Ireland 6 Nations chat

First topic message reminder :

Geoff on the Ulster thread created a clever analysis on squad depth and I am taking a crack at a similar one for Ireland in advance of the 6 nations:

My assumptions are based on a squad of 36 (not the 40 Joe named last year). Players categories into 4 ratings:

World class = top three in position in world, and/or Lions test starter
International class = would make the team for other tier 1 nations
Below international class - would not make the team for other tier 1 nations
Exciting prospect - show potential to be a real asset

Ideally we have one world class and 2 international class per position.

TH (3)
World class - Furlong
International class - Ryan
Exciting prospect - Porter

Assessment - Drop off after Furlong, but not as steep as with hooker

Hooker (3)
International class - Best, Cronin (instead of Tracy)
Below international class - Herring

Assessment - Our weakest forward position, with a big drop off after Best

LH (3)
World class - McGrath (Lions bench for all three tests, scrapes in here)
International class - Healy, Kilcoyne

Assessment - Most consistently strong position in front row, all three are great players and Healy may well rereach his world class heights in 2018. Add in Moore and its a great position for us

Lock (5)
International class - Henderson, Toner
Below international class - Dillane, Roux (instead of Treadwell)
Exciting prospect - Ryan

Assessment - good first team pair, with some exciting prospects coming through.

Flankers (6)
World class - POM
International class - VDF, Murphy (Instead of TOD, Ruddock and SOB out due to injury)
Exciting prospect - Leavy

Assessment - embarrasment of riches!

No. 8 (2)
International class - Stander, Conan
Assessment - Very strong, with multiple flankers also able to play there

Scrumhalf (3)
World class - Murray
Below international class - Marmion, McGrath

Assessment - big drop off after Murray. Marmion/McGrath neither have been able to fully translate provincial form to ireland

Flyhalf (3)
World class - Sexton
Below international class - Keatley
Exciting prospect - Carberry

Assessment - Sexton staying fit is essential to winning in Twickenham, the drop off after that is huge.

Centers (5)
International class - Henshaw, Aki,
Below international class -  Farrell
Exciting prospect -Scannell (Instead of Ringrose and McCloskey)

Assessment - strong, if not the most exciting group of players.

Wings (5)
International class - Earls
Below international class - Conway, McFadden (Instead of Byrne, Sweetnam)
Exciting prospect - Stockdale

Assessment - some exciting young players coming through, but think Earls will start

Fullback (2)
International class - Kearney
Exciting prospect - Larmour

Assessment - Kearney continues to show his class in the big games and will start 3/4 of the 6 nations, I think Larmour has a good shot of starting the others. TOH if not.

If I was Irish, I'd be worried about the lack of tries.

Ireland are the team I least like to watch as a neutral - their game style is not easy on the eye.

England need to find a way to counter Ireland's choke tackle strategy.

England's potential weakness is the lack of discipline and vs Ireland, they'll need to be at the top of their game in that area.

geoff you think England's fixture list is bad?

We have to play both two teams low on confidence away.

The two teams on highest confidence at home.

Late response but a mixed bag from Ireland.

The build up play and drop goal were simply phenomenal and should give the team a lot of confidence.

With 3 home games now we are in great shape.

That said to fail to threaten Frances try line after dominating territory and possession for most of the game is very worrying.

I thought we started well enough but just seemed to run out of ideas once France started reading our moves.

Kearney was solid at the back but not having an attacking option at 15 is an issue and the back row missed O'Briens ball carrying threat, Stander gets through a lot but tends to play closer to the ruck, so we didn't have much carrying options out wide.

I still fancy us for the slam now but we have a lot to work on.

Having watched the game back again, the first ten minutes we attacked well and caused them problems. The weather turned and we didn't adapt well enough. Some individual errors cost us in the French 22. We tried to play to much rather than ping the corners. But all in all we weren't that bad for the first game and playing in Paris.
Think we are being a bit harsh on ourselves. 3 years ago would we have expected to go to France and get anything?
Yes we need to improve collectively and individually.
Italy at home is a perfect time to make sure we tighten up and score some trys.
Onwards and upwards

I was at the game. It was bitterly cold in Paris. A fair bit colder than in Dublin. I wasn't surprised really that it was as attritional as it was.

