Ireland 2016 Squad

First topic message reminder :

So what would you like to see for the 6 nations and end of season tour of South Africa? Who would you like brought in and left out? Les Kiss and POC are gone, the only definites..


Players I think should be brought in to the squad or considered:
Olding - Utility back
McCloskey - center
Garry Ringrose - center
Marmion - scrum half
Luke McGrath - scrum half
Dave O'Callaghan - blindside
Sherry - hooker
Josh Van Der Flier - openside
Dan Leavy - backrow
Jack Conan - 8
Jack O'Donoghue - 8
Cj Stander - 8
Ross Moloney - lock
Marty Moore - tighthead
Matt Healy - winger
Cathal Marsh  - outhalf
Andrew Trimble - winger

Some of the best young (except Trimble) players in Ireland to consider.

Just do what ROG says - get more south sea islanders and kiwis.

When does Teo qualify for us?

Two years is it?

Just in time not to be up to speed for another WC

I'm going to put $50,000 on us only getting to the Quarters again right now! I gotta make this consistency of ours pay me compensation some way.

I wouldn't bother sending a team to Japan and would be building for 2023.

Ah it'll be good practice in the building process though rodders

send the wolfhounds

send the Poodles......

..oh sorry........... we tried that already...

Send the poodles for the noodles and save the 'hounds for the pounds.

SecretFly wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Another key factor that must be noted for Scotland's change of play is that they now have the players who suit such a game - Russell, Bennett, Seymour and Hogg in particular. The pack also suits this game also with the Gray brothers, Denton, Strauss, Hardie etc.

Ireland do not have the same players as of yet and that is the reality. Unless people suggest we fast track some of the youngsters immediately.

Anything over 20 is okay by me.  Bring them into an extended camp and let the coaches work with and analyse at close range.  No reason why we can't use younger ambitious players.  BOD started out before he played for Leinster.  
But also I mentioned a while back that Schmidt should set up specific camps within each year with the express purpose of getting the Provincial 'side-kick' players of promise together to just get them up to speed on the nature of the camps and the requirements he has.  A few 'working-dinner' camps as it were for the fringe younger players both to get to know each other better and the International coaches, and to work on a few things without the pressures of being directed at any upcoming competition.

This is already happening though. The likes of Ringrose have already been involved in the training squads. JOD is being touted as having a big future and I'm fairly certain Schmidt has name checked him already. Schmidt has given Henshaw game time and already he is starting to be mentioned as a future Lion, despite being out of position!

The reality is that unless people want to see some of these players walk straight into the starting team, we are going to have to wait before we see much change. The good thing about Schmidt's approach is that the younger players know the standards they must meet to get into the Ireland squad, and this sort of ruthless selection policy is going to mean we get the very best out of our players. Too long have we been the nice little overachievers; Schmidt wants results and he will be encouraging rivalry and competition in his squad.

Schmidt is not above reproach, but he actually has done a very good job and you cannot deny that his tactics are effective. We beat both Australia and South Africa last year on the same tour, and we have almost beaten NZ. That is an incredible achievement when you think of where Ireland were before Schmidt was appointed head coach. I also think people are currently overrating our players by an awful lot, and expect them to suddenly unleash this hidden magical attacking flair from nowhere. I would love to see our attacking game improve, and I have absolutely no doubt Schmidt is working on this, but it will not happen overnight. I actually thought that Sexton, Henshaw and Payne were looking more dangerous with each game, and I didn't realise that they never actually started together once in the entire world cup!

My main criticism towards Schmidt would be his over reliance on certain key players. The reality is he will have to look to a world without Jonny Sexton, but we all know that Ireland are simply not the same side without him.

We have beaten SA and Aus ( in a wc remember) and almost beaten the ABs (also away) under previous mgmt. The tactics are effective to a point this was proven in the wc the warmups and in the 6ns (Wales and England). We will probably remain effective under Joe but to advance we need better game.

I have read this thread, re-read this thread and I cant help but again notice just how much people cannot see the similarities between the opening phases of DK's tenure and the opening phases of JS's tenure.

I made the point earlier but some on here really just have to look at the similarities.

They are strikingly similar...

eirebilly wrote:I have read this thread, re-read this thread and I cant help but again notice just how much people cannot see the similarities between the opening phases of DK's tenure and the opening phases of JS's tenure.

I made the point earlier but some on here really just have to look at the similarities.

They are strikingly similar...

