QF3: Ireland v Argentina, 18 October

First topic message reminder :

   
IRELAND v ARGENTINA

18 October 2015
KO: 13:00 BST (UTC+01)
Millennium Stadium, Cardiff

Live on [tbc]

Ref: Jerome Garcès (France)
ARs: Romain Poite (France)and Chris Pollock (NZ)
TMO: George Ayoub (Australia)

A. Head to Head

15 Played 15
10 Won 5
0 Drawn 0
5 Lost 15
331 Points 283

B. Recent Form

14 June 2014
Estadio Monumental José Fierro, Tucumán
17 – 23 to Ireland

7 June 2014
Estadio Centenario, Resistencia
17 – 29 to Ireland

24 November 2012
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
46 – 24 to Ireland

28 November 2010
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
29 – 9 to Ireland

22 November 2008
Croke Park, Dublin
17 – 3 to Ireland

30 September 2007
Parc des Princes, Paris, France
30 – 15 to Argentina

2 June 2007
Estadio José Amalfitani, Buenos Aires
16 – 0 to Argentina

C. TEAMS:

IRELAND


15. Rob Kearney (UCD/Leinster)
14. Tommy Bowe (Belfast Harlequins/Ulster)
13. Keith Earls (Young Munster/Munster)
12. Robbie Henshaw (Buccaneers/Connacht)
11. Dave Kearney (Lansdowne/Leinster)
10. Johnny Sexton (St Mary's College/Leinster)
9. Conor Murray (Garryowen/Munster)
1. Cian Healy (Clontarf/Leinster)
2. Rory Best (Banbridge/Ulster)
3. Mike Ross (Clontarf/Leinster)
4. Devin Toner (Lansdowne/Leinster)
5. Iain Henderson (Ballynahinch/Ulster)
6. Jordi Murphy (Lansdowne/Leinster)
7. Chris Henry (Malone/Ulster)
8. Jamie Heaslip (Dublin University/Leinster) captain

Replacements;
16. Richardt Strauss (Old Wesley/Leinster)
17. Jack McGrath (St Mary's College/Leinster)
18. Nathan White (Connacht)
19. Donnacha Ryan (Shannon/Munster)
20. Rhys Ruddock (St Mary's College/Leinster)
21. Eoin Reddan (Old Crescent/Leinster)
22. Ian Madigan (Blackrock/Leinster)
23. Luke Fitzgerald (Blackrock/Leinster)

ARGENTINA


15. Joaquin Tuculet
14. Santiago Cordero
13. Matías Moroni
12. Juan Martín Hernández
11. Juan Imhoff
10. Nicolás Sánchez
9. Martín Landajo
1. Marcos Ayerza
2. Agustín Creevy (c)
3. Ramiro Herrera
4. Guido Petti
5. Tomás Lavanini
6. Pablo Matera
7. Juan Martín Fernández Lobbe
8. Leonardo Senatore

Replacements:
16. Julián Montoya
17. Lucas Noguera
18. Juan Pablo Orlandi
19. Matías Alemanno
20. Facundo Isa
21. Tomás Cubelli
22. Jerónimo De La Fuente
23. Lucas González Amorosino

Munchkin wrote:All hail Kiss, the real head coach, that lead us to two back to back 6N's victories.

I'm glad he's coming to Ulster as well. ERCC final, here we come!

Should be easy peasy seeing as quarter final matches against the weakest rugby championship team is supposedly lightyears ahead of any club rugby in the northern hem...

You don't even need intensity (apparantly!).

Enjoy Munch. I obviously hope he isn't a dud for Ulster as we need all Provinces kicking hard as always.

But I really want to see was he the real link all the time with the less inventive stuff - considering Kidney wasn't a coaching coach and yet Kiss was the only guy who survived the coup

clivemcl wrote:

Munchkin wrote:All hail Kiss, the real head coach, that lead us to two back to back 6N's victories.

I'm glad he's coming to Ulster as well. ERCC final, here we come!

Should be easy peasy seeing as quarter final matches against the weakest rugby championship team is supposedly lightyears ahead of any club rugby in the northern hem...

You don't even need intensity (apparantly!).

Nice snooze Breaks in between for the breathers and the air sucking apparently

clivemcl wrote:

Munchkin wrote:All hail Kiss, the real head coach, that lead us to two back to back 6N's victories.

