Ireland v Australia 22 Nov 2014: Dog v Cat: Ali V Foreman: Beauty v Beast, Xavier v Wolfman

First topic message reminder :

Have they ever met?
Sure they have.  And they're meeting each other now every second of every day in the lead up to the weekend's encounter - Schmidt even dreaming tactics whilst asleep at night, as there are not nearly enough hours in an atomic-clock week for him.  A meeting of brainwaves as one tries to look into the other's head and plan victory or defeat.

Schmidt doesn't rate the number 3.  Neither does Cheika.  But Cheika will still want the number back out of a sense of pride  He got no time for Ranking nonsense but he'll take it as his pound of flesh anyway given that the rules of the game forbid real flesh being taken.

Schmidt is the scientist; birdlike, almost timid, edgy and nervous when tension grows.  Cheika is the brick wall that needs no door to make a space for itself in a fight.  He has a nice smile, especially when he's happy, and that's usually when his fingers are around someone's neck and squeezing

Schmidt is considered pedantic, perfecting and getting on for being an infuriating perfectionist.  That can often be a problem as the word has noting to do with achieving perfection and everything to do with simply never being satisfied.  Perfectionism can often cloud the path to an easier fulfilling life.  Schmidt is driven but I don't think he'll ever find peace.

Cheika seems more like a company CEO.  Goals adopted, timeframes given, pie charts done, costs analysed, work done, work done, work redone with shouts and screams to make people listen and goals achieved.  Next project.  First project forgotten, yesterday's news.  Little genuine emotion for the victory or the initial goal that rapidly sinks into his history and falls into his junkbox.  
Schmidt wants to win - yes - but he wants to play chess.  Cheika just wants results.

And of course both coached Leinster.  One began the journey but had a temperament that wasn't conducive to a long partnership with the players.  Schmidt continued the journey and honed it but also had a temperament that didn't seem to want the relationship to last long.
This will be a brief encounter for both men - just the way they like it.  Brief encounter but the makings of a very long day for both sets of fans.

Notch wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Joe should be using the 6N away games to build some contingency in these five positions if Ireland are to realise the dream of making the final four.

I hate that, I really do. We've won one Grand Slam in sixty years- only two ever- and people are talking about using the Six Nations as a testing ground. So we can make a World Cup semi-final? There's no trophy for getting a semi-final and for a nation like Ireland to gamble everything on winning a World Cup... it would be foolish. And with England distracted by the pressures of hosting and France and England in Dublin, we have the kind of opportunity for silverware next year this country has often had to wait generations for.

You see there is a trophy for the Six Nations, a trophy we rarely win, and it's precisely because of that we need to go after it in the biggest possible way when we have the chance. Because we have a team good enough to win it and as we've seen every point in that tournament is crucial. So we'll not be experimenting for the World Cup, we'll be doing our damnedest to win 5 matches in a row as comprehensively as possible knowing that if we do that, it would mean this Ireland side had already matched the team from the late forties/early fifties as the best Irish side of all time. What a wave of momentum we'd be riding into the World Cup then!

Accuse me of lacking vision if you like but the point is, winning the Six Nations is a laudable vision in itself. That should be our target and we should only talk about the World Cup once the Six Nations is over. Using the Six Nations as a dry run for the World Cup is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We should pick whoever it takes to win the Six Nations and thats it.

The 6N is a testing ground, that's why every international match is known as a Test. Players, systems, coaches, tactics - everything is tested. Selecting a player for every game is a test just as much as rotating the position, and if Eddie O'Sullivan taught us anything it was that having 15 untouchables doesn't win tournaments. Players get fatigued, or injured and if there is no contingency plan then the team gets derailed. Building a base of interchangeable players means that Ireland are far more likely to win things, rather than hope that a select few will maintain fitness and form over a series of grueling matches.

Schmidt has already shown that he doesn't need 'box office' names to win games - he has been giving others the opportunity and some have been grabbing it with both hands. There is far greater risk to competitiveness in being unprepared for an injury than planning rotation in preparation for it.

I'd still like to know what we're all meant to be talking about when we use the word 'Experimentation' - which seems to have been used somewhere above and someone got mad with the word?

Most of the people I see on this thread have been around for a bloody long time on this site and the other one before it.  I think we all know rugby sufficently well to understand that when the word 'experimentation' is mentioned it isn't done to suggest a completely different 15 players on the field for England, and another bundle of new guys for France, and another handful thrown at Wales, and mixing up positions for the fun of it.

No, we all know nobody means that here - but it seems that for the purposes of argument some of us pretend that's what we're hearing when we hear the word 'experimentation'

It's as if the definition of Experimentation has become: The Willful Forfeiting of Winnable Games for the Hollow Betterment of a Fairytale Future in some Distant Overblown Contest.

Even I'm afraid of that defintion!

MichaelT wrote:

Notch wrote: Does anyone give a £$*$ that England got to the Final in 2007?

I do. I remember that 2007 tournament with greater fondness than winning the 2011 Six Nations. Beating Australia, then France, then the final in consecutive weekends was tremendous for me as a supporter. To do something similar next year would be very welcome.

But are you English though? Because thats kind of my point- nobody outside of England thinks about it too often because the memories are all they have to show, not the trophy.

