Declan Kidney- IRFU decide not to renew contract

First topic message reminder :

Declan Kidney has been sacked.

The search for a new ireland coach begins.

Les Kiss appointed interm coach. is this an interview for the top job. what can the IRFU learn about him during a tour to the states?
http://www.irishrugby.ie/news/28869.php

Sin é wrote:How much England coaching do you think someone like Chris Aston needs to be there for a break?

This is grown ups rugby. The players should be able to work this out themselves. Maybe that is the problem - they have all been overcoached at their clubs and they can't think for themselves?

I get the sense that they're not aloud to think for themselves in the national set-up, Sin e. We have seen glimpses of what they can do. Against Argentina, and first half against Wales, for example, but it's never consistent, and fails to reflect the success at club level.

No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan)
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan)
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)
6) most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)
etc. etc. etc.

Munchkin wrote:

Sin é wrote:How much England coaching do you think someone like Chris Aston needs to be there for a break?

This is grown ups rugby. The players should be able to work this out themselves. Maybe that is the problem - they have all been overcoached at their clubs and they can't think for themselves?

I get the sense that they're not aloud to think for themselves in the national set-up, Sin e. We have seen glimpses of what they can do. Against Argentina, and first half against Wales, for example, but it's never consistent, and fails to reflect the success at club level.

That would be the complete opposite to Kidney's coaching philosophy.

Very close to Eddie O'Sullivan's though. I remember DOC saying something about EOS tearing into him because he did something that was a bit off the cuff.

Sin é wrote:No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan)
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan)
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)
6) most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)
etc. etc. etc.

There has been some disasters. This is true, but it's more than mistakes, Sin e. It's a mind-set. 2nd half v Wales? That wasn't down to errors.

Munchkin wrote:

Sin é wrote:No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan)
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan)
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)
6) most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)
etc. etc. etc.

There has been some disasters. This is true, but it's more than mistakes, Sin e. It's a mind-set. 2nd half v Wales? That wasn't down to errors.

Down to Peter O'Mahony going off

Sin é wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Sin é wrote:No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan)
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan)
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)
6) most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)
etc. etc. etc.

There has been some disasters. This is true, but it's more than mistakes, Sin e. It's a mind-set. 2nd half v Wales? That wasn't down to errors.

Down to Peter O'Mahony going off

Think Ireland were back in their box before POMs injury, but, from memory, he had a good enough game. When Henry came on they were already firmly entrenched in defense mode.

On Rodder's scrumhalf point.

Scrum halves have their talents..and some are better at some things (box kicking) than others (delivering a fast ball consistently).. but that's the same for all positions - natural strengths and weaknesses coming together in one player.

So, like many people do here - you could simply go looking for the right players. We'd see the resolution of a problem lying in the skills of a particular player. And how often this place has rang to the sounds of battle about the merits of one player over another.

My slant has always been - well, an example - O'Leary had his talents and his instincts. Some thought he had what Ireland needed, some didn't.
The man was criticised more than he was applauded...and mostly that was because he had a habit of repeating a thing called a 'box kick' - over and over - and many people didn't like it. Many people complained about it, many people said it wasn't working. No opposition team was unduly worried about them, they didn't put pressure on.

So, you could say, well scoot around for a scrum half who COULD play the game the way the majority wanted it - a physically robust player like O'Leary but one who could feed the ball fast and furiously to a waiting backline with only a hint of box kicking thrown in to keep the opposition honest.

The problem tended to be that, with Ireland, when you went looking, you sometimes came back with nothing in the bag - the player wasn't there, he didn't exist.

And that's when the big arguments often took place here when champions of this player rubbished claims made by champions of another player - each actually knowing no existing player in the position was going to be good enough.

Now - at that very point - that is when I say a coach starts to really earn his money. That's when they don't back clap and offer words of encouragement. That's when they have to do work and put into operation a clearly defined path for the under pressure player (continuing with O'Leary as example) Forget how he naturally plays, forget his instincts - change him. Make him understand the kind of scrumhalf you want him to be and demand he follows through. "Quit the box kicking, O'Leary - it's not working and it isn't a team plan"

I seldom saw that kind of coaching in action whereby a player would commit mistakes we all saw happening, he was the best of the bad lot, he could be motivated to change his ways and the International coaches actually changed/improved him. In O'Leary's case, his box kicking went on and on and was allowed to because...well, that was his 'natural' game and you'd really need another scrumhalf to change the structure of the team.

