Ireland's Summer Tour

First topic message reminder :

Hey all,

Haven't been on here in a while, living out in the middle east so time is short and the chances to watch rugby are a little too rare. I saw the entire 6 Nations and Autumn series but haven't seen as much pro12 or HCup as I would like. So apologies if some of my picks or reasoning are off, I can only judge on what I have seen and am more than happy to watch clips that shed more light on selections etc.

So this is one for the summer tour. I am going to go out on a limb here and say this is probably the biggest summer tour we've had in a while in terms of importance. Last year gave us a look at some lads out in North America and gave some semi meaningful game time to some individuals. Two years ago we very nearly dispelled the curse of the All Blacks and previous ones have all had merit too. This one I feel is different for a number of reasons.

1) We have a new coach who is massively system and skill based. Individuals need to learn the way he wants to play, develop into it and then become comfortable playing with it in International settings. This can't be fully achieved over two games in Argentina but those two games can help.

2) We had the oldest squad of the six nations (significantly oldest). Age is not something that should affect selection but it does slow players down and increase the likelihood of injuries in some cases. We need depth here and in some positions replacements.

3) We have a bank players who are in the 1-10 cap category. These guys need game time to get accustomed to international rugby.

4) This is our last major testing opportunity for new players before the RWC. Players will come through during the 14/15 season at HCup and Pro12 level but next years 6Nations and the majority of the Autumn series will have a fairly settled look to it with less experimentation.

This is who I'd bring to Argentina for the two test series

PROPS:

McGrath: Second choice. Has impressed but has lots to learn and the gametime as first choice will do him good. Healy knows Joe's system and needs rest.
Kilcoyne: Form appears to have fallen from last season. We want depth in this position as it could be an area of strength. Better option than Court imo.
Moore: Could well end up being first choice sooner rather than later. Still has work to do on scrummaging but is developing well. Ross to rest.
Fitzpatrick: If fit he could well end up breaking into matchday 23s. He needs a chance to work in Joe's systems and learn accordingly.

HOOKERS:

Best: An obvious choice for leadership and consistency in the front row where a lot of experimentation is happening.
Cronin: An excellent impact option and deserves to tour.
Strauss: Needs further gametime at international level following his heart condition. A very talented player.

LOCKS:

O'Connell: Captain but among a number who need to mold themselves into Joe's systems still. It's still early days yet regarding new playing style.
Toner: His learning curve is rocketing and this should be allowed to continue.
Henderson: A much more dynamic player that should be explored to give us a different option in selection. Will get gametime there in Ulster 14/15.
Tuohy: I don't think he is back yet but neither is Ryan and like Hendy, Tuohy offers something different in a Hines/Thorn style.

BACKROW:

O'Mahony: Excellent player who is still learning Joe's style and about international rugby. Has a lot of growing to do imo but can become outstanding.
O'Donnell: An exciting and different option and one that should be nurtured to give Schmidt selection choices in horses for courses scenarios.
Henry: Excellent in the 6N, can kick on from this imo.
Murphy: A dynamic, powerful and versatile player that could be perfect for a world cup squad.
Heaslip: Leadership and consistency required much in the same way Best offers this. High standard and versatile playing style.

SCRUMHALVES:

Murray: An all round excellent player and first choice.
Reddan: Playing quite well and doing all the basics really well, needs to gain consistency and show he can excel when his pack are being chewed up.
Marmion: The most potential of all 9s in Ireland. Needs to be given gametime to see what he can do and possibly prepare him for more regular international gametime.

FLYHALVES:

Jackson: Leaving Sexton to rest. Jackson should start as first choice. An excellent player who has more potential and needs time with joe.
Madigan: Needs time to get back to his best and experience in high intensity rugby environments.

CENTRES:

Marshall: Needs gametime as while he has the raw materials he has lots to learn and should be aiming to challenge Darcy more.
Henshaw: My choice for the Irish 13 jersey this summer. Needs gametime at this level and time with Joe. One of my favourite players.