I'm glad he's coming to Ulster as well. ERCC final, here we come!

Should be easy peasy seeing as quarter final matches against the weakest rugby championship team is supposedly lightyears ahead of any club rugby in the northern hem...

You don't even need intensity (apparantly!).

Well Kiss doesn't have much to do at Ulster then. With our passive displays we are halfway there

SecretFly wrote:Enjoy Munch.  :OK:   I obviously hope he isn't a dud for Ulster as we need all Provinces kicking hard as always.

But I really want to see was he the real link all the time with the less inventive stuff - considering Kidney wasn't a coaching coach and yet Kiss was the only guy who survived the coup ;)

I don't know what he will bring to the table, Fly. It can't be any worse than the dross we are being served now. I think he will be fine, but I want great, and I don't know if he can deliver great. He might well do. Proof of the pudding and all that. Hopefully he brings a forwards coach with him as well.

Actually the one massive criticism I have of the way the team is coached is based on the way we defend, so I'm not disappointed Kiss is moving on as an Ireland fan- and I'm pleased we're getting him in as an Ulster fan. I would be extremely critical of the way we defended yesterday, in that we surrendered way too many yards before the tackle, which was also what happened against Italy so warning signs were there. But what killed us was the time Sanchez and Hernandez had on the ball. Those two players are so classy, so they can't be allowed time to pick out their passes and make decisions. They have to be pressurised. I feel like the defence exercised zero pressure on Argentina. Even the kick chase went to shoite. Just sat back and let them run at us, gave them time to play.

I have no issues with our game plan in terms of attack. We cut our cloth to what we have and to be honest he does it well. People are saying, he doesn't foster attacking rugby- what about Zebo and Gilroy?! But firstly those guys aren't spectacular compared to other really good wingers, they are just pretty good, and secondly we are not set up as a team to engineer the space out wide for them to prosper. We have a halfback partnership is not good at injecting tempo into the game in my opinion. Both excellent players, just ones that prefer more of a controlling style than a running style of play. I think of our current outside backs only Jared Payne has the basic skill set to play a fast, wide game. Most of our centres don't have the basic skill set of the position. So given what we have I think the game plan we've adopted best fits the players that we have in Ireland- it's nowhere as conservative as it's been made out to be by some detractors, we actually do have some good attacking patterns and variety from game to game. But what we rely on in attack is deception, screens, decoys and power plays because thats what fits the team the best. The basics are lacking. We have some excellent kickers of a rugby ball, we have a great chasing game, we have players well able to learn their role in very complex moves and master that role, we have some superb lineout and breakdown technicians and thats what we've built our house on. On the things we generally do very well.

The thing is, to expand on that takes time and adopt a more expansive style effectively takes a lot of time and will require results to be sacrificed in the short term for long term gain. I mentioned this yesterday, but I have watched nearly every game Argentina have played in the Rugby Championship over the past few years and they have lost a lot of their games due to unforced errors, dropped balls etc. when trying to move the ball quickly and to offload out of the tackle. This is because they are trying to play at a pace and a tempo that is so high the execution of basic skills need to be incredible and it takes a long time to get a whole team to the point where they can execute that skill level consistently. Argentina have been consciously trying to up skill themselves for a few years and in a way they've had the freedom to do that; because everyone expects them to lose to New Zealand the results pressure isn't there in the same way that it would be for us if we tried to play basketball rugby and lost to Italy.

I wouldn't mind it if we tried that approach, but we'd have to reject the habits of a life time and actually give the team a few years where we don't even worry about results. And as you can see, as soon as the team loses they get lynched so I'm not sure it will ever happen like that.

That's how you'd do it from the top down; if you're not going to sacrifice results in the short term, it needs to be ingrained in schools and grassroots rugby so the players are comfortable in their basics when they get to professional level.

I do feel like our current team was not accurately represented by that result though. If we actually did the things we usually do well well we would have put a lot more pressure on them and we could have beaten them. I just keep coming back to two things; defence and kick chase. It was that passivity in defence and lack of accuracy in the kicking game that gave them so much time and space on the ball when they were attacking and counter-attacking. It's not so much that the tactics we use were exposed. We didn't execute a kick and chase game well, we didn't slow down any ball or stem any of their momentum.We almost never regathered a kick, or forced the receiver into touch. We let them get across the gain line almost every time they and the ball and let them get quick ball as a result.