SecretFly wrote:
We value highly the 6N in Europe - but to the SH nations, it's crud.  I really mean that - that's their hard headed, cold and functional attitude to our little NH jamboree.  Oh it's entertaining to them to an extent (the few of them who probably watch it from start to finish) but when their watching is done - it's a yawn and disinterest.

So what? I'm not at all interested in Super Rugby or the Top14 and I don't rate them as leagues to watch as a neutral, but I doubt the Waratahs or Toulon are stressing out about that.

SecretFly wrote:
Saying an Irish Province should go all out to win a Pro12 title at the expense of holding something back for the blunderbuss games of the ERCC, is to me an alien idea.  If Leinster won another Pro12 contest after having been kicked unceremoniously out of the ERCC, it would be no consolation to me.  Pro12 is a smaller contest.  I'd much prefer to see Leinster in a ERCC final and lose than to crow about another Pro12 title.  I'd prefer us to be 4th or 5th in Pro12 if it meant a final in ERCC.

This metaphor doesn't hold up at all as the Pro12 and the ERCC run concurrently and the Six Nations and World Cup run subsequently. So there is no conflict between the two international competitions and nothing to stop us going all out for both. There are four test matches before the World Cup for experimentation and preparation.

What's more, I've been in exactly the position you describe as an Ulster fan in 2012 and I would indeed trade the Final we lost in then for a Final we won in in the Pro12. Silverware is the only game in town. Doesn't matter how good you are, no silverware and no-one will care in a decade. No-one outside your own province or country will care about your 2nd place finish. Winning silverware isn't one thing that matters for good sides, it's the only thing. There is no competition where coming second beats coming first in another competition. Winning. It's the only thing.

SecretFly wrote:For me it's not about trophies - they're metal and they're shiny, so what?  Kids get trophies.  To me its all about Reputation.  That's my primary motivation in anything I watch or do - not the prizes but reputation.

The only way to get reputation in any sport is by wining things. Trophies are the only path to reputation, thats the entire reason they exist. All a trophy is is a symbol for being the best. Sport is about striving to be the best. Only the best win trophies- also-rans get nothing. I'd rather win a 'lesser' trophy than get the best nothing in a bigger tournament.

I disagree completely with all that Notch.  I just see the world differently and especially my chosen sport of passion - rugby.  

No harm in that - we don't see eye to eye on the goals.

But we all know Amlin was a trophy and that the Challenge Cup is a trophy.  You win one of those and it's a sure fire bet you haven't won the one that the media and most rugby fans across Europe will be talking about. One is a consolation, the other is the bigger prize and reputation setter.

The goal is Reputation.  Munster only won the HEC twice.  It's not their trophies that make them a legendary HEC side, but their persistence in it - their quarter finals, their semi-finals - that's their calling card of sustained power and potency when other sides were dancing up and dancing down again.

Munster are Munster because of their continuing European reputation not because of wins.

But we'll just agree that we don't agree on this one.  The WC is my focus next season, and as a consolation prize I hope we also win the 6N  I'm greedy

SecretFly wrote:The goal is Reputation.  Munster only won the HEC twice.  It's not their trophies that make them a legendary HEC side, but their persistence in it - their quarter finals, their semi-finals - that's their calling card of sustained power and potency when other sides were dancing up and dancing down again.

Munster are Munster because of their continuing European reputation not because of wins.

but this doesn't fully make sense... Without the trophies Munster actually won, then they would have the nearly-men rep of a team like Clermont. I would prefer to be Munster to Clermont but more seriously, I would always prefer an actual Rabo trophy to a good ERC Cup run (I am from Connacht) (the Challenge Cup is a pointless tournament so winning it means nothing). Ireland have the worst record by far of the 5 Nations, with fewer Grandslams, championships, matches won etc then even Scotland. We have done better the last 15 years, but still only 2 championships to show for it... Lets win the 6 Nations (Grand Slam would be amazing). Then we can see if the "dark horses" for the WC tag fits us as we enter favorites for a semi-final. And the respect from the top 3 SH teams comes from beating THEM. Not beating a load of NH/Argentina on the way to a semi-final. I think our Autumn results are more respectful in some ways from a SH point of view then the WC run I am describing, though SANZAR posters feel free to correct me. Knock one of the SANZAR out of the WC, then you have respect. I think we have a 40% chance of beating Aus in a WC semi, 30% of SA and 10% NZ... its tough to stay at that table, despite our amazing autumn results.

They won yes.... but I'm saying had they won twice and folded after, or had they no history before they started winning, they'd have less of a fearsome reputation in Europe than now.

Even now, after a lull of a number of years since winning, even now after a few years of very below par performances and form - they are still a side no other European club wants to see in their group.  And they've proven it's no bluff by getting to two recent semis whilst being way off the boil of their top European form.

That reputation they have is built on their consistency in the Highest rated Club contest they can be part of.  It doesn't come from their Pro12 exploits - the English still sneer at Pro12 quality - and it isn't based on their win ratio in HEC.  It's based on the fear factor, the fearsome reputation, the side that can kill all dreams of any fancy side that backs itself and takes them lightly.

Yes, wins help build that reputation but two wins a few years back don't create it.  

Our stock would rise much higher the longer we last in the WC.  If we fall away in the pools again after dominating the 6N, it'll be seen as a failure of potential for Ireland yet again.  A 6N victory would emphasise the fall.  Some won't admit that now...but in the aftermath of a below performance WC, they will - and they'll  shout loudly about it too.