How are they similar? Results wise? Style of play? Or tactically? At a minimum the key difference between DK and Joe is that DK was a great man manager but had no ideas of changing tactics. Joe is clearly close to the opposite. Because of that I think he will take the World Cup as a huge wake up and see that there are areas we need to vastly improve in. DKs response was... More of the same. If we have the exact same game plan in a year you def have a point. But I really doubt that. Joe is more ambitious then any of us. And I think now that it's clear there is no path to the NZ job after our RWC, he is with us until the next one. And he is with us to try and win it. He may not last that long but I def think that's in his head

What does Declan Kidney have to so with it anyway? He isn't involved in this Irish team. This is why I bring up provincial bias, the same old Munster personnel are brought up over and over again and it is tiresome. There is no relevance at all. Kidney has had his time with Ireland.

We've had Kidney, Penney, Foley, obviously Earls, Stringer, ROG, Wallace... We've even had Tomas O'Leary make an appearance on this thread for goodness sake!

eirebilly wrote:I have read this thread, re-read this thread and I cant help but again notice just how much people cannot see the similarities between the opening phases of DK's tenure and the opening phases of JS's tenure.

I made the point earlier but some on here really just have to look at the similarities.

They are strikingly similar...

I think people remember results, and the first two years of JS and DK are different enough in that respect.

DK year 1 : grand slam, win vs SA, draw vs Australia (there was another game against a minnow side we won too I think).
JS year 1 : 6 nations win, loss to Eng away, 2 wins vs Argentina , win vs SA and win vs Australia.

DK year 2: lost to Scotland (who lost to Italy) in the 6ns. Soundly beaten by France. 38 point loss to NZ, loss to Australia, loss to NZ Maori, another 20 point loss to NZ, loss to South Africa, beat Samoa.
JS year 2 : 6 nations win, loss to Wales in Cardiff, (WC warm ups- not worth counting IMO), beat Canada, Romania, Italy, France, lost Argentina.

JS has definately been more successful in his second year than DK was, so it doesn't surprise me that people don't recognise the similarities.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What does Declan Kidney have to so with it anyway? He isn't involved in this Irish team. This is why I bring up provincial bias, the same old Munster personnel are brought up over and over again and it is tiresome. There is no relevance at all. Kidney has had his time with Ireland.

We've had Kidney, Penney, Foley, obviously Earls, Stringer, ROG, Wallace... We've even had Tomas O'Leary make an appearance on this thread for goodness sake!

I joined this forum because I love Connacht rugby and Irish rugby. I also support the other Irish provinces, though probably a little more love for Munster as one of my parents is from there. I'm growing increasingly frustrated that we can't have a sensible discussion about Irish rugby without the same minority taking the thread completely off course to suit their own twisted and at times, overly aggressive agendas. I want to discuss Irish rugby in 2015 going forward and I haven't commented on any of this nonsense as it is of no relevance. I'd love to be able to do that if the threads can stay on topic or if a mod can step in. Otherwise it's a waste of time and I will be happy to find somewhere else where I can have sensible discussion.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What does Declan Kidney have to so with it anyway? He isn't involved in this Irish team. This is why I bring up provincial bias, the same old Munster personnel are brought up over and over again and it is tiresome. There is no relevance at all. Kidney has had his time with Ireland.

We've had Kidney, Penney, Foley, obviously Earls, Stringer, ROG, Wallace... We've even had Tomas O'Leary make an appearance on this thread for goodness sake!

1. History repeats itself. It will save a lot of trouble if we try and learn from it.
2. Schmidt has a history of not changing his very conservative rugby philosophy (Auckland Blues)
3. He is a poor man manager.
4. Why so bitter and twisted by the mention of Tomas O'Leary, particularly when he is playing well for Munster so far - he would be a better option than Isaac Boss anyway.

Exiled Gael wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What does Declan Kidney have to so with it anyway? He isn't involved in this Irish team. This is why I bring up provincial bias, the same old Munster personnel are brought up over and over again and it is tiresome. There is no relevance at all. Kidney has had his time with Ireland.

We've had Kidney, Penney, Foley, obviously Earls, Stringer, ROG, Wallace... We've even had Tomas O'Leary make an appearance on this thread for goodness sake!

I joined this forum because I love Connacht rugby and Irish rugby. I also support the other Irish provinces, though probably a little more love for Munster as one of my parents is from there. I'm growing increasingly frustrated that we can't have a sensible discussion about Irish rugby without the same minority taking the thread completely off course to suit their own twisted and at times, overly aggressive agendas. I want to discuss Irish rugby in 2015 going forward and I haven't commented on any of this nonsense as it is of no relevance. I'd love to be able to do that if the threads can stay on topic or if a mod can step in. Otherwise it's a waste of time and I will be happy to find somewhere else where I can have sensible discussion.

Totally agree. I'm dismayed at the same rubbish again.

There are very little parallels with EOS or Deccie - these were different times with different players against different opposition. Even if there were, by coincidence, they are totally irrelevant as this isn't 2003 or 2011.