BACK 3:

Zebo: Needs gametime with Joe and to be in this camp. That being said needs to learn a lot before hand and McFadden could get into this squad.
Fitzgerald: Injury dependent for rest of season. Down as back up centre cover too. Could be simply excellent but needs gametime to prove his class.
Earls: Possibly best winger in Ireland in January. I really want to see him back in.
Bowe: Again seen as centre cover. Needs time with Joe and admist lots of good wingers needs to show he is one cut above the rest.
Kearney Jr: Big brother given a rest as he is a clear first choice. Dave given the chance to show he can play 15.
Trimble: Opportunity to show that he is top class after an unbelievable six nations championship.


MAIN GOALS:

1) Come away with a series win.
2) To get options at centre.
3) To create depth at loosehead prop and give Moore/Fitzpatrick the opportunity to prove they are better than Ross.
4) To improve the quality of halfbacks through gametime and time in camp.
5) To incorporate players into the new Irish way of playing the game.

What do people think?
What are peoples main goals.

30 I think.

Very big injury blow for Argentina as Benjamin Macome is ruled out of the second test. They return one of their 'missing stars'- the very handy Lucas Gonzalez Amorosino returns to the wing in the place of Santiago Cordero. Some very handy depth in that area growing for Argentina.

Argentina: 15 Joaquín Tuculet, 14 Lucas González Amorosino, 13 Jerónimo De la Fuente, 12 Gabriel Ascárate, 11 Manuel Montero, 10 Nicolás Sánchez, 9 Martín Landajo (captain), 8 Antonio Ahualli de Chazal, 7 Tomás De la Vega, 6 Rodrigo Báez, 5 Tomas Lavanini, 4 Manuel Carizza, 3 Ramiro Herrera, 2 Matías Cortese, 1 Lucas Noguera Paz.

Replacements: 16 Santiago Iglesias Valdez, 17 Bruno Postiglioni, 18 Matías Díaz, 19 Matías Alemanno, 20 Javier Ortega Desio, 21 Tomás Cubelli, 22 Santiago González Iglesias, 23 Matías Orlando.

Ireland (v Argentina): Rob Kearney; Andrew Trimble, Fergus McFadden, Darren Cave, Simon Zebo; Jonny Sexton, Eoin Reddan; Dave Kilcoyne, Rory Best, Mike Ross; Devin Toner, Paul O’Connell (capt.); Rhys Ruddock, Chris Henry, Jamie Heaslip.

   Replacements: Rob Herring, James Cronin, Jack McGrath, Iain Henderson, Jordi Murphy, Conor Murray, Ian Madigan, Noel Reid.

Not too bad,I've a few gripes though.Marmion deserved another shot off the bench at least imo and I'd like to have seen Henderson alongside Toner in the 2nd row.

And the Irish team;

15. Rob Kearney
14. Andrew Trimble
13. Fergus McFadden
12. Darren Cave
11. Simon Zebo
10. Johnny Sexton
9. Eoin Reddan

1. David Kilcoyne
2. Rory Best
3. Mike Ross
4. Devin Toner
5. Paul O'Connell (c)
6. Rhys Ruddock
7. Chris Henry
8. Jamie Heaslip

16. Rob Herring 17. James Cronin 18. Jack McGrath 19. Iain Henderson 20. Jordi Murphy 21. Conor Murray 22. Ian Madigan 23. Noel Reid

Not massively happy with the team but in Joe we trust

Would have preferred if Cave had been kept at 13.
Would have preferred if Marmion was in the squad somewhere.
Would have like if Diack was in the squad somewhere.

Ah well.

Also, why is Joe putting McFadden at 13 when he was the one who said he should concentrate as a winger?? Urgh.

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Also, why is Joe putting McFadden at 13 when he was the one who said he should concentrate as a winger?? Urgh.

Probably more to look at Cave at 12 then McFadden at 13 I'd imagine.

Glad Zebo gets another game to impress and I like the look of the back row.

McGrath covering tight head?

Oh Frak he is covering tighthead!?!?!?!?!?!? What!?!?!?!

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Also, why is Joe putting McFadden at 13 when he was the one who said he should concentrate as a winger?? Urgh.

Because everyone is injured Pete. Sometimes in rugby you have to make do with what you have and I think you are being massively unrealistic complaining about the centres when we have D'Arcy, Olding, Luke Marshall, Jared Payne, Keith Earls and Robbie Henshaw all unavailable.