No, you need coaches doing exactly what they are paid to do - directing philosophy and methods.

Sin é wrote:Ireland will be lucky to get anyone - Vern Cotter has ruled himself out now. Didn't he go for the England job?


http://www1.skysports.com/rugby-union/news/12506/8616363/Clermont-Auvergne-coach-Vern-Cotter-out-of-running-for-Ireland-job

Na, Cotter didn't want diddly to do with England, think he's still got unfinished business with Clermont and Europe. Perhaps after this season's tournament he'll reevaluate, shame really as I rate him massively.

Sin é wrote:No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan)
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan)
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)
6) most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)
etc. etc. etc.

No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan) – A game plan built on giving away the ball may well generate more penalty type situations then one where we keep the ball and recycle it.
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan) – Its obvious the players for Ireland are coached to take contact and set a platform rather then offload in contact (looking at you Gert Smal)
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan) – entirely players faults.
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)- mixture of coaching and execution. So partly players fault.
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)- again coaching + execution with all partly to blame.
6) most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)- A gameplan built on soaking up big collisions will generate a lot more injuries, so a mixture of coaches tactics/badluck
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)- we have the players to not be pushed back in the scrum when they push as 8. It seems rare that all 8 push and so this definitely seems a coaching issue.

So to summarise:

1)Coach/Players
2)Coach
3)Players
4) Players/Coach
5)Players/Coach
6)Luck/Coach
7)Coach

I really don't understand fans who are blaming our players. They haven't even been given an honest break by a tactical plan that suits their strengths to show what they can do!

wolfball wrote:

Sin é wrote:No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan)
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan)
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)
6) most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)
etc. etc. etc.

No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan) – A game plan built on giving away the ball may well generate more penalty type situations then one where we keep the ball and recycle it.
Against England: Possession 58%, Territory 57%. Turnovers 15. England 6. Penaltes: 11 , England 14. Kicks from hand 32 (england 40; Passes: 88. England 61. Lineouts lost on own throw: 3. England 2.
England still won even though they kicked the ball away more than Ireland.
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan) – Its obvious the players for Ireland are coached to take contact and set a platform rather then offload in contact (looking at you Gert Smal). Works for England. They had 1 offload as well.
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan) – entirely players faults.
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)- mixture of coaching and execution. So partly players fault.
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)- again coaching + execution with all partly to blame. International players should not need to have coach passing. Every Province has a Skills coach.
6) Most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)- A gameplan built on soaking up big collisions will generate a lot more injuries, so a mixture of coaches tactics/badluck Explain to me why David Wallace could have avoided been tackled by Manu Tualagi or Simon Zebo's injury was down to a collision?
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)- we have the players to not be pushed back in the scrum when they push as 8. It seems rare that all 8 push and so this definitely seems a coaching issue. Same coach that coaches Leinster coaches Ireland (and a lot of the personnel in the forwards). Why would he coach them differently?

So to summarise:

1) Players
2) Players
3) Players
4) Players
5) Players
6) Luck/Coach
7) Players (they must not be doing what they are told to do by Feek).

I really don't understand fans who are blaming the coaches. They don't get the time to actually have to coach passing skills - players should be able to hit the international training camp with that skill at least - then maybe they would have time to work on timing, running lines etc.

Test players shouldn't need coaches to teach them passing skills (Earls excepted), they need coaches to tell them how to use those passing skills to win games.

In the last nine Tests, Ireland have been worse in the second half than the first half in eight of them. That indicates a coaching team who are being out-thought by their opponents rather than players who display skills in the first period and then suddenly forget them in the second.

The Great Aukster wrote:Test players shouldn't need coaches to teach them passing skills (Earls excepted), they need coaches to tell them how to use those passing skills to win games.

In the last nine Tests, Ireland have been worse in the second half than the first half in eight of them. That indicates a coaching team who are being out-thought by their opponents rather than players who display skills in the first period and then suddenly forget them in the second.

International coaches should not have to tell players how to use those passing skills to win games.