Yes we failed to take our chances but France defended well and they are a team that we historically struggle with in Paris so to win as we did is fine by me.

beshocked wrote:If I was Irish, I'd be worried about the lack of tries.

Ireland are the team I least like to watch as a neutral - their game style is not easy on the eye.

England  need to find a way to counter Ireland's choke tackle strategy.

England's potential weakness is the lack of discipline and vs Ireland, they'll need to be at the top of their game in that area.

geoff you think England's fixture list is bad?

We have to play both two teams low on confidence away.

The two teams on highest confidence at home.

14 tries last year for Ireland - 2 less than England.... who scored 1 try against France in a 19 -16 game - a home in Twickers.  Ireland scored 19 - 9 at home to France - also 1 try to Ireland.
15 tries in 2016 - 2 more than England
8 tries in 2015 - 10 less than England.  Ireland Six Nations champs.
16 tries in 2014 - 2 more than England.  Ireland Six Nations champs.

Closer to home.  The AIs:  England 13 tries I think.  Ireland 10 tries.

Why should we worry about try scoring yet?  It's only one game we've played...all of us.  If we don't get a try against Italy, then yes................... we're in trouble in the try scoring department.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:I was at the game. It was bitterly cold in Paris. A fair bit colder than in Dublin. I wasn't surprised really that it was as attritional as it was.

Yes we failed to take our chances but France defended well and they are a team that we historically struggle with in Paris so to win as we did is fine by me.

Rugby is a winter sport. If you can't score tries in the rain or cold, that's a serious problem.

I agree there's no need to panic. Solid away win. Just for the favourites in a lot of peoples eyes, a 30%(?) kick away from a loss isn't too impressive.

SecretFly wrote:

beshocked wrote:If I was Irish, I'd be worried about the lack of tries.

Ireland are the team I least like to watch as a neutral - their game style is not easy on the eye.

England  need to find a way to counter Ireland's choke tackle strategy.

England's potential weakness is the lack of discipline and vs Ireland, they'll need to be at the top of their game in that area.

geoff you think England's fixture list is bad?

We have to play both two teams low on confidence away.

The two teams on highest confidence at home.

14 tries last year for Ireland - 2 less than England.... who scored 1 try against France in a 19 -16 game - a home in Twickers.  Ireland scored 19 - 9 at home to France - also 1 try to Ireland.
15 tries in 2016 - 2 more than England
8 tries in 2015 - 10 less than England.  Ireland Six Nations champs.
16 tries in 2014 - 2 more than England.  Ireland Six Nations champs.

Closer to home.  The AIs:  England 13 tries I think.  Ireland 10 tries.

Why should we worry about try scoring yet?  It's only one game we've played...all of us.  If we don't get a try against Italy, then yes................... we're in trouble in the try scoring department.

Err.... are you feeling okay, Fly? Perhaps a slight fever? Touch of the mange, perhaps?

Scottrf wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:I was at the game. It was bitterly cold in Paris. A fair bit colder than in Dublin. I wasn't surprised really that it was as attritional as it was.

Yes we failed to take our chances but France defended well and they are a team that we historically struggle with in Paris so to win as we did is fine by me.

Rugby is a winter sport. If you can't score tries in the rain or cold, that's a serious problem.

I agree there's no need to panic. Solid away win. Just for the favourites in a lot of peoples eyes, a 30%(?) kick away from a loss isn't too impressive.

Not only the rubbish conditions but France were unknown, new players, new tactics, new coach Ireland would have found it hard to know what they were up against

A conservative approach was smart and safe

Pot Hale wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

beshocked wrote:If I was Irish, I'd be worried about the lack of tries.

Ireland are the team I least like to watch as a neutral - their game style is not easy on the eye.

England  need to find a way to counter Ireland's choke tackle strategy.

England's potential weakness is the lack of discipline and vs Ireland, they'll need to be at the top of their game in that area.

geoff you think England's fixture list is bad?

We have to play both two teams low on confidence away.

The two teams on highest confidence at home.

