Ireland vs Italy, 8th March

First topic message reminder :

IRELAND VS ITALY

Date: Saturday, March 8
Kick-off: 14:30 GMT
Venue: Aviva Stadium, Dublin
Referee: Nigel Owens (Wales)
Assistant referees: Pascal Gauzère (France), Greg Garner (England)
Television match official: Geoff Warren (England)
Assessor: Andrew Cole (Australia)

IRELAND TEAM wrote:15 Rob Kearney, 14 Andrew Trimble, 13 Brian O'Driscoll, 12 Gordon D'Arcy, 11 Dave Kearney, 10 Jonathan Sexton, 9 Conor Murray, 8 Jamie Heaslip, 7 Chris Henry, 6 Iain Henderson, 5 Paul O'Connell (c), 4 Devin Toner, 3 Mike Ross, 2 Rory Best, 1 Cian Healy.

16 Sean Cronin, 17 Jack McGrath, 18 Martin Moore, 19 Rhys Ruddock, 20 Jordi Murphy, 21 Eoin Reddan, 22 Paddy Jackson, 23 Fergus McFadden.

ITALY TEAM wrote:15 Luke McLean, 14 Angelo Esposito, 13 Michele Campagnaro, 12 Gonzalo Garcia, 11 Leonardo Sarto, 10 Luciano Orquera, 9 Tito Tebaldi, 8 Robert Barbieri, 7 Paul Derbyshire, 6 Joshua Furno, 5 Marco Bortolami (c), 4 Quentin Geldenhuys, 3 Martin Castrogiovanni, 2 Leonardo Ghiraldini, 1 Alberto de Marchi

16 David Giazzon, 17 Michele Rizzo, 18 Lorenzo Cittadini, 19 Antonio Pavanello, 20 Manoa Vosawai, 21 Edoardo Gori, 22 Tommaso Allan, 23 Andrea Masi

If we win this game by a larger margin than the winners of the other two games achieve then it's very, very simple- we set up a Cup Final for ourselves in Paris to win the Championship. We do already have the best points difference but we have a chance to settle the issue of points difference beyond all doubt and make this a very simple equation. An Ireland win in Paris, and we are champions. We are out to score and Joe Schmidt has named his strongest available team.

Italy have chosen to rotate their squad with half an eye on targeting the final game against England, Sergio Parisse is rested along with the first choice halfbacks in a team with a more experimental look. Tito Tebaldi and Andrea Masi make long awaited returns to the Italian match day squad and Luciano Orquera will hope to recapture the form which saw him perform so well in some famous Italian victories in the 2013 campaign.

There'll be plenty of applause for a retiring legend... but no room for sentiment. A ruthless and clinical performance is required.

1. Results...none of the big five beaten yet (all will be forgiven if he beats France away)
2. Change in personnel...has gone backwards...
3. Most of the improvements are in the forward play....remind me who the forwards coach is?

so far B- (must do better Joe)

GunsGerms wrote:

ME-109 wrote:Havent said anything much about him lately as he isnt going to be taken into consideration. Just pointing out the deficiencies that we currently appear to have...maybe someone should tell Joe its not the HC...

Seems strange not to be focusing on the vast improvements he has made on the teams performances rather than the things that still need some work.

Englands progress for example has been in phases and methodical. You can plot their improvement as follows as I see it.

-Lancaster came in an firstly improved dicipline. Adopoted a zero tolerance stance.
-England then build a simple game plan around a cohesive pack, competitive breakdown and strong set pieces and very basic back moves.
- Backs slowly become more cohesive, mistakes decrease and endevour increases.

Schmidt similarly in my opinion has deconstructed our team and started from the start too. Improvements so far include:

Dicipline - less penalties than ever.
Defence - 1 try conceded in three games.
Set piece - scrum, lineout and maul have improved.
Organisation - Everyone seems to have a better idea what their role in each scenario.
Tactics - There have been different tactics for every game and we are no longer predictable.

That is a lot of improvements. Flair and attacking nous are usually the last things to come once the basics are mastered and confidence and cohesion improves. We are on the right road to achieving that.

