6N 2016: Ireland v Italy, 12 March

The Great Aukster wrote:


1. Fair enough you "don't think that Henshaw is a 12 at all", but there are many who think he is and that he had a very good game playing there on Saturday and indeed for most of the times he has played there since his impressive start against South Africa. Joe obviously likes Henshaw at 12 because he continues to start him there and he doesn't give a fig for what anyone else thinks.
The point being made was that Schmidt picks players to execute his gameplan and gives then as much practice as he can to prepare to do so in the match. Reallocating starting players to different roles compounds the disruption of an injury.

2. Everyone acknowledges the need to build depth, but the specific question was about doing so when the team is injury ravaged and the personnel constantly changing - your opinion is that it's OK, and that's OK.
IMO I'd prefer to introduce a new player when he is the only variable rather than throw him in with half the team wondering what the other half is doing. I'd also prefer to minimise the pressure where possible as everyone is nervous until they settle in. Each to their own.

GunsGerms wrote:Another thing I will say is we have to beat Scotland at all costs. Throw everything at them for a few reasons.

We need some redemption for a poor campaign, they need to lay down a marker and show all other teams and themselves that they are still good and to preserve our excellent home record. We also need to keep Scotland's ranking low. If they beat us they will be on track to overtake us by year end and that cant happen.

If we beat Scotland we will probably end the campaign in third place which wouldn't be bad for a year in transition.

We could even finish second if Wales lose to Italy and we beat Scotland.

wolfball wrote:The point is not whether you or anyone is open to unforced changes; everyone wants to see up and coming players given a shot. The point is unforced changes on top of a raft of existing injury enforced changes. Some modicum of continuity is required in international rugby. Maybe we wish that wasn't the case but if watching France and Lancaster's England taught us anything is that constant changing to flavour of the month players does more harm then good.

There were 8 players playing against Italy who played in the same fixture last year. And even last years team was  hardly conservative when you look at it, with Keatley starting and Diack on the bench. The idea our coach is conservative with selection baffles me. His starting selection is nearly always perfect once you take into consideration available players. But we then have massive ruckus over his choice of bench. A bench that all played pretty well (though as painful as it feels to admit it as a mayo man, white certainly and marmion a bit less so were disappointing off the bench). I am a connacht supporter and love seeing our lads get a shot. And henshaw aside (who is consistently one of our best backs) only Dillane has shown an actual aptitude for this level. And Dillane is getting his shot off the bench and learning loads. Exactly how it should be.