Ireland's November Series and Beyond...

First topic message reminder :

Right boys, I want you give realistic guess of how Ireland will do in the November tests. I want you to separate your hearts from your heads. How do you predict Ireland will do and how will this set them up for the Six nations based on your poll prediction for the Autumn tests.

Do you believe in Schmidt? Do you believe he is the catalyst for consistent success or will we yet again disappoint by firing hot and cold like recent championships have dictated. Is there cause for quite confidence or should we be holding are cards close to our chest.

Feel free to throw out your wildest aspirations on the table or to throw caution to the wind.

The rest is up to you....


Sat 9th Ireland vs Samoa - Autumn
Sat 16th Ireland vs Australia - Autumn
Sun 24th Ireland vs New Zealand

Aye, JJ is a better kicker. I'm not disputing that Jackson's kicking has been a mixture of some very good days and some very bad days. He is indeed inconsistent. My point is though that Paddy has not been suffering from a lack of opportunity on this front! He's been afforded a lot of opportunities to kick at goal.

Not bringing your bench ten on at the drop of a hat is one thing. But I don't think not having a back-up ten on the bench is giving your starting ten "full responsibility".

But opportunity..ie kicking chances... doesn't equate with kicking success.  
You always hope it leads there of course, meaning you hope that experience improves technique and that technique improves success.  But there is no natural law that says one always leads to the other.

Anyway.... two good players (amongst others!).  We should just hope Schmidt into the future picks the most effective one that will bring pleasing results to Ireland.  That's all I require.

Olding is apparently going to start at flyhalf for Ulster this weekend.

Good opportunity for him to stake a claim as the starting 10 vs NZ?





God, we don't half get carried away.

Jackson has been saying in the press this week that he isn't happy with not having the full kicking duties for Ulster. The fact that he seems capable, but isn't given them is not going to build his confidence to get that match winning kick (i.e., another Brock James & Nick Evans).

Sexton had similar issues as well when he took on the responsibly later than usual in his career.

If Jackson is so well able to handle all of this pressure, why isn't he given the kicking duties fulltime when they are in his range and let Pienaar take the long ones.

Don, it must have been a great confidence boost to JJ (after what happened against Edinburgh) that Penney backed him. He knew he was being backed for the full 80.

By the way, Conor Murray is a decent goalkicker (he kicked the first pts in the new Thomond Park).

Sin é wrote:If Jackson is so well able to handle all of this pressure, why isn't he given the kicking duties fulltime when they are in his range and let Pienaar take the long ones.

But... thats whats happening... exactly. Oh God, I'm going to get out of here before I get sucked into another one of this guys parallel universes. See y'all in a day or two.

So what would have happened if Hanrahan had been injured in the first ten? Was the purpose of this fixture to build up the confidence of JJ Hanrahan?

It's a team game. If you're saying that not having a back-up ten was so that JJ woudl feel good about himself, I'd be horrified.

Seems like we have more kickers than we know what to do with! Kearney kicked reasonably too didn't he before he stopped and admitted to getting stale.

Poor Ireland - even when we try to emerge from our Kicking era.... our kicking genes keep kicking us back that way.

Notch wrote:

Sin é wrote:If Jackson is so well able to handle all of this pressure, why isn't he given the kicking duties fulltime when they are in his range and let Pienaar take the long ones.

But... thats whats happening... exactly. Oh God, I'm going to get out of here before I get sucked into another one of this guys parallel universes. See y'all in a day or two.

What happened against Montpellier is that Pienaar took most the kicks. Jackson took the first conversion of Trimble's try, then Pienaar got the next 5 pts. He was allowed to take the last kick at the end (when the match was well won).

Don Alfonso wrote:So what would have happened if Hanrahan had been injured in the first ten? Was the purpose of this fixture to build up the confidence of JJ Hanrahan?

It's a team game. If you're saying that not having a back-up ten was so that JJ woudl feel good about himself, I'd be horrified.

Murray made Stuart Hogg look like a flyhalf on the Lions. He would have been fine covering for him in what was a big defence effort in the end. Tomas O'Leary once won MOTM in a win against the Ospreys in Wales - Paul Warwick got injured and no ROG on the bench. He scored a try and converted it as far as I remember and made a great try saving tackle on Phillips.