100% spot on Guns .... .the flair and attacking nous will come next season when Jared Payne qualifies ....

Jared Payne is old enough to be retiring on the first day of the WC isn't he?

That's an inconvenient retirement date, Jared! Left us with a bit of a typical Irish WC mess there. Thanks a bunch

Gees fly being 31 just about gets you in the Ireland u-20s side!

ME-109 wrote:1. Results...none of the big five beaten yet (all will be forgiven if he beats France away)
2. Change in personnel...has gone backwards...
3. Most of the improvements are in the forward play....remind me who the forwards coach is?

so far B- (must do better Joe)

1. We have certainly come closer to beating the big five. The results in this years six nations were already better after two games. Improvement.
2. Just because there are less Munster players doesnt mean the selections are wrong. Inconsequental.
3. No, I already pointed out all the improvements. Of the five I mentioned only one specifically relates to the forwards. Improvement.

Please try harder DOD. Would you really prefer to go back to "we will give it a lash" Ireland under Mr Potato head?

  

ME-109 wrote:1. Results...none of the big five beaten yet (all will be forgiven if he beats France away)
2. Change in personnel...has gone backwards...
3. Most of the improvements are in the forward play....remind me who the forwards coach is?

so far B- (must do better Joe)

B+ for me.

Closest ever game against NZ and far better team structure.
(Only Australia was a negative).
Which personnel changes have gone backwards

Much better than your predecessor Joe.

As some boys at mature (Jackson, Olding, Marmion) and 1 other becomes eligable (Payne) Ireland will be fine with attacking potential in the backs

Apart from the Australian game which was a disaster I don't think anything else could be asked for at this stage.

rodders wrote:Gees fly being 31 just about gets you in the Ireland u-20s side!

   

I'd have to agree with ME here. (and he'll of course forgive me)

B- for Joe so far. Which was a pretty neat result in my day...before the 16 A+s students started turning up with their calculators allowed in exams and the biggest encyclopedia in the world in the guise of Mr Net!!!

A+ me arse!

B- gives lots of room for improvement which is why I like it as this point. I'd be even tempted to think genuinely more C- ish

When I was in School, I never paid much attention to the midterm grades. Finals were the key- and it's looking like the away game in Paris is our Final in every sense of the word. So judge him on that.

Schmidt (and his other coaches - who must not be forgotten - as I didn't forget to blame more than one coach for the stuff of the past) is doing better than I expected so far.

But that doesn't mean A.  A is an ideal of perfection.  I like it that he has much to work on into the year and beyond. Like I said, B- is a fine grade for now and even if we win the Championship and we beat France well (tall ask even against the mad boys!) then it might still be an overall B- from me.  

This entire Championship, result and all, is a beginning.

Ok with B- but if that is a fair grade, which I think it is, then in the interest of consistancy the older boy in the class (D. Kidney) needs to be regraded to a D+ for his term as class rep.

geoff998rugby wrote:  

ME-109 wrote:1. Results...none of the big five beaten yet (all will be forgiven if he beats France away)
2. Change in personnel...has gone backwards...
3. Most of the improvements are in the forward play....remind me who the forwards coach is?

so far B- (must do better Joe)

B+ for me.

Closest ever game against NZ and far better team structure.
(Only Australia was a negative).
Which personnel changes have gone backwards

Much better than your predecessor Joe.

As some boys at mature (Jackson, Olding, Marmion) and 1 other becomes eligable (Payne) Ireland will be fine with attacking potential in the backs

Just to note we only lost by 1 point to NZ in 63, drew with them in 73, and have only lost by three points away twice. At least in the 22-19 loss we actually competed for 80 mins. Oh and his predecessor won a GS and was unbeaten over 10 games. Including a win against SA. But that neither here nor there as you brought it up.

Personnel changes = same old same old backline (and I mean old backline).

Beat France and he more than likely wins a championship...which would be close to B+ but lose and its mid table mediocrity...no change from last year...

geoff998rugby wrote:Ok with B- but if that is a fair grade, which I think it is, then in the interest of consistancy the older boy in the class (D. Kidney) needs to be regraded to a D+ for his term as class rep.