Nothing wrong with Earls passing here for Zebo's 2 tries. You do realise that Zebo has a fairly decent try scoring record and he usually plays outside Earls.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7YU-NQS2EU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Or his own try here against Ulster (2 passes - off each side). If BOD made that pass to Holland that Earls did, people would be making full length feature movies of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7YU-NQS2EU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Having poor 2nd halfs is far more likely to suggest that a) there is a lack of leadership on the pitch (when the going gets tough, the tough get going), b) an inability to play what is in front of them, c) that the fitness levels are not good enough.

SecretFly wrote:On Rodder's scrumhalf point.

Scrum halves have their talents..and some are better at some things (box kicking) than others (delivering a fast ball consistently).. but that's the same for all positions - natural strengths and weaknesses coming together in one player.

So, like many people do here - you could simply go looking for the right players. We'd see the resolution of a problem lying in the skills of a particular player. And how often this place has rang to the sounds of battle about the merits of one player over another.

Fly I think my point was that Ireland have either

a) been attempting the right gameplan with the wrong players
b) the wrong game plan with the wrong players
c) the wrong game plan with the right players

Either way the coaches are heavily to blame.

Kidney has continually selected a flankeresque slow ball scrum half, which is fine for a Munster/South Africa 10 man game where you pick and go around the fringes and play for territory. Now the problem is that only works if a) you have a dominant pack and b) you have strong ball carriers who can cross the gainline with slow ball.

If indeed you want to play a more attack orientated game then you need quick ball, which means a quick thinking, quick passing no 9. You also need a natural openside who supports the ball carrier and keeps the ball off the deck and you need players with pace,power and footballing ability who can make breaks and score tries. You also need a fly half who can stand flat on the gainline.

Kidneys problem is that he doesn't understand this (nor does Sin e). He thinks you can just throw a random group of players on the pitch and expect them to click and come up with a gameplan on the fly.

Its the coaches job to pick the right players to play the right tactics against a given opposition and also to make changes mid game where necessary if that plan is not working or not being implemented.

Kidney, Smal and Kiss have totally failed in this most basic aspect of their job over the past 3 years and regardless of what other problems there are in Irish rugby they deserve to face the criticism for that.

spot on rodders.

im going to leave this debate now. IRFU made the right call there was no way he did enough for an extension and making a change was the right and inevitable call.

Best of luck to all provinces this weekend. Irish rugby could do with a lift

Lets hope we are celebrating 3 victories on Monday!!!

rodders wrote:
Kidney has continually selected a flankeresque slow ball scrum half, which is fine for a Munster/South Africa 10 man game where you pick and go around the fringes and play for territory. Now the problem is that only works if a) you have a dominant pack and b) you have strong ball carriers who can cross the gainline with slow ball.

If indeed you want to play a more attack orientated game then you need quick ball, which means a quick thinking, quick passing no 9. You also need a natural openside who supports the ball carrier and keeps the ball off the deck and you need players with pace,power and footballing ability who can make breaks and score tries. You also need a fly half who can stand flat on the gainline.

Its funny you mention SA - their fans have exactly the same criticism of Pienaar that you have of Murray.

Kidneys problem is that he doesn't understand this (nor does Sin e). He thinks you can just throw a random group of players on the pitch and expect them to click and come up with a gameplan on the fly.

Its the coaches job to pick the right players to play the right tactics against a given opposition and also to make changes mid game where necessary if that plan is not working or not being implemented.

Kidney, Smal and Kiss have totally failed in this most basic aspect of their job over the past 3 years and regardless of what other problems there are in Irish rugby they deserve to face the criticism for that.

[/quote]

What you don't understand is that you can't use your chequebook to import expensive TH props and scrumhalfs to play internationally. You have to make the best of what you've got. I see Schmidt is going with SOB at openside and Boss at scrumhalf against Wasps.

Sin é wrote:

rodders wrote:
Kidney has continually selected a flankeresque slow ball scrum half, which is fine for a Munster/South Africa 10 man game where you pick and go around the fringes and play for territory. Now the problem is that only works if a) you have a dominant pack and b) you have strong ball carriers who can cross the gainline with slow ball.

If indeed you want to play a more attack orientated game then you need quick ball, which means a quick thinking, quick passing no 9. You also need a natural openside who supports the ball carrier and keeps the ball off the deck and you need players with pace,power and footballing ability who can make breaks and score tries. You also need a fly half who can stand flat on the gainline.