Oh, and Keatley was given the weekend off. He has played in every game so far this season.

SecretFly wrote:Seems like we have more kickers than we know what to do with!  Kearney kicked reasonably too didn't he before he stopped and admitted to getting stale.

Poor Ireland - even when we try to emerge from our Kicking era.... our kicking genes keep kicking us back that way.

Murray still practices.

You need a kicker so that the opposition know that they will be punished if they infringe.

Sin é wrote:

Notch wrote:

Sin é wrote:If Jackson is so well able to handle all of this pressure, why isn't he given the kicking duties fulltime when they are in his range and let Pienaar take the long ones.

But... thats whats happening... exactly. Oh God, I'm going to get out of here before I get sucked into another one of this guys parallel universes. See y'all in a day or two.

What happened against Montpellier is that Pienaar took most the kicks. Jackson took the first conversion of Trimble's try, then Pienaar got the next 5 pts. He was allowed to take the last kick at the end (when the match was well won).

Yep! Thats what happened in Montpellier. The week before Jackson took all the kicks against Leicester and the week before that he kicked against the Ospreys, another big game.

I've said many times that it'll take Jackson some time to get consistency in his kicking game. I think he will have to continue to work at it. But it's not like Ulster are not letting him have the opportunity to learn on the job. He's kicked in every Ulster game he's been in this season. He's kicked in test matches for Ireland. He's kicked in big Heineken Cup games. The last thing you can say is that he isn't getting the chance to work on his kicking.

Notch... Sin's spell is working. He has his watch out and he's dangling it over and back in front of your eyes. You're being sucked in!!!!

I'm off though.... you two get to bed before 4 in the morning now, you hear me! And I'll read the 24 pages when I tune in tomorrow

SecretFly wrote:Notch... Sin's spell is working.  He has his watch out and he's dangling it over and back in front of your eyes.   You're being sucked in!!!!

I know!!! It's... infuriating. It's like quicksand, it's when you struggle against it the effect gets worse.

Sin é wrote:

Don Alfonso wrote:So what would have happened if Hanrahan had been injured in the first ten? Was the purpose of this fixture to build up the confidence of JJ Hanrahan?

It's a team game. If you're saying that not having a back-up ten was so that JJ woudl feel good about himself, I'd be horrified.

Murray made Stuart Hogg look like a flyhalf on the Lions. He would have been fine covering for him in what was a big defence effort in the end. Tomas O'Leary once won MOTM in a win against the Ospreys in Wales - Paul Warwick got injured and no ROG on the bench. He scored a try and converted it as far as I remember and made a great try saving tackle on Phillips.

Oh, and Keatley was given the weekend off. He has played in every game so far this season.

a) It might not have been a big defensive effort at the end if Hanrahan hadn't been playing for the whole 80 - didn't he score Munster's try? So without that, they may have needed to attack at the end rather than defend. Would Murray have been as good at that?

b) Your point about O'Leary. What you're saying is that once, three and a half years ago, a scrunhalf who used to play for Munster, and now plays for an English team, had to cover flyhlaf for a player who also no longer plays for Munster, against Welsh side Ospreys, and did a good job. Is that right? Is that the point you're making about the inexperienced Hanrahan not having any cover on the bench for Munster's game against Glasgow last week? 

In response, I'd argue that camel-racing is very popular in Qatar.

Just to mention Will Greenwoods man of the 2nd round of HC games was Paddy Jackson

Johnny Sexton is indeed flying back to Paris. He's going to be in the Racing Metro 23 against Biarritz.

This isn't great in general, but it will at least illustrate to the IRFU that they can't be complacent about contract negotiations in future because there is a knock-on effect on the national squad and they are behind us in terms of conditioning over in France.

Don Alfonso wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Don Alfonso wrote:So what would have happened if Hanrahan had been injured in the first ten? Was the purpose of this fixture to build up the confidence of JJ Hanrahan?

It's a team game. If you're saying that not having a back-up ten was so that JJ woudl feel good about himself, I'd be horrified.