We are where we are now - we' exceeded expectations in recent years by winning back to back 6N and followed it up with a marginally disappointing RWC, where we went out a stage earlier than hoped.

We have a condensed season now and are unlikely to see much success in Europe with the provinces or in the 6N - the summer tour to SA and autumn internationals are a chance to rebuild the squad, introduce new players and see where we are in the 2017 6N and whether Joe is the man to take us to 2019.

rodders wrote:

Exiled Gael wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What does Declan Kidney have to so with it anyway? He isn't involved in this Irish team. This is why I bring up provincial bias, the same old Munster personnel are brought up over and over again and it is tiresome. There is no relevance at all. Kidney has had his time with Ireland.

We've had Kidney, Penney, Foley, obviously Earls, Stringer, ROG, Wallace... We've even had Tomas O'Leary make an appearance on this thread for goodness sake!

I joined this forum because I love Connacht rugby and Irish rugby. I also support the other Irish provinces, though probably a little more love for Munster as one of my parents is from there. I'm growing increasingly frustrated that we can't have a sensible discussion about Irish rugby without the same minority taking the thread completely off course to suit their own twisted and at times, overly aggressive agendas. I want to discuss Irish rugby in 2015 going forward and I haven't commented on any of this nonsense as it is of no relevance. I'd love to be able to do that if the threads can stay on topic or if a mod can step in. Otherwise it's a waste of time and I will be happy to find somewhere else where I can have sensible discussion.

Totally agree. I'm dismayed at the same rubbish again.

There are very little parallels with EOS or Deccie - these were different times with different players against different opposition. Even if there were, by coincidence, they are totally irrelevant as this isn't 2003 or 2011.

We are where we are now - we' exceeded expectations in recent years by winning back to back 6N and followed it up with a marginally disappointing RWC, where we went out a stage earlier than hoped.

We have a condensed season now and are unlikely to see much success in Europe with the provinces or in the 6N - the summer tour to SA and autumn internationals are a chance to rebuild the squad, introduce new players and see where we are in the 2017 6N and whether Joe is the man to take us to 2019.

You are right about there being little parallels between Deccie or EOS. Neither of them got a free pass for their failures, Schmidt does.

Schmidt team selections v. Argentina were poor and he sent his team out poorly prepared. Why won't any of you admit that and stop making excuses for him?

Sin é wrote:
You are right about there being little parallels between Deccie or EOS. Neither of them got a free pass for their failures, Schmidt does.

Schmidt team selections v. Argentina were poor and he sent his team out poorly prepared. Why won't any of you admit that and stop making excuses for him?

Deccie had 4 seasons, Eddie from 2002- 2008. There was a clear downward spiral towards the end of their runs.

Schmidt is only in his second season and so far, minus a couple of tight loses, it has been a near perfect set of results. Graham Henry couldn't have done better.

One loss to Argentina does not warrant criticism in itself - in quite a lot of peoples eyes, particularly in the SH, we were underdogs and that was with a full team.

In what sense where we under prepared? The one mistake was naming Sexton in the side when he was unlikely to be fit but given it was a RWC QF it's not unreasonable to gamble on your best player.

Who would you have picked against Argentina? Earls weak defense was evident against Italy so perhaps Schmidt should have looked at other options like Fitzgerald or Cave. However there is no evidence to suggest they would have done any better. The reality is behind Jared Payne we had no proven international class options at outside center, so any selection would have presented a gamble.

rodders wrote:

Sin é wrote:
You are right about there being little parallels between Deccie or EOS. Neither of them got a free pass for their failures, Schmidt does.

Schmidt team selections v. Argentina were poor and he sent his team out poorly prepared. Why won't any of you admit that and stop making excuses for him?

Deccie had 4 seasons, Eddie from 2002- 2008. There was a clear downward spiral towards the end of their runs.

Schmidt is only in his second season and so far, minus a couple of tight loses, it has been a near perfect set of results. Graham Henry couldn't have done better.

One loss to Argentina does not warrant criticism in itself - in quite a lot of peoples eyes, particularly in the SH, we were underdogs and that was with a full team.

In what sense where we under prepared? The one mistake was naming Sexton in the side when he was unlikely to be fit but given it was a RWC QF it's not unreasonable to gamble on your best player.

Who would you have picked against Argentina? Earls weak defense was evident against Italy so perhaps Schmidt should have looked at other options like Fitzgerald or Cave. However there is no evidence to suggest they would have done any better. The reality is behind Jared Payne we had no proven international class options at outside center, so any selection would have presented a gamble.

This is Schmidt 3rd season with Ireland (and just had an extended period with the squad). Three years later we are still seeing selection of Leinster players (of lesser talent) because they 'know the system'. Players like McCarthy over either Tuohy or Dave Foley, Boss over Marmion, Dave Kearney over Trimble, Gilroy & Zebo. Dave Kearney may have done well in the warm-ups, but he didn't play particularly well against France but yet he is starting against Argentina when a fresher Zebo or Luke Fitz would have been a better selection bearing in mind the physical toll of France.