I think come the World Cup McFadden will only be considered as winger and Cave probably won't be in the squad but thats because the centre spots will be filled with some combination of the above players.

Big opportunity for Cave. I believe that Schmidt sees him as a potential 12 for Ireland. Henshaw is the 13 I reckon.

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Oh Frak he is covering tighthead!?!?!?!?!?!? What!?!?!?!

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/mcgrath-tighthead-trial-was-long-planned-schmidt-30351333.html

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Also, why is Joe putting McFadden at 13 when he was the one who said he should concentrate as a winger?? Urgh.

Because McFadden isn't a winger.  He's too naturally combative, abrasive and energetic to be wasted on the wing.  He's a battleground (central) player - natural wings are special forces snipers on hilltops away from the grunt work.

I really hope we don't mess up the kid McGrath by throwing him in at TH. We should be trying to develop Moore and Ah You instead of converting one of the few players that can put pressure on Healy. Healy is a beast, but he is playing at that level cause he sees Jack there in training and coming off the bench putting in great performances. Healy can't take the foot off the throttle, he can't get lazy. Unfortunately if we mess with McGrath we then will have a poor situation where we make him a poor TH over 5 years and Healy eases back on his performance levels as he has to stay in front of Killer.

profitius wrote:Big opportunity for Cave. I believe that Schmidt sees him as a potential 12 for Ireland. Henshaw is the 13 I reckon.

I concur but think he see's D'arcy as starting 13 and it is vital that Cave proves himself as interchangeable to nail down a RWC spot.

Cave and McFadden is an interesting combination - potentially very good and potentially a disaster. Neither have a decent long range passing game but if McFadden can run decent lines off cave it could be quite creative and they have the ability to switch.... defensively neither are great and may struggle against the pace and power of the pumas.

This looks like a stronger team than last week- at least closer to the team Schmidt sees as his strongest so should give a bit of a glimpse of who'll start in the autumn.

The Great Aukster wrote:Joe can't take more that five back rows to the RWC. Let's assume he takes POM, SOB, Heaslip and Henry. Of those Heaslip plays in only one position and 8 is arguably the position with the least cover from the other three players.
Right now those four players would be in the 23 against France and Italy, and while Joe will rotate the bench he won't want to flog them against Canada and Romania as well. In the unique circumstances imposed by the RWC squad restrictions, it is more important that the fifth player is a jack of all trades rather than a master of one.
Of the list of trades Jack has to cover Schmidt needs a viable 8 the most. Murphy is no better option there than Henry, SOB or POM, so unless he is selected ahead of one of them he won't make the RWC squad.

I suspect Copeland would be Heaslip's specialist replacement should JH have to leave the tournament through injury, but he isn't versatile or experienced enough to cover more positions.

That leaves Ruddock and Diack. Crucially Diack is a good lineout option and can operate in the second row so that gives him an edge to be the floating cover if Joe only takes 3 locks. OTOH if Joe takes four locks, Ruddock would probably be a better choice.

I think back row is incredibly competitive:-

100% certain (imo) at this stage are

Lock

POC, Toner and Henderson

Backrow

Heaslip, O'Mahoney, SOB, Henry

I think he may take McCarthy (or less likey Touhy) as cover for O'Connell which then allows Henderson to cover 6/lock and Jordi Murphy will pip Ruddock due to his ability to cover 7 and 8 if he takes a 5th back rower.

Ruddock and Diack look best placed to break in to the above or provide injury cover to the 30.

This team - if they play like the individual components can - should destroy this Argentina.  The team last week, - with its components - should have had a much more comfortable night of it too.

The first team had an excuse of being just off the plane as it were and not having a first game review to work off.  This team is better on paper (in my humble fallible view ) and has no such excuses.

We have to stop bigging up paltry opponents, stop waving 'tough physical game' excuses at paltry opponents.  Argentina (this one without its main players) will offer nothing like France offered in the 6N and nothing of the intensity that England threw at us in the 6N.  Stop the excuses for training field tempo displays and charge into them as though they were New Zealand.  Give them no rest for 20 or 30 minutes, be oppressive and ruthless.

