• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2016 RBS Six Nations] Round 4: Ireland vs. Italy (12/03/2016)

What about the the style of play? What about Stander, Dillane, VDF, Marmion, Bealham, Zebo, Madigan and Ruddock all