As for Earls: Earls defence was certainly not weak against Italy and was pretty good against France. What he is blamed for is not organising the defence. Why couldn't Rob Kearney organise the defence then? Or Robbie Henshaw (who you all claim should be playing 13 anyway so will need to be able to organise the defence).

Why haven't we any other options at outside centre? Is it because the coach didn't prepare for backup? Why is he not getting criticised for that?

double post

Exiled Gael wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What does Declan Kidney have to so with it anyway? He isn't involved in this Irish team. This is why I bring up provincial bias, the same old Munster personnel are brought up over and over again and it is tiresome. There is no relevance at all. Kidney has had his time with Ireland.

We've had Kidney, Penney, Foley, obviously Earls, Stringer, ROG, Wallace... We've even had Tomas O'Leary make an appearance on this thread for goodness sake!

I joined this forum because I love Connacht rugby and Irish rugby. I also support the other Irish provinces, though probably a little more love for Munster as one of my parents is from there. I'm growing increasingly frustrated that we can't have a sensible discussion about Irish rugby without the same minority taking the thread completely off course to suit their own twisted and at times, overly aggressive agendas. I want to discuss Irish rugby in 2015 going forward and I haven't commented on any of this nonsense as it is of no relevance. I'd love to be able to do that if the threads can stay on topic or if a mod can step in. Otherwise it's a waste of time and I will be happy to find somewhere else where I can have sensible discussion.

My point has nothing to do with Provincial bias, its more to do with my perceived 'honeymoon period' that all coaches seem to go through. I am not slating JS nor am I bigging up DK. I am simply implying that maybe Ireland seem to go through the same phases no matter what coach is in place.
It could very well simply be an issue with Irish rugby, not whoever coaches the team.

Sin é wrote:
This is Schmidt 3rd season with Ireland (and just had an extended period with the squad). Three years later we are still seeing selection of Leinster players (of lesser talent) because they 'know the system'. Players like McCarthy over either Tuohy or Dave Foley, Boss over Marmion, Dave Kearney over Trimble, Gilroy & Zebo. Dave Kearney may have done well in the warm-ups, but he didn't play particularly well against France but yet he is starting against Argentina when a fresher Zebo or Luke Fitz would have been a better selection bearing in mind the physical toll of France.

As for Earls: Earls defence was certainly not weak against Italy and was pretty good against France. What he is blamed for is not organising the defence. Why couldn't Rob Kearney organise the defence then? Or Robbie Henshaw (who you all claim should be playing 13 anyway so will need to be able to organise the defence).

Why haven't we any other options at outside centre? Is it because the coach didn't prepare for backup? Why is he not getting criticised for that?

No Earls was criticized for his poor line speed and passive defense against Italy and the same against Argentina - it was just poor.

Trimble's form for Ulster hasn't been great and he doesn't look fully fit so that doesn't look like a terrible decision to leave him out. Boss and McCarthy were just to hold tackle bags, nothing more. Zebo had his chances in the group stages and was part of the side that struggled against Italy - he's back up to Rob Kearney.

I don't claim Henshaw should play 13, I think he should play 12 where he is doing exceptionally well but he needs someone experienced outside and we didn't have anyone.

rodders wrote:

Sin é wrote:
This is Schmidt 3rd season with Ireland (and just had an extended period with the squad). Three years later we are still seeing selection of Leinster players (of lesser talent) because they 'know the system'. Players like McCarthy over either Tuohy or Dave Foley, Boss over Marmion, Dave Kearney over Trimble, Gilroy & Zebo. Dave Kearney may have done well in the warm-ups, but he didn't play particularly well against France but yet he is starting against Argentina when a fresher Zebo or Luke Fitz would have been a better selection bearing in mind the physical toll of France.

As for Earls: Earls defence was certainly not weak against Italy and was pretty good against France. What he is blamed for is not organising the defence. Why couldn't Rob Kearney organise the defence then? Or Robbie Henshaw (who you all claim should be playing 13 anyway so will need to be able to organise the defence).

Why haven't we any other options at outside centre? Is it because the coach didn't prepare for backup? Why is he not getting criticised for that?

No Earls was criticized for his poor line speed and passive defense against Italy and the same against Argentina - it was just poor.

Trimble's form for Ulster hasn't been great and he doesn't look fully fit so that doesn't look like a terrible decision to leave him out. Boss and McCarthy were just to hold tackle bags, nothing more. Zebo had his chances in the group stages and was part of the side that struggled against Italy - he's back up to Rob Kearney.