Its funny you mention SA - their fans have exactly the same criticism of Pienaar that you have of Murray.

Kidneys problem is that he doesn't understand this (nor does Sin e). He thinks you can just throw a random group of players on the pitch and expect them to click and come up with a gameplan on the fly.

Its the coaches job to pick the right players to play the right tactics against a given opposition and also to make changes mid game where necessary if that plan is not working or not being implemented.

Kidney, Smal and Kiss have totally failed in this most basic aspect of their job over the past 3 years and regardless of what other problems there are in Irish rugby they deserve to face the criticism for that.

What you don't understand is that you can't use your chequebook to import expensive TH props and scrumhalfs to play internationally. You have to make the best of what you've got. I see Schmidt is going with SOB at openside and Boss at scrumhalf against Wasps.
[/quote]

The difference is Pienaar is perfectly suited to SA gameplan, the critcism from SA fans comes from the fact that they want to play a different type of game.

Boss is much better suited to attacking rugby than Murray or TOL. Boss has an attacking instinct that they don't have but his Ireland career was sabotaged by ROG who didn't like playing with a strong minded scrum half who could think for himself. Same with Reddan.

rodders wrote:
The difference is Pienaar is perfectly suited to SA gameplan, the critcism from SA fans comes from the fact that they want to play a different type of game.

Boss is much better suited to attacking rugby than Murray or TOL. Boss has an attacking instinct that they don't have but his Ireland career was sabotaged by ROG who didn't like playing with a strong minded scrum half who could think for himself. Same with Reddan.

Oh, the irony in your comment about SA fans

Boss might be better suited to attacking rugby - pity he can't do it very well. Boss is so predictable (& selfish) its not funny. I'd say Stringer (& reddan) sabotaged Boss's career. I think I'll do an internet search to see how many times the phrase 'headless chicken' & Eoin Reddan appear in the same sentence.

Sin é wrote:

rodders wrote:
The difference is Pienaar is perfectly suited to SA gameplan, the critcism from SA fans comes from the fact that they want to play a different type of game.

Boss is much better suited to attacking rugby than Murray or TOL. Boss has an attacking instinct that they don't have but his Ireland career was sabotaged by ROG who didn't like playing with a strong minded scrum half who could think for himself. Same with Reddan.

Oh, the irony in your comment about SA fans

Well the irony is that Kidney aspires for Ireland to play a SA style gameplan which they themselves even realise is not an effective one, and they actually have the players to do it!

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/irony

Sin é wrote:No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan)
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan)
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)
6) most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)
etc. etc. etc.

Actually a lot of that is down to the coaching.

Don't stifle players by asking them to play to your pre conceived plan rather than to there strengths - a good example is Trimble. Ireland best winger this year but only at Province level
Don't pick forwards whose handling is poor - like McCarthy
Don't pick a pack with only 1 front line line out jumper like we did against Italy
Don't pick LH's at TH
Don't play a game plan where off loading in the forwards seems to be an unrequired activity

[quote="geoff999rugby"]

Sin é wrote:No gameplan devised by Henry or Gatland will work if the players
1) give away penalties (thats not part of the gameplan)
2) fail to offload at the right moment (that not part of the gameplan
3) knock-on (thats not part of the gameplan)
4) lose the line-out (thats not part of the gameplan)
5) fail to pass correctly (thats not part of the gameplan)
6) most your team get injured (thats not part of the gameplan)
7) get pushed about in the scrum (thats not part of the gameplan)
etc. etc. etc.

Actually a lot of that is down to the coaching.

Don't stifle players by asking them to play to your pre conceived plan rather than to there strengths - a good example is Trimble. Ireland best winger this year but only at Province level. Thats the thing of international rugby - its not provincial where you can use your chequebook to build your team - you play with the cards you are dealt with.

Don't pick forwards whose handling is poor - like McCarthy. Pretty much all the forwards have question marks over them. THere would have been warm if DOC started
Don't pick a pack with only 1 front line line out jumper like we did against Italy. Well Paul O'Connell's injury, Leo past it and Muller, Le Roux etc. don't help much providing front line locks.
Don't pick LH's at TH. Yea, I can't understand why Kidney won't use Declan Fitzpatrick a bit more.
Don't play a game plan where off loading in the forwards seems to be an unrequired activity. [color=red] I'm really looking forward to watching our Irish forwards offloading this weekend. How many do you think they will average each 2/3?

