What makes the current Ireland squad so good?

Hi all, I hope you're all doing well!



​After some seriously impressive performances during the Six Nations Ireland certainly left an impression on the rugby world. So much so that it got me thinking about why their squad is so strong at the moment.



So I made this short video breaking down and analysing some of the players within the current squad. Please feel free to give it a watch and hopefully, it'll make you laugh a bit but I understand it won't be everyones cup of tea!






Do you think Ireland has one of the best squads in world rugby? Who do you think is their most important player?



I'd love to discuss it below!:nod:



Thanks!

What makes the current Ireland squad so good?

They have good players?

Good players with out doubt, and the use of the "project player" route (Lowe, Stander and Gibson Parks just a couple of hugely successful ones)

The other bonus is that they "mostly" play for Leinster so train with each other week in week out...play together and can manage theyre playing time etc.

Some moan about that but hey its working both at Champ Cup level and International level for Ireland so whos to knock it.

But is it really working when you get to the top level? How many World Cups have Ireland won (how many World Cup semi finals have they made)? They can rightly show their 6 Nations form and point to their No1 world ranking, but until they have won the World Cup against the Southern hemisphere teams, no one is going to rate them as the actual best team in the world.

Likewise Leinster in the Champ cup, despite being able to effectively pick an Ireland XXIII being beaten by La Rochelle in back to back finals reinforces the opinion expressed by some that they are chokers at the top level. The financial strength of the game in Ireland allows them to keep all their top players playing at home where their game time is strictly monitored, etc; they can recruit project players to fill any talent gaps, and they can employ the best coaches. But ultimately all the money does is give them the best opportunity to do as well as they can, but the best has consistently not been good enough. So I would go with the Ireland squad is good, but not "so good".

nlpnlp wrote:But is it really working when you get to the top level?  How many World Cups have Ireland won (how many World Cup semi finals have they made)?  They can rightly show their 6 Nations form and point to their No1 world ranking, but until they have won the World Cup against the Southern hemisphere teams, no one is going to rate them as the actual best team in the world.

Likewise Leinster in the Champ cup, despite being able to effectively pick an Ireland XXIII being beaten by La Rochelle in back to back finals reinforces the opinion expressed by some that they are chokers at the top level.  The financial strength of the game in Ireland allows them to keep all their top players playing at home where their game time is strictly monitored, etc; they can recruit project players to fill any talent gaps, and they can employ the best coaches.  But ultimately all the money does is give them the best opportunity to do as well as they can, but the best has consistently not been good enough.  So I would go with the Ireland squad is good, but not "so good".

Meh, Leinster have still won the second most champions cups of all time and are up there with the most final appearances. Losing the cup by a point against a good side is more an indication that you are a good side too than not. As for the world cup at the last two world cups when Ireland have been at their strongest they have faced NZ at the quarter finals and yet at the last RWC they were within a whisker of winning that game.

The world cup for me isn't the be all and end all anyway like some people like to make it out to be. I personally feel that almost all international matches count and its a bit disingenuous to suggest they don't. Cup competitions like the RWC are great at deciding who is the best at winning knock out cup competitions but probably aren't the best format for deciding who the best side really is given the side of the draw you are on can have a massive bearing and given the fact that every team has a different route to the final. If you truly believe that the RWC definitively decides who is the best in the world then you should probably be prepared to believe that Argentina and England are better than France and Ireland but that wouldnt make much sense.

Last RWC, Ireland beat the winners and were a whisker away from beating the other finalist. Their failure doesn't make them anything but a very good side.

My personal opinion is that they are a team that consistently has very good players, are extremely well coached and organised, but maybe lack the one or two truly X-factor players that would put them 'over the top'. Obviously the likes of Dories and vdF are cracking players, but are they the best in the world in their position? In the conversation yes, but not clearly better than anyone else. The last absolutely undoubted world class player Ireland had was BOD, but since then they've shown what is achievable with 15 / 22 very good players.

Furlong and Sexton were World Class at their best.
I would accept neither were at their peak at the last world cup

Last RWC, 6 of the 8 teams that made the QFs were very close to each other in performance terms.

Only two games were decided by more than one score - Wales losing to Argentina and Argentina losing to New Zealand.

South Africa famously won all their knockout games by 1 point; arguably any of NZ, France, Ireland or England had enough to win the tournament had a couple of moments gone the other way.

For instance, the Boks were very lucky that Etzebeth didn't pick up a red card for his tackle on Atonio in the QF - which was almost identical to the one that (ultimately) earned Owen Farrell a red in the Wales warm up game. That one decision alone could have produced a completely different tournament outcome.

Of the teams in contention, though, I'd argue that Ireland were the ones who looked least likely to pull off a win. I remember feeling that the game was slipping away from them in the second half. I would say that they had two key weaknesses: 1) over the past 8 years they have tended to have a very good gameplan, but not enough backup options when they come up against a team that's worked out how to counter it; 2) the years finally seemed to tell on Sexton, who looked a bit off his best when it came down to it.

geoff999rugby wrote:Furlong and Sexton were World Class at their best.
I would accept neither were at their peak at the last world cup

I might agree regarding Furlong - certainly one of the players as an England supporter I always wished was one of ours (always though the same about Paul O'Connell, as the ultimate PITA to play against).