I don't claim Henshaw should play 13, I think he should play 12 where he is doing exceptionally well but he needs someone experienced outside and we didn't have anyone.

I just looked up the Player Ratings in the Press for Earls. Absolutely no such criticism. For example:

v. Italy
13. Keith Earls: 7
Like Zebo, he wasn't given the same space to dazzle today, but we saw glimpses. He drifted into a nice support line for the try and made a couple of half breaks. Defensively sound.

2. Robbie Henshaw: 6.5
A solid World Cup debut for the Connacht youngster, and he did brilliantly to offload for Earls' try. His physical presence was needed today, making 12 tackles. He still has quite a bit to learn about the position but is developing nicely.

v. Argentina
Rob Kearney 6: Saw plenty of the ball – he made 11 carries - but found the going tough in the aerial battle.

Tommy Bowe 6: The third Irish player to be carted off in a week. Knee injury a cruel end to his involvement.

Keith Earls 7: Banged up last week but put his body on the line. Linked well with his centre partner.

Robbie Henshaw 8: Appeared to be carrying an injury but Ireland’s top ball carrier and tackler – again.

Can you support your claim with similar media comments please about his defence v. Italy?

Why not look to the future for tackle bag holders then with Marmion or Dave Foley (I'm happy Foley didn't go, but I think that is the way Schmidt should be looking if he intends hanging around for the next world cup).

Zebo wasn't given a chance in the warm-up games on the wing (other than the time he came on for Andrew Trimble when he got injured). Schmidt continues to ignore skilful players who have big game mentality.

Why not start Luke Fitzgerald then instead of Kearney who is also a big game player.

To those complaining about the thread being hijacked its apparent that it doesn't matter a damn who Joe brings in if we play the same rugby by numbers.
Secondly the comparisons with previous coaches is irrelevant. We might be more consistent now but at the end of the day we were knocked out in a wc qf.
I think the evidence is there with the blues,Clermont and Leinster that we aren't going to get any further development in how we play and that is a concern . If anything we have gone backwards since BOD retired in terms of back play

What had Luke Fitzgerald done to warrant a start ahead of Kearney at that point?

I suppose if I go back to before the game I'll see all the armchair know it all's criticize the selection or are do you all come out of the woodwork in the after event?

Sin e championing Luke Fitzgerald! I've heard it all now!

ME-109 wrote:To those complaining about the thread being hijacked its apparent that it doesn't matter a damn who Joe brings in if we play the same rugby by numbers.
Secondly the comparisons with previous coaches is irrelevant. We might be more consistent now but at the end of the day we were knocked out in a wc qf.
I think the evidence is there with the blues,Clermont and Leinster that we aren't going to get any further development in how we play and that is a concern . If anything we have gone backwards since BOD retired in terms of back play

Good points.

But are we say limited because of the personnel we have rather than just the tactics? - this is my belief- we need to see if certain players like Olding, Ringrose, McCloskey, Gilroy, Hanaran, Reid, Healy, McGrath, Jackson, Marmion etc. can make the grade over the next few years. Henshaw, Zebo, DK, Madigan are fairly young still too.

I think what we have at the minute is not the end product but unlike under previous coaches we have a solid base to work from - good set piece, good defense (bar against the Pumas maybe), strong in the contact, work ethic etc.

The execution needs to improve, and we need a bit more individual brilliance, but I don't think we are as conservative or one dimensional as some make out.

The problem is that so readily WE - as in the media and fans - keep going to extremes to explain away the frustrations of disappointment.

And so we have this up/down conveyer belt of opinion on just what we have in the tank.  And according to a general overview of a myriad of those opinions, we seem to have just about everything we need to be successful and at the same time not a whole lot to go on to keep us competitive!

Some say we have the players to be lethal in attack - if allowed.  Others say being lethal in attack in Pro12 or even NH International terms is a long way off the instincts and athletic ability needed to be lethal in a WC for more than one game. (Australian players are playing at a furious intensity still - after having perhaps the most difficult sequence of games of any side through a WC in a long time)

So some conclude that we don't have the creative players, and the players don't have the skills to play an openfield attacking game at pace for extended runs of games.  

Therefore, those critics fall back on the idea (for comfort) that we're pretty damn good at the SA style game of collision and physical intimidation instead, and that using our traditional strengths of in-your-face physical confrontation and continuous heavy contact to 'tire out' opponents, plus set-piece, is our best and most effective model.

Others then say, we're kidding ourselves there too as we're no SA and we in no way intimidate any of the top sides with our Physicality - neither will we every tire a top side out.  Indeed, after a generalised pummel show from us against good sides through a first half, they tend to come back on the bounce in the second; and having absorbed all the physicality we had to give, use our own tiring against us and lay siege on us as we try to cling on.