Touhy, Henry and Henderson are fantastic offloaders

I see Conor The Great has been speaking out again about Ireland.

The gist of it being "No, no - I still don't want the job. One minute you're a saint, the next minute you're the devil. Pressure. Besides I said I am committed to the Harlequins, it's my contract and I'll honour it. But Schmidt, I think he'd be great for Ireland"

That's only me paraphrasing him of course but................ he obviously thinks the Leinster coach isn't on an important contract himself. I mean one that would have to be rewritten substantially if he agreed to take the Ireland job. But some jobs you just have to 'honour' more than others it seems.

I thought COS was the man for the job but I'm glad now he doesn't want it.

rodders wrote: Touhy, Henry and Henderson are fantastic offloaders

How many do you reckon they will make so this weekend?

Sin é wrote:

rodders wrote: Touhy, Henry and Henderson are fantastic offloaders

How many do you reckon they will make so this weekend?

As many are needed to beat sarries

Good luck to the Munster boys sin, have a good one .....

It must be that time of year, when Munster are less unattractive than their opponents in the HC and I begrudgingly root for them...

SUFTUM goes without saying of course

Leinster need to get to the Amlin final to validate that competition.

rodders wrote:

Sin é wrote:

rodders wrote: Touhy, Henry and Henderson are fantastic offloaders

How many do you reckon they will make so this weekend?

As many are needed to beat sarries

Good luck to the Munster boys sin, have a good one .....

Ta - but I think Munster will need a bit more than luck.

Best of luck to Ulster though - hopefully you will quieten the usual din from Sarries in twickers.

Glas a du wrote:It must be that time of year, when Munster are less unattractive than their opponents in the HC and I begrudgingly root for them...

SUFTUM goes without saying of course

Leinster need to get to the Amlin final to validate that competition.

You mean like drive-testing the new home for the Provinces after the PRL/ERC negotiations have ended??

How does buying NIQ (the same number as Munster have brought in) have anything to do with the way Kidney has totally misused Trimble in an Irish shirt

Most forwards may have poor handling skills - not sure the logic in picking the poorest of the lot though

Lineout against Italy would have benefitted from DOC at the front instead of McCarthy. Alternatively he could have put Henderson in the backrow as an alternative
Only 1 lineout jumper should be a no no in this day and age

DF is not the alternative to Ross - you have that wonderful Archer, or alternatively Ireland should not be so precious about
England based players - Andress should be a squad regular

Ulster will off load more than Ireland this weekend and I suspect Leinster will as well, cant speak for Munster

Kidney has been poor and he record shows it

geoff999rugby wrote:How does buying NIQ (the same number as Munster have brought in) have anything to do with the way Kidney has totally misused Trimble in an Irish shirt

Who mentioned Ulster? (or is that a guilty conscience speaking up?) All provinces can bring in NIQ players. Interesting that most the NIQ have all been capped by someone else and are not available to Ireland. Munster can bring in BJ Botha, a world cup winner, Ireland get to bring in Michael Bent, an ITM Cup loser!

Most forwards may have poor handling skills - not sure the logic in picking the poorest of the lot though

Ah here now, its not all McCarthy's fault. Jamie Heaslip made as many, if not more errors and he has 3 Heineken Cup wins and a Grand Slam.

Lineout against Italy would have benefitted from DOC at the front instead of McCarthy. Alternatively he could have put Henderson in the backrow as an alternative
Only 1 lineout jumper should be a no no in this day and age

Its easy after the game to come to that conclusion.

DF is not the alternative to Ross - you have that wonderful Archer, or alternatively Ireland should not be so precious about
England based players - Andress should be a squad regular

Andress isn't good enough for Ulster, why should he be good enough for Ireland. And thanks for mentioning Archer. He doesn't start for Munster (yet), but you think he should be up to Ireland standard.