Murray made Stuart Hogg look like a flyhalf on the Lions. He would have been fine covering for him in what was a big defence effort in the end. Tomas O'Leary once won MOTM in a win against the Ospreys in Wales - Paul Warwick got injured and no ROG on the bench. He scored a try and converted it as far as I remember and made a great try saving tackle on Phillips.

Oh, and Keatley was given the weekend off. He has played in every game so far this season.

a) It might not have been a big defensive effort at the end if Hanrahan hadn't been playing for the whole 80 - didn't he score Munster's try? So without that, they may have needed to attack at the end rather than defend. Would Murray have been as good at that?

b) Your point about O'Leary. What you're saying is that once, three and a half years ago, a scrunhalf who used to play for Munster, and now plays for an English team, had to cover flyhlaf for a player who also no longer plays for Munster, against Welsh side Ospreys, and did a good job. Is that right? Is that the point you're making about the inexperienced Hanrahan not having any cover on the bench for Munster's game against Glasgow last week? 

In response, I'd argue that camel-racing is very popular in Qatar.

My point is that its not the first time that Munster (or Ireland) have played a match without a back-up flyhalf. Dutchy Holland was ROG's back-up for years, as was Paddy Wallace for Ireland.

geoff999rugby wrote:Just to mention Will Greenwoods man of the 2nd round of HC games was Paddy Jackson

Look, my point is that if Jackson doesn't get to grips with his place kicking and is trusted by Ulster fairly quickly, he will be overtaken by JJ Hanrahan in the not too distant future.

Notch wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Notch wrote:

Sin é wrote:If Jackson is so well able to handle all of this pressure, why isn't he given the kicking duties fulltime when they are in his range and let Pienaar take the long ones.

But... thats whats happening... exactly. Oh God, I'm going to get out of here before I get sucked into another one of this guys parallel universes. See y'all in a day or two.

What happened against Montpellier is that Pienaar took most the kicks. Jackson took the first conversion of Trimble's try, then Pienaar got the next 5 pts. He was allowed to take the last kick at the end (when the match was well won).

Yep! Thats what happened in Montpellier. The week before Jackson took all the kicks against Leicester and the week before that he kicked against the Ospreys, another big game.

I've said many times that it'll take Jackson some time to get consistency in his kicking game. I think he will have to continue to work at it. But it's not like Ulster are not letting him have the opportunity to learn on the job. He's kicked in every Ulster game he's been in this season. He's kicked in test matches for Ireland. He's kicked in big Heineken Cup games. The last thing you can say is that he isn't getting the chance to work on his kicking.

So why the feck wasn't he left with the kicking duties for Montpelier. Ulster don't trust him and that isn't good for his development.

Sin é wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Just to mention Will Greenwoods man of the 2nd round of HC games was Paddy Jackson

Look, my point is that if Jackson doesn't get to grips with his place kicking and is trusted by Ulster fairly quickly, he will be overtaken by JJ Hanrahan in the not too distant future.

Wow.

Sin é wrote:

Notch wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Notch wrote:

Sin é wrote:If Jackson is so well able to handle all of this pressure, why isn't he given the kicking duties fulltime when they are in his range and let Pienaar take the long ones.

But... thats whats happening... exactly. Oh God, I'm going to get out of here before I get sucked into another one of this guys parallel universes. See y'all in a day or two.

What happened against Montpellier is that Pienaar took most the kicks. Jackson took the first conversion of Trimble's try, then Pienaar got the next 5 pts. He was allowed to take the last kick at the end (when the match was well won).

Yep! Thats what happened in Montpellier. The week before Jackson took all the kicks against Leicester and the week before that he kicked against the Ospreys, another big game.

I've said many times that it'll take Jackson some time to get consistency in his kicking game. I think he will have to continue to work at it. But it's not like Ulster are not letting him have the opportunity to learn on the job. He's kicked in every Ulster game he's been in this season. He's kicked in test matches for Ireland. He's kicked in big Heineken Cup games. The last thing you can say is that he isn't getting the chance to work on his kicking.

So why the feck wasn't he left with the kicking duties for Montpelier. Ulster don't trust him and that isn't good for his development.

Actually Jackson took all the kicks bar the long rangers (about 50m or more) which Pienaar took.