So what are we actually good at?  Being mediocre with a very few top class players to drag us over some very close-run victories.

I say none of that is about individual players or about having to wait for good ones - it's about the nature of the game we play in Provinces and the intensity we bring.  The players we have can be creative enough but they need to be stretched every week in stamina and skill levels to hone skills upward.  They're not idiots, they can adapt but they need the intent in their coaches to give them the gameplans (every week) to grow upwards.

We often say here that there is a danger of putting too much pressure on players at a young age.  We age our wines slowly here and we seem to have a rather proud attitude about that philosophy.  I kinda think it stinks.  We don't put our younger players under enough pressure in demanding a tempo that forces them to make mistakes and learn from them.  Brains adapt - it's got little to do with natural skills.  If players are good enough to be selected by any of the Provinces, then they're good enough to have potential for International at the highest level.  But the training paddock for that is not International camps.... it's Provinces being honest in driving development in a much more demanding climate.  
DOD is right in saying some years back our players were much more fluid on the ball, much more at ease with ball in hand.  It's true.  It's surprising true, and even more surprising now that we're giving ourselves excuses for why that isn't now the case - saying we just don't have the players with enough ball handling skills.
I don't believe that.  I do believe we're bloody extremely rusty because we've over-relied on defensive shape, defensive gameplans, containment kicking, over-reliance on set-piece.
The players simply lack the needed weekly pressure of playing high tempo attack minded games - to levels not necessarily needed for specific games in Pro12 but certainly required to up the instincts and conditioning required to play the International game at the highest level.

rodders wrote:What had Luke Fitzgerald done to warrant a start ahead of Kearney at that point?

I suppose if I go back to before the game I'll see all the armchair know it all's criticize the selection or are do you all come out of the woodwork in the after event?

Sin e championing Luke Fitzgerald! I've heard it all now!

If you paid attention, you would have known that I've always been a big fan of Luke Fitz.
Luke Fitz would have warranted the start from the point of view, he was good enough for the bench the previous week and to invoke the Tommy Bowe clause, done it in the past. Schmidt would know the player very well and would have seen him in training as well

Any links to that outragious claim you made about Earls in the Italian game?

Considering Earls took a right battering the week before and was on his 5th start in the world cup, I would probably have started Luke at 13, Zebo on the wing and Earls on the bench.

rodders wrote:

ME-109 wrote:To those complaining about the thread being hijacked its apparent that it doesn't matter a damn who Joe brings in if we play the same rugby by numbers.
Secondly the comparisons with previous coaches is irrelevant. We might be more consistent now but at the end of the day we were knocked out in a wc qf.
I think the evidence is there with the blues,Clermont and Leinster that we aren't going to get any further development in how we play and that is a concern . If anything we have gone backwards since BOD retired in terms of back play

Good points.

But are we say limited because of the personnel we have rather than just the tactics? - this is my belief- we need to see if certain players like Olding, Ringrose, McCloskey, Gilroy, Hanaran, Reid, Healy, McGrath, Jackson, Marmion etc. can make the grade over the next few years. Henshaw, Zebo, DK, Madigan are fairly young still too.

I think what we have at the minute is not the end product but unlike under previous coaches we have a solid base to work from - good set piece, good defense (bar against the Pumas maybe), strong in the contact, work ethic etc.

The execution needs to improve, and we need a bit more individual brilliance, but I don't think we are as conservative or one dimensional as some make out.
 

The point that you are all failing to grasp is that most of those players are not going to get a real chance with Schmidt. Those type of players don't fit his rugby philosophy.

I'd also question his man management. He clearly has his favourites, but to allow the we're sunk if we don't have Sexton stuff doesn't do much for either Madigan or Jackson's confidence. They were being programmed to fail.

Sin é wrote:
The point that you are all failing to grasp is that most of those players are not going to get a real chance with Schmidt. Those type of players don't fit his rugby philosophy.

I'd also question his man management. He clearly has his favourites, but to allow the we're sunk if we don't have Sexton stuff doesn't do much for either Madigan or Jackson's confidence. They were being programmed to fail.

If they can tackle and ruck then they'll get their shot if they are good enough.

Madigan and Jackson aren't as good as Sexton, who we were sunk without in the end.

Schmidt has high expectations of everyone in the squad and every player is given clear work on's if they aren't meeting them - that is excellent man management in my book - 3 great examples are Trimble, Zebo and Cave, who are all better players because of the feedback they received.

He also wants players to play across multiple positions, which is the NZ way - look at Ben Smith for example.

rodders wrote:

Sin é wrote:
The point that you are all failing to grasp is that most of those players are not going to get a real chance with Schmidt. Those type of players don't fit his rugby philosophy.