Sexton for me even at his best falls a little short, although that might be because the first half of his career overlapped with Daniel Carter, as one of the true all time greats...

geoff999rugby wrote:Furlong and Sexton were World Class at their best.
I would accept neither were at their peak at the last world cup

For me Dan Sheehan is the best hooker in the world. I wouldn't swap him for anyone else.

Good shout - certainly the equal of his contemporaries

Unfortunately yet again despite having pretty much every advantage possible, come the big game Ireland's best players came up short against Toulouse. It isn't a question of bottling it - they just weren't good enough. And I don't think they can have any complaints about the refereeing as they seemed to get most of the decisions (Caelen Doris seems to have inherited Ritchie McCaw's cloak of invisibility).

Individually there are some great players, but collectively there is just something missing.

nlpnlp wrote:Unfortunately yet again despite having pretty much every advantage possible, come the big game Ireland's best players came up short against Toulouse.  It isn't a question of bottling it - they just weren't good enough.  And I don't think they can have any complaints about the refereeing as they seemed to get most of the decisions (Caelen Doris seems to have inherited Ritchie McCaw's cloak of invisibility).

Individually there are some great players, but collectively there is just something missing.

Lol, Carley was unfortunately quite bad in my view. He and his team missed missed quite a number of obvious things. Possibly one of the the worst refs around at the moment.

I'm not sure what the advantages you refer to are but I'm sure its nothing that hasn't been whinged about ad nauseum before.

Was at the match and enjoyed it, very entertaining. Definitely the two best team in Europe and it doesnt hurt too much to lose to a great side like Toulouse. 15-15 at full time wasn't much of a surprise.

The Spurs stadium was very nice but it took ages to get into the stadium, very very slow access and impossible to get a drink. After queuing for ages the pie I got was really good to be fair. It isnt really suitable as a rugby stadium though as the in goal area is tiny.

There also wasn't a mens toilet anywhere on the level I was on, was told the best way was to go down to the lower tier. Wasn't that impressed with the stadium for those reasons but otherwise its very nice and super modern. London transport in general is also a headache, Stanstead express was cancelled and replaced by an 90 minute bus instead of the usual 45 minute train the day I left and there were similar transport issues to Heathrow. Flights in and out were super expensive as was accommodation.

Hopefully the EPRC spreads the finals out a lot more. Five finals in England and none in Italy and just two in Wales, Scotland and Ireland together is not acceptable especially for a tournament that is apparently founded on merit.

nlpnlp wrote:Unfortunately yet again despite having pretty much every advantage possible, come the big game Ireland's best players came up short against Toulouse.  It isn't a question of bottling it - they just weren't good enough.  And I don't think they can have any complaints about the refereeing as they seemed to get most of the decisions (Caelen Doris seems to have inherited Ritchie McCaw's cloak of invisibility).

Individually there are some great players, but collectively there is just something missing.

This post needs to be called out for the bilge water it is.
Anyone who can claim that Leinster got the rub of the calls clearly does know the rules concerning going off your feet in a ruck or going in at the side at the ruck, both of which Toulouse did regularly.
Dont get me wrong Toulouse derserve to win and even when legal dominated the breakdown but claiming they 'got most of the decisions' is derisable.

As to being not good enough, again nonsense, man for man Leinster win most of the head to heads.

Change just one player Dupont for JGP and the result would have been a safe Leinster win.
JPG is no slouch but Dupont is, argueably the best Scrum Half ever
(I can remember back to the 1960's)

geoff999rugby - I hope you have had time to cool down and reflect on some of the claims you made.  Matthew Carley has been praised by most people for his performance in the final - he was clear in what he wanted the players to do and applied it consistently.  And yes I still maintain that Leinster got the rub of the green - Doris was off his feet playing the ball 4 or 5 times and only got pinged once.  Irish players are very 'cute' at playing a ball and then asking "is the ball out" - when the referee says no they then release the ball, but by then the ball has been slowed down.

To suggest that "changing just one player Dupont for JGP" would have won you the game is one big insult to JGP who is a truly wonderful player.  I think your 10 was poor and your 12 was average.  Plus collectively your backs made lots of mistakes.

You can look at this one game and say how unlucky you were, which I don't think you were.  But as I have said in my previous posts Ireland and Leinster have consistently come up short come the big game - Collapse2005 you can whine about this all you like but if you are happy for Leinster and Ireland to be consistent losers then history shows I am correct.  I think Ireland need to look at why they are consistent losers and address the issues to become a really top tier contender.

nlpnlp wrote:geoff999rugby - I hope you have had time to cool down and reflect on some of the claims you made.  Matthew Carley has been praised by most people for his performance in the final - he was clear in what he wanted the players to do and applied it consistently.  And yes I still maintain that Leinster got the rub of the green - Doris was off his feet playing the ball 4 or 5 times and only got pinged once.  Irish players are very 'cute' at playing a ball and then asking "is the ball out" - when the referee says no they then release the ball, but by then the ball has been slowed down.