Ulster will off load more than Ireland this weekend and I suspect Leinster will as well, cant speak for Munster

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/international/schmidt-interested-to-hear-leinster-s-take-on-ireland-job-1.1351594

Sounds like Schmidt is interested but will honour Leinster contract if they don't want him to go.

No guilt Sin e just using Trimble as an example of a player who excels at Province level but doesn't do the same things at International level - thats coaching

Its not all McCarthy fault but he is the most glaring example - if you want to play a certain type of the game you dont pick a player who can't play that game

I was wise about the lineout deficiencies against Italy before the game not just after. An Irish international, I think it was Tyrone Howe, made exactly the same point in a recent article.

Andress is good enough for Ulster - Humphreys pulled the plug on the deal.
Andress remains the only true Irish alternative to Ross - it is crazy he is not in the set up. Plenty of players who are first team regulars are part of ther Irish set up - Madigan, Henderson and Gilroy all come to mind why not Archer as well.

Sin é wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Test players shouldn't need coaches to teach them passing skills (Earls excepted), they need coaches to tell them how to use those passing skills to win games.

In the last nine Tests, Ireland have been worse in the second half than the first half in eight of them. That indicates a coaching team who are being out-thought by their opponents rather than players who display skills in the first period and then suddenly forget them in the second.

International coaches should not have to tell players how to use those passing skills to win games.

Nothing wrong with Earls passing here for Zebo's 2 tries. You do realise that Zebo has a fairly decent try scoring record and he usually plays outside Earls.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7YU-NQS2EU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Or his own try here against Ulster (2 passes - off each side). If BOD made that pass to Holland that Earls did, people would be making full length feature movies of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7YU-NQS2EU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Having poor 2nd halfs is far more likely to suggest that a) there is a lack of leadership on the pitch (when the going gets tough, the tough get going), b) an inability to play what is in front of them, c) that the fitness levels are not good enough.

First try is basic execution of an overlap, if he can't do that he has no business playing with an U-15 team never mind Munster. Second one was slightly better due to the fact that he drew his man first, but those are pretty basic skills for rugby players and crucial for a centre. He did his job well, but he doesn't deserve a medal for doing what should be expected of a guy of his supposed class. Super pass to Holland though in fairness, guy has tremendous potential, he could be a very solid centre, I prefer him elsewhere personally.

[quote]

Thomond wrote:

Sin é wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Test players shouldn't need coaches to teach them passing skills (Earls excepted), they need coaches to tell them how to use those passing skills to win games.

In the last nine Tests, Ireland have been worse in the second half than the first half in eight of them. That indicates a coaching team who are being out-thought by their opponents rather than players who display skills in the first period and then suddenly forget them in the second.

International coaches should not have to tell players how to use those passing skills to win games.

Nothing wrong with Earls passing here for Zebo's 2 tries. You do realise that Zebo has a fairly decent try scoring record and he usually plays outside Earls.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7YU-NQS2EU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Or his own try here against Ulster (2 passes - off each side). If BOD made that pass to Holland that Earls did, people would be making full length feature movies of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7YU-NQS2EU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Having poor 2nd halfs is far more likely to suggest that a) there is a lack of leadership on the pitch (when the going gets tough, the tough get going), b) an inability to play what is in front of them, c) that the fitness levels are not good enough.

First try is basic execution of an overlap, if he can't do that he has no business playing with an U-15 team never mind Munster. Second one was slightly better due to the fact that he drew his man first, but those are pretty basic skills for rugby players and crucial for a centre. He did his job well, but he doesn't deserve a medal for doing what should be expected of a guy of his supposed class. Super pass to Holland though in fairness, guy has tremendous potential, he could be a very solid centre, I prefer him elsewhere personally.

Maybe you should read what that post was responding first! i.e., earls according to Auster doesn't have these basic skills.

The Great Aukster wrote:
Test players shouldn't need coaches to teach them passing skills (Earls excepted), they need coaches to tell them how to use those passing skills to win games.

If you listen to the end of the video, you will hear the commentator commenting on the influence of Keith Earls.