If we stand accused if being too negative, I reject that claim. I think we just weren't good enough at being negative on the day. Ireland teams have taken some of their biggest scalps by stopping other teams playing and pressurising them into mistakes, but we didn't do it. We didn't put any pressure on them, we just stood off them and let them play. So we can talk about how we get our skill levels up so we can emulate what Argentina or New Zealand or Australia do with the ball, but the things our best performances are traditionally built upon were absent.

Very good post Notch (the first one).

What was wrong with the second one?!

One thing that struck me - the sight of Madigan bawling his eyes out after France. I guess at the time it had the makings of an "iconic" moment but I couldnt help thinking, mate you have only topped a pool group here, not won the World Cup. I wouldnt expect players serious about challenging for a world cup to be getting so emotional before the knock out stage has even began. Maybe that contributes to the "one big game" mentality and failure to put together back to back big performances. The serious business is only beginning after the pool stage. No sense in burning yourself out mentally and physically in the group stages.

Hadn't read it

Like I said more jovially before somewhere, we'll probably suffer some Leadership issues into the next 6N with POC gone, with Sexton really not in great form these last number of months.  I think he'll need quite a while now to get back to his older self with Leinster pals. He wasn't happy in France at all.

BUT... I do honestly think Schmidt now has a genuine chance of introducing more creativity with a younger player than POC and hopefully with one or two fresh eyes joining him as assistants.  I do feel the gameplan was catering somewhat for POC's strengths rather than his weaknesses.

catchweight wrote:One thing that struck me - the sight of Madigan bawling his eyes out after France. I guess at the time it had the makings of an "iconic" moment but I couldnt help thinking, mate you have only topped a pool group here, not won the World Cup. I wouldnt expect players serious about challenging for a world cup to be getting so emotional before the knock out stage has even began. Maybe that contributes to the "one big game" mentality and failure to put together back to back big performances. The serious business is only beginning after the pool stage. No sense in burning yourself out mentally and physically in the group stages.

He was probably crying out of relief. Think you're reading far too much into it. Men cry for all sorts of reasons, from genuine grief to just being a big girls blouse. Impossible to tell the relevance unless it's explained.

catchweight wrote:One thing that struck me - the sight of Madigan bawling his eyes out after France. I guess at the time it had the makings of an "iconic" moment but I couldnt help thinking, mate you have only topped a pool group here, not won the World Cup. I wouldnt expect players serious about challenging for a world cup to be getting so emotional before the knock out stage has even began. Maybe that contributes to the "one big game" mentality and failure to put together back to back big performances. The serious business is only beginning after the pool stage. No sense in burning yourself out mentally and physically in the group stages.

That had nothing to do with the Pool or thinking too far ahead into the competition.  It was a personal moment concerning his family and the absolute bullschit at times the man had to read about himself in the press.  It was a personal moment between himself and his parents, captured by the World media.  And as Keith Wood said, it was lovely.  Too much gung ho bunk in rugby - all the Angry faces, scowls and brief grunting words from coaches.  Play hard and don't give a damn then about smiles and tears after.

kunu wrote:I wouldn't agree. A good manager should trust himself. He can't pick everyone - bad management doesn't equate to dropping Zebo. To counteract that , he dropped Hendo after a MOM performance and Toner came in twice the player. The two of them were fantastic vs France. Strauss also slotted in well for Cronin after being given the chance. Schmidt is not a wonderful man manager- but he's not a bad one either.

You are not comparing like with like. Hendo was given a chance in the 2nd Row to compete with Toner. Zebo was not given a chance to compete for a wing spot even though that is the position he plays in. He was asked to compete for a fullback spot - a position he rarely plays in. In fact, D Kearney would have played more at fullback than Zebo.

Schmidt would have been vindicated if Kearney had a great game and Ireland won. But Kearney had a poor game and Ireland didn't win.

Incidentally, I think Schmidt could have rotated the team a bit - for instance, start Luke Fitz at centre, start Zebo on wing and have Earls on bench (who has had a huge workload). Fitz & Zebo would have been fresh for Argentina.

Ryan would also have been much fresher as he has played very little since the warmups when he had a super game against Wales (alongside Henderson).

