each occasion I see a comment from you about it, I'll repeat the accusation. Heart led his head.

And what do you think lead BOD's decision to go for glory - heart or head?

And everytime you do that, I'll ask you this question until you answer it? Check it out on the RTE player - about 5.50 mins into the game. Why did BOD not pass to Earls outside him?

Big wrote:

fa0019 wrote:
Don't underestimate his new role as a da either. As a father myself I can state that it changes you and your priorities. I expect his career was firmly number 1 for him... That will all change now, quality time is what we all crave and long trips away from the family are gut wrenching... Does he want to miss out on his kids first few years???

It's not just about priorities. I think the posters on here either haven't had children or have forgotten what the first few weeks are like! Seriously folks, he turned up to the England game hours after his first sprog was born. He probably hadn't slept all night, and was more than likely in still in an emotional daze. He probably hasn't had much sleep since either. I'd be amazed if he could fully focus on a game. A week before sprog arrived he was the difference between Ireland winning and Ireland losing, give him a couple of months to get some kind of sleep/normality back and he'll probably be back at that level. His days may be numbered but they're not over yet.

Completly agree. Giving birth is exhausting even for the dad. Every emotion imaginable squeezed into a very short time frame. It blows your mind. Not sure how anyone could play a match after.

IF................. and I mean it's getting to be a bigger IF by the week............. so IF any or some Irish players get picked for Gatland's Lions...then I guarantee you, we'll see how Irish players operate when coached well, when they know they have something substantial in tactics to cling onto to and to throw their individual skills at.

Gatland mightn't pick a blessed one Irish guy, and I wouldn't blame him and I wouldn't lose too much sleep either as Ireland is primary concern for me (and getting us sorted out) but if he does, he'll be out to prove to the IRFU (his old buddies from way back) just what a 'real' coaching unit can do for Irish players.

Sin é wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Sin................ Earls was going for glory. I'll repeat it as often as you call me up on it. So if you want the matter to die down, don't keep trying to get a confession out of me that I'm wrong. On each occasion I see a comment from you about it, I'll repeat the accusation. Heart led his head.

And what do you think lead BOD's decision to go for glory - heart or head?

And everytime you do that, I'll ask you this question until you answer it? Check it out on the RTE player - about 5.50 mins into the game. Why did BOD not pass to Earls outside him?

Saw that. It wasnt as clear cut but he should have passed too I felt.

Sin é wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Sin................ Earls was going for glory. I'll repeat it as often as you call me up on it. So if you want the matter to die down, don't keep trying to get a confession out of me that I'm wrong. On each occasion I see a comment from you about it, I'll repeat the accusation. Heart led his head.

And what do you think lead BOD's decision to go for glory - heart or head?

And everytime you do that, I'll ask you this question until you answer it? Check it out on the RTE player - about 5.50 mins into the game. Why did BOD not pass to Earls outside him?

Blindly for personal glory.

GunsGerms wrote:

red_stag wrote:Guns and Golden,

I would accept McFadden starting over Earls/Gilroy provided that Jackson still took the kicks.

I think that even though he ain't great he needs to be retained as goal kicker against France.

Definitely. I would give him the kicks and have McFadden take them only if required.

You'd be fooling no one doing that - especially Jackson. Having Pienaar at Ulster available to take the kicks hasn't helped him.

SecretFly wrote:

Sin é wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Sin................ Earls was going for glory. I'll repeat it as often as you call me up on it. So if you want the matter to die down, don't keep trying to get a confession out of me that I'm wrong. On each occasion I see a comment from you about it, I'll repeat the accusation. Heart led his head.

And what do you think lead BOD's decision to go for glory - heart or head?

And everytime you do that, I'll ask you this question until you answer it? Check it out on the RTE player - about 5.50 mins into the game. Why did BOD not pass to Earls outside him?

Blindly for personal glory.

Well, lets have a go at BOD for being a glory hunter!

...

Sin é wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

red_stag wrote:Guns and Golden,

I would accept McFadden starting over Earls/Gilroy provided that Jackson still took the kicks.

I think that even though he ain't great he needs to be retained as goal kicker against France.

Definitely. I would give him the kicks and have McFadden take them only if required.

You'd be fooling no one doing that - especially Jackson. Having Pienaar at Ulster available to take the kicks hasn't helped him.

Piennar isnt "available" to take the kicks at Ulster, he takes all the kicks. Thats different. McFadden is required as backup to relieve pressure. Its a no brainer.

Kearney should be primed to take long range kicks. Defys belief that we have to rely on one kicker in every match.

Sin é wrote:

Well, lets have a go at BOD for being a glory hunter!

I'm sure you will be doing it for everyone whatever happens.