But that's my main worry.  I still think that despite Schmidt's teachings and homework disciplin, Ireland remain stubbornly attached to this genetic disposition to give sucker teams an even break.  We allow ourselves to slide into the tempo of lesser sides and don't seem to be able to mimic England, who want to humiliate any side they face with pace and fury.  
We'll be kicking ourselves in the arse come the end of the WC if we don't learn how to be ruthless at ALL times!  We have to create a reputation for ourselves as a side that will humiliate you if you're not ready or them or don't have the quality to match them.

We're still talking ourselves and our ability down.

I don't agree fly - I think we vastly overrate our players.

Athletically we aren't great bar some exceptions and need to grind teams down using our high levels of fitness, technique and commitment.

If we execute our game plan well we can rack up a few points but people need to be patient - we don't have the game breakers and cutting edge we had a few years ago.

Tbh Fly I also think you've been very disrespectful to Argentina as well over the past while. You may accuse us of talking ourselves down, but you've been talking them down to. England destroyed them last year but they have taken those lessons and learned and improved a lot. This group has been together for a year since that series and have grown as a team.

I think you fall into the trap of thinking because most of these players don't play in Europe they are useless- I guarantee you if it wasn't for their Rugby Championship commitments a lot more of these guys would have been signed by French teams. You will see this team forming the core of a future SuperRugby franchise I believe.

Thats not to say we shouldn't be beating them comfortably- we should. Nor is it to say we shouldn't have both performed better and won by more last week. Again we should have. But the way you talk about them it's like you think they are on a par with Tonga, Japan or Fiji when they are closer in level to Samoa, Italy or Scotland. They are inexperienced, and they do lack class in the back row and centres but they have really excellent half-backs, a brilliant and exciting back three and a tight five that is very solid with only their loose head letting them down.

I want Ireland to win by 30 points, but it will be because we were good not because the opposition is weak.

rodders wrote:I don't agree fly - I think we vastly overrate our players.

Athletically we aren't great bar some exceptions and need to grind teams down using our high levels of fitness, technique and commitment.

If we execute our game plan well we can rack up  a few points but people need to be patient - we don't have the game breakers and cutting edge we had a few years ago.

Don't agree, Rodders.  Never did.  This was originally only prepared for you but I've modified it a little to also double up as a reply to Notch.  

We have the ability to present the opposition with a tempo that will create more problems and many more mistakes.   We have the ability to present Argentina with an intensity that had England absolutely delighted that they pulled off a win against us in Twickers.  "Now that's a Test match!" glowed Lancaster, acknowledging the true calibre of both sides.  That's our league - we stubbornly refuse to accept the responsibility.

Mistakes by opposition are a big part of winning games.  That's what New Zealand do...shaft you with speed and intensity and wait for the errors that they know will come.  And errors will certainly come from inexperience of the tempo International can hit you with.

We might not have 'game breakers'  - I'd beg to differ on that one too BTW (Sexton, Trimble, O'Brien, Healy, Cronin. etc ) - but we can do a game that loads on so much intensity that this Argentina couldn't live with - fact.  That may not be palatable to those of us who feel you should also talk respectfully of the opposition.  It might be regarded as disrespectful.  Respectful though is to say what's need to be done to beat them well - for our sake, for our future plans, for our realistic stab at the WC, NOT to play with language and offer false platitudes instead.  True Argentina has stayed away from this fight (for their own legitimate SH Championship reasons).   If we feel we don't have enough ammo to make the remainder suffer then let's give up talk of Autumn (Australia/South Africa!) or the WC to come. We're in Argentina to test ourselves for bigger hurdles to come not there to help their players improve their confidence levels.

Our "sucker=break" mentality doesn't allow us to be charged sufficiently for these encounters.  Indeed, since I'm acused of disrespect, I'll go one further.  What we show this Argentina if we play like we did again is ironically the very contempt I'm acused of.  You respect them by giving them the honour of Ireland playing with the intensity they'd use against New Zealand or England or Wales or Australia.  Heaslip this week yawned about the idea that they maybe would be better off in New Zealand.  Not for Heaslip.  He thinks Argentina is good enough for now. And he's publically keen to get to his holidays.  Me showing disrespect?