After winning against France I am wondering if the team felt they had a bye into the semi and were caught out hence the slow start. Ireland normally start fired up and can over run teams but tend to fade in the last 10 min, but the blood and thunder start did not happen.

SecretFly wrote:

catchweight wrote:One thing that struck me - the sight of Madigan bawling his eyes out after France. I guess at the time it had the makings of an "iconic" moment but I couldnt help thinking, mate you have only topped a pool group here, not won the World Cup. I wouldnt expect players serious about challenging for a world cup to be getting so emotional before the knock out stage has even began. Maybe that contributes to the "one big game" mentality and failure to put together back to back big performances. The serious business is only beginning after the pool stage. No sense in burning yourself out mentally and physically in the group stages.

That had nothing to do with the Pool or thinking too far ahead into the competition.  It was a personal moment concerning his family and the absolute bullschit at times the man had to read about himself in the press.  It was a personal moment between himself and his parents, captured by the World media.  And as Keith Wood said, it was lovely.  Too much gung ho bunk in rugby - all the Angry faces, scowls and brief grunting words from coaches.  Play hard and don't give a damn then about smiles and tears after.

It was an emotional release after a big match. But I wouldnt expect that kind of reaction for a France win a player in team that was expecting to top the pool and go on and challenge. It looked like the Irish had invested everything in that game and left themselves spent for the busines end of the competition.

SecretFly wrote:Hadn't read it

Like I said more jovially before somewhere, we'll probably suffer some Leadership issues into the next 6N with POC gone, with Sexton really not in great form these last number of months.  I think he'll need quite a while now to get back to his older self with Leinster pals.  He wasn't happy in France at all.

BUT... I do honestly think Schmidt now has a genuine chance of introducing more creativity with a younger player than POC and hopefully with one or two fresh eyes joining him as assistants.  I do feel the gameplan was catering somewhat for POC's strengths rather than his weaknesses.

I am usually guilty of ridiculing some statements on occasion without reading them through properly. So for this I would seriously like you to explain what you mean here? Are you really suggesting that because of POC Schmidt was coaching the team in a certain way and based his game plan around one player?

So Madigan's tears were for all the team?

I agree with you in that Ireland were spent. That game took a huge amount out of both teams.

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Hadn't read it

Like I said more jovially before somewhere, we'll probably suffer some Leadership issues into the next 6N with POC gone, with Sexton really not in great form these last number of months.  I think he'll need quite a while now to get back to his older self with Leinster pals.  He wasn't happy in France at all.

BUT... I do honestly think Schmidt now has a genuine chance of introducing more creativity with a younger player than POC and hopefully with one or two fresh eyes joining him as assistants.  I do feel the gameplan was catering somewhat for POC's strengths rather than his weaknesses.

I am usually guilty of ridiculing some statements on occasion without reading them through properly. So for this I would seriously like you to explain what you mean here? Are you really suggesting that because of POC Schmidt was coaching the team in a certain way and based his game plan around one player?

Yeah.

catchweight wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

catchweight wrote:One thing that struck me - the sight of Madigan bawling his eyes out after France. I guess at the time it had the makings of an "iconic" moment but I couldnt help thinking, mate you have only topped a pool group here, not won the World Cup. I wouldnt expect players serious about challenging for a world cup to be getting so emotional before the knock out stage has even began. Maybe that contributes to the "one big game" mentality and failure to put together back to back big performances. The serious business is only beginning after the pool stage. No sense in burning yourself out mentally and physically in the group stages.

That had nothing to do with the Pool or thinking too far ahead into the competition.  It was a personal moment concerning his family and the absolute bullschit at times the man had to read about himself in the press.  It was a personal moment between himself and his parents, captured by the World media.  And as Keith Wood said, it was lovely.  Too much gung ho bunk in rugby - all the Angry faces, scowls and brief grunting words from coaches.  Play hard and don't give a damn then about smiles and tears after.

It was an emotional release after a big match. But I wouldnt expect that kind of reaction for a France win a player in team that was expecting to top the pool and go on and challenge. It looked like the Irish had invested everything in that game and left themselves spent for the busines end of the competition.