GunsGerms wrote:

Sin é wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

red_stag wrote:Guns and Golden,

I would accept McFadden starting over Earls/Gilroy provided that Jackson still took the kicks.

I think that even though he ain't great he needs to be retained as goal kicker against France.

Definitely. I would give him the kicks and have McFadden take them only if required.

You'd be fooling no one doing that - especially Jackson. Having Pienaar at Ulster available to take the kicks hasn't helped him.

Piennar isnt "available" to take the kicks at Ulster, he takes all the kicks. Thats different. McFadden is required as backup to relieve pressure. Its a no brainer.

Kearney should be primed to take long range kicks. Defys belief that we have to rely on one kicker in every match.

My point is that to bring in McFadden to do the kicking is to say to Paddy from the start that McFadden will be taking the kicks which will leave Paddy time to concentrate on his game. He can go back to Ulster and start there with his place kicking in less pressurised games to build up his confidence.

From his time at the U20s, I think it is a confidence thing for him and his confidence won't improve if you start putting in other lads to take the kicks if he starts missing them.

My point is that to bring in McFadden to do the kicking is to say to Paddy from the start that McFadden will be taking the kicks which will leave Paddy time to concentrate on his game. He can go back to Ulster and start there with his place kicking in less pressurised games to build up his confidence.

From his time at the U20s, I think it is a confidence thing for him and his confidence won't improve if you start putting in other lads to take the kicks if he starts missing them.

That's very sensible.

GunsGerms wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Well, lets have a go at BOD for being a glory hunter!

I'm sure you will be doing it for everyone whatever happens.

Only if Fly keeps going on about Earls being a glory hunter.

What I don't get is that everyone of you seem to have failed to notice that Earls breaks are typical centre breaks which Brian O'Driscoll isn't capable of making anymore as he doesn't have the legs for it. Earls is ill served not having a winger to make the same kind of runs that Zebo/Luke Fitz does.

Glas a du wrote:

My point is that to bring in McFadden to do the kicking is to say to Paddy from the start that McFadden will be taking the kicks which will leave Paddy time to concentrate on his game. He can go back to Ulster and start there with his place kicking in less pressurised games to build up his confidence.

From his time at the U20s, I think it is a confidence thing for him and his confidence won't improve if you start putting in other lads to take the kicks if he starts missing them.

That's very sensible.

So you think that Dan Biggar, Berrick Barnes/Cooper and Lambie/Goosen all suffer because there is a second/third kicking option in their teams?

Of course not.

The amount of matches Wales have won because 1/2p has nailed a last minute kick. Ireland v Wales last year for example.

Same with Australia winning in SA a couple of years ago Beale nailing a last minute long ranger.

We all know how effective SA are at picking off scores with all their kicking options.

Its a no brainer.

Its a no brainer.

That must be why Kidney doesn't do it then

Glas a du wrote:

Its a no brainer.

That must be why Kidney doesn't do it then

Sure New Zealand had to rely on about 4 different kickers in winning the World Cup including scrum half Piri Weepu. Everyone else is at it, why are we so slow to do something so obvious?

GunsGerms

Interesting point.... cricket bowlers still have regular batting practice I guess. Look how decent bergamasco got after he was trained up by Mallett.

Perhaps it may be required once a season but if its the difference between winning that game and not it should be done.

GunsGerms wrote:

Glas a du wrote:

My point is that to bring in McFadden to do the kicking is to say to Paddy from the start that McFadden will be taking the kicks which will leave Paddy time to concentrate on his game. He can go back to Ulster and start there with his place kicking in less pressurised games to build up his confidence.

From his time at the U20s, I think it is a confidence thing for him and his confidence won't improve if you start putting in other lads to take the kicks if he starts missing them.

That's very sensible.

So you think that Dan Biggar, Berrick Barnes/Cooper and Lambie/Goosen all suffer because there is a second/third kicking option in their teams?

Of course not.

The amount of matches Wales have won because 1/2p has nailed a last minute kick. Ireland v Wales last year for example.

Same with Australia winning in SA a couple of years ago Beale nailing a last minute long ranger.

We all know how effective SA are at picking off scores with all their kicking options.

Its a no brainer.

None of those lads are being brought in specifically to take the place kicks. 1/2p is probably the first name on the Welsh teamlist. McFadden wouldn't be a first choice winger - he is behind Bowe, Gilroy, Earls & Zebo - it would be awful to leave someone like Zebo out because McFadden is needed to do the placekicking.

Sin é wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Glas a du wrote:

My point is that to bring in McFadden to do the kicking is to say to Paddy from the start that McFadden will be taking the kicks which will leave Paddy time to concentrate on his game. He can go back to Ulster and start there with his place kicking in less pressurised games to build up his confidence.