SecretFly wrote:The goal is Reputation.  Munster only won the HEC twice.  It's not their trophies that make them a legendary HEC side, but their persistence in it - their quarter finals, their semi-finals - that's their calling card of sustained power and potency when other sides were dancing up and dancing down again.

Wales have won more Six Nations than us since the tournament started but we've won more games. Us winning all those games but not many trophies did indeed get Ireland a reputation; as chokers. Same thing happened to NZ in the World Cup. As wolf ball says you'll never get a reputation without winning the thing outright. Good teams who don't win trophies to go with it are called chokers.

This argument you're making is all to do with narratives, what others think, reputations. You're obsessed with what other people think of us! I don't give a shoite about that because you're caught up in the ephemeral. That stuff doesn't stand the test of time. We don't talk about what the press and what other teams thought about Jackie Kyle in the 40s and 50s, all that remains is the fact they won three championships including a Grand Slam. That is the only thing that matters now. Everything else in sport is fleeting and ephemeral but victories last forever.

In you example about Ireland hypothetically dominating the Six Nations and flopping in the World Cup. Well of course you're right nobody would be happy about the second part, but the two things are completely independent of each other anyway so that would not be any contradiction. But that would still be better than be also-rans in both, even good also-rans, because like I don't ask my grandfather about the team that won the slam in 1948, my grandson in sixty years would not care about the reaction to the World Cup campaign or the vicissitudes of our season. All of that would be forgotten. All there would be left is a single line- Ireland, Six Nations Champions.

Not Ireland, Six Nations Champions and flops in the World Cup. Not Ireland, 2nd in Six Nations and really good World Cup. The only things that will be remembered about 2015 in a couple of generations are the winners of the Six Nations, Rugby Championship and the World Cup. Those are the only legacies that matter. Everything else- runners-up, third place, semi-finals, quarter-finals- is for the birds. Doesn't matter. Time strips away the things we think matter in the present and leaves only the essentials. There's no place for also rans in history.

As for the Munster thing, I can't stomach it because their 'love affair; with the European Cup is just a romanticised myth we tell ourselves that Sky Sports picked up and ran with to sell the Heineken Cup. There was a glimmer of truth in it for two or three years but its blown way, way out of proportion by the media. Which is their job. But anyway you never even got that until they won it in 2006. Before then it was the agony of the wait, the near misses etc. etc.

Notch wrote:

SecretFly wrote:The sickening thing for me would be that Ireland puts all its efforts into the 6N, as other sides possibly continue to toy around with a few positions in preparation for the WC.  And that we'd hit a vein of form that won us another Championship or Slam..... but that England, France, Wales or even indeed Scotland grabbed a WC semi-final slot or a final slot or even won the damn thing as we still patted ourselves on the back about the 6N.

Short of them winning, honestly wouldn't care. Does anyone give a £$*$ that England got to the Final in 2007? Or Wales got to the semi-final in 2011? No, of course not. There are two categories come the World Cup; the eventual winners and everyone else. People remember the winners and thats it. There's one winner and 19 losers and I don't really think losing better this time is worth undermining our chances in the Six Nations. Whether you are 2nd or 20th in the RWC you're still a loser. Same applies in the Six Nations; from 2nd to 6th you are a loser. There can only be one winner in both tournaments.

If you offered me 2nd in the Six Nations and 2nd in the World Cup versus 1st in the Six Nations and a group stage exit in the World Cup I would take the Six Nations win every time. The second option we win a trophy. The first we don't. It's a complete and total no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.

Tis a bit short sighted Notch. For one the 6N is every year, and you've already won that. To make the final of the World cup next year based on the progression Ireland made would confirm Ireland as a true force in rugby, and would do wonders for progressing the game and Irelands profile.

To be able to support your own countrymen on the day of the sports greatest showpiece when you haven't got near it ever would be huge. Huge for the side, the supporters..Ireland.

Sure no one remembers England in 07 but they remain one of only four winners and 5 finalists. This would break that mould. And down this way, no one cares who won the 6N much. Thats not going to faze you but we would certainly think of Ireland differently.

Beating SA and Oz last two weeks will have made the SH take notice far more than the 6N win.

My view anyway.

Well constructed arguments. Respectful ripostes. Not a nahnanahnanah in sight. Wow, there's hope for this place yet.

Taylorman wrote:Beating SA and Oz last two weeks will have made the SH take notice far more than the 6N win.

My view anyway.

Again, this assumes your opinions matter to us. Maybe they do to Fly. But I couldn't give a fiddlers. No offence like

All I care about is wining games and trophies. I don't care about the SH view of the Six Nations as they are not involved. Same way my only interest in the Rugby Championship is as an Argentinean well-wisher. Who wins it doesn't matter to me, I don't take much heed of it. I doubt the fans of the SANZAR teams are worrying about that so why should I worry about what they think of the Six Nations?

But even having said that, I could agree with you if we were like England and France who have won the Five/Six Nations many times. We have only won it outright 8 times since 1910. We have only had one successful title defence in 104 years, and that was before 95% of posters on here were born! So defending our title means a hell of a lot. It's massive. It's as big as the World Cup. It would be a big milestone in the history of Irish Rugby if we won the Six Nations title again next year. The only way to top it would be by winning the World Cup outright. A Six Nations title is not something to turn your nose up at.