I'd also question his man management. He clearly has his favourites, but to allow the we're sunk if we don't have Sexton stuff doesn't do much for either Madigan or Jackson's confidence. They were being programmed to fail.

If they can tackle and ruck then they'll get their shot if they are good enough.

Madigan and Jackson aren't as good as Sexton, who we were sunk without in the end.

Schmidt has high expectations of everyone in the squad and every player is given clear work on's if they aren't meeting them - that is excellent man management in my book - 3 great examples are Trimble, Zebo and Cave, who are all better players because of the feedback they received.

He also wants players to play across multiple positions, which is the NZ way - look at Ben Smith for example.

Will they (though it doesn't seem to be a requirement for either of the Kearney brothers).

Trimble & Cave have improved. What has Zebo got to do to get ahead of Dave Kearney?

From what I see, Schmidt is great with players who are average enough. He is just very poor with improving talented players.

And with that I'm out. I really just wanted to be in a forum where you could have a civilised chat and exchange of views, even where you don't agree, on Irish rugby. This forum clearly isn't the place for that where a couple of individuals are overindulged to completely take conversations way off topics.

Good luck to you all. Here's hoping for another improved season in Galway and hope we might end the season as at least Ireland's third best province!

World cup injury tally:

Tommy O'Donnell (out until new year)
Paul O'Connell ?
Peter O'Mahony (around April next year)
Jared Payne (2 month I think - next January)
Tommy Bowe (6 months - april next year)
Iain Henderson (latest - hand surgery - six week - end of Dec).

Bearing in mind that Leinster have the largest contingent of players, how did they avoid getting any players injured? Is it they don't try hard enough when playing for national side as they know they are going to be picked anyway?

Exiled Gael wrote:And with that I'm out. I really just wanted to be in a forum where you could have a civilised chat and exchange of views, even where you don't agree, on Irish rugby. This forum clearly isn't the place for that where a couple of individuals are overindulged to completely take conversations way off topics.

Good luck to you all. Here's hoping for another improved season in Galway and hope we might end the season as at least Ireland's third best province!

I can understand a degree of frustration at the tone (sometimes) of this place, but really I can't understand what mood and what conversations are expected from a topic that states "Ireland's 2016 squad"?

Obviously given that many people will have opinions on players that have played this season and players they think should play next season, a debate will emerge where disagreements occur.

What's your take on 2016's Ireland squad, Gael? That's often the best way to revert to the main topic, by someone actually addressing it and ignoring the stuff that annoys them.

SecretFly,

I appreciate your post and have enjoyed engaging with you over the past number of weeks. Even where I do not agree with you, I like that what you say challenges me to think in a different way about a number of issues and it is in the spirit of people who just want Ireland to do well irregardless of provincial status. However, I refer to the post and poster above you whose latest statement alleges that Leinster players don't get injured because they don't try as hard on international duty. I honestly don't want to engage in a forum where continual posts of that tone and natural are enabled and indulged. It sucks other people into a debate they would be better off not getting into and ruins the conversation for others.

As I say, I've enjoyed engaging with you and others but this thread demonstrates that you can't have reasonable debate here and a lack of moderation means it is unlikely to change. Hope you enjoy the rest of the season and I hope you aren't back in four years after another disappointing World Cup!

Sin é wrote:World cup injury tally:

Tommy O'Donnell (out until new year)
Paul O'Connell ?
Peter O'Mahony (around April next year)
Jared Payne (2 month I think - next January)
Tommy Bowe (6 months - april next year)
Iain Henderson (latest - hand surgery - six week - end of Dec).

Bearing in mind that Leinster have the largest contingent of players, how did they avoid getting any players injured? Is it they don't try hard enough when playing for national side as they know they are going to be picked anyway?

Take a break Gael. But no harm in keeping your account open for now. You might be ready to get back in in a few months The moods might have died down by then with some We all might be feeling upbeat again.

After this weekend I'll thankfully be gone until the 6Ns!

Exiled Gael wrote:And with that I'm out.

Yeah I'd do the same but I've nothing better to do .... take it easy big guy!

Sin é wrote:World cup injury tally:

Tommy O'Donnell (out until new year)
Paul O'Connell ?
Peter O'Mahony (around April next year)
Jared Payne (2 month I think - next January)
Tommy Bowe (6 months - april next year)
Iain Henderson (latest - hand surgery - six week - end of Dec).

Bearing in mind that Leinster have the largest contingent of players, how did they avoid getting any players injured? Is it they don't try hard enough when playing for national side as they know they are going to be picked anyway?

How did they get injured if it was only Leinster players being picked in the first place?

Sin é wrote:World cup injury tally:

Tommy O'Donnell (out until new year)
Paul O'Connell ?
Peter O'Mahony (around April next year)
Jared Payne (2 month I think - next January)
Tommy Bowe (6 months - april next year)
Iain Henderson (latest - hand surgery - six week - end of Dec).