14 tries last year for Ireland - 2 less than England.... who scored 1 try against France in a 19 -16 game - a home in Twickers.  Ireland scored 19 - 9 at home to France - also 1 try to Ireland.
15 tries in 2016 - 2 more than England
8 tries in 2015 - 10 less than England.  Ireland Six Nations champs.
16 tries in 2014 - 2 more than England.  Ireland Six Nations champs.

Closer to home.  The AIs:  England 13 tries I think.  Ireland 10 tries.

Why should we worry about try scoring yet?  It's only one game we've played...all of us.  If we don't get a try against Italy, then yes................... we're in trouble in the try scoring department.

Err.... are you feeling okay, Fly?   Perhaps a slight fever?  Touch of the mange, perhaps?

I know   Sorry for stepping into your department.  It won't happen again...... unless it happens again.

Scottrf wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:I was at the game. It was bitterly cold in Paris. A fair bit colder than in Dublin. I wasn't surprised really that it was as attritional as it was.

Yes we failed to take our chances but France defended well and they are a team that we historically struggle with in Paris so to win as we did is fine by me.

Rugby is a winter sport. If you can't score tries in the rain or cold, that's a serious problem.

I agree there's no need to panic. Solid away win. Just for the favourites in a lot of peoples eyes, a 30%(?) kick away from a loss isn't too impressive.

So England had serious problems after losing to Ireland last year without scoring a try? It wasn't even that cold nor wet that day. Was at that game too.

Anyway it doesn't take a genius to realise that weather particularly really bad weather will generally have an effect on the game.

SecretFly wrote:

beshocked wrote:If I was Irish, I'd be worried about the lack of tries.

Ireland are the team I least like to watch as a neutral - their game style is not easy on the eye.

England  need to find a way to counter Ireland's choke tackle strategy.

England's potential weakness is the lack of discipline and vs Ireland, they'll need to be at the top of their game in that area.

geoff you think England's fixture list is bad?

We have to play both two teams low on confidence away.

The two teams on highest confidence at home.

14 tries last year for Ireland - 2 less than England.... who scored 1 try against France in a 19 -16 game - a home in Twickers.  Ireland scored 19 - 9 at home to France - also 1 try to Ireland.
15 tries in 2016 - 2 more than England
8 tries in 2015 - 10 less than England.  Ireland Six Nations champs.
16 tries in 2014 - 2 more than England.  Ireland Six Nations champs.

Closer to home.  The AIs:  England 13 tries I think.  Ireland 10 tries.

Why should we worry about try scoring yet?  It's only one game we've played...all of us.  If we don't get a try against Italy, then yes................... we're in trouble in the try scoring department.

I was really talking more about the first game - France preventing you from scoring.

Well 9 of your tries last year were vs Italy so if you take out Italy it was 5 in 4 games..... that's pretty poor.

In 2016 - again 9 tries vs Italy which give a distorted view. Only 6 tries in 4 games.


You guessed it.... in 2014 Ireland filled their boots again with 7 tries vs Italy. 9 in 4 is more respectable but Ireland have gone backwards in attack against teams not called Italy in the 6 nations!  

So England only got 7 tries against Italy... should they be worried about their try scoring ability?

We need.to work on our rolling mauls a bit more tbh. I'd also like.us to steal more tries ala exeter well.

It's discipline England have to be worried about.

Stats!

God, Pot, I've got myself into a bloody stat war...you know how I hate stat wars.

2014 - Ireland 16 tries - 2 more than England.  England v Italy: 7 tries.  Ireland v Italy: 7 tries.  
If Ireland got most of their tries from Italy where did England get most of theirs considering we both got the same number of tries against them but Ireland had 2 more tries in total?

2015 - Ireland 8 tries - 10 less than England.  England v Italy: 6 tries.  Ireland v Italy: 2 tries.  
That wild year between England and France.  England scored 7 but leaked 5.  Ireland's total is less influenced by Italy than England's total

2016 - Ireland 15 tries - 2 more than England.  England v Italy: 5 tries.  Ireland v Italy: 9 tries.  
England win!  Italy game helps Ireland more than England.

2017 - Ireland 14 tries - 2 less than England.   England v Italy 6 tries.  Ireland v Italy: 9 tries.  
England win!  Italy game helps Ireland more than England.

So we share the spoils of how much Italy have influenced our overall tally over those four recent years?