Notch wrote:

SecretFly wrote:The goal is Reputation.  Munster only won the HEC twice.  It's not their trophies that make them a legendary HEC side, but their persistence in it - their quarter finals, their semi-finals - that's their calling card of sustained power and potency when other sides were dancing up and dancing down again.

Wales have won more Six Nations than us since the tournament started but we've won more games.

Us winning all those games but not many trophies did indeed get Ireland a reputation; as chokers. Same thing happened to NZ in the World Cup. As wolf ball says you'll never get a reputation without winning the thing outright. Good teams who don't win trophies to go with it are called chokers.

As for the Munster thing, I can't stomach it because their 'love affair; with the European Cup is just a romanticised myth we tell ourselves that Sky Sports picked up and ran with to sell the Heineken Cup. There was a glimmer of truth in it for two or three years but its blown way, way out of proportion by the media. Which is their job.

But anyway you never even got that until they won it in 2006. Before then it was the agony of the wait, the near misses etc. etc.

Look at Munster record in HEC.  Detail it and say it's a jinx, it ain't real, it's a myth, it's a sky media creation.  Look at the record of Munster players in it too.  It's no myth, it's real - it's over now with the beginning of a new competition (I detest old competition records used to varnish new ones) - but don't try telling me it was all a myth invented by Sky.

Next................... now we're back to saying winning is what creates reputation?  So are you saying let's stick to what we have a realistic chance of winning in our 'limited NH' view of ourselves.  Let's win the 6N and not get too worked up about trying to win the competition further down the line - afterall, that's a competition for the big boys of which we don't belong?

You're not saying that, Notch - so why are we having this debate.

I'll go back to the bolts of the debate.  I say Schmidt should try to win the 6N, but he should do so - and WILL continue to do so - by looking at combinations or retrying combinations that didn't have sufficent time etc) - and that will be because he is also preparing to have an honest and genuine shot at WINNING the competition that follows along - the WC.

Saying we should 'concentrate' on the 6N in order to win it and that if doing so weakens our chances in the WC then so be it - 6n takes precedence.  I just don't believe any Irish supporter has that mentality.  And if they do then I think we fooled Schmidt into taking a job he didn't need.  His ambitions are higher than 6N.  I want to be on his bus - win or lose, that's the bus I want on. It's the risk I'm prepared to take.

Taylorman wrote:
Beating SA and Oz last two weeks will have made the SH take notice far more than the 6N win.

My view anyway.

Thanks for the moral support, Taylor I felt quite lonely there for a while!

Notch wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Beating SA and Oz last two weeks will have made the SH take notice far more than the 6N win.

My view anyway.

Again, this assumes your opinions matter to us. Maybe they do to Fly. But I couldn't give a fiddlers. No offence like

All I care about is wining games and trophies. I don't care about the SH view of the Six Nations as they are not involved. Same way my only interest in the Rugby Championship is as an Argentinean well-wisher. Who wins it doesn't matter to me, I don't take much heed of it. I doubt the fans of the SANZAR teams are worrying about that so why should I worry about what they think of the Six Nations?

you're right, you shouldnt. (which is why is myopic)...we agree on that at least. But I'd say if you ran a poll and asked Irish fans if they had the choice which would they rather see Ireland in a match tomorrow...a 6N match to win the title, or the world cup final. I'd say you'd be a bit lonely on your side of the vote.

Interesting on Against the Head tonight DOB asked the panel what they would rather have - a 6N Slam or a RWC semi. Quinlan said a RWC final(!) but then said the semi, Lenihan said the World Cup by a mile, and Matt O'Connor said given the progression of the provinces it was right to target the RWC.

....and we all want the 6N too!

Nobody is saying f**k the 6N. Only that we try to win it as a prep for WC.

SecretFly wrote:Look at Munster record in HEC.  Detail it and say it's a jinx, it ain't real, it's a myth, it's a sky media creation.  Look at the record of Munster players in it too.  It's no myth, it's real - it's over now with the beginning of a new competition (I detest old competition records used to varnish new ones) - but don't try telling me it was all a myth invented by Sky.

No, their record is real. The romanticised myth is that that record comes from anything special or unusual or it's somehow different to the records held by other great teams. Thats there something different in the water in Munster or they have a relationship with the tournament that is somehow more profound than other sides... bollox. They just won more clutch games more consistently than other sides. The rest is just blowing smoke up arses and selling papers, season tickets and TV subscriptions.

SecretFly wrote:So are you saying let's stick to what we have a realistic chance of winning in our 'limited NH' view of ourselves.  Let's win the 6N and not get too worked up about trying to win the competition further down the line - afterall, that's a competition for the big boys of which we don't belong?

You're not saying that, Notch

You're right I'm not saying that. Which makes the preceding paragraph a waste of time. You've described something I'm not saying then acknowledged that I'm not saying it... Well, I agree with you. I'm not saying it.

SecretFly wrote:I'll go back to the bolts of the debate.  I say Schmidt should try to win the 6N, but he should do so - and WILL continue to do so - by looking at combinations or retrying combinations that didn't have sufficent time etc) - and that will be because he is also preparing to have an honest and genuine shot at WINNING the competition that follows along - the WC.