We allowed Argentina into the game with our smoking-break apathy and naturally their confidence increased when they saw we weren't on premium fuel.  It's us that's giving Argentina its confidence to chase at us - Us.  Nope, they are not a side that needs to be broken down slowly... neither were New Zealand  The disrespect is that we don't play them as hard as we'd expect to play the top 3 or 4.

Thanks Rodney your international career is over

geoff999rugby wrote:Thanks Rodney your international career is over

Poor Rodney.  At the risk of me being seen as an even more callous git than I am already! - me and some family members were laughing about poor Rodney last time.  I'm not sure if it was me - though because of my genetic coldness it probably was - but the comment came close to your comment at the end of the game.  "Thanks Rodney - here's the plane ticket home"

It was just a joke!!!  I didn't mean it.  I hope he's with us celebrating the WC win.

SecretFly wrote:

rodders wrote:I don't agree fly - I think we vastly overrate our players.

Athletically we aren't great bar some exceptions and need to grind teams down using our high levels of fitness, technique and commitment.

If we execute our game plan well we can rack up  a few points but people need to be patient - we don't have the game breakers and cutting edge we had a few years ago.

Don't agree, Rodders.  Never did.  This was originally only prepared for you but I've modified it a little to also double up as a reply to Notch.  

Yeah I don't mean we don't have decent players but physically we are one of the less imposing teams in international rugby right now - whether that's genetic, training, diet, lack of illicit substances is beyond the scope of this post but when you see two of our most physical backs handed off with ease and our no 8 and vice captain get driven back by a part timer then its pretty obvious.

We just don't have the physicality that the likes of England have to blow these teams away, nor the pace and rapier of Australia - compare Falou with Kearney or Jones - either so we have to out work and grind these teams down, out smart them.

Jared Payne and Sean O'Brien apart, which Irish players make you get out of your seat when they have the ball these days? Henderson and Zebo maybe but not that many.... We don't churn out a conveyer belt of Ferris, Dricos, Bowes, Geordon Murphys, David Wallaces ...

NZ are in a similar position right now funnily enough, they just have higher skill levels and intensity which is what we need to aspire too. We are getting there, the set piece is improving and we are getting better at producing quick ball at the breakdown. People just need to be patient imo.

rodders wrote: our no 8 and vice captain get driven back by a part timer then its pretty obvious.

That's my very point.  He wouldn't have been driven back so comically had he been in the right mindset and had he been playing against one of the top four.  Heaslip is disinterested.  He's like me, he doesn't rate what's in front of him.  I'm annoyed about his lack of resepect...he ain't

Another reason why he wouldn't have been driven so far back in a game against much higher opposition is that his players around him would have been turned on more too and would have provided ballast to him to resist the shove.  But nope, he was driven back and back and air was all around him.  Team contempt for the level of competition that the Argentinians were providing.

I don't think you can say that fly, that we weren't motivated unless you are going to say the ABs weren't motivated when they played us in the Autumn.

I think you are being too critical of last weeks performance. There is loads of scope for improvement but all things considered it was decent enough given the physicality of the pumas, the hostile atmosphere and new combinations we were fielding.

I'm hoping for a big improvement tomorrow but you have to respect the pumas on their home soil and the fact they are going to put it up to us no matter who plays...this is a decent test.

rodders wrote:I don't think you can say that fly, that we weren't motivated unless you are going to say the ABs weren't motivated when they played us in the Autumn.

I think you are being too critical of last weeks performance. There is loads of scope for improvement but all things considered it was decent enough given the physicality of the pumas, the hostile atmosphere and new combinations we were fielding.

I'm hoping for a big improvement tomorrow but you have to respect the pumas on their home soil and the fact they are going to put it up to us no matter who plays...this is a decent test.

I respect us Rodders.  And when I see us lowering our gears to do enough and no more to lesser sides (and this Argentina is a lesser side regardless of how any of us want to journalistically butter them into something they're not) then I'll be ultra critical.  I was ultra critical in Kidney's time.  I'm not going to ease up on whatever I deduce to be happening simply because Joe is in charge.

