Ireland Squad Nov 2018 - Who’s going to play errr England?

First topic message reminder :

Italy 3 Nov - Chicago - Ireland 54-7
Argentina 10 Nov Dublin - 28-17
New Zealand 17 Nov Dublin 16-9
USA 24 Nov Dublin - 52-14

November Total - 150-47

Frontrowers
Rory Best 112 (c)
Rob Herring 6
Sean Cronin 63
Niall Scannell 10

Tadhg Furlong 26
Andrew Porter 9
John Ryan 15

Finlay Bealham 8
Cian Healy 81
Dave Kilcoyne 23
Jack McGrath 51


Locks
Tadhg Beirne 3
Iain Henderson 40 USA
Quinn Roux 7
James Ryan 11
Devin Toner 61

Backrowers

Dan Leavy 10
Josh van der Flier 11
Jordi Murphy 23
Sean O’Brien 51
Peter O’Mahony 50 (vc)
Rhys Ruddock 20
Jack Conan 10
CJ Stander 26


Scrumhalves
John Cooney 3
Kieran Marmion 22
Luke McGrath 6

10s
Jonathan Sexton 76 (vc)
Ross Byrne 2
Joey Carbery 14

Centres
Garry Ringrose 15
Robbie Henshaw 36
Will Addison 2
Bundee Aki 10
Sam Arnold 1
Stuart McCloskey 3

Back three
Andrew Conway 8
Keith Earls 70
Rob Kearney 86
Jordan Larmour 7
Jacob Stockdale 12
Darren Sweetnam 3

Yep...he should have known that. A game of errors for him...but the clock starts at the beginning again next week thank God.

SecretFly wrote:Yep...he should have known that.  A game of errors for him...but the clock starts at the beginning again next week thank God.

Yep, hallelujah

How did NZ get on with their 4 tries per game record today Tman?

Collapse2005 wrote:How did NZ get on with their 4 tries per game record todat Tman?

No good. Someone decided to pour buckets of water on that one. Theyll just have to start again next week. Mind you, not a record I mind missing when I didnt even know it was there till this week. And given the ABs are only ever beating it themselves, tier one that is, not one we need to worry about. Its not going anywhere juspdging by the try rates this weekend.

Ireland a record 9 wins in a row at home huh? Going to keep that?

If you do youd be fast closing in on the ABs record....of 57.

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:More or less how I thought the game would go. 9 wins in a row in Lansdowne. Not pretty but ground them down. Leavy to start v NZ is probably a good thing.

Yep ground me down as well. Theyre very good at that. ABs wont want to muck around in their own 22 for long as Ireland will do what SA used to do all day. Play the corners and pummel away from there all day.

Theyll want to stretch Ireland as they tried unsuccessfully in horrid conditions to do to England, and got lucky. Not a good effort to change the game plan and got away with it, plain and simple. I would have accepted that try and loss, already had at the time.

Full injuries still to vone out but SBWs shoulder looked his injury, SOBs arm, maybe Aki’s foot, and awkward looking dance on it. Our subs came on early so the load was shared and the returnees will be better for the run.

Just keep the rain away Ireland, this match deserves better.

Yeah ahould be good alright.

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:How did NZ get on with their 4 tries per game record todat Tman?

No good. Someone decided to pour buckets of water on that one. Theyll just have to start again next week. Mind you, not a record I mind missing when I didnt even know it was there till this week. And given the ABs are only ever beating it themselves, tier one that is, not one we need to worry about. Its not going anywhere juspdging by the try rates this weekend.

Ireland a record 9 wins in a row at home huh? Going to keep that?

If you do youd be fast closing in on the ABs record....of 57.

NZ are on a 1 match win streak at home no?

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:How did NZ get on with their 4 tries per game record todat Tman?

No good. Someone decided to pour buckets of water on that one. Theyll just have to start again next week. Mind you, not a record I mind missing when I didnt even know it was there till this week. And given the ABs are only ever beating it themselves, tier one that is, not one we need to worry about. Its not going anywhere juspdging by the try rates this weekend.