By the way you talk about Jackson's development being hindered by place kicking.  Yet you have made no mention that JJ Hanrahan has been playing second fiddle to Ian Keatley for the 2 or 3 seasons that Hanrahan has been being touted as the next great Irish 10.  He got the nod against Glasgow last weekend but aside from that O'Gara and Keatley have been getting all the starts - do you not think that Hanrahan's development has been hindered much more on account of this, that Jackson's place kicking?

Ye're going round in circles lads! I'm sure PJ will discover a kicking technique that suits him in the not too distant future and I'm sure JJ will get more high profile games as the season goes on. Talk of Olding starting at 10 for Ulster which could make things really interesting for Ulster and Ireland!

Artful_Dodger wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Notch wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Notch wrote:

Sin é wrote:If Jackson is so well able to handle all of this pressure, why isn't he given the kicking duties fulltime when they are in his range and let Pienaar take the long ones.

But... thats whats happening... exactly. Oh God, I'm going to get out of here before I get sucked into another one of this guys parallel universes. See y'all in a day or two.

What happened against Montpellier is that Pienaar took most the kicks. Jackson took the first conversion of Trimble's try, then Pienaar got the next 5 pts. He was allowed to take the last kick at the end (when the match was well won).

Yep! Thats what happened in Montpellier. The week before Jackson took all the kicks against Leicester and the week before that he kicked against the Ospreys, another big game.

I've said many times that it'll take Jackson some time to get consistency in his kicking game. I think he will have to continue to work at it. But it's not like Ulster are not letting him have the opportunity to learn on the job. He's kicked in every Ulster game he's been in this season. He's kicked in test matches for Ireland. He's kicked in big Heineken Cup games. The last thing you can say is that he isn't getting the chance to work on his kicking.

So why the feck wasn't he left with the kicking duties for Montpelier. Ulster don't trust him and that isn't good for his development.

Actually Jackson took all the kicks bar the long rangers (about 50m or more) which Pienaar took.

Exactly - Pienaer was there to take the long ones.

Jackson is first choice kicker but if he is having a poor day or they are over a certain distance Pienaer takes over

But hey lets not stop Sin e in his delusion that:

Ulster don't trust Jackson kicking and that him playing regularly at al levels is a poorer path to take, career wise, than Hanrahan
who is not trusted to start regularly, is behind to non international standard players, but remains the best thing since sliced bread

Yer right  

SecretFly wrote:

Notch wrote:What better thing to bring him on than competition? He'll develop consistency and I don't think sharing the kicking duties hurts him very much. Battling with Pienaar for the role will both develop his resilience, which has already been helped by the pressures he's came through, and give him a focus to improve his kicking. I would wager that he has both taken more kicks at goal in general than Hanrahan this year and taken more pressure kicks.

In the interests of fairness and because I was just curious:

Kicking.  As we all agree, a kicker kicks what is earned by his team and kicking isn't influenced by the opposition as they have to all stand back and let the kicker kick.  So number of kicks is not really indicative of kicking ability and neither is the opposition relevant to kicking.

Pro12

Paddy has 1 Try  3 conversions and 17 penalties (20 successful kicks) from 465 minutes on the field
JJ has 2 Tries 7 Conversions and 10 penalties (17 successful kicks) from 244 minutes on the field

Paddy has indeed taken more kicks  - 20 successful kicks to JJ's 18 attempts.  I don't know (can't find) how many attempts Paddy has made.

Kicking and hitting the target top spot though (Pro12 Golden Boot) goes to JJ so far in Pro12 competition.  17 hits from 18 attempts.

They are interesting stats and regardless of the discussion above are good news for Munster at least...

Paddy Jackson wrote:
He is far more composed and effective from the kicking tee but he does admit to experiencing some frustration when kicking duties are taken from him with Ulster.

He's now more used to seeing Ruan Pienaar handed the kicking duties – "when it first happened I tried to overdo things but it is something I've gotten used to" – but insists he is currently happy with that facet of his game.

"The first few games this season I just decided I was kicking and I was kicking well. I think I was maybe 13 of 14.

"Ruan's got a longer kick than me – darn those long legs! – so if we needed those from further out then he took them.