It was about his parents.. he waved at them...it was about them.  He said so - he lost it when he saw them in the crowd...okay?  Don't try to do a psychology essay on it catchweight.

glamorganalun wrote:After winning against France I am wondering if the team felt they had a bye into the semi and were caught out hence the slow start. Ireland normally start fired up and can over run teams but tend to fade in the last 10 min, but the blood and thunder start did not happen.

Do we? We can sometimes do it that way but do we really use that pattern? I think we more tend to start slowly.... establish a pace and increase it bit by bit towards the end of the first half and into part of the second. Then we sit back and defend, defend, defend what we might have collected to the tight and bitter close-run end.

SecretFly wrote:

ME-109 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Hadn't read it

Like I said more jovially before somewhere, we'll probably suffer some Leadership issues into the next 6N with POC gone, with Sexton really not in great form these last number of months.  I think he'll need quite a while now to get back to his older self with Leinster pals.  He wasn't happy in France at all.

BUT... I do honestly think Schmidt now has a genuine chance of introducing more creativity with a younger player than POC and hopefully with one or two fresh eyes joining him as assistants.  I do feel the gameplan was catering somewhat for POC's strengths rather than his weaknesses.

I am usually guilty of ridiculing some statements on occasion without reading them through properly. So for this I would seriously like you to explain what you mean here? Are you really suggesting that because of POC Schmidt was coaching the team in a certain way and based his game plan around one player?

Yeah.

Thats what I thought...doesnt deserve a response...

Thanks. I'm not in the mood to elaborate.

I'd keep it to yourself.

That's what I said yeah.

have to say, as a neutral observer, Argentina dominated the contact, be it tackle, ruck or maul, from the start to such an extent that ireland were always reacting to the scoreboard ( ie. being behind!) and were unable to settle into any kind of rythmn.
losing SOB and POM were two massive blows to the forward effort, one which Ireland couldnt adjust to. With the Wallabies losing their first choice loosehead on Sunday, im not sure they will cope with the scrum next week, even with all their recent improvements under Le Desmo.

sensisball wrote:have to say, as a neutral observer, Argentina dominated the contact, be it tackle, ruck or maul, from the start to such an extent that ireland were always reacting to the scoreboard ( ie. being behind!) and were unable to settle into any kind of rythmn.
losing SOB and POM were two massive blows to the forward effort, one which Ireland couldnt adjust to. With the Wallabies losing their first choice loosehead on Sunday, im not sure they will cope with the scrum next week, even with all their recent improvements under Le Desmo.

As a non neutral observer I totally agree.

In fact I was impressed that Ireland didn't panic and clawed their way back in because the Pumas are the worst side to be chasing because they are so good at countering. Mentally we couldn't launch the second comeback which is why that missed penalty at 20-23 was so key.

That said having watched it again defensively we weren't good enough out wide. Ireland were defending very close to the ruck because of the threat of the Puma ball carriers who were taking 2 defenders to bring down and then they Argentinians had the skill to shift the ball wide so quickly and take out 2 or 3 defenders and leave the wide men exposed in a way we weren't used to - so it's easy to identify the issue but harder to fix.

BOD has criticized Earls and hinted that Schmidt should have played a specialist 13 but I don't think we had any better options. For me the problem wasn't the defense but we gave the Pumas too much ball and they have too much threat across the field to hold them out.

rodders wrote:

sensisball wrote:have to say, as a neutral observer, Argentina dominated the contact, be it tackle, ruck or maul, from the start to such an extent that ireland were always reacting to the scoreboard ( ie. being behind!) and were unable to settle into any kind of rythmn.
losing SOB and POM were two massive blows to the forward effort, one which Ireland couldnt adjust to. With the Wallabies losing their first choice loosehead on Sunday, im not sure they will cope with the scrum next week, even with all their recent improvements under Le Desmo.

As a non neutral observer I totally agree.

In fact I was impressed that Ireland didn't panic and clawed their way back in because the Pumas are the worst side to be chasing because they are so good at countering. Mentally we couldn't launch the second comeback which is why that missed penalty at 20-23 was so key.

That said having watched it again defensively we weren't good enough out wide. Ireland were defending very close to the ruck because of the threat of the Puma ball carriers who were taking 2 defenders to bring down and then they Argentinians had the skill to shift the ball wide so quickly and take out 2 or 3 defenders and leave the wide men exposed in a way we weren't used to - so it's easy to identify the issue but harder to fix.