I didn't rate last week's performance when I take into account the opposition and I'm not really going to apologise for that.  We all judge our rugby based on how our team does - based on the considered value of the opposition.  
We do it all year at Provincial level and I continue it at International level.  I deduce how we're doing by assessing what we do based on the quality of the oppostion.  We stood off the Argentinians for long periods, we gave them their confidence to take us on.  We certainly didn't hit them with anything like the bite we can muster.  At times it looked like Sexton and Trimble got the complete wrong plans off Joe because they were the only ones trying to mimic the pace aggression we can bring to a game.

I'm also hoping for a Big improvement tomorrow so why am I wrong in saying it wasn't enough last week?  I expect a big improvement - mostly in the actual mental intent to bring our game to them rather than sitting back and allowing them to impose theirs on us.

Sorry Fly, but before the first test you said the Emerging Ireland side would have a stiffer test on their tour than the Ireland team in Argentina... I don't know if you saw the scoreline there, 66-0 against Russia after 45 mins, but even if you didn't a glance at the team sheets would disabuse you of that notion.

Thats not journalistically buttering them into something they're not just pointing out some BS in the comments you made about them last week. They have some very talented players and I'm excited to see them play again. We should beat them, but let's not pretend its because they are sub-standard. They aren't at the same level as Ireland without the missing players and we should be aiming to win by a few scores- but they'll have a very good chance of getting one over Scotland and a lot of these players will play in the Rugby Championship and be able to hold their heads high afterwards too.

SecretFly wrote:

rodders wrote: our no 8 and vice captain get driven back by a part timer then its pretty obvious.

That's my very point.  He wouldn't have been driven back so comically had he been in the right mindset and had he been playing against one of the top four.  Heaslip is disinterested.  He's like me, he doesn't rate what's in front of him.  I'm annoyed about his lack of resepect...he ain't

Another reason why he wouldn't have been driven so far back in a game against much higher opposition is that his players around him would have been turned on more too and would have provided ballast to him to resist the shove.  But nope, he was driven back and back and air was all around him.  Team contempt for the level of competition that the Argentinians were providing.

AThat is such utter nonsense and disrespect to Benjamin Macome who is easily good enough to come over and play a high level of rugby in Europe. The reason he isn't is because of Argentinas international calendar. If NIQ places weren't an issue I would probably take him at one of our provinces, he'd add depth to Ulsters back row alright. He played for Stade Francais as an injury joker this season. He's no part timer.

Heaslip got driven back because of an aggressive, well-organised Argentine defence that limited our options and shut us down. They had successfully defended the rolling maul and killed our momentum so we had to pass to Heaslip who was static behind the gain line. Not acquitting him of responsibility for going into contact too high but to simply take away credit from the home side on the basis of some warped misconception we are playing a team of nobodies is just ridiculous. Their strong defensive play created that moment, created the situation where Heaslip was isolated and the pack was going backwards.

You want to invent levels of quality for other sides go ahead.  I'll do my own reading.

BTW - I said what I said about the Emerging Ireland side and hold to it in the sense that I felt what I felt and admitted it.  I didn't keep my opinions ready to be wise after events, I spoke about how I feel and I speak my mind.  Just like I'm doing now, just like I did in Kidney's time.  No apologises in this place for doing so.

Plus - do mention the fact that it seems Emerging Ireland are facing 'Emerging' Tier 2 Nations - bizarrely so.  And do also mention the fact that I alluded to my Emerging Ireland predictions in the Emerging Ireland thread recently (you've been there) and admitted "I was wrong" about the calibre of opposition Russia and the like would throw at us.  So I didn't exactly require your heroic exposure of me and my weaknesses.  I admit to them - I don't run away.  I'm here when we lose too (6N games of 2013 come to mind) when most of the rest of us ran off and went missing in action.  I'm human, I don't mind being wrong.  
But I'm not always wrong, especially about when Ireland are trying and when they aren't.  I was one of the few, if not the only one, who said we'd slaughter the 'real' Argentina last time we met them in 2012 - when most home supporters were doing their caution, caution, respect, respect, don't underrate them, don't underrate them  act.  I said we'd kill them because I believed it, and we did.  This was during Kidney's Ireland stint when I had no right to be making such 'arrogant' predictions about any opposition.  I've watched rugby long enough, I'm certainly old enough and I'm no idiot when I quit the (highly irritating to some!!!) clown act and get serious about what I think.  I know when a team is trying and when it isn't.  