"I missed a few last weekend but I'm feeling confident in my kicking at the moment so I don't see any reason why I shouldn't be kicking."

With his kicking yips from last season hopefully well and truly behind him, Jackson is keen to move on to the next evolution of his career and is looking forward to working with Schmidt.

There were 3 misses against Montpelier. Is that not why Pienaar took over?

Notch wrote:Johnny Sexton is indeed flying back to Paris. He's going to be in the Racing Metro 23 against Biarritz.

This isn't great in general, but it will at least illustrate to the IRFU that they can't be complacent about contract negotiations in future because there is a knock-on effect on the national squad and they are behind us in terms of conditioning over in France.

Agreed on that Notch. If he plays any part I cant see Sexton starting against Samoa. Schmidt has already called out that he looked flat in training and has lost 3kg since he start of the season.

Part of me worries that the blazers will try to use this as a warning to players thinking of moving to france along the lines of "if you leave those evil clubs dont look after you like we do", rather than pay them something closer to the market rate. I have a sinking feeling we'll see a good 6-7 quality players move abroad over the next 2 seasons.

I doubt it and if we do I'd imagine it will only be old guys at the end of their career like D'arcy for example or guys like Hart that didnt make the Leinster academy.

The IRFU do pay the players very well as is. I dont think you can call French wages "the market rate". Wages over there are inflated due to wealthy ownership. Rates in Ireland are fair.

Sexton has always been a fairly egotistic character. Therefore, I fail to see how his contract negotiations set the trend for the flood gates to open.

As you say I expect the reverse is more likely in that others will see how playing abroad serves as more of a barrier to international inclusion and career longevity. Not too concerned.

That's kinda the balancing act players will have to do.  And I hope most of them do their thinking on their own without their Mr 15% agents whispering sweet everythings in their ear.

The balancing act is do you go abroad under the incentive of higher wages, more workload and potentially a shorter playing career (burn out risks)

or

Do you stay at home on a lesser pay packet but still potentially earn more money in real terms from your career as a result of a longer stint playing at top Provincial level.

The agent will look for quick money because it's not his legs doing the work and he'll earn on regardless of a player's career ending abruptly.
The player really does have to think about the details of what he wants, both monetarily and as regards career achievements.
The highest bid isn't always going to be the best bid on either of those two fronts.

Artful_Dodger wrote:By the way you talk about Jackson's development being hindered by place kicking.  Yet you have made no mention that JJ Hanrahan has been playing second fiddle to Ian Keatley for the 2 or 3 seasons that Hanrahan has been being touted as the next great Irish 10.  He got the nod against Glasgow last weekend but aside from that O'Gara and Keatley have been getting all the starts - do you not think that Hanrahan's development has been hindered much more on account of this, that Jackson's place kicking?

Ah no, an easy mistake to make. Penney is showing his faith in Hanrahan by slowly feeding him into the team and not picking him for big games. Ulster on the other hand are showing they don't trust Jackson by making him undisputed first choice 10.

Certainly with all this gametime we risk turning Jackson into the next Brock James, whereas by giving Hanrahan less gametime and less opportunities to kick at goal Penney is bringing Hanrahan through like Dan Carter. Understand now?

littlejohn wrote:Part of me worries that the blazers will try to use this as a warning to players thinking of moving to france along the lines of "if you leave those evil clubs dont look after you like we do", rather than pay them something closer to the market rate.

Well they might try and lowball them but they aren't wrong when they say that players are looked after far, far better in Ireland than anywhere else in Europe.

Isn't the French govt. imposing a 75% tax on super high earners? I know the issue is tearing apart French football but nobody seems to have talked about the implications for Top14 rugby.

theslosty wrote:Isn't the French govt. imposing a 75% tax on super high earners? I know the issue is tearing apart French football but nobody seems to have talked about the implications for Top14 rugby.

Depends as to what is classed as a super high earner in France.  Would someone earning under a million a year be in the super high bracket?  Maybe they would.  If so, yeah - it has implications.

So much newness entering into the rugby world right now, it's hard to keep up with them or their implications into the second half of this decade.

littlejohn wrote:

Notch wrote:Johnny Sexton is indeed flying back to Paris. He's going to be in the Racing Metro 23 against Biarritz.