Wow you think winning a GS = D+ but you would give JS a B+ for beating Samoa, Scotland and Wales....

ME-109 wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:  

ME-109 wrote:1. Results...none of the big five beaten yet (all will be forgiven if he beats France away)
2. Change in personnel...has gone backwards...
3. Most of the improvements are in the forward play....remind me who the forwards coach is?

so far B- (must do better Joe)

B+ for me.

Closest ever game against NZ and far better team structure.
(Only Australia was a negative).
Which personnel changes have gone backwards

Much better than your predecessor Joe.

As some boys at mature (Jackson, Olding, Marmion) and 1 other becomes eligable (Payne) Ireland will be fine with attacking potential in the backs

Just to note we only lost by 1 point to NZ in 63, drew with them in 73, and have only lost by three points away twice. At least in the 22-19 loss we actually competed for 80 mins. Oh and his predecessor won a GS and was unbeaten over 10 games. Including a win against SA. But that neither here nor there as you brought it up.

Personnel changes = same old same old backline (and I mean old backline).

Beat France and he more than likely wins a championship...which would be close to B+ but lose and its mid table mediocrity...no change from last year...

We have already improved on last year. its really hard for you to acknowledge that isnt it?

We have already scored more tries than last year with Italy at home to come.
Already have more wins than last year and have yet to play last years wooden spooner and this years bottom team.
We have conceded five times less tries than last year at this point.
Conceded way less penalties.

This time last year we were heading towards the wooden spoon. Right now this year we are top of the table with a real chance of winning the competition.

I dont understand your point re the results v NZ in 63 and 73. How does that prove or deny any signs of improvement for this team?

Kidney won a grand slam in a weaker field. Massive achievement but achieved very little after that.

Maybe it was a case of passing a tight jar around until last person manages to open it aided by everyone elses efforts beforehand? His failure to progress in any way post '09 suggests that may have been the case.

I think that winning a championship in his first year when we have away games in Paris and London would be a big achievement, only slightly less than Kidneys inaugural Grand Slam. The even numbered years are traditionally harder for us. Bearing in mind that that Slam is the only time we've been Six Nations champions in the professional era it would be a fairly big deal. It would also be a big deal to get a win in Paris.

Lose in Paris and beat Italy, and it's a slightly disappointing year with many promising features, a reason for cautious optimism.

But you can't ever get an A for just winning well against NH sides.

No need to write off Kidneys Slam either, he really got the players believing in themselves and working together that year. It's a massive shame the slow unravelling of that belief happened from 2010 on but that doesn't change the fact we started very well under Kidney.

Notch wrote:No need to write off Kidneys Slam either, he really got the players believing in themselves and working together that year. It's a massive shame the slow unravelling of that belief happened from 2010 on but that doesn't change the fact we started very well under Kidney.

Wouldnt dream of it. I think its fair to acknowledge that we had been building towards a slam under Gatland and EOS too who both came close and contributed in no small part to the '09 success themselves.

ME-109 wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:  

ME-109 wrote:1. Results...none of the big five beaten yet (all will be forgiven if he beats France away)
2. Change in personnel...has gone backwards...
3. Most of the improvements are in the forward play....remind me who the forwards coach is?

so far B- (must do better Joe)

B+ for me.

Closest ever game against NZ and far better team structure.
(Only Australia was a negative).
Which personnel changes have gone backwards

Much better than your predecessor Joe.

As some boys at mature (Jackson, Olding, Marmion) and 1 other becomes eligable (Payne) Ireland will be fine with attacking potential in the backs

Just to note we only lost by 1 point to NZ in 63, drew with them in 73, and have only lost by three points away twice. At least in the 22-19 loss we actually competed for 80 mins. Oh and his predecessor won a GS and was unbeaten over 10 games. Including a win against SA. But that neither here nor there as you brought it up.

Personnel changes = same old same old backline (and I mean old backline).

Beat France and he more than likely wins a championship...which would be close to B+ but lose and its mid table mediocrity...no change from last year...