Ireland a record 9 wins in a row at home huh? Going to keep that?

If you do youd be fast closing in on the ABs record....of 57.

NZ are on a 1 match win streak at home no?

Dunno, I only take notice when its into the 20s, no point counting before that...ops

Iteland still have to beat the ten test run the ABs have in Ireland. add a few more if its being unbeaten.

Where are they now. Ireland 2015 squad Vs Argentina in the world cup. Only 6 of those played yesterday. Goes to show the turnover of players in 3 years.

https://amp.independent.ie/sport/ru...nium-mauling-where-are-they-now-37513624.html

I'd expect Kearney back in at fullback. I think Lamour is better on the wing. He looks small for a fullback as well, which might work ok if you have two giants on the wings, but we don't.

Its times like this it would be good to have Zebo around.

For Christ's sake!  

Zeeebo.

Zebo walked Sin.  He didn't like the coach or the coach's tactics.  He's a big boy.  He's made his decision.  Beirne had to come home to be chosen.

Larmour is maybe a shade small for a fullback but really, it was more his confidence in the position against top grade competition (International) that lets him down.  

Conundrum - how do you gain confidence there quick?  You risk him in big games.  He's realising that the very highest standards at International puts the dampers on the jinxes and the darts.  Kearney dour honesty is required for long stretches.  So Larmour needs more confidence to handle the frustrations of the position and to learn a lot of stoic and strategic patience.

SecretFly wrote:For Christ's sake!  

Zeeebo.

Zebo walked Sin.  He didn't like the coach or the coach's tactics.  He's a big boy.  He's made his decision.  Beirne had to come home to be chosen.

Larmour is maybe a shade small for a fullback but really, it was more his confidence in the position against top grade competition (International) that lets him down.  

Conundrum - how do you gain confidence there quick?  You risk him in big games.  He's realising that the very highest standards at International puts the dampers on the jinxes and the darts.  Kearney dour honesty is required for long stretches.  So Larmour needs more confidence to handle the frustrations of the position and to learn a lot of stoic and strategic patience.

On Zebo - I know he made the choice - I just think its Ireland's loss. Lamour is tiny (and I don't see him getting much of a chance to develop at Leinster anyway with Kearney about).

Andrew Conway could do a job I suppose, but he is also quite small. Thats why I think we need someone who is good at attacking the ball (which is what Kearney, Zebo (and Conway) do). Maybe Henshaw could be moved back.

Sin é wrote:

SecretFly wrote:For Christ's sake!  

Zeeebo.

Zebo walked Sin.  He didn't like the coach or the coach's tactics.  He's a big boy.  He's made his decision.  Beirne had to come home to be chosen.

Larmour is maybe a shade small for a fullback but really, it was more his confidence in the position against top grade competition (International) that lets him down.  

Conundrum - how do you gain confidence there quick?  You risk him in big games.  He's realising that the very highest standards at International puts the dampers on the jinxes and the darts.  Kearney dour honesty is required for long stretches.  So Larmour needs more confidence to handle the frustrations of the position and to learn a lot of stoic and strategic patience.

On Zebo - I know he made the choice - I just think its Ireland's loss. Lamour is tiny (and I don't see him getting much of a chance to develop at Leinster anyway with Kearney about).

Andrew Conway could do a job I suppose, but he is also quite small. Thats why I think we need someone who is good at attacking the ball (which is what Kearney, Zebo (and Conway) do). Maybe Henshaw could be moved back.

Schmidt talked about that possibility recently. If you go by the maxim of wanting to have your best players on the field then without Kearney, it’s worth looking at.

Well that weekend couldn't have gone any better.

Ireland despite the obvious shortcomings - lineout, midfield defence, high ball - I think will be happy enough. It was a bit of a reality check for the like of Larmour in terms of his ability as an international 15 and gives us plenty to work on.

Marmion was also poor enough, Best wasn't great but I think the criticism of Henderson is a bit over the top.

On the plus side we dealt with the loss of Henshaw well, the scrum totally dominated and the bench all did really well, particularly Leavy who in my opinion turned the whole breakdown contest around in the second half.