As if there's some kind of conflict between the two! We have four warm-up games to experiment immediately before the World Cup which is where that experimenting with combinations will happen. Of course I expect Schmidt to rotate to get the peak out of his squad in the Six Nations, you simply can't have 15 players playing all 80 minutes in five games but he has no need to be looking at combinations or experimenting unnecessarily because he's already established a strong and deep squad for 2015. We've had more than 30 players starting test matches under Schmidt. A few more will come in out of necessity NOT out of rotation in the Six Nations but they'll be prepped within an inch of their lives and it won't be any kind of trial run for them. It'll be the real thing.

There's this perception that we have to do something to prepare for the World Cup, treat games as warm-ups or try out potential replacements for key players from the start. The best possible way to use the Six Nations as a warm-up for the World Cup is to treat every game like a World Cup final and select and prepare appropriately. Get the group used to putting that pressure on themselves- start playing knockout rugby in February and come into the World Cup battle hardened. Thats how we prepare. Then the warm-up games are about trying out contingency plans and giving exposure to players who are cover for key men and getting match fitness.

We should be targeting both of course. My only point was that a season where we win something is better than a season where we don't. The Six Nations title defence is a very big prize to play for. I'll be tearing my hair out when the Six Nations comes around and people are talking about the World Cup. It's annoying enough now. Contrary to popular belief no games played now have any impact on the World Cup whatsoever. Winning the World Cup is about momentum generated within the tournament itself. I wish people would give over about it until it starts.

The team is always talking about being performance driven rather than results driven. Which is funny because we got the results but the performances weren't that good. If our scrum and lineout continue as they were in the last few weeks we will not be winning the 6 Nations, let alone the RWC.

I think everyone has their heads in the clouds because of two good results. Ireland showed zero creativity with the ball. Lucky our kicking game was so good because when we tried to keep the ball in hand we were smashed backwards at a rate of knots. Australia dominated our scrum. I repeat, Australia. We lost a huge number of our own throws in these games. We had a magnificent defence and a quality kicking game. So we're basically back to 2009; minus a good lineout.

Schmidt will have to improve our attacking with the ball. Kidney tried that and it didn't work out very well. Let's hope Schmidt has more luck or all this talk of Grand Slams and RWC final's will look ridiculous.

Notch wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Look at Munster record in HEC.  Detail it and say it's a jinx, it ain't real, it's a myth, it's a sky media creation.  Look at the record of Munster players in it too.  It's no myth, it's real - it's over now with the beginning of a new competition (I detest old competition records used to varnish new ones) - but don't try telling me it was all a myth invented by Sky.

No, their record is real. The romanticised myth is that that record comes from anything special or unusual or it's somehow different to the records held by other great teams. Thats there something different in the water in Munster or they have a relationship with the tournament that is somehow more profound than other sides... bollox. They just won more clutch games more consistently than other sides. The rest is just blowing smoke up arses and selling papers, season tickets and TV subscriptions.

SecretFly wrote:So are you saying let's stick to what we have a realistic chance of winning in our 'limited NH' view of ourselves.  Let's win the 6N and not get too worked up about trying to win the competition further down the line - afterall, that's a competition for the big boys of which we don't belong?

You're not saying that, Notch

You're right I'm not saying that. Which makes the preceding paragraph a waste of time. You've described something I'm not saying then acknowledged that I'm not saying it... Well, I agree with you. I'm not saying it.

SecretFly wrote:I'll go back to the bolts of the debate.  I say Schmidt should try to win the 6N, but he should do so - and WILL continue to do so - by looking at combinations or retrying combinations that didn't have sufficent time etc) - and that will be because he is also preparing to have an honest and genuine shot at WINNING the competition that follows along - the WC.

As if there's some kind of conflict between the two! We have four warm-up games to experiment immediately before the World Cup which is where that experimenting with combinations will happen. Of course I expect Schmidt to rotate to get the peak out of his squad in the Six Nations, you simply can't have 15 players playing all 80 minutes in five games but he has no need to be looking at combinations or experimenting unnecessarily because he's already established a strong and deep squad for 2015. We've had more than 30 players starting test matches under Schmidt. A few more will come in out of necessity NOT out of rotation in the Six Nations but they'll be prepped within an inch of their lives and it won't be any kind of trial run for them. It'll be the real thing.

There's this perception that we have to do something to prepare for the World Cup, treat games as warm-ups or try out potential replacements for key players from the start. The best possible way to use the Six Nations as a warm-up for the World Cup is to treat every game like a World Cup final and select and prepare appropriately. Get the group used to putting that pressure on themselves- start playing knockout rugby in February and come into the World Cup battle hardened. Thats how we prepare. Then the warm-up games are about trying out contingency plans and giving exposure to players who are cover for key men and getting match fitness.

We should be targeting both of course. My only point was that a season where we win something is better than a season where we don't. The Six Nations title defence is a very big prize to play for. I'll be tearing my hair out when the Six Nations comes around and people are talking about the World Cup. It's annoying enough now. Contrary to popular belief no games played now have any impact on the World Cup whatsoever. Winning the World Cup is about momentum generated within the tournament itself. I wish people would give over about it until it starts.

Because of the timing its probably not relevant but in 2011 both NZ and SA sacrificed the RC to concentrate on the World cup. The boks didnt send their top side to NZ or Oz and instead went into camp. NZ held back 7 key players from going to SA to allow others- Dagg back from injury being one- to make the squad.