I suppose you'd prefer Cave to be starting for Munster

He did what was asked and what he should be capable of, he did his job, fair play to him, I just feel that doing his job at its most basic level doesn't warrant much praise, perhaps the fact we are discussing it shows there is doubt about his role and effectiveness as a centre? I think he has struggled behind an outhalf who doesn't excell at running the backline in O'Gara and a pack who do struggle to maintain dominance or gain it (Sunday being the notable exception)

Come off it - the criticism is over the top (i.e., the criticisms of him are that he isn't able to pass, that he is greedy and he can't defend) which would seem to suggest that people don't think he is capable of doing a job.

This season, he has struggled with injury (as O'Gara has) and needs a run of games. I expect O'Gara to start against Leinster for the same reasons.

Personally I would like to see Keatley there, mainly because this should be O'Gara's last year, we need to move on from him next year, he won't get dropped for the semi (we won't beat Clermont playing like last week as we won't get that dominance in the pack, so I think his uses may be negated)


As for Earls, I haven't criticised him, the fact he can execute basic skills shouldn't impress anyone. It shouldn't alter their opinion in a bad way either. He gets too much criticism, a lot of guys are made scapegoats, some guys escape a lot of it (TOL was getting a bollocking despite being better than Murray at tiems last year, Heaslip avoids a lot of it)

Sin é wrote:Come off it - the criticism is over the top (i.e., the criticisms of him are that he isn't able to pass, that he is greedy and he can't defend) which would seem to suggest that people don't think he is capable of doing a job.

This season, he has struggled with injury (as O'Gara has) and needs a run of games. I expect O'Gara to start against Leinster for the same reasons.

Earls v Cave is no contest. Cave is a journeyman similar to Trimble (albeit Trimble did show some form five years ago). Keatley will play second fiddle to jj when he comes through. Keatoey plays the same way he did at connect. Good one minute, abject the next.

Thomond wrote:Personally I would like to see Keatley there, mainly because this should be O'Gara's last year, we need to move on from him next year, he won't get dropped for the semi (we won't beat Clermont playing like last week as we won't get that dominance in the pack, so I think his uses may be negated)

As for Earls, I haven't criticised him, the fact he can execute basic skills shouldn't impress anyone. It shouldn't alter their opinion in a bad way either. He gets too much criticism, a lot of guys are made scapegoats, some guys escape a lot of it (TOL was getting a bollocking despite being better than Murray at tiems last year, Heaslip avoids a lot of it)

The point is Earls gets criticised for not being able to pass when he obviously can and if he was as greedy as some make out, Simon Zebo would not be the prolific tryscorer that he is. There are enough jumping on that bandwagon without you adding to it.

DOD wrote:

Sin é wrote:Come off it - the criticism is over the top (i.e., the criticisms of him are that he isn't able to pass, that he is greedy and he can't defend) which would seem to suggest that people don't think he is capable of doing a job.

This season, he has struggled with injury (as O'Gara has) and needs a run of games. I expect O'Gara to start against Leinster for the same reasons.

Earls v Cave is no contest. Cave is a journeyman similar to Trimble (albeit Trimble did show some form five years ago). Keatley will play second fiddle to jj when he comes through. Keatoey plays the same way he did at connect. Good one minute, abject the next.

There are some posters here who think the new coach should build the internatonal team around suiting Andrew Trimble's skills (and dropping Bowe or Zebo to accommodate that).

I've said he did his job, has he butchered chances? Absolutely he has, name me a centre who hasn't? I'm actually defending the guy here, in an orthodox way, he gets far too much criticism, guys will always be made scapegoats, Paddy Wallace was one during his time with Ireland,there was a brief stage when Mafi got a tremendous amount of it. Earls is a good player. He does his job well a good 80% of the time, the other 20% is what people tend to remember, which is unfortunate. As for setting up Zebo, a fair few times he has made a killer pass to put him in or drawn the man well, but I don't think it's solely down to Earls alone to be fair.

Sin é wrote:

DOD wrote:

Sin é wrote:Come off it - the criticism is over the top (i.e., the criticisms of him are that he isn't able to pass, that he is greedy and he can't defend) which would seem to suggest that people don't think he is capable of doing a job.

This season, he has struggled with injury (as O'Gara has) and needs a run of games. I expect O'Gara to start against Leinster for the same reasons.

Earls v Cave is no contest. Cave is a journeyman similar to Trimble (albeit Trimble did show some form five years ago). Keatley will play second fiddle to jj when he comes through. Keatoey plays the same way he did at connect. Good one minute, abject the next.