BOD has criticized Earls and hinted that Schmidt should have played a specialist 13 but I don't think we had any better options. For me the problem wasn't the defense but we gave the Pumas too much ball and they have too much threat across the field to hold them out.

Murray Kinsella, as usual, has excellent analysis of the defence. But light on detail on the breakdown battle. There is plenty to say about it.

http://www.the42.ie/ireland-defence-argentina-analysis-rwc-15-2398472-Oct2015/?utm_source=twitter_self

Anyone else think Henshaw should be pushed out one by the 6 nations? He's an absolute beast in contact but there were times when we had numbers and he didn't release the ball. Maybe he doesn't trust his outside options?

I think he would do better at 13, especially outside a distributing 12 (fingers crossed Olding can make it back to where he was).

Anyway he's an absolute cracking player and cant wait to see more of him.

Henshaw is class but his game awareness needs a little work, his peripheral vision was either not as good as it could have been or he was a little lost without Payne to chaperone alongside. He for me remains absolute class so wherever you guys feel he is best placed either at 12 or 13. Maybe his inexperience lead to the lack of composure on times but this fella will definitely be the complete player IMO.

Henshaw has the eyes. I look at his eyes and I see he right stuff - calm intensity. Yes, a real find. It'll take management and more experience to make him even better but at 22 he has time.

But at 22 he's been trusted. Maybe because there were few alternatives but Ireland have to do more of this. See raw talent and throw it in at the deep end. The apprenticeship in Ireland can be too long.

I'm from Galway so I'm a Connacht lad (my mum's from Cork so I'm technically half Munster too) so I really want Henshaw to do well. It's good for our province and good for Irish rugby that Henshaw is in the team and plus well.

On the 12/13 debate the difference in opposition skills and game plans between France and Argentina showed what sort of player Henshaw is. An excellent runner, a good defender with good positional awareness. However his distribution is simply not good enough for the expansive game people are saying Ireland need to play. I don't think we could play like Argentina with Henshaw at 12 no matter who is outside him. Personally Henshaw to me is a 13 and will be in the longer term. If we want to play the sort of fast flowing game we were beaten by on Sunday we need someone who could be classed a distributing 12. I have seen McCloskey at 12 for Ulster around 5/6 times and while I'm impressed by him, he does look like a very similar player to Henshaw. Maybe Ulster fans who will have seen him more might be able to say whether that is an accurate reflection of him as a player. I really like Stuart Olding but will he come back from serious injury? He has basically missed two seasons of rugby and that won't do his development any good let alone making a full medical recovery. Could Fitzgerald be a potential answer? He would need to be Leinster's starting 12 to be considered.

On a similar note, and this may be heresy, but we may also need a better half back partnership to play the slick, quick expansive game. I'm just not sure Murray and Sexton, as good as they are in other facets of their game, are naturally suited to that style of play. Of course the proof would be in the pudding so to speak and we would know better how they would cope if we attempted that style of play.

If Schmidt wanted to continue playing a more low-risk and conservative style of play then we might just see McCloskey and Henshaw paired together. That partnership doesn't do an awful lot to excite me. We also need to find two top class wingers. If fit and firing Trimble and Earls should start for me, but Trimble is 29/30 now, Bowe 30/31? Zebo has, contrary to others, had a shot on the wing (such as the Six Nations) and hadn't done enough to grab the jersey. Kearney is a workmanlike player who, until Sunday, never really had a bad game for Ireland. We need better than that to be a real contender on the world stage.

I like the way Gatland "threw" the 20 year old Tyler Morgan in v SA and he did a great job and rarely looked out of place. Another exciting prospect for us and I can see him and Henshaw having some battles in the future, both big and skilful lads who offer more than just Bosh!!!!

Henshaw might just be one of your reasons for hopefully avoiding that dreaded curve which gets closer and closer

Distribution can be thought taught .  Distribution is part of the coaching process that would be involved if we felt we really need to mix this thing up now and become genuinely more expansive at times to keep sides guessing.

But I don't believe you should go looking for the perfect player or that you should wait three or four years to find him and judge him by what he does 'naturally' at his own Province.  We'll be a long time waiting for the perfect player in every position to show up, the once in a generation one-of-a-kind find in all fifteen positions over four years.  It ain't gonna happen
So,  I think you find the raw talent; energy, drive, natural athleticism, power etc etc...and then mould it to meet the requirements of the Irish team as it evolves.  These skills that Australia or Argentina have are learned, they're perfected, they're drilled until they become second nature.  Argentina had to evolve and they did by increasing skillsets amongst players that didn't necessarily have them to begin with.