This isn't great in general, but it will at least illustrate to the IRFU that they can't be complacent about contract negotiations in future because there is a knock-on effect on the national squad and they are behind us in terms of conditioning over in France.

Agreed on that Notch. If he plays any part I cant see Sexton starting against Samoa. Schmidt has already called out that he looked flat in training and has lost 3kg since he start of the season.

Part of me worries that the blazers will try to use this as a warning to players thinking of moving to france along the lines of "if you leave those evil clubs dont look after you like we do", rather than pay them something closer to the market rate. I have a sinking feeling we'll see a good 6-7 quality players move abroad over the next 2 seasons.

The IRFU are not going to compete with silly money and rightly so. They have a limit and any player who wants more than that is free to leave. Thats the proper way to run things otherwise things will spiral out of control.

I don't think people should just dismiss players moving as a bad thing - there are pros and cons.

As an international nation we've been pretty dire recently and historically so to have the insular notion that our system is superior and gets the best out of our players is a bit fanciful.

The player welfare system has failed on a number of fronts - injury prevention, team and individual performance, results in international tournaments.

Lets see how Sexton and any other exiles do over a prolonged period before judging whether or not the move has been detrimental to the team and player.

profitius wrote:
The IRFU are not going to compete with silly money and rightly so. They have a limit and any player who wants more than that is free to leave. Thats the proper way to run things otherwise things will spiral out of control.

I agree.

rodders wrote:I don't think people should just dismiss players moving as a bad thing - there are pros and cons.

As an international nation we've been pretty dire recently and historically so to have the insular notion that our system is superior and gets the best out of our players is a bit fanciful.

The player welfare system has failed on a number of fronts - injury prevention, team and individual performance, results in international tournaments.

Lets see how Sexton and any other exiles do over a prolonged period before judging whether or not the move has been detrimental to the team and player.

Thats not true at all Rodders. Since rugby became professional the Irish squad has steadily improved. It is only in the last couple of years that results have started to dip albeit Ireland were still one of the few teams to beat the best team in the NH last year.

I agree with you on injury prevention. That is something that needs to be readdressed. In the O'Sullivan era despite less rotation there were a lot less injuries. The game seems to become more driven by higher impact all the time so this probably accounts for some of the injuries however, it probably isnt the only reason.

In any case rugby is more a squad game now than ever so it makes sense that the IRFU cleverly introduced the quota on foreign players per position that everyone whinged about for months on end.

GunsGerms wrote:Thats not true at all Rodders. Since rugby became professional the Irish squad has steadily improved. It is only in the last couple of years that results have started to dip albeit Ireland were still one of the few teams to beat the best team in the NH last year.

I agree with you on injury prevention. That is something that needs to be readdressed. In the O'Sullivan era despite less rotation there were a lot less injuries. The game seems to become more driven by higher impact all the time so this probably accounts for some of the injuries however, it probably isnt the only reason.

No that's not the point Guns.

The point is relative to countries employing different domestic systems we haven't done any better internationally, therefore there is no tangible evidence that the player welfare system, and reduced number of games, has any benefits -other than anecdotal- in terms of international performance, nor that by playing more domestic games that this will be detrimental.

We simply don't have the international results to support this view, other teams manage to play more games and achieve comparable or better results.

Our best performer for a number of seasons was Tommy Bowe and he was playing much more games than the home based players.

SecretFly wrote:

theslosty wrote:Isn't the French govt. imposing a 75% tax on super high earners? I know the issue is tearing apart French football but nobody seems to have talked about the implications for Top14 rugby.

Depends as to what is classed as a super high earner in France.  Would someone earning under a million a year be in the super high bracket?  Maybe they would.  If so, yeah - it has implications.

So much newness entering into the rugby world right now, it's hard to keep up with them or their implications into the second half of this decade.

this tax is only applicable for anything earned over a million per year so yes applicable to footballers but long way to go for rugby players to earn that kind of money...

rodders wrote:I don't think people should just dismiss players moving as a bad thing - there are pros and cons.

As an international nation we've been pretty dire recently and historically so to have the insular notion that our system is superior and gets the best out of our players is a bit fanciful.

The player welfare system has failed on a number of fronts - injury prevention, team and individual performance, results in international tournaments.