I also could take offence to the idea of how some here belittle the Irish contingent in Argentina by suggesting we ain't all that flashy as some fans seem to think, and that we should all take a reality pill about them and downgrade them a few notches.

I could decide to affect ratty offence in all that stuff but I don't.  I'm not so small minded.  Rodders opinions are his and I respect his opinions - I don't always agree with them but I respect them. You might try respecting mine whilst disagreeing passionately with me?

We disagree - big deal.  I believe what I believe and I say what I believe.  My right.  I believe totally that the Argentina side we're playing in these two games would absolutely be torn apart by an English side.  Torn apart - this year as much as last year.  They'd come to be ruthless and they'd set out to treat the Argentinians as any other side they face.  The English don't differentiate their opponents - they play to their rhythm regardless.  And that creates a routine, that creates a familiarity with the tempo, that becomes a habit.  And that's why my main criticism of any Irish side, whether it be led by Schmidt or Kidney,  - inconsistency.  

No - no apologies for that view, Notch.  But thanks for the 'bullshyte' and 'utter nonsense' compliments. I'll keep them in mind.

So you think Heaslip was driven backwards 10 yards because he wasn't trying then? Maybe you could just give our opponents the credit they deserve instead of over-focusing on Ireland.

Ireland were slightly disjointed in the last test as you'd expect with some rotation and little preparation time, we didn't perform that well. But please don't write off good play by Argentina by saying it was merely because Ireland didn't get their attitude right. There were two teams out there and when you only look at one you can't possibly see the whole picture.

It makes me so angry to see you talk like this about that Heaslip turnover which was all about good defence from Argentina; I saw a player who was fired up to be representing his country, doing so well in defence there to drive Heaslip back and it's just written off as us not getting our attitude right. As showing contempt to Argentina- otherwise they couldn't possibly have driven him back right? I saw a good player, young and inexperienced but a highly rated player who has played against the Springboks and in the Top14 coming out and making a great hit against a British and Irish Lion and killing the momentum of the attack and ultimately forcing the turnover. And this is how much credit you give him in your analysis; zero. Zero credit. Thats what you give him and his teammates for their part in the game. Both the good team defence leading up to that incident to cause Heaslip to get man and ball at the same time, and the great individual hit, driving him back. You ignore both aspects of that incident and that can be said about every positive contribution Argentina made to the game.

If the shoe was one the other foot and it's an Ireland player driving one of the key forwards of a higher ranked team back 10 yards and turning over the ball in his own 22 we'd be raving about it. When Ferris did the same thing in his short-lived comeback game against the Scarlets it was an instant youtube hit. And you say it's because we weren't taking them seriously? Thats just one moment in an entire game but for god's sake, give credit where credit is due.

Anything else just comes across as churlish, disrespectful and ultimately insulting. And they should have earned your respect at this stage. You wrote them off before the first test as barely fit to take the pitch against us and when they came out and showed how wrong that misconception was and that they are well on their way to competing at this level, even though we played poorly and still won comfortably, you might give them credit for forcing us to work hard and contributing to a very good test match.

This is exactly what people complain about with All Blacks fans. Before the game they write their opponents off and if their opponents DO show they can compete, after the game it's simply written off as the favourites under-performing not the opponents dragging them down as often happens.

Well we can beat Argentina by a good score. We agree there. But if they make life hard for us again, I won't be shy giving them credit if they deserve it.

We all get angry.  

None of us are adverse to anger.  

People would be best served remember that and not assume anger is a one way process when they use insulting language in a debate which up until that point wasn't being used.

I'll repeat it for you.  In a game against a higher ranked side, when Irish players would be full of nervous energy and apprehension and fully alive to the dangers before them, Heaslip would not have been pushed back as fully as he was.  Look at it in detail, look at him.  Collect your reading of how involved mentally he is against Argentina - and again look up his OWN opinion - not mine.  Happy to be confronting Lesser opposition, looking forward to getting away on holiday.  That's his opinion, not mine.  If you think he's at New Zealand or England or even Wales mental level then so be it - that's what you'll feel.  I don't.  Not remotely so.  And that's the part I criticise.  Some minds aren't taking this trip seriously enough.