To suggest that "changing just one player Dupont for JGP" would have won you the game is one big insult to JGP who is a truly wonderful player.  I think your 10 was poor and your 12 was average.  Plus collectively your backs made lots of mistakes.

You can look at this one game and say how unlucky you were, which I don't think you were.  But as I have said in my previous posts Ireland and Leinster have consistently come up short come the big game - Collapse2005 you can whine about this all you like but if you are happy for Leinster and Ireland to be consistent losers then history shows I am correct.  I think Ireland need to look at why they are consistent losers and address the issues to become a really top tier contender.

Lot to unpack/Respond too

First not sure why you suggest I cool down when I perfectly relaxed and calm
You seem to think Im a Leinster supporter - I'm not. No idea why you have that impression

All the, non Irish sites I've read do not praise Carley for his performance so not sure where you get the 'praised by most people' from
Also an obvious contradiction - Carley had applied the rules consitantly but Doris got away with going off his feet. You cant have it both ways  
If you missed the repeated occassions where Toulouse forwards did the same you need to go to Specsavers

Irish players try and get away with stuff ?
Of course no other nation does do they, they play strickly by the rules  
If you think other front line nations do things differently you are delusional
Toulouse identifed Carley wasn't policing the breakdown strictly/correctly and made it work for them
As to Leinster getting the rub of the green (surely this does not occur with a good refereeing performance?)
Leinster had a very good shout for a try when a knock on was given which wasn't.
That was the biggest refereeing error in the game

I'm not insulting JPG in any way far from it.
News alert - he is not as good as Dupont.
He is a fine players and possibly/probably the 2nd best No 9 in the World.
He just suffers by comparision, Dupont is great, possibly the greatest 9.

I think your find both sides made mistakes, in such a high intensity game that was prbably inevitable.
The sides were very even - hence extra time, and Leinster being a drop goal away from winning at theend of normal time.

Ireland came up short, with respect to the World Cup, because of the draw.
Best 4 teams in one half of the draw.
You could reasonably argue Ireland came up against the best 1st, 3rd, 4th and 5th seeds in their group (the first two are certainly true)
In an attritional game that takes its toll, especially when you then face one of the other top 4 sides in the QF (who themselves have had an easier group qulafication)
If Ireland had been in the other half of the draw they would have reached the SF without leaving 2nd gear.
None of the teams in that half of the draw were good enough to win the World Cup.

Losers  

Lets see - Leinster have won 4 European Cups and been Losing finalist 4 times.
Other than Toulouse no one else comes remotely close to that record.
No English team has made the final in the last 4 years.

Ireland have won back to back 6N Trophys.
In the last 4 years England have failed to finish 1st or 2nd in the 6N.
Ireland have always been at least 5 points ahead of England and have accumulated 34 more points over 4 years.

The English Premiership has reduced from 13 to 10 teams.
One of theose teams only accumulated 5 points in 18 games.
The League is in trouble.

By contrast, with the introduction of the Saffers the URC goes from strength to strength and 4 of the 5 countries have done well in recent years.
Even Zebre have achieved 15 points from 18 games.

Given our population (7 Million) as opposed to England (57.5 million) we punched above our weight.
If you are looking for 'falling short' I suggest you look closer to home

nlpnlp wrote:geoff999rugby - I hope you have had time to cool down and reflect on some of the claims you made.  Matthew Carley has been praised by most people for his performance in the final - he was clear in what he wanted the players to do and applied it consistently.  And yes I still maintain that Leinster got the rub of the green - Doris was off his feet playing the ball 4 or 5 times and only got pinged once.  Irish players are very 'cute' at playing a ball and then asking "is the ball out" - when the referee says no they then release the ball, but by then the ball has been slowed down.

To suggest that "changing just one player Dupont for JGP" would have won you the game is one big insult to JGP who is a truly wonderful player.  I think your 10 was poor and your 12 was average.  Plus collectively your backs made lots of mistakes.

You can look at this one game and say how unlucky you were, which I don't think you were.  But as I have said in my previous posts Ireland and Leinster have consistently come up short come the big game - Collapse2005 you can whine about this all you like but if you are happy for Leinster and Ireland to be consistent losers then history shows I am correct.  I think Ireland need to look at why they are consistent losers and address the issues to become a really top tier contender.

Lol, someone comes across a bit jealous. Ireland are back to back six nations champs and Leinster the second most decorated European side of all time. A blind bat could see through your comments. Maybe you are the loser? Also its a bit weird to get so bent out of shape about criticism of Carley, he was dire in the final and his refereeing of the Fiji Wales game was one of the worst in memory.

Collapse2005 wrote:   Also its a bit weird to get so bent out of shape about criticism of Carley, he was dire in the final and his refereeing of the Fiji Wales game was one of the worst in memory.

Forgotten about that one.
For me, by a country mile, the worst referring performance I have ever seen at International level.
Quite frankly it stank.
I don't think I have ever come away from any other game thinking that referee was biased towards one team, like I did for this one.

It left me with the nagging doubt that maybe you were more likely to get a favourable decision the lighter your skin was.
Hopefully I'm wrong, and he was just plan incompetant

What's the Irish for schadenfreude?