Oz picked their best players every match and I think it showed in the tournament. Players fell like flies to injury.

But a lot of this was about preserving players so close to the tournament. Ireland won't have this problem but in terms of using it for the world cup there are some things you can do. Not selecting young players for debut unless they are exceptionally talented and are a world cup possibility is one.

Schmidt should know 90% of his squad by now. Incorporating new moves is another. Create an environment where players get to try different things. Theyre probably doing that now but doing so with the Wcup in mind is a slant on it. Trying different things versus France- their pool friend, and the likely match to decide the pool.

Notch wrote:

SecretFly wrote:So are you saying let's stick to what we have a realistic chance of winning in our 'limited NH' view of ourselves.  Let's win the 6N and not get too worked up about trying to win the competition further down the line - afterall, that's a competition for the big boys of which we don't belong?

You're not saying that, Notch

You're right I'm not saying that. Which makes the preceding paragraph a waste of time. You've described something I'm not saying then acknowledged that I'm not saying it... Well, I agree with you. I'm not saying it.

Notch, if you're not saying what you say I accused you of saying  (it was a grammatical question) - even in your mind - then we wouldn't be having this discussion.  

You're the one who got irked when some of us placed WC position ahead of 6N victory.

So that annoys you, so be it - why do you have to insist it's not a legitimate approach?  

It is a legitimate approach and state of mind.  The only problem is that it conflicts with your world view and your legitimate opinions.  So be it.  I've said before we differ in our world view of what priorities should exist next year.  

You said you'd be more accepting of a lower placing in WC if it meant a 6N victory.  I don't share that view.  Just accept that some of us Irish supporters see that conclusion as a very poor return for a very promising team development and a fine coaching recruitment (he was on his way home!).  

I repeat, to do well in the WC means you also do well in 6N, or try to.  But you still prioritise the WC - in - my - humble - opinion.  You don't forget it or put it to one side in your brain.

Correction:  Maybe you do.  So be it.  

I don't and I'm not alone, as I'm sure you're not alone in your view.  Why always get so ratty in a debate?  Why should you get 'angry' that others might have an opposing view?

Just for Sub,.nahnahnananaaah...

In defence of Schmidt....the last year has certain similarities to a certain DK first year. However I would say in reference to Feckless's comment that there was no luck involved with regards to the kicking game or the showing against both SA and Aus.

I do believe that Schmidt will work things through in terms of our attack. No idea how but am sure he knows...(at least I hope so).

RE: Munster and the HC myth. What Notch said is completely correct.

There was your downfall ME.  Penney believed the Myth fished to him by the Sky boys.

He went home, or to Japan, with Munster whispers in his ears.  "It was all a fairytale, Penns.  You never been here.  We don't exist.  Munster is just an illusion.  Now when I click me fingers, you'll wake up and you'll be back to reality...with a Japanese phraseology book"

I'm not annoyed, I'm just trying to cut through the bullshoite- I've no time for straw men and that was a humorously self-deconstructed straw man.

If you're wrong about what I think I'll let you know. If you're ascribing opinions to me that have nothing to do with what I think I need to point that out.

Like this;

SecretFly wrote:You said you'd be more accepting of a lower placing in WC if it meant a 6N victory.

That is most definitely not what I said. That has a very different meaning to what I said. It is a similar thing but it is not the specific thing I am arguing which is;

A season where we win the Six Nations trophy but do poorly in the World Cup is more successful than a season where we do well in both but win neither as the only true, lasting measure of success is silverware.

You can not infer value judgements about how I view the World Cup or whether I feel that represents us meeting our potential from that. There is nothing in there in which I argue we sacrifice one tournament for the other or that success in one makes failure in the other somehow permissible. In fact it was the reverse of that that I was pushing against in the first place, that we should at least partially sacrifice the Six Nations for the World Cup. There is also nothing in there about what I expect from the World Cup, or how I see Ireland in the rugby world or anything else. There is just that one specific point. It doesn't need tying back into the general.

I do not get angry when people disagree. I want a debate. I get rather sharp and annoyed with people who misrepresent my own views back to me as this destroys the debate.

Such long posts. Sometimes its like an episode of dawsons creek here.

I'm sorry if I came across as ratty. I'm just very inclined to go hard on posts that tell me what I think about things. I already know what I think about things you see.

GunsGerms wrote:Such long posts. Sometimes its like an episode of dawsons creek here.

 I don't want to wait... for our lives to be over...

Notch wrote:I'm not annoyed, I'm just trying to cut through the bullshoite- I've no time for straw men and that was a humorously self-deconstructed straw man.

If you're wrong about what I think I'll let you know. If you're ascribing opinions to me that have nothing to do with what I think I need to point that out.

Like this;

SecretFly wrote:You said you'd be more accepting of a lower placing in WC if it meant a 6N victory.

That is most definitely not what I said. That has a very different meaning to what I said. It is a similar thing but it is not the specific thing I am arguing which is;

A season where we win the Six Nations trophy but do poorly in the World Cup is more successful than a season where we do well in both but win neither as the only true, lasting measure of success is silverware.