Lets see how Sexton and any other exiles do over a prolonged period before judging whether or not the move has been detrimental to the team and player.

That's all true in the context you mention, Rodders.

I still am not inclined and won't be inclined in the future to 'follow' Racing, or to follow, and treat as my 'club' side, Leicester or Saracens or Castres etc simply because those are the places most of my International players might fly in from in years to come.

If that's happening in the future, then Irish rugby will already be a shell with the embers of Provincial power only a memory, as they get on with their lesser role of 'breeding' young 'uns for the Big Daddy sides of European grandeur and excellence.

Nothing against players going off and doing what they want to do if that's their decision; but Irish rugby (despite an increasingly grim International period under one coach) is and has been hitting above its weight in this professional age because most of our top players stayed at home.  Provincial success proves that and, overall, we haven't done too badly in 6N history either - much more consistent than up and down Wales.

The LNR and PRL would love us to give up the ghost and admit defeat to 'market forces' - throw our hands in the air and say it's over.  Then they'd start plan B and kill two birds with one stone.  Taking our best players would be the first bird; and killing us off as a competitive opponent at club level would be the second bird.  

Because you can be certain that if Irish players can be lured away, then the foreign players who turn up because of present Provincial reputations can certainly be lured away.  And if best players go, then expertise can easily be siphoned off too.  Coaching panels would also be lured away.  

Schmidt didn't come to Leinster because they were a bitsy side of rookies looking for a bail out.  He came because he knew his career might get a rise out of it, considering the raw materials already available to him.

I think the structure of the northern hemisphere season handicaps NH countries. Players' fitness and form etc have to be juggled so they peak in certain times of year. The problem is they have to peak from when the HEC starts to when the season ends.


Ideally we'd have a more SH like system where the HEC would start later in the season and the international matches would start a week or two later. That would allow the international players a longer summer off and it would also allow them to ease into the season like the SH players do.


Its an interesting topic which deserves its own thread.

rodders wrote:
No that's not the point Guns.

The point is relative to countries employing different domestic systems we haven't done any better internationally, therefore there is no tangible evidence that the player welfare system, and reduced number of games, has any benefits -other than anecdotal- in terms of international performance, nor that by playing more domestic games that this will be detrimental.

We simply don't have the international results to support this view, other teams manage to play more games and achieve comparable or better results.

Our best performer for a number of seasons was Tommy Bowe and he was playing much more games than the home based players.

When Tommy was at the Ospreys he was quite young. Player welfare in my opinion is particularly important for players who are in the last five years of their career.

In any case Im not sure that the aim of player welfare is to make to players better players but to bast manage our relatively thin pool of professionals.

You argue that compared to other countries we arent getting the results however, more importantly compared to Irelands results before the domestic structures you reference were put in place our results are far surperior. This is a far more important consideration. At least now Ireland are competitive.

Fly -

We have over a period of 12 seasons had good times and bad, with a number of coaches. That doesn't prove anything in relation to us retaining players and the systems that we implement domestically.

We have never gone beyond the QF stage of a RWC and have a solitary GS/6N title in this period. If you think that constitutes punching above our weight then I don't know what Wales and the pumas have been doing - nor the French who we are told flog their players and also employ many intl players from other nations.... hell the perennially injured Jonny Wilkinson revived his career there..

In terms of Leinster and the provinces - well that is a totally separate debate.

Look I'm not for a mass exodus and remember the 90s well but at the same time I don't think we can make a blanket claim that staying here is always in the best interest of the player and the international team - or that our systems are more likely to maximise performance than others.

There are pros and cons and the detriments and benefits of players leaving will take time to become apparent.

GunsGerms wrote:When Tommy was at the Ospreys he was quite young. Player welfare in my opinion is particularly important for players who are in the last five years of their career.

In any case Im not sure that the aim of player welfare is to make to players better players but to bast manage our relatively thin pool of professionals.

Totally agree about Tommy but that is my point - it depends on the individual and the stage of the career the player is at.

If the aim is to manage our thin resources then it isn't working because the reduced playing and increased emphasis on training hasn't reduced the number of injuries.