Hopefully Kearney, Ringrose and Henshaw are fit. Toner and Henderson to switch places probably will help the line out and Sexton can't be so poor again.

Strange there is still talk of Murray coming back in, it would be great but can't see it. I would start McGrath over Marmion.

Not sure I'd test any blunt quick-fire experiments in the next game though.

Runts!

RUNTS!

We're plagued with runts!

On recent exploits, yep, for sure McGrath over Marmion.

Although, another no droppable suddenly becomes all too apparent? That's two. (Toner and Murray - for the biggest games). Going back to old habits, Ireland?

Henderson looked very pale faced and not up to speed for the step up. Maybe a bluff...but we gotta say it as we see it.

Sin é wrote:

SecretFly wrote:For Christ's sake!  

Zeeebo.

Zebo walked Sin.  He didn't like the coach or the coach's tactics.  He's a big boy.  He's made his decision.  Beirne had to come home to be chosen.

Larmour is maybe a shade small for a fullback but really, it was more his confidence in the position against top grade competition (International) that lets him down.  

Conundrum - how do you gain confidence there quick?  You risk him in big games.  He's realising that the very highest standards at International puts the dampers on the jinxes and the darts.  Kearney dour honesty is required for long stretches.  So Larmour needs more confidence to handle the frustrations of the position and to learn a lot of stoic and strategic patience.

On Zebo - I know he made the choice - I just think its Ireland's loss. Lamour is tiny (and I don't see him getting much of a chance to develop at Leinster anyway with Kearney about).

Andrew Conway could do a job I suppose, but he is also quite small. Thats why I think we need someone who is good at attacking the ball (which is what Kearney, Zebo (and Conway) do). Maybe Henshaw could be moved back.

I think Addison is the best option to replace Kearney.

Larmour is short, but also doesn't seem to jump well which compounds this. I get why they are trying him at 15 to get him more space but he doesn't seem comfortable under the high ball and good teams will expose this.

rodders wrote:

Larmour is short, but also doesn't seem to jump well which compounds this. I get why they are trying him at 15 to get him more space but he doesn't seem comfortable under the high ball and good teams will expose this.

Schmidt's devilish MKUltra tactics are working.

Anyway Murray and Hendshaw are definitely out

Addison is only 5' 10" so no Folau, but he is a good footballer with a decent rugby brain.

Big windfall for Irish rugby. Just give it to Schmidt?

IRFU promise to invest €27 million land sale fee into grassroots rugby http://the42.ie/4334975

Yep...Joe just upped his asking price during breakfast as he read that news.

I just laugh at the differences though. How long would 27million keep a top Premiership side going? Three or four weeks? If that.

SecretFly wrote:Yep...Joe just upped his asking price during breakfast as he read that news.

Ha thats what I was thinking

SecretFly wrote:I just laugh at the differences though.  How long would 27million keep a top Premiership side going?  Three or four weeks?  If that.

Premiership clubs would literally take money from anywhere though. Osama bin Escobar from Criminalland could offer them money and they would take it. Its only going to become more of a money laundering backwater when the UK leaves the EU.

The Great Aukster wrote:Addison is only 5' 10" so no Folau, but he is a good footballer with a decent rugby brain.

He and Larmour are both taller than McKenzie

marty2086 wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Addison is only 5' 10" so no Folau, but he is a good footballer with a decent rugby brain.

He and Larmour are both taller than McKenzie

Well thats not saying much

Collapse2005 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I just laugh at the differences though.  How long would 27million keep a top Premiership side going?  Three or four weeks?  If that.

Premiership clubs would literally take money from anywhere though. Osama bin Escobar from Criminalland could offer them money and they would take it. Its only going to become more of a money laundering backwater when the UK leaves the EU.

Wait until you see what Leinster have planned for next year before throwing mucky stones.....

What?

Pot Hale wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I just laugh at the differences though.  How long would 27million keep a top Premiership side going?  Three or four weeks?  If that.