You can not infer value judgements about how I view the World Cup or whether I feel that represents us meeting our potential from that. There is nothing in there in which I argue we sacrifice one tournament for the other or that success in one makes failure in the other somehow permissible. In fact it was the reverse of that that I was pushing against in the first place, that we should at least partially sacrifice the Six Nations for the World Cup. There is also nothing in there about what I expect from the World Cup, or how I see Ireland in the rugby world or anything else. There is just that one specific point. It doesn't need tying back into the general.

I do not get angry when people disagree. I want a debate. I get rather sharp and annoyed with people who misrepresent my own views back to me as this destroys the debate.

Why don't you just win both?...there...settled. None of his settling for second's. You can be sure Schmidt and he boys won't be. From that loss to the AB's last year Ireland sure have responded. Always said a well timed loss can work wonders. And if hey can improve in that 12 months, what can they do next year. Looking good Ireland. Pity we arent playing this weekend. Would have been great.

I suggest take off the reading glasses, close the eyes, put on the classical music and meditate, Guns Never read stuff you don't want to read.

wolfball wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Such long posts. Sometimes its like an episode of dawsons creek here.

 I don't want to wait... for our lives to be over...

Yesssssss haha

GunsGerms wrote:

wolfball wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Such long posts. Sometimes its like an episode of dawsons creek here.

 I don't want to wait... for our lives to be over...

Yesssssss haha

Can the children please go to the playroom...

Notch wrote:I'm sorry if I came across as ratty. I'm just very inclined to go hard on posts that tell me what I think about things. I already know what I think about things you see.

You don't have to apologise to me.  I'd just prefer a less confrontational debating mood  We both want what's best for Ireland.  Like coaches, we just obviously have our individual methodology in how best to get there.  
But yes, winning helps.......... as many games as possible.  And I think we need 12 straight wins from here (less the world prep games, which I'd also hope we win) to hold both the GS cup and the World Cup in the air in the same year!!!

So no pressure folks  ....that's..................... em........................... doable...................... I think.........................maybe................................ not

I'm interested Notch, if you had to choose one outcome from the following, which one would you take?

6N Grand Slam
or
beating the All Blacks

The Great Aukster wrote:I'm interested Notch, if you had to choose one outcome from the following, which one would you take?

6N Grand Slam
or
beating the All Blacks

Hmmm, 50/50. Beating the All Blacks would be equally historic. I don't think it's better than a Slam but neither is it less significant in the long-term.

The thing with me is.................  I don't dine out long on anything.  Which is frustrating and maybe a sign of aging

Highs are fleeting - or maybe I could word that better by saying Highs just force my mind faster to the next potential High beyond.

I'd like us to beat the ABs but moreso just because they are a damn good team and have been Number 1 in rankings for so long - Not because of breaking any record, or crowing about a Firsty Historic Win over them.  I'd like us beating them just to beat them because they are a standard bearer in the sport.... probably the most potent standard bearer in any field sport on this planet. I'd like beating them in the very same sense that I liked us beating SA and AUS. Teams habitually well above us. You want to get up to where they fly to see how good the view is - I have a fascination with altitude.

But I also know for a fact that the glow of beating them would drain away rapidly and I'd be thinking that the victory won't be worth much if we can't back it up against sides considered lower than the ABs.  I'd be thinking if we're beaten by England or France or Wales, then they'll giggle that we must have caught the ABs on one of their stomach bug days.

So that's why the ABs are such a special team; not only that they walk the walk of being best, but they also can still motivate themselves to keep getting better even with all their enemies almost always beneath them.  We look up for our motivation, they have to always look down.  They have a much tougher task than people appreciate.

Really enjoyed the posts on this last page. Kind of came out of the blue... but I like when people throw themselves passionately (but without rancour) at an otherwise completely useless and irrelevant topic!

For my part, I think two key points have been obscured by all the passionate rhetoric:

1) Normally I find myself on Notch's side of these arguments... but not on this one. We are poles apart. As more of a sportsman than a spectator myself, I don't remotely believe that trophies are everything. And I don't think trophies are the only way that teams get credit or respect. Sometimes TV can make it feel like that. But as Taylorman pointed out above, our performances against the SH sides over the last year have (perhaps) done more for our reputation and international credibility in rugby than our last-minute Grand Slam drop goal win did many years ago. Competing consistently at the highest level is the key to supporter pride and collegial respect. Trophies are great... and are the easiest way to get all that. But its not black and white. Style and grace and the manner in which you compete are still important - even in the professional age. I don't look back on the ABs of 1995 and think: "what a bunch of losers!" I think they were one of the most awesome and exciting sporting sights I ever remember witnessing. That is never forgotten.

2) More importantly (re the topic) I don't think the black and white divide being drawn here - between picking first teamers for 6Ns and keeping them in reserve for the WC - is an accurate representation of the new debate under Schmidt. As far as I can see Schmidt is not planning on holding back any players simply to keep them fit. Rather (like at Leinster) he will be aiming to build two properly competitive and high-quality squads because (as in football and now even in Dublin GAA) this is precisely HOW you win tophies in the modern game! It is not a question of sacrificing the 6Ns... but of short-term versus long-term thinking. It is about building a proper structure that allows you to win multiple 6Ns and compete consistently over the course of multiple seasons. That also gives you the freedom and room to develop your own style, artistry and character - which for me is far more important than simply winning silverware in whatever way you can.

We all know how Dublin did in the All Ireland this year!