In a full blooded game, with something big to play for, against high level opposition - and that concept exists in real terms - in real terms.  There are sides that are better than others.  It's real.  Fluffing over that detail so as to try not offending people won't cut into the truth.   - So against high level competition, blood fully up, lots at stake, Heaslip would not have gone back as far as he did.  And he Would have been quickly bolstered by teammates in such a game.  And that he wasn't quickly bolstered will have been on Schmidt's video replay lessons!  Oh I firmly believe that will be on his video inquisition.

But we disagree is the only conclusion that can be reached here.  You call it disrespect, I'll call it analysing the quality of opposition before us.  We won't be agreeing no matter how angry you get.  We won't be agreeing on the detail of that first game.

Here's to a better second attempt.

Yep, some teams are better than others. And you can write off the teams worse than you to the point where you convince yourself anything they do well is an aberration or exclusively the fault of the better team or you can respect them enough to acknowledge the good play they produce and give them credit for it.

Thats the bottom line for me. If you want to talk down the opposition, fair play, but I've always bought into the idea of giving credit to good play irrespective if it's produced by your team or the opponents. Good night and good luck.

Wasn't a lot of that giving credit to opposition teams going around when Heir Kidney was at the helm and people wanted rid of him. The bottom line for me is that... like you.... I remember what people say. And whilst I'm sure you'll remember this conversation, I will too.

Good night Notch.

Yeah, bully for you Fly. You work away.

No Sin É, I go away for a couple of days and Notch and Fly start fighting with each other...whatever next...

Anyhow Geoff...regarding Diack...in reality Joe has Ruddock (which is why he was mentioned) and Murphy ahead of him that is why the Whiff opinion is easily argued against. If POM had been fit Diack would have been with the emerging Ireland squad...

Yellow Card for Trimble 16 mins in for an early tackle Ireland lead 6-3

Try for Argentina 23 Mins in a great break eventually brought down by Zebo but argentina made the numbers count and scored under the sticks. Argentina lead 10-6

Sexton Penalty 10-9 to Argentina

pretty evenly matched at the moment. Irelands breakdown work on top at the moment.

We are dire in defence

10-9 to Argentina at the break, Ireland have looked the more threatening but haven't had the support for the people who break the line and some poor defence let Argentina in

Zebo having a great game and Kearney playing well too, Ruddock had been very good up until that fumble at the end,not much more positives on our side after that.

Scrum has been good too, I'm suprised by how little support we are getting up with the guys making breaks.

Pretty poor half from Ireland, have to applaud the counter-attacking of this young Pumas side. They are much more organised in defence than us too, that is for sure! And willing to give away the penalty whenever they get in trouble, to be fair. Think Argentina will lose another man to the sin bin before the game is out. But I think the people who wrote off Argentina before this series will be rather red faced.

Poorly executed drift defence aside, Irelands biggest weakness is the centres- in defence and attack- and we're playing too much rugby in front of their defence. That combination in midfield is patched up and it really shows.

And for goodness sake what were were we thinking going for the corner when we had a chance to turn around ahead after being second best for most of the half. That was a crazy decision!

In fairness Wallace made a good point,the Argies are constantly giving away penalties and should have a yellow card for persistent infringements soon.

Yeah in fairness we have an outside centre playing inside centre and a wing playing centre and it is showing really but I guess this is the time and place to be testing such pairings. Clearly this one is not one that has a future.

In the US and now show on the tv front...any links available?

Oho!!

They've been trying to force that inside ball when it wasn't on all game but when it is on it is deadly. G'wan Zebo!

Try time for Zebo 14-10 to Ireland

I wish Ireland had a quality winger instead of the over-rated Zebo

Nachos Jones wrote:I wish Ireland had a quality winger instead of the over-rated Zebo

Dont worry Kearneys injury isnt too bad. Hell be back for the AIs

Golden wrote:

Nachos Jones wrote:I wish Ireland had a quality winger instead of the over-rated Zebo

Dont worry Kearneys injury isnt too bad. Hell be back for the AIs

Touché