Anyone on here from Sneem in Kerry?

Distribution can be taught Fly but can you teach "instinct" or "composure" or are they components of a skill set that you either have or you don't?

'taught' even

Of course Ruby there to assist. I obviously think too much!

RubyGuby wrote:Distribution can be taught Fly but can you teach "instinct" or "composure" or are they components of a skill set that you either have or you don't?

Henshaw has enough instinct to be guided and have his game expanded on. Coaching sees the avenues and expands the skill set of all players. The player must be good enough to be worth the effort of course.

there you go Ruby's RWC stats, no missed tackles, plenty of trys and 1 assist.

RubyGuby wrote:I like the way Gatland "threw" the 20 year old Tyler Morgan in v SA and he did a great job and rarely looked out of place. Another exciting prospect for us and I can see him and Henshaw having some battles in the future, both big and skilful lads who offer more than just Bosh!!!!

Henshaw might just be one of your reasons for hopefully avoiding that dreaded curve which gets closer and closer

And onto the dreaded curve.... my intended first port of call but it turns out to be my third post directed at Ruby.

Let's not forget, Ruby, that Gats climbs mountains, shivers in Goby deserts, gasps for air in Salt Lakes, crashes his players into brick walls at 70mph, boils them in acid, drops them from ten storey buildings, lobotomises them and replaces their brains with that of Tazmanian Devils, and has warm-down training camps on the Moon to reach the potential of his curves  Ireland get to the top of theirs in the cool, grey, boring drizzle of a Dublin suburb, doing a few laps around Malahide Castle.  Boring!

Beware the curve, Ruby.  Tis true.

Your guys are pushing Argentina up too much. The brutal truth is without POC and Sexton, Ireland were rubbish. They had no leadership and played like headless chickens. Hell not being funny but even England could of got out of a pool with Georgia, Namibia and Tonga in it. The Tongans are the only team basically that could of stopped them qualifying and they had a terrible tournament themselves.

Excluding the games in this world cup, from June 2013 Argentina's record reads like this: Played 29, won 6, lost 23!
The 6 games they won were against Georgia, Italy (twice), France, South Africa and Australia.

Now lets look at some of their losses:
Argentina 3-32 England
Argentina 26-51 England
South Africa 73 - 13 Argentina
Argentina 17 - 54 Australia
Wales 40 - 6 Argentina
Scotland 41 - 31 Argentina

Hell even Scotland beat them home and away in that time period.

Sorry no, Argentina aren't that good, they had a very, very easy pool and played an abject Ireland team that shorn of it's 2 best players threw in the towel.

SecretFly wrote:Distribution can be thought.  Distribution is part of the coaching process that would be involved if we felt we really need to mix this thing up now and become genuinely more expansive at times to keep sides guessing.

But I don't believe you should go looking for the perfect player or that you should wait three or four years to find him and judge him by what he does 'naturally' at his own Province.  We'll be a long time waiting for the perfect player in every position to show up, the once in a generation one-of-a-kind find in all fifteen positions over four years.  It ain't gonna happen
So,  I think you find the raw talent; energy, drive, natural athleticism, power etc etc...and then mould it to meet the requirements of the Irish team as it evolves.  These skills that Australia or Argentina have are learned, they're perfected, they're drilled until they become second nature.  Argentina had to evolve and they did by increasing skillsets amongst players that didn't necessarily have them to begin with.

I largely agree. If someone had the natural skills throw them into the team. Having a lack of experience isn't an excuse. You don't get experience sitting on the bench or holding tackle bags in extended squads. I think you over empahise what coaching can achieve though. There are naturals aspects to people's skill sets and personality traits which you can coach, maybe improve slightly, but won't be able to change. If it were so simple Rory Best would never miss a throw, Ronan O'Gara would never have missed a tackle, etc etc. Of course you can improve the raw materials- look at Andrew Trimble. 50 odd caps which were a mixture of very good to abject. It took him until he was 28 and written off before he became a genuine international class winger. He is the model for any Irish player to aspire to. Maybe you won't live up to your potential of your early 20s, but with hard work and good coaching you can get there later than presumed.