Premiership clubs would literally take money from anywhere though. Osama bin Escobar from Criminalland could offer them money and they would take it. Its only going to become more of a money laundering backwater when the UK leaves the EU.

Wait until you see what Leinster have planned for next year before throwing mucky stones.....

27 million a month, financed by MS13???

OH God...am I looking forward to next year!!!!!!

The IRFU statement in part says this:

“The IRFU regards the delivery of a sustainable, long-term additional income stream for investment in the domestic game, for the benefit of clubs and schools, as one of its key priorities,” said Browne.
“The sale of the lands at Newlands, acquired by the IRFU between 1994 and 1996, has been identified for some time as imperative to delivering on this objective.
“It will now allow the Union the opportunity to progress investment options which will, in addition to securing a new realisable asset, produce an additional, long-term income stream to support further development of the domestic grassroots game on this island, in the decades to come.
“It is also envisaged that a portion of the proceeds will be provided for new club and playing facilities development programmes.”

Wonder what realisable asset they are considering for investment that will produce a long-term income stream to support the grassroots game?

Ok, Larmour was not great under the high ball on Saturday but he has been in the past and it may have just been an off game. The back 3 were all bad under the high ball, not just Larmour so I would honestly stick with him at 15 myself even against the AB's (unless Kearney is available).

For me the issue was Addison coming in at such late notice to replace Henshaw, that was never going to be good but I thought he held up very well given the circumstances. I would prefer (if fit) a midfield of Farrell/Ringrose for the AB's though.

I didn't think that Henderson was too bad myself, I was actually more disappointed with CJ myself...

I think McGrath has to start at 9 over Marmion as well, service was much better after he came on.

Pot Hale wrote:The IRFU statement in part says this:

“The IRFU regards the delivery of a sustainable, long-term additional income stream for investment in the domestic game, for the benefit of clubs and schools, as one of its key priorities,” said Browne.
“The sale of the lands at Newlands, acquired by the IRFU between 1994 and 1996, has been identified for some time as imperative to delivering on this objective.
“It will now allow the Union the opportunity to progress investment options which will, in addition to securing a new realisable asset, produce an additional, long-term income stream to support further development of the domestic grassroots game on this island, in the decades to come.
“It is also envisaged that a portion of the proceeds will be provided for new club and playing facilities development programmes.”

Wonder what realisable asset they are considering for investment that will produce a long-term income stream to support the grassroots game?

Are they planning on buying the ground at the RDS?

I suppose the good thing...well maybe two good things...about the game at the weekend was firstly, that Ireland showed absolutely nothing to New Zealand.  It was a game won with a drive of go-forward grit in the second half, forth quarter.  But little of it was impressive, just enough to impose dominance.  And I'm sure that was the command from Joe.  Some basics and nothing else.  Like I said before, a pretty good result of dominance despite some very off performances and a slim playbook of ideas used.

The 2nd good thing about the result is that it created niggles and annoyances.  I'd assume that was part of the gameplan too in Joe's minds.  He knows the gameplan to apply pressure and 'ask' players to work through the task at hand.  Better to go into next week feeling that you've really been much too ordinary the week before.  That lingering rattiness will serve them well in training.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:The IRFU statement in part says this:

“The IRFU regards the delivery of a sustainable, long-term additional income stream for investment in the domestic game, for the benefit of clubs and schools, as one of its key priorities,” said Browne.
“The sale of the lands at Newlands, acquired by the IRFU between 1994 and 1996, has been identified for some time as imperative to delivering on this objective.
“It will now allow the Union the opportunity to progress investment options which will, in addition to securing a new realisable asset, produce an additional, long-term income stream to support further development of the domestic grassroots game on this island, in the decades to come.
“It is also envisaged that a portion of the proceeds will be provided for new club and playing facilities development programmes.”

Wonder what realisable asset they are considering for investment that will produce a long-term income stream to support the grassroots game?

Are they planning on buying the ground at the RDS?

Wouldn't like that. I'm a traditionalist - went to many horse shows and spring shows as a kid. The smell of Horses needs to be retained. Totally redefining that property would be like putting a cinema in the GPO.