Now remember - we're the boring defensive team and yet we've been pretty decent with the tries.  So on to what we're supposed to be boringly good at - defending.

Are we really any good there?

Over those four years we've let in 269 points and England has let in 316.  So again - even more impressive.  As we try to be good at what we're meant to be boringly good at - defending - and are; we also take the time to score heavily enough in tries.

Plus... just one more thing when I'm at this stats stuff that drives me mental:  Isn't it strange that the Italy game is about the only game that Ireland ever really might change design and turn from a defensive side into a more offensive side - often using 'lesser' players too to play a bit of champagny stuff.

So in 2014: Ireland's 7 tries: Wales scored 2 tries against Italy.  France scored 3 tries against Italy.  Scotland scored 1 try against Italy.
In 2015: Ireland's 2 tries: Wales scored 8 tries against Italy.  France scored 2 tries against Italy.  Scotland scored 1 try against Italy.
In 2016: Ireland's 9 tries: Wales scored 9 tries against Italy.  France scored 3 tries against Italy.  Scotland scored 3 tries against Italy.
In 2017: Ireland's 9 tries: Wales scored 3 tries against Italy.  France scored 4 tries against Italy.  Scotland scored 4 tries against Italy.

We should use attack more often, as many Irish fans say!  We seem to be better at it than the 'natural' attacking sides  

Can you do the stats for championships won over the past two years?

Scottrf wrote:Can you do the stats for championships won over the past two years?

Jeez you are a real bore Scott. Are you worried about Ireland this year or something?

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Can you do the stats for championships won over the past two years?

Jeez you are a real bore Scott. Are you worried about Ireland this year or something?

Of course. And it was a joke you Muppet.

Scottrf wrote:Can you do the stats for championships won over the past two years?

Do you forget such merriment so quickly, Scott?

But yes.... I'll calculate the stats for you.................

wait a sec, this takes time..................


..I said wait. Don't be impatient.

Yes, it's confirmed: Italy came last in 2017 and 2016.




..oh and Ireland and England scored the exact same amount of tries over the two year period..

Pity to see VDF injured. Thought Leavy had better form prior to the French game. Does Leavy keep that jersey?
Thought Healy was fairly poor, does Kilcoyne or McGrath get in ahead of him?
Ryan was quiet in the second row and fumbled a lineout, will Toner get back in in front of him?
Conway has been playing great, does he recover from injury in time for the Italy game?

Whatever we say about awkward Toner, he kinda gives us more possession 'guarantee' from lineouts and if our aim is to go hard at Italy, we should mix it up and make lineouts a fast sharp shock contribution too. Toner is familiar with what we want at this level and we have to get back a bounce in our step
I think Cronin should be given a start too.  To keep saying he's not safe enough as a starter is an insult to him and if we were to have a sharp and fast bunch of starters we could do the second half work in the first half.  Best should be rested and let on for 10 or so minutes in the end.

So I'd have Carbery at 15, Cronin in for Rory, Sexton and McGrath at 9 and 10.  Earls had a bit of a frustrating time in the style of game we chose or were forced to play.  He's a player that operates on confidence and he needs another run out now where space might be kinder to his particular talents.  Stockdale?  Hmmm.  Jury out on him for me.  Promise yes but International at the toughest grade - in these burningly emotive and often physically demanding games - he'll need to show a bit more now.  Tough game to show it for everyone at the weekend, I understand that - so let him start again too.  
But we need these backs to show why they are being selected.  Hopefully, Italy will be a return to confidence and more drive.
I'd still keep Larmour for Wales.  He shouldn't be told that he's not good enough yet to meet a bunch of Scarlet boys.  I know International is different but the Scarlet boys are I'm sure being told they are good enough to meet Ireland....they're meeting England first.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:Pity to see VDF injured.  Thought Leavy had better form prior to the French game.  Does Leavy keep that jersey?
Thought Healy was fairly poor, does Kilcoyne or McGrath get in ahead of him?
Ryan was quiet in the second row and fumbled a lineout, will Toner get back in in front of him?
Conway has been playing great, does he recover from injury in time for the Italy game?

Yes. Yes. Yes.
No. No. Yes
No. So what. Depends on where the ball is going.
Yes. No.