But you can only increase the skill sets of players have the ability and instinct to take them on board. Something only becomes second nature of you have good instincts and a solid thought process to begin with. I don't think mentally we have those skills in a number of positions. I think, for instance, Fitzgerald, Earls and Zebo all have great natural instincts and are the sort of players you are referring to to that can be coached into excellence. Dave Kearney, Madigan, Jordi Murphy and Devon Toner? I don't think they have it between the ears, the real natural rugby instincts, a feeling for game to be really top class players. All can work hard, yes. Coaching can improve them of course. But in the highest of high pressure situations I don't think they have the intangibles. You can teach them on paper, on the training pitch, when to throw a miss-pass, what to do when you have a 4 on 3 overlap. Those are things we need to improve on most definitely. What we need, what the really good teams have in spades, are players who know technically what they should do but their instincts tell them there is something better. It's not that you have 4 on 3 overlap, it's that one of those guys has a weak left shoulder and I have half a gap and I'm going to have a go. It's that thought of 'bugger it' there's the 'second nature' choice of what I've been coached to do, or the instinctive choice that a player doesn't think about, he just does. That's what we need in green. But you don't know whether a player has that unless you pick them and play them.

Well they blew SA apart away from home shifty which is something we've never even come close to and they lost 26-16 to NZ in an enthralling game which is quite possibly the closest anyone will get to them.

Argentina aren't the best there has ever been. But nope...they're not push-overs either.

Actually, it's Australia that are the side that's had too much pomp and splendour headlines thrown their way in this competition. Scotland showed everyone yet again how ordinary they are when you don't hold them in awe.

RubyGuby wrote:Well they blew SA apart away from home shifty which is something we've never even come close to and they lost 26-16 to NZ in an enthralling game which is quite possibly the closest anyone will get to them.

You do realise we blew South Africa apart the last time we played them away?
The problem is we conceded 2 tries in the last few minutes, and Liam Williams shoulder charged one of their players on the touch line which resulted in Steve Walsh giving a penalty try meaning we lost the game with the last kick of the game.

South Africa had already sent a message down congratulating us on our win because Wales were miles ahead in the closing stages.
It's a pity Wales always seem to screw the last few minutes up against the bi 3.

Shifty wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Well they blew SA apart away from home shifty which is something we've never even come close to and they lost 26-16 to NZ in an enthralling game which is quite possibly the closest anyone will get to them.

You do realise we blew South Africa apart the last time we played them away?
The problem is we conceded 2 tries in the last few minutes, and Liam Williams shoulder charged one of their players on the touch line which resulted in Steve Walsh giving a penalty try meaning we lost the game with the last kick of the game.  

South Africa had already sent a message down congratulating us on our win because Wales were miles ahead in the closing stages.  
It's a pity Wales always seem to screw the last few minutes up against the bi 3.

If only....if only for 28 of the last 30 games against the big three....

RubyGuby wrote:Anyone on here from Sneem in Kerry?

Kerry people arent allowed to comment on Rugby unless they have gone through rigorous electric shock therapy.

ME-109 wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Anyone on here from Sneem in Kerry?

Kerry people arent allowed to comment on Rugby unless they have gone through rigorous electric shock therapy.

Ooops! I didn't know that, strangely enough I'm the fella that usually gives the ECT!!!! - My grandfather was born in Sneem and his family hails from there - On the plus side I've now won 6 Grand Slams and 8 championships in the past 10 years.

Shifty wrote:
Now lets look at some of their losses:
Argentina 3-32 England
Argentina 26-51 England
South Africa 73 - 13 Argentina
Argentina 17 - 54 Australia
Wales 40 - 6 Argentina
Scotland 41 - 31 Argentina

Hell even Scotland beat them home and away in that time period.

Sorry no, Argentina aren't that good, they had a very, very easy pool and played an abject Ireland team that shorn of it's 2 best players threw in the towel.

Argentina rarely get access to their top players so they don't get anything like the preperation the tier 1 sides do. When they do they are as good as any side in the world. Not surprisingly this tends to coincide with RWCs.

They are definitely a notch up on the 6N teams at the minute. How many wins do you think the 6N teams would pick up in the RC over 2 or 3 seasons - on the evidence of the RWC not many.