Bearing in mind that Leinster have the largest contingent of players, how did they avoid getting any players injured? Is it they don't try hard enough when playing for national side as they know they are going to be picked anyway?

That's the most sensible post you've made all day ... like where were Devon Toners hands when Hendo got injured?

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

Sin é wrote:World cup injury tally:

Tommy O'Donnell (out until new year)
Paul O'Connell ?
Peter O'Mahony (around April next year)
Jared Payne (2 month I think - next January)
Tommy Bowe (6 months - april next year)
Iain Henderson (latest - hand surgery - six week - end of Dec).

Bearing in mind that Leinster have the largest contingent of players, how did they avoid getting any players injured? Is it they don't try hard enough when playing for national side as they know they are going to be picked anyway?

How did they get injured if it was only Leinster players being picked in the first place?

They all tried the D4 accents. Paulie's the most laughable. But of course, luckily enough, the boss doesn't have a clue. He just heard them spoofing about falling out of Lilly's Bordello at 4 am in the morning and was convinced.

Are these more of a bronze generation as opposed to the golden generation we've just enjoyed?

More Generation X(ray) methinks....

Wales are moving into the A&E generation - it should be an interesting 6 Nations -

Ok work done for today I'm off to the In-Laws for Tea - Or Supper as they like to call it. Supper FFS!!!

RubyGuby wrote:Are these more of a bronze generation as opposed to the golden generation we've just enjoyed?

I think we'd all be delighted if they had won bronze

I was reading some stuff in the Indo and came across this spikey tet-a-tet in the 'comments' section that I found funny:

Tractor
"It would be wonderful if we could play wide expansive Rugby , we can't, just as the Irish scoccer team can't play like Brazil. At the end of the day only one team can win the World Cup, are all the rest failures ?"

Jsbeaumont
"@Tractor how would you know if they can or can't do it unless they are allowed to try?"

Tractor
"I have a donkey here in the back yard but I know without bringing him all the way to Aintree that he is not going to win the Grand National anytime soon , call it an educated guess."

Jsbeaumont
"@Tractor ah god that's fierce smart, fair play, sure you must be right so! Although you apparently haven't a clue as to how Brazil play these days.... but maybe your donkey could update you, he sounds like the brains of the family!"

eirebilly wrote:I have read this thread, re-read this thread and I cant help but again notice just how much people cannot see the similarities between the opening phases of DK's tenure and the opening phases of JS's tenure.

I made the point earlier but some on here really just have to look at the similarities.

They are strikingly similar...

You make a good point there. Kidney started well and it went downhill. EOS started well and was consistent for years before it went downhill. Schmidt started well but there are already signed that its going downhill. For starters, we've been found out. Teams had 2 years to plan to counter Irelands style and as a result we've found it harder and harder to score tries. For all the dominance against France, there were only 5 points in it with about 10 min to go.


Then you have the semi final where the team bombed out. It wasn't just a defeat but a humiliation. As soon as the leaders got injured the whole thing fell apart. Tactically as well Ireland came up way shorter than what is acceptable.


Without wanting to make this into a provincial argument (and I'm far from a Munster fanboy as my posts prove) Schmidt favouring Leinster players (which we can all agree that he does) could be very damaging long term. He can do that as long as he is winning but as soon as results go bad, I think resentment will grow. That by the way could explain what happened with Kidney, and the drop off in performances.

profitius - I fear you're right.

But they should be Irish players first who play for a province second.

It's too easy to just go 'provincial bias in selection'. Even if a coach was hired who was never at an Irish province a tight Kearney/Zebo, Earls/Fitz, POM/Henderson decision would still have many on the likes of this site claiming bias.

Exiled Gael wrote:SecretFly,

I appreciate your post and have enjoyed engaging with you over the past number of weeks. Even where I do not agree with you, I like that what you say challenges me to think in a different way about a number of issues and it is in the spirit of people who just want Ireland to do well irregardless of provincial status. However, I refer to the post and poster above you whose latest statement alleges that Leinster players don't get injured because they don't try as hard on international duty. I honestly don't want to engage in a forum where continual posts of that tone and natural are enabled and indulged. It sucks other people into a debate they would be better off not getting into and ruins the conversation for others.

As I say, I've enjoyed engaging with you and others but this thread demonstrates that you can't have reasonable debate here and a lack of moderation means it is unlikely to change. Hope you enjoy the rest of the season and I hope you aren't back in four years after another disappointing World Cup!

Well then don't bother and grow a pair or start your own private sanitised discussion for the stepford wives where only good things are said to the sound of elevator music

https://youtu.be/zyltK6pmJGg