Why do you have to be so effortlessly analytical, Pot!!!??

Now I'm going to have to take half an hour to work out which Yes's mean what.

My poor head.... AND I have the flu!

Romain Poite.

I hope the players all know to say 'Please' and 'Thank you' to him with a big smile on their faces. He wouldn't have taken well to some of the 'angst' that went down in the French game with the protestations to Nigel.

Just doff the cap and bow lads.............

beshocked wrote:If I was Irish, I'd be worried about the lack of tries.

Ireland are the team I least like to watch as a neutral - their game style is not easy on the eye.

England  need to find a way to counter Ireland's choke tackle strategy.

England's potential weakness is the lack of discipline and vs Ireland, they'll need to be at the top of their game in that area.

geoff you think England's fixture list is bad?

We have to play both two teams low on confidence away.

The two teams on highest confidence at home.

Thing is though, Ireland do have that ability to turn on the style and blow teams away. The problem is consistency and game plans that Ireland struggle with.

As for the chock tackle, Ireland are not the only team to use this tactic and probably use it less than other teams these days. 4-5 years ago that would have been a valid point but not now I think.

beshocked does seem to look at a lot of old Irish videos to make his judgements...

The choke tackle is what I associate with Ireland. Other teams might use it but I see it as primarily the tactic of Ireland.

eirebilly true Ireland can turn on the style - more often than not vs Italy but I haven't seen Ireland do it enough.

France aren't easy on the eye either but they are in disarray. Ireland are a well organised side. I admire Ireland's experience and will to win but find the tactics a bit predictable.

I see Ireland as England's biggest rivals in the 6 nations at the moment plus probably biggest contenders outside of NZ.

thebandwagonsociety wrote: Pity to see VDF injured.

Agreed

thebandwagonsociety wrote:  Thought Leavy had better form prior to the French game.  

Agreed

thebandwagonsociety wrote: Does Leavy keep that jersey?

Yes

thebandwagonsociety wrote: Thought Healy was fairly poor,

I dont

thebandwagonsociety wrote: does Kilcoyne or McGrath get in ahead of him?

Maybe McGrath to keep Healy fresh

thebandwagonsociety wrote: Ryan was quiet in the second row

No he didn't

thebandwagonsociety wrote: and fumbled a lineout,

Ok lets drop everyone who madea mistake

thebandwagonsociety wrote: will Toner get back in in front of him?

No

thebandwagonsociety wrote: Conway has been playing great,

Agreed

thebandwagonsociety wrote: does he recover from injury in time for the Italy game?

Only on the bench instead of McFadden

beshocked wrote:The choke tackle is what I associate with Ireland. Other teams might use it but I see it as primarily the tactic of Ireland.

eirebilly true Ireland can turn on the style - more often than not vs Italy but I haven't seen Ireland do it enough.

France aren't easy on the eye either but they are in disarray. Ireland are a well organised side. I admire Ireland's experience and will to win but find the tactics a bit predictable.

I see Ireland as England's biggest rivals in the 6 nations at the moment plus probably biggest contenders outside of NZ.

Yes but to be fair I didn't see the choke tackle vs France, but it is possible they started doing so past the point I was watching closely.

It may well be as much down to a couple of players, like O'Brien or Heaslip, as to the team as a whole.

The french driving position when entering contact was fairly good for the entire game. A 'choke' tackle only works if the ball carrier gets so pre-occupied with the bash-n-fend that they end up staying too upright and allow the tackler to get in under the ball. France were making contact at the angle where momentum was going towards the ground. Also made for easier tackles and defensive line holdouts.

On a point of clarity a player can't deliberately bring a maul down without a penalty yet we see choke tackles do just that immediately on the ref call of maul without sanction. Why?

No 7&1/2 wrote:On a point of clarity a player can't deliberately bring a maul down without a penalty yet we see choke tackles do just that immediately on the ref call of maul without sanction. Why?

It is not to something do with that a choke tackle into a maul situation is usually stationary, whereas the deliberately pulling down a maul that is moving and has momentum has actually generated injury? Just a thought?

There's no law distinction between the two. I would say it's probably that normally during a choke tackle the ball carrier is trying to get to ground i.e. the defending team wants the maul, whereas a normal maul is set up by the attacking team so the ball carrier doesn't want to go to ground.