From his time at the U20s, I think it is a confidence thing for him and his confidence won't improve if you start putting in other lads to take the kicks if he starts missing them.

That's very sensible.

So you think that Dan Biggar, Berrick Barnes/Cooper and Lambie/Goosen all suffer because there is a second/third kicking option in their teams?

Of course not.

The amount of matches Wales have won because 1/2p has nailed a last minute kick. Ireland v Wales last year for example.

Same with Australia winning in SA a couple of years ago Beale nailing a last minute long ranger.

We all know how effective SA are at picking off scores with all their kicking options.

Its a no brainer.

None of those lads are being brought in specifically to take the place kicks. 1/2p is probably the first name on the Welsh teamlist. McFadden wouldn't be a first choice winger - he is behind Bowe, Gilroy, Earls & Zebo - it would be awful to leave someone like Zebo out because McFadden is needed to do the placekicking.

then why not get Kearndog to take some kicks? He has a ridiculously good kick. His schools team got to the senior cup final on the strength of his goal kicking from all over the pitch. Guarentee you he could still do it.

I wouldn't trust Kearney to take kicks. Especially now that he is really out of form.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:I wouldn't trust Kearney to take kicks. Especially now that he is really out of form.

It might be a reason for having him on the field? That is to say, his 15 form is so bad, he might actually be a better 'effective' bet as a kicker.

Absurd post!

There's a tendency to take the cliché "only as good as your last game" too literally on this board. If we're going to bolster clichés I'd prefer "class is permanent, form temporary". After the Wales game BOD was once again god, now he's a finished has been. A bit like Farrell, one minute the real deal, next an uncreative kicker. You have to look at what he could bring to the team, so for me he's a Lions starter.
On the other hand I wouldn't have him as captain as I don't think he's particularly liked by other players even among his fellow Leinster men and the ability to bring a team together in a short space of time is imperative for a Lions captain.

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:Absurd post!

There's a tendency to take the cliché "only as good as your last game" too literally on this board. If we're going to bolster clichés I'd prefer "class is permanent, form temporary". After the Wales game BOD was once again god, now he's a finished has been. A bit like Farrell, one minute the real deal, next an uncreative kicker. You have to look at what he could bring to the team, so for me he's a Lions starter.
On the other hand I wouldn't have him as captain as I don't think he's particularly liked by other players even among his fellow Leinster men and the ability to bring a team together in a short space of time is imperative for a Lions captain.

You call other posts absurd and then you go on to say Drico isnt liked by team mates and other players. Where on earth did you source that like nugget of information from?

???................not liked amongst his fellow Leinster men? Boy, the longer you last in this game, the more icepicks a surgeon has to remove from your back...now there's another cliche..

SecretFly wrote:???................not liked amongst his fellow Leinster men? Boy, the longer you last in this game, the more icepicks a surgeon has to remove from your back...now there's another cliche..

Not sure they'd go that far fly, but love the cliché. No, he's the Will Carling of Irish rugby, respected as a player but a bit privileged and not really one of the boys.

You don't know Dublin4 World Cup... it's the culchies like Kearney, Reddan and Ross that aren't one of the boys. O'Driscoll is amongst his own.

BOD was Ireland's best player by a distance on Sunday - he is probably the most intelligent rugby player I have had the privilege to watch. A true phenomenon

I have to agree with Sin on this one. Why start someone who is clearly way off first choice in their position just to facilitate Paddy Jackson. I could understand if we were facilitating Dan Carter but Paddy Jackson?

Madigan is in better form than Jackson and kicking goals for Leinster, we should start him........now thats a no brainer.

My Team for France:

Court
Best
Ross
Hendo
Ryan
POM
SOB
Heaslip
Murray
Madigan
Trimble (really dont see what Gilroy has done to keep his place)
Marshall
BOD
Fitz
Earls

Kilcoyne
Sherry
Fitz
DOC
O'Donnell
Reddan
Jackson
Gilroy

gleesonisgod wrote:Madigan is in better form than Jackson and kicking goals for Leinster, we should start him........now thats a no brainer.

What nonsense. So your plan is to give Jackson 70 minutes against Scotland. React to him missing a few kicks by immediately dropping him for another unproven player.

What if Madigan doesnt instantly deliver - will you drop him immediately for Keatley or Hanrahan?

The Championship can't be won now - we must concentrate on player development. By all means have Madigan on bench over O'Gara. It would be a dreadful move to kick out Jackson immediately for Madigan.

To me people just want Madigan in by hook or by crook and damn the consequences. He is good but not as good as many suggest.

Reddan out first...Murray on the bench... otherwise yeah, I'd take that team Gleeson

I'd leave Jackson in too... but Madigan on the bench.