Also if we aren't open to players moving then these thin resources are unlikely to grow. In fact the only scope for increasing our player pool is by supporting players to move if it is in the interest of the player and team.

On the subject of Ireland captain. I think Schmidt is managing it quite well. He is really playing down the importance of the captaincy, even suggesting there may be multiple captains. I think there was too much scrutany on Heaslip when given the nod as too much was made of it. The hulabaloo was ridiculous.

Aparently if POC is fit he will be given the nod which is the best choice if you ask me. If not it will be given to POM or Best. I would be happy with Best but POM as I dont see him as a guarenteed starter nor experienced enough (16 caps) to take on the role.

rodders wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:When Tommy was at the Ospreys he was quite young. Player welfare in my opinion is particularly important for players who are in the last five years of their career.

In any case Im not sure that the aim of player welfare is to make to players better players but to bast manage our relatively thin pool of professionals.

Totally agree about Tommy but that is my point - it depends on the individual and the stage of the career the player is at.

If the aim is to manage our thin resources then it isn't working because the reduced playing and increased emphasis on training hasn't reduced the number of injuries.

Also if we aren't open to players moving then these thin resources are unlikely to grow. In fact the only scope for increasing our player pool is by supporting players to move if it is in the interest of the player and team.

Do you not think its best to have our elite players in Ireland and the fringe ones plying their trade elsewhere?

If a player isnt good enough to make the grade then extra games will benefit them in improving. James Hart (Grenoble), Robin Copeland (Cardiff) were off the radar until they went abroad.

I think guys like this have a better chance of making a name for themselves abroad than established guys like O'Leary or Stringer who are on the AP scrap heap.

Guys like Downey and Ross revived their career abroad for example. I think thats the way it should be anyway.

I think he's waiting to see whether O'Connell or O'Driscoll can take part in the internationals.

If he planned on Heaslip captaining he'd have named him already I think.

O'Connell looks like he is the preferred choice.

GunsGerms wrote:
Do you not think its best to have our elite players in Ireland and the fringe ones plying their trade elsewhere?

I'm going to say yes ...... but not necessarily. If an individual player feels unhappy or that he needs another challenge elsewhere then its better for all parties if he leaves.

Also being too insular is not good and if all our players were based here then that wouldn't be good for the team either. That experience of other leagues and cultures is good to have in the camp.

rodders wrote:Fly -

We have never gone beyond the QF stage of a RWC and have a solitary GS/6N title in this period. If you think that constitutes punching above our weight then I don't know what Wales and the pumas have been doing - nor the French who we are told flog their players and also employ many intl players from other nations.... hell the perennially injured Jonny Wilkinson revived his career there..

In terms of Leinster and the provinces - well that is a totally separate debate.

It is and we have been punching above our weight, Rodders.  That's the very point.  Where did we come from?  Where you've come from dictates how much you're punching above your weight.

We came from pre-Professionalism.  That's what we emerged out of.  And what was Ireland pre-professionalism?  Not just the 90s.  Our 'history' against our neighbours is a lot longer than the 90s.  You mention Wales as if we had a right to be outplaying them through the last 13 years or so.  Where would that opinion come from?  Certanly not our history against Wales in the preceding decades.

We are hitting above our weight... all through the last decade was hitting above our weight.  It might not have been as successful as you or I wanted, but what right had we to expect anything else?  The Six Nations emerges and all of a sudden we're expecting ourselves to take Slam after Slam in the first decade of professionalism?  We had nothing to base such expectations on.  

No, we got to third in the World Rankings (higher than Wales has got since the rankings were created.)  We have third highest win ratio in the 6N - just two games off France and England.  Our provinces have five of the last 8 HCs - three of our four Provinces have won it.

Our problem is that we think we've been around for ever at this Professionalism lark.  No, it's only a baby - and Ireland has done pretty okay considering what it came from.  Consolidating the real and quick advances we've made since professionalism, and forging ahead into a longer term view, is what IRFU should now be planning for.  No they're not doing everything right - of course the plans need honing all the time as you learn what is going good and learn what could be improved.

But I hope most of us believe we can do all that here - at home - instead of begging our International players off big European rubgy bases into the future... or worse still, chasing down Irish grannys in foreign fields.