Ball carrier equally likely to want to stay up once it's called maul though?

Fluxy wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:On a point of clarity a player can't deliberately bring a maul down without a penalty yet we see choke tackles do just that immediately on the ref call of maul without sanction. Why?

It is not to something do with that a choke tackle into a maul situation is usually stationary, whereas the deliberately pulling down a maul that is moving and has momentum has actually generated injury? Just a thought?

It is a curious one alright. Not entirely sure. Both situations could be pinged for deliberately bringing down. But on a driving maul you are usually entering the side to sack the ball carrier (and get done for illegal entry) or bringing a maul to ground tends to be pulling down players at the front of the maul preventing the ball carrier from advancing through the existing contact in place in the maul. On a choke-tackle-maul, the defenders usually have their hands on the ball with multiple players in contact with the player in possession with the ball. If those players have entered the created maul legally and have contact with the player in possession in a called 'maul' can they take that player to ground? Possibly.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ball carrier equally likely to want to stay up once it's called maul though?

Not if he's getting stripped. You're not going to have the momentum, position or support for it to be advantageous.

That could be it bandwagon. Don't think the majority of choke tackles look like the ball is.about to be stripped though scott.

I don't think the majority are pulled down illegally. You can't take the ball carrier to ground however you entered, or whether you have hands on him.

Just coincidence that they go to ground immediately after the ref calls maul? I suppose that's one way round refs having to think too much!! Ta

Sometimes the ref calls a scrum before they go to ground dont they? If the maul isnt moving for example?

Also doesnt the ref sometimes also give mauls that have collapsed a chance for the ball to be cleared before blowing for a scrum?

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Sometimes the ref calls a scrum before they go to ground dont they? If the maul isnt moving for example?

Also doesnt the ref sometimes also give mauls that have collapsed a chance for the ball to be cleared before blowing for a scrum?

It's a scrum for an unplayable ball, yes.

And to the second question, would depend how it collapsed.

Scottrf wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Sometimes the ref calls a scrum before they go to ground dont they? If the maul isnt moving for example?

Also doesnt the ref sometimes also give mauls that have collapsed a chance for the ball to be cleared before blowing for a scrum?

It's a scrum for an unplayable ball, yes.

And to the second question, would depend how it collapsed.

Well that could explain why an attacking side might want to get it to the ground even after a maul has been called?

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Sometimes the ref calls a scrum before they go to ground dont they? If the maul isnt moving for example?

Also doesnt the ref sometimes also give mauls that have collapsed a chance for the ball to be cleared before blowing for a scrum?

It's a scrum for an unplayable ball, yes.

And to the second question, would depend how it collapsed.

Well that could explain why an attacking side might want to get it to the ground even after a maul has been called?

Exactly. Completely forgot that that was the main reason to be honest.

Now keep this in mind for the games at weekend and see when the maul is called the defenders flop straight away!

No 7&1/2 wrote:Now keep this in mind for the games at weekend and see when the maul is called the defenders flop straight away!

The attacking side are trying to get it to the ground already so Id say its more a case the defending side stop trying to hold it up and it naturally goes down. The defending side doesnt even need to bring it down to get a scrum.

Which then should result in a pen as the defenders have deliberately gone to ground.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Which then should result in a pen as the defenders have deliberately gone to ground.

If the ball carrier wants to get to ground, and the tackler simple stops keeping him up, that's not pulling the maul down.

You're holding it up and then stop deliberately because maul is called...That's going to ground delibaretaly. It seems to me as it's being ignored as there was never a set of laws designed for the choke tackle.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You're holding it up and then stop deliberately because maul is called...That's going to ground delibaretaly. It seems to me as it's being ignored as there was never a set of laws designed for the choke tackle.

No. It's not the tackler going to ground, it's the ball carrier, which is not an offense. You're not under any obligation to keep him up. The ball carrier in a choke tackle doesn't want to stay on his feet.

You can't deliberately go to ground though. Was it care who ran into parrise and a lock at the weekend? Maul called straight to ground. Deliberate but seems to be allowed. Strictly by the law it should be a pen. Unlikely the mass of care meant they could.only.hold him so long!