I'd think 27million would be pretty cheap too for such a facility in such a part of Dublin.

It would definitely be cheap, I expect they would need to add a fair bit more to it.

Its where Adolf Hitler's brother met his Irish wife too at the horse show at the RDS.

Maybe they'll buy shares in the RDS. I'd agree that €27m wouldn't be near enough to buy it. Or they might try to buy the houses which are blocking the end of the Aviva being properly developed.


Also it said that any future rezoning of the sold land could also benefit the IRFU.

We need to win this game against NZ if we want to win the RWC. There is a good chance we will have to beat NZ, SA and Australia if we want to win the RWC per the below scenario:

Scenario 1:

Collapse2005 wrote:We need to win this game against NZ if we want to win the RWC. There is a good chance we will have to beat NZ, SA and Australia if we want to win the RWC per the below scenario:

Scenario 1:

For that scenario you need to win the group, talk about getting ahead of yourselves. Pretty sure Scotland will have a big say in that group.

You don't think there's a good chance ireland will finish top?

No 7&1/2 wrote:You don't think there's a good chance ireland will finish top?

They have just as much chance as Scotland have.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:You don't think there's a good chance ireland will finish top?

They have just as much chance as Scotland have.

I think most people would say they have significantly more chance than Scotland, including the bookies who will give you 1/5 on Ireland to win the group and 3/1 on Scotland.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:You don't think there's a good chance ireland will finish top?

They have just as much chance as Scotland have.

Id be happy to take your point if its about the final and Ireland having no chance. However, Ireland have a positive record v Scotland, Australia and South Africa in the last few years so coupled with their current ranking would probably be favorites to win those games.

Last game v Scotland 28–8 to Ireland
Last game v SA  38 – 3   to Ireland
Last game v Australia 16–20 to Ireland

There are reasons to be confident. In any case its just a scenario, if you read my post you will have noticed it wasn't being put forward as a prediction.

Yeah I think ireland are a better team than scotland. Not controversial to say that.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yeah I think ireland are a better team than scotland. Not controversial to say that.

Unless you’re Welsh of course....

In that scenario...

With a loooong history of jumping away from conclusions rather than to them when confronted by pesky facts.

Collapse2005 wrote:We need to win this game against NZ if we want to win the RWC. There is a good chance we will have to beat NZ, SA and Australia if we want to win the RWC per the below scenario:

Scenario 1:

It would be unprecedented if Ireland win that way. Only NZ have won the World Cup beating even 2 of the big 3 Southern Hemisphere teams in the knockouts (obviously they can't play themselves) in 2015.

England only beat 2 of the big 3 Southern Hemisphere teams to win their World Cup in 2003, and only once in the knockouts.

Of the Southern Hemisphere winners since South Africa's reintroduction, South Africa beat both in 95 but Australia were beaten in the pool stages. Australia avoided in 99, SA avoided both Australia and New Zealand all tournament in 2007 and NZ avoided South Africa in 2011.

However, current rankings and recent results might suggest that if Ireland won that way, they'd be lucky to have avoided England and Wales.

Wales are ranked third and have won their last game against Australia and their last 3 against South Africa.
England are ranked fourth and have won their last 5 games against Australia and their last 2 against South Africa.

Meanwhile South Africa are ranked 5th and Australia are ranked 7th.

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:We need to win this game against NZ if we want to win the RWC. There is a good chance we will have to beat NZ, SA and Australia if we want to win the RWC per the below scenario:

Scenario 1:

It would be unprecedented if Ireland win that way. Only NZ have won the World Cup beating even 2 of the big 3 Southern Hemisphere teams in the knockouts (obviously they can't play themselves) in 2015.

England only beat 2 of the big 3 Southern Hemisphere teams to win their World Cup in 2003, and only once in the knockouts.

Of the Southern Hemisphere winners since South Africa's reintroduction, South Africa beat both in 95 but Australia were beaten in the pool stages. Australia avoided in 99, SA avoided both Australia and New Zealand all tournament in 2007 and NZ avoided South Africa in 2011.