ME-109 wrote:We all know how Dublin did in the All Ireland this year!

I restrained myself from making that comment

I would hope that Joe isn't taking any lessons from the Dubs!

Sin é wrote:

ME-109 wrote:We all know how Dublin did in the All Ireland this year!

I restrained myself from making that comment

I would hope that Joe isn't taking any lessons from the Dubs!

I knew it was coming... I thought I could take it... But its still too soon!

Saw the Dub team went to dinner with Carter, Dagg and Retallick in Bear last night.

Did they all go willingly or did AIG demand they all turned up?

AIG

Must have been a bore for the Dubs..

Yeah....the Dubs are known to love the bit of the craic.......................... *crickets*

Thank goodness you guys have moved off topic for now... and back to the usual inter-provincial banter.

No seriously. It was a pleasure to get beat by Ireland.
I'm hoping you keep on rising with your feet still on the ground. If that makes any sense at all.
I'm quietly confident you will get even better.

They should go for everything. 6N and RWC. Why not? I think that's the plan anyway.

Your team is on a roll and I'd like to see it continue for some time. Share the joy you all thoroughly deserve and that kind of thing.

The Loaded Dog wrote:Thank goodness you guys have moved off topic for now... and back to the usual inter-provincial banter.

No seriously. It was a pleasure to get beat by Ireland.
I'm hoping you keep on rising with your feet still on the ground. If that makes any sense at all.
I'm quietly confident you will get even better.

They should go for everything. 6N and RWC. Why not? I think that's the plan anyway.

Your team is on a roll and I'd like to see it continue for some time. Share the joy you all thoroughly deserve and that kind of thing.

Thanks for the words, Dog

Yep, most of us are old enough to have been right here before and so caution caution will be the order of the day.  Steps at a time.  And certainly we'll never undervalue any of the sides that'll meet us into the next year.  In the 6N, practically any of the 4 can beat us - and even Italy if they caught us sleeping could put a boot in.  We're a long way from being invincible even in European terms.  Next year will be one tough year for all sides - some fighting to get better, others willing good form to last and even improve.

For me though - the joy is perhaps longterm.  Ireland I feel, as a Nation, has taken another step closer to being a bona fide genuine Rugby Nation.  More and more people are coming out of the woodwork and supporting the Irish squad.  That means too that more and more young children will be exposed to a sport they might have seen for the first time through these last few weekends.  Some of those bright eyed kids might be inspired by what they saw (as I was in the 70s) and choose to take their sporting interests down that route.  We're also beginning to see our immigrant populations more and more attending games and cheering.  They'll add more to the mix of player choices too into the next decades.

So we might lose the 6N and not do as well as hoped in the WC - but the game is expanding.  We have set-backs for sure but the graph keeps rising.

I think the main things Ireland has gained from the last year or so is belief which has come from consistency of performance. Many barriers have been crossed and that should give them some confidence going forward. For instance they've broken their France hoodoo, won a 6 nations on the tougher schedule (France and England away), won both tests in Argentina comfortably and won all their november tests.

As well as belief, consistency was the main ingredient missing. You could see a great performance followed by a terrible performance a week later. Actually it was more along the lines of one big performance every year.

But there seems to be a shift in mentality now. There was no wild celebrations after beating the Boks or Australia unlike previous victories. They even used to celebrate and bask in the glory of winning triple crowns which to me always looked like a schoolboy finding a tenner on the street.

Most of the matches Ireland played in the last year have been great to watch especially in terms of intensity. Starting with the narrow loss to NZ, then England and France away where IMO the French played their best rugby of the year. Then the games against the Boks and Aussies. All the other matches this year were easy wins so beating teams well is another step forward for the side.


Btw, I watched the match back again and here are my ratings

7 McGrath
6 Best Got some turnovers but his throwing is costly
6 Ross
5 Toner His worst game for Ireland
8 POC
8 POM My motm, edging POC.
7 Ruddock
6 Heaslip
6 Murray
6 Sexton
7 Zebo
5 D'Arcy
7 Henshaw
7 Bowe
6 Kearney Solid but missed a few tackles.


I'd give a lot of credit to Australia for closing down all of Irelands space and being in the backs' faces throughout the match.

Almost exactly my ratings. Maybe a 7 for Sexton and Kearney. Cronin and Madigan made a huge impact off the bench.

Agree on POM, should have been MOTM.

profitius wrote:


Btw, I watched the match back again and here are my ratings

7 McGrath
6 Best   Got some turnovers but his throwing is costly
6 Ross  
5 Toner  His worst game for Ireland
8 POC
8 POM    My motm, edging POC.
7 Ruddock
6 Heaslip  
6 Murray  
6 Sexton  
7 Zebo
5 D'Arcy
7 Henshaw  
7 Bowe  
6 Kearney   Solid but missed a few tackles.


I'd give a lot of credit to Australia for closing down all of Irelands space and being in the backs' faces throughout the match.

Not sure how you can give Bowe and Zebo the same rating. Bowe didnt make a single mistake whereas Zebo did. An 8 for Bowe.

Toner deserves a bad score. He had a bad day.

Pom put in an epic tackle on Skelton towards the end but I reckon Poc shaded it.

Guns, I think the stats balance out Zebo's efforts in comparison to Bowe's. He put in a bloody good day at the office. And if Bowe deserves 7, so does Zebo.