There are some posters here who think the new coach should build the internatonal team around suiting Andrew Trimble's skills (and dropping Bowe or Zebo to accommodate that).

Ah feic it why not. Lets bring in Ian Humphreys while we are at it

Thomond wrote:I've said he did his job, has he butchered chances? Absolutely he has, name me a centre who hasn't? I'm actually defending the guy here, in an orthodox way, he gets far too much criticism, guys will always be made scapegoats, Paddy Wallace was one during his time with Ireland,there was a brief stage when Mafi got a tremendous amount of it. Earls is a good player. He does his job well a good 80% of the time, the other 20% is what people tend to remember, which is unfortunate. As for setting up Zebo, a fair few times he has made a killer pass to put him in or drawn the man well, but I don't think it's solely down to Earls alone to be fair.

Jebus Thomand you really are f...ing boring the Shiite out of me.

I have that effect on people so I'm told. I'm surprised I'm getting stick for saying people should lay off Earls though.

DOD wrote:

Thomond wrote:I've said he did his job, has he butchered chances? Absolutely he has, name me a centre who hasn't? I'm actually defending the guy here, in an orthodox way, he gets far too much criticism, guys will always be made scapegoats, Paddy Wallace was one during his time with Ireland,there was a brief stage when Mafi got a tremendous amount of it. Earls is a good player. He does his job well a good 80% of the time, the other 20% is what people tend to remember, which is unfortunate. As for setting up Zebo, a fair few times he has made a killer pass to put him in or drawn the man well, but I don't think it's solely down to Earls alone to be fair.

Jebus Thomand you really are f...ing boring the Shiite out of me.

Ok...I sincerely apologise, that was uncalled for. But please stop

Thomond wrote:I've said he did his job, has he butchered chances? Absolutely he has, name me a centre who hasn't? I'm actually defending the guy here, in an orthodox way, he gets far too much criticism, guys will always be made scapegoats, Paddy Wallace was one during his time with Ireland,there was a brief stage when Mafi got a tremendous amount of it. Earls is a good player. He does his job well a good 80% of the time, the other 20% is what people tend to remember, which is unfortunate. As for setting up Zebo, a fair few times he has made a killer pass to put him in or drawn the man well, but I don't think it's solely down to Earls alone to be fair.

This is meant to be defending Earls? Very begrudging.

First try is basic execution of an overlap, if he can't do that he has no business playing with an U-15 team never mind Munster.

I suppose you think Penney will bench Earls and keep Laulala (responsible for 3 of the tries that Munster conceeded against Glasgow) against Clermont? Zebo has a great try scoring record which would indicate that his centres try and get the ball out to him to score tries (and must be reasonably successful at it).

You haven't mentioned what you think of Cave after Friday!

Thomond wrote:I have that effect on people so I'm told. I'm surprised I'm getting stick for saying people should lay off Earls though.

Ok you aren't as bad as Stag (I don't believe he is a munsterman -too articulate to be from limerick). Who is giving you stick...cork city supporters?

DOD wrote:

Sin é wrote:

DOD wrote:

Sin é wrote:Come off it - the criticism is over the top (i.e., the criticisms of him are that he isn't able to pass, that he is greedy and he can't defend) which would seem to suggest that people don't think he is capable of doing a job.

This season, he has struggled with injury (as O'Gara has) and needs a run of games. I expect O'Gara to start against Leinster for the same reasons.

Earls v Cave is no contest. Cave is a journeyman similar to Trimble (albeit Trimble did show some form five years ago). Keatley will play second fiddle to jj when he comes through. Keatoey plays the same way he did at connect. Good one minute, abject the next.

There are some posters here who think the new coach should build the internatonal team around suiting Andrew Trimble's skills (and dropping Bowe or Zebo to accommodate that).

Ah feic it why not. Lets bring in Ian Humphreys while we are at it

Actually it was Pete who was suggesting that Trimble will do well under new management He hasn't got back to me yet on who he was going to drop to get Trimble into the team.

As for the poor man's Ian Madigan - pity he didn't have Tomas O'Leary covering his defence this year. That would have been fun at LI.

You thinking of going to Montpelier? I haven't done a trip since 08 and the semi in 2000 was my first big one...have the same feeling about this one