However, current rankings and recent results might suggest that if Ireland won that way, they'd be lucky to have avoided England and Wales.

Wales are ranked third and have won their last game against Australia and their last 3 against South Africa.
England are ranked fourth and have won their last 5 games against Australia and their last 2 against South Africa.

Meanwhile South Africa are ranked 5th and Australia are ranked 7th.

I have got to say I agree. I think Id prefer to face Aus and SA than England, Wales or even Argentina.

Pot Hale wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yeah I think ireland are a better team than scotland. Not controversial to say that.

Unless you’re Welsh of course....

In that scenario...

With a loooong history of jumping away from conclusions rather than to them when confronted by pesky facts.

Whats being Welsh have to do with anything. Grief.

You really have a problem PH.

I am only going by the remit on here, whenever Wales play Scotland we are told that they could beat us, how dare I say it regarding other nations.

Hence a good chance and not definitely.

Collapse2005 wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:We need to win this game against NZ if we want to win the RWC. There is a good chance we will have to beat NZ, SA and Australia if we want to win the RWC per the below scenario:

Scenario 1:

It would be unprecedented if Ireland win that way. Only NZ have won the World Cup beating even 2 of the big 3 Southern Hemisphere teams in the knockouts (obviously they can't play themselves) in 2015.

England only beat 2 of the big 3 Southern Hemisphere teams to win their World Cup in 2003, and only once in the knockouts.

Of the Southern Hemisphere winners since South Africa's reintroduction, South Africa beat both in 95 but Australia were beaten in the pool stages. Australia avoided in 99, SA avoided both Australia and New Zealand all tournament in 2007 and NZ avoided South Africa in 2011.

However, current rankings and recent results might suggest that if Ireland won that way, they'd be lucky to have avoided England and Wales.

Wales are ranked third and have won their last game against Australia and their last 3 against South Africa.
England are ranked fourth and have won their last 5 games against Australia and their last 2 against South Africa.

Meanwhile South Africa are ranked 5th and Australia are ranked 7th.

I have got to say I agree. I think Id prefer to face Aus and SA than England, Wales or even Argentina.

Yes with the plethora of cups they have compared to SA and Oz.

I see Henshaws out, backing your side yet? I mean if no. 5 england can nearly win, surely youd back your own number 2?

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:We need to win this game against NZ if we want to win the RWC. There is a good chance we will have to beat NZ, SA and Australia if we want to win the RWC per the below scenario:

Scenario 1:

It would be unprecedented if Ireland win that way. Only NZ have won the World Cup beating even 2 of the big 3 Southern Hemisphere teams in the knockouts (obviously they can't play themselves) in 2015.

England only beat 2 of the big 3 Southern Hemisphere teams to win their World Cup in 2003, and only once in the knockouts.

Of the Southern Hemisphere winners since South Africa's reintroduction, South Africa beat both in 95 but Australia were beaten in the pool stages. Australia avoided in 99, SA avoided both Australia and New Zealand all tournament in 2007 and NZ avoided South Africa in 2011.

However, current rankings and recent results might suggest that if Ireland won that way, they'd be lucky to have avoided England and Wales.

Wales are ranked third and have won their last game against Australia and their last 3 against South Africa.
England are ranked fourth and have won their last 5 games against Australia and their last 2 against South Africa.

Meanwhile South Africa are ranked 5th and Australia are ranked 7th.

I have got to say I agree. I think Id prefer to face Aus and SA than England, Wales or even Argentina.

Yes with the plethora of cups they have compared to SA and Oz.

I see Henshaws out, backing your side yet? I mean if no. 5 england can nearly win, surely youd back your own number 2?

Henshaw is not a massive loss given that I would probably be starting Ringrose at 13 anyway, would have been a toss up between Henshaw and Aki at 12. Some may disagree with that assessment. The big name missing is Murray, who in all honestly I think is more important to how our game is structured that anyone else including Sexton. But you can't be dependent on one player as injuries will always happen and going into a game against New Zealand with only one guaranteed starter (maybe two if you include O'Brien) out is pretty good going.