I am well aware of those result but I still maintain that the recent loss was the nearest we got to a win

So no personnel changes = personnel changes  

If we beat Italy and lose to France we will have 3 wins and finish in the top half of the table.
Last year we won 1 game and finished 5th - you think that is the same.

We are a much better team than we were this time last year

ME-109 wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:Ok with B- but if that is a fair grade, which I think it is, then in the interest of consistancy the older boy in the class (D. Kidney) needs to be regraded to a D+ for his term as class rep.

Wow you think winning a GS = D+ but you would give JS a B+ for beating Samoa, Scotland and Wales....

He did show great early promise but didn't maintain it.
By the time he left we were a poor side.

Schmidt has only been in charge for 6 games and has already shown a better understanding of what is required at the top level.

The Grand Slam was brilliant but for me:
Schmidt
O'Sullivan
Kidney

in that order

Cant argue with that.

Feel like those who are supportive of Schmidt and those who are less so are both massively jumping the gun in terms of judging him already. We're only halfway through his first Six Nations!

ME-109 wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:Ok with B- but if that is a fair grade, which I think it is, then in the interest of consistancy the older boy in the class (D. Kidney) needs to be regraded to a D+ for his term as class rep.

Wow you think winning a GS = D+ but you would give JS a B+ for beating Samoa, Scotland and Wales....

Kidneys reign didn't end in 2009,he achieved something remarkable that year however the longer he was at the helm the worse the results became.That in itself pretty much sums up his tenure.

Notch wrote:Feel like those who are supportive of Schmidt and those who are less so are both massively jumping the gun in terms of judging him already. We're only halfway through his first Six Nations!

Not basing my assessment just on his tenure at Ireland but Leinster as well.

I've seen enough to convince me he is a superior coach to Kidney

Scores for Deccie:

2009 B+, GS, unbeaten- during a lions year so the best team we beat away was Wales.

2010 C-, Lost at home to Scotland!!

2011 D- bar 2 heroic performances, it was shocking. Wales in the WC was proof he was out of his depth, brain dead tactics.

2012 D poor performances, no squad development, poor performances rewarded with caps, shocking use of the bench/.

2013 F total disaster

GunsGerms wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:  

ME-109 wrote:1. Results...none of the big five beaten yet (all will be forgiven if he beats France away)
2. Change in personnel...has gone backwards...
3. Most of the improvements are in the forward play....remind me who the forwards coach is?

so far B- (must do better Joe)

B+ for me.

Closest ever game against NZ and far better team structure.
(Only Australia was a negative).
Which personnel changes have gone backwards

Much better than your predecessor Joe.

As some boys at mature (Jackson, Olding, Marmion) and 1 other becomes eligable (Payne) Ireland will be fine with attacking potential in the backs

Just to note we only lost by 1 point to NZ in 63, drew with them in 73, and have only lost by three points away twice. At least in the 22-19 loss we actually competed for 80 mins. Oh and his predecessor won a GS and was unbeaten over 10 games. Including a win against SA. But that neither here nor there as you brought it up.

Personnel changes = same old same old backline (and I mean old backline).

Beat France and he more than likely wins a championship...which would be close to B+ but lose and its mid table mediocrity...no change from last year...

We have already improved on last year. its really hard for you to acknowledge that isnt it?

We have already scored more tries than last year with Italy at home to come.
Already have more wins than last year and have yet to play last years wooden spooner and this years bottom team.
We have conceded five times less tries than last year at this point.
Conceded way less penalties.

This time last year we were heading towards the wooden spoon. Right now this year we are top of the table with a real chance of winning the competition.

I dont understand your point re the results v NZ in 63 and 73. How does that prove or deny any signs of improvement for this team?

Kidney won a grand slam in a weaker field. Massive achievement but achieved very little after that.

Maybe it was a case of passing a tight jar around until last person manages to open it aided by everyone elses efforts beforehand? His failure to progress in any way post '09 suggests that may have been the case.

The point about NZ is that it was brought up as an improvement but we have come close before...still didnt win though.

You arent reading what I am saying (and it doesnt differ from Fly). The improvements we have made in certain areas are impressive. However dont get too carried away with wins over teams we would be expected to beat. Everyone else is bringing up DK but as I said before the Fine Gael argument (it was the previous crowds fault) begins to falter.

Your argument on the GS is absolute rubbish regarding a weaker field, because we have done it so often in the past right?

Anyway regardless the team has to beat one of the big five yet to show advancement (I dont think thats too controversial do you?). Look at the game last weekend and read Quinlans article today. England beat us relatively comfortably and left a lot of points out on the pitch. We almost nicked it but didnt quite...unlucky...

We have a chance to win a championship by winning away in France. To my mind this would be very good if we do because it requires the win in France. Even though we won in 2003 it was against Frances third team (if you recall they were missing about 12 - 15 players due to injury) so this time would be excellent.

The other main concern is the manner of our play. Outside of the forwards its not great and he is to my mind being conservative in his selection.

Not a huge amount of controversy there, just not too much fawning either.

ME-109 wrote:

We have a chance to win a championship by winning away in France. To my mind this would be very good if we do because it requires the win in France. Even though we won in 2003 it was against Frances third team (if you recall they were missing about 12 - 15 players due to injury) so this time would be excellent.

The other main concern is the manner of our play. Outside of the forwards its not great and he is to my mind being conservative in his selection.

Not a huge amount of controversy there, just not too much fawning either.

Fair enough. To be honest, I'll judge him on what happens post-BOD in terms of our back play! And I hope Marshall gets the nod for Italy, would like to see Zebo involved but think he might have to wait until the summer tour now.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:Ok with B- but if that is a fair grade, which I think it is, then in the interest of consistancy the older boy in the class (D. Kidney) needs to be regraded to a D+ for his term as class rep.

Wow you think winning a GS = D+ but you would give JS a B+ for beating Samoa, Scotland and Wales....

Kidneys reign didn't end in 2009,he achieved something remarkable that year however the longer he was at the helm the worse the results became.That in itself pretty much sums up his tenure.

No you are correct it didnt. But he did win all the group games in the 2011 world cup winning against Aus (and not at home). A Kidney team won three in a row against England (EOS four in a row) etc.

Up to this point JS hasnt done anything remarkable that is the point. Hopefully that will change.

Its a B-/C+ for me

Australia game was terrible somewhat mitgated by the All Blacks performance.

He has done absolutely nothing about sorting out the centres which is a timebomb waiting to happen.

Our back play is pedestrian and resembles Munster from last year.

His spat with Zebo has potentially has cost us a grand slam.

Positives, set pieces are stonger than ever and there appears to be a unity in the squad.

Still the best man for the job no agruements but maybe not the saviour everybody was predicting.

ME-109 wrote:The point about NZ is that it was brought up as an improvement but we have come close before...still didnt win though.

You arent reading what I am saying (and it doesnt differ from Fly). The improvements we have made in certain areas are impressive. However dont get too carried away with wins over teams we would be expected to beat. Everyone else is bringing up DK but as I said before the Fine Gael argument (it was the previous crowds fault) begins to falter.

Your argument on the GS is absolute rubbish regarding a weaker field, because we have done it so often in the past right?

Anyway regardless the team has to beat one of the big five yet to show advancement (I dont think thats too controversial do you?). Look at the game last weekend and read Quinlans article today. England beat us relatively comfortably and left a lot of points out on the pitch. We almost nicked it but didnt quite...unlucky...

We have a chance to win a championship by winning away in France. To my mind this would be very good if we do because it requires the win in France. Even though we won in 2003 it was against Frances third team (if you recall they were missing about 12 - 15 players due to injury) so this time would be excellent.

The other main concern is the manner of our play. Outside of the forwards its not great and he is to my mind being conservative in his selection.

Not a huge amount of controversy there, just not too much fawning either.

Finally. You starting to losen up down there in Skibbereen Dod?

One point though. Outside of the forwards our play has also improved. While it may not be the all cohesive attacking backs under EOS our backs have improved:

Less knock ons.
Better defense.
Move back moves. More creativity.
4 of our 6 tries so far have come from the backs. Thats one less try than we scored in total last year.

Yes our backs certainly need to improve but there is progress already.

BlueMuff wrote:His spat with Zebo has potentially has cost us a grand slam.

Thats a wee bit hyperbolic!

Notch wrote:

BlueMuff wrote:His spat with Zebo has potentially has cost us a grand slam.

Thats a wee bit hyperbolic!

Comedy gold. You can always rely on a Munster man for a laugh.

GunsGerms wrote:

ME-109 wrote:The point about NZ is that it was brought up as an improvement but we have come close before...still didnt win though.

You arent reading what I am saying (and it doesnt differ from Fly). The improvements we have made in certain areas are impressive. However dont get too carried away with wins over teams we would be expected to beat. Everyone else is bringing up DK but as I said before the Fine Gael argument (it was the previous crowds fault) begins to falter.

Your argument on the GS is absolute rubbish regarding a weaker field, because we have done it so often in the past right?

Anyway regardless the team has to beat one of the big five yet to show advancement (I dont think thats too controversial do you?). Look at the game last weekend and read Quinlans article today. England beat us relatively comfortably and left a lot of points out on the pitch. We almost nicked it but didnt quite...unlucky...

We have a chance to win a championship by winning away in France. To my mind this would be very good if we do because it requires the win in France. Even though we won in 2003 it was against Frances third team (if you recall they were missing about 12 - 15 players due to injury) so this time would be excellent.

The other main concern is the manner of our play. Outside of the forwards its not great and he is to my mind being conservative in his selection.

Not a huge amount of controversy there, just not too much fawning either.

Finally. You starting to losen up down there in Skibbereen Dod?

One point though. Outside of the forwards our play has also improved. While it may not be the all cohesive attacking backs under EOS our backs have improved:

Less knock ons.
Better defense.
Move back moves. More creativity.
4 of our 6 tries so far have come from the backs. Thats one less try than we scored in total last year.

Yes our backs certainly need to improve but there is progress already.

Nope in this instance I completely disagree. Our two wins were completely based on forward dominance and nothing to do with creativity in the backs. The match last weekend is more of a pointer to where we are at. Which isnt great.

BlueMuff wrote: His spat with Zebo has potentially has cost us a grand slam.

.

Utter nonsense !

People only seem to remember the last stages of DK's run and not all the good things he did do which is a shame as he is a quality coach.

Personally I am as yet to be convinced by JS, he was hailed as a master tactician but he hasn't really showen that too me just yet. Last week he was tactically ineffective if I may be honest.

The loss against Australia was a poor match and even the loss against the AB's was bad. After getting the big early lead, Ireland did basically nothing and were dominated for the majority of the match. People remember just loosing but it was not as good a performance as the 22-19 loss in NZ under Kidney (I know the other results that tour BTW).

I feel that unless he starts developing the side and giving the younger players a go, Ireland will struggle. Ireland are playing with a very old back line with two key centres that wont be at the RWC (maybe he will pick D'Arcy) in just over a year. Its this that JS needs to look at before I will hail him the master tactician. I am giving him the benefit of the doubt but I am not getting carried away with him just yet.

ME-109 wrote:
Nope in this instance I completely disagree. Our two wins were completely based on forward dominance and nothing to do with creativity in the backs. The match last weekend is more of a pointer to where we are at. Which isnt great.

So you deny that our backs are making less mistakes, better drilled, defending better, have scored more tries this year?

All the evidence and statistics suggest you are wrong.

Look at the facts DOD last year we scored 3 tries from backs in 5 games. This year we already have 4 from 3 games with the whipping boys to come.

Even if the forwards have shown the most improvements are you seriously suggesting that Schmidt had no influence on said improvement?

geoff998rugby wrote:

BlueMuff wrote: His spat with Zebo has potentially has cost us a grand slam.

.

Utter nonsense !

So your denying that Zebo could have made a differnce in the last 10 minutes of a 3 point game.

Selected for the Lions, a brilliant try ratio and the most dynamic back that we currently have available.

BlueMuff wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

BlueMuff wrote: His spat with Zebo has potentially has cost us a grand slam.

.

Utter nonsense !

So your denying that Zebo could have made a differnce in the last 10 minutes of a 3 point game.

Selected for the Lions, a brilliant try ratio and the most dynamic back that we currently have available.

We should proabaly make the Zeeman Ireland player coach. Slam every year, no question.

GunsGerms wrote:

ME-109 wrote:
Nope in this instance I completely disagree. Our two wins were completely based on forward dominance and nothing to do with creativity in the backs. The match last weekend is more of a pointer to where we are at. Which isnt great.

So you deny that our backs are making less mistakes, better drilled, defending better, have scored more tries this year?

All the evidence and statistics suggest you are wrong.

Look at the facts DOD last year we scored 3 tries from backs in 5 games. This year we already have 4 from 3 games with the whipping boys to come.

Even if the forwards have shown the most improvements are you seriously suggesting that Schmidt had no influence on said improvement?

Am sure you have the stats to hand Guns but never mind last year. We could end up scoring 12 tries against italy but still come third or fourth in the 6ns...no wins against France or England.

I would agree the backs look well drilled, defending has been pretty good and yes they have scored more tries than last year....but they have still looked very ordinary when under pressure.

GunsGerms wrote:

BlueMuff wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

BlueMuff wrote: His spat with Zebo has potentially has cost us a grand slam.

.

Utter nonsense !

So your denying that Zebo could have made a differnce in the last 10 minutes of a 3 point game.

Selected for the Lions, a brilliant try ratio and the most dynamic back that we currently have available.

We should proabaly make the Zeeman Ireland player coach. Slam every year, no question.

Well not sure about that now Guns. What we do need is winger who can outrun a lock unlike Average Dave   

BlueMuff wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

BlueMuff wrote: His spat with Zebo has potentially has cost us a grand slam.

.

Utter nonsense !

So your denying that Zebo could have made a differnce in the last 10 minutes of a 3 point game.

Selected for the Lions, a brilliant try ratio and the most dynamic back that we currently have available.

Well that depends, which try scoring chances do you feel Zebo would have put away that others didn't in the last 10 minutes?

ME-109 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

ME-109 wrote:
Nope in this instance I completely disagree. Our two wins were completely based on forward dominance and nothing to do with creativity in the backs. The match last weekend is more of a pointer to where we are at. Which isnt great.

So you deny that our backs are making less mistakes, better drilled, defending better, have scored more tries this year?

All the evidence and statistics suggest you are wrong.

Look at the facts DOD last year we scored 3 tries from backs in 5 games. This year we already have 4 from 3 games with the whipping boys to come.

Even if the forwards have shown the most improvements are you seriously suggesting that Schmidt had no influence on said improvement?

Am sure you have the stats to hand Guns but never mind last year. We could end up scoring 12 tries against italy but still come third or fourth in the 6ns...no wins against France or England.

I would agree the backs look well drilled, defending has been pretty good and yes they have scored more tries than last year....but they have still looked very ordinary when under pressure.

Yes like I said they have things to work on, maybe lots to work on but you cant deny there have been improvements in the backs too.

GunsGerms wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

ME-109 wrote:
Nope in this instance I completely disagree. Our two wins were completely based on forward dominance and nothing to do with creativity in the backs. The match last weekend is more of a pointer to where we are at. Which isnt great.

So you deny that our backs are making less mistakes, better drilled, defending better, have scored more tries this year?

All the evidence and statistics suggest you are wrong.

Look at the facts DOD last year we scored 3 tries from backs in 5 games. This year we already have 4 from 3 games with the whipping boys to come.

Even if the forwards have shown the most improvements are you seriously suggesting that Schmidt had no influence on said improvement?

Am sure you have the stats to hand Guns but never mind last year. We could end up scoring 12 tries against italy but still come third or fourth in the 6ns...no wins against France or England.

I would agree the backs look well drilled, defending has been pretty good and yes they have scored more tries than last year....but they have still looked very ordinary when under pressure.

Yes like I said they have things to work on, maybe lots to work on but you cant deny there have been improvements in the backs too.

I just did...   

ME-109 wrote:
Well not sure about that now Guns. What we do need is winger who can outrun a lock unlike Average Dave   

How many times have you brought this up today? Yes Kearney was tackled by a lock. Not sure what that proves, he is still fast enough. Speed isnt everything anyway. Bowe is probably one of our slowest wingers but probably our best.

Often players that are fast develop an over reliance on their pace, Ashton par example, to the detriment of other skills, positioning, passing, decision making etc. Zebo himself has plenty of things to work on before he is the finished article. Attitude would surely be a good place to start as it is every bit as important as pace in the grander scheme of things.

rodders wrote:

BlueMuff wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

BlueMuff wrote: His spat with Zebo has potentially has cost us a grand slam.

.

Utter nonsense !

So your denying that Zebo could have made a differnce in the last 10 minutes of a 3 point game.

Selected for the Lions, a brilliant try ratio and the most dynamic back that we currently have available.

Well that depends, which try scoring chances do you feel Zebo would have put away that others didn't in the last 10 minutes?

Clearly Zebo would have went the length of the pitch and won us the game... Zebo probably cloud have added something but the wingers are hardly the reason we lost, nor have they been poor in any of the games.

GunsGerms wrote:

ME-109 wrote:
Well not sure about that now Guns. What we do need is winger who can outrun a lock unlike Average Dave   

How many times have you brought this up today? Yes Kearney was tackled by a lock. Not sure what that proves, he is still fast enough. Speed isnt everything anyway. Bowe is probably one of our slowest wingers but probably our best.

Often players that are fast develop an over reliance on their pace, Ashton par example, to the detriment of other skills, positioning, passing, decision making etc. Zebo himself has plenty of things to work on himself before he is the finished article. Attitude would surely be a good place to start as it is every bit as important as pace.  

It proves he isnt a good winger to me if he is chased down (yes chased down) by a lock forward. Apparently as per Joes recent conference tackling and catching the ball are the main things (oh and hitting rucks - dont forget Joe likes his wings to hit rucks - scoring tries are not so important).

Out of curiosity...what would you see zebo needs to improve on (not sure what attitude is in relation to being a rugby player - do you mean having oodles of talent and not using it - oh hang on thats Jamie )?

I would say that Joes reply to that would be that scoring tries is a team effort and he would not rely on one player to create/finish opportunities. You have to be a complete player and well drilled as well to come into the team no matter how talented you are- I'm sure Zebo has the ability to do everything required of him long term.

I'd like to see Zebo have a good career for Ireland, all his try scoring shenanigans aside, he's obviously hugely talented. But it's kind of silly to reduce the whole debate to one player.

ME-109 wrote:

It proves he isnt a good winger to me if he is chased down (yes chased down) by a lock forward. Apparently as per Joes recent conference tackling and catching the ball are the main things (oh and hitting rucks - dont forget Joe likes his wings to hit rucks - scoring tries are not so important).

Its a good thing you arent Ireland coach Dod if you pick up on single incidents and call for the axe. POM high tackled a winger and according to some deserved a yellow card or even penalty try. Does that prove to you he doesnt have the temperament to be a rugby player? Or do single incidents apply only to Leinster players you dont approve of?

ME-109 wrote:

Out of curiosity...what would you see zebo needs to improve on (not sure what attitude is in relation to being a rugby player - do you mean having oodles of talent and not using it - oh hang on thats Jamie )?

I have already said his attitude clearly needs to improve. I'd argue that his focus does too. He can be a bit of a headless chicken at times. I wouldnt imagine him to be a team player or the sort that takes direction well.

Zebo's try scoring record for Ireland is similar to Kearney's.

Zebo - Ireland 6 caps 2 tries.
- Ireland A 2 caps 1 try

Kearney - Ireland 4 caps 2 tries
- Ireland A 2 caps 1 try

Kearney is in the team on merit and has hardly put a foot wrong. Zebo may get his chance yet but there is nothing much to suggest he would have done any better.

ZeeeboTime is a comin'

SHOWTIME!!

PomPom girls are going to announce his entrance onto the pitch.

Schmidt is finally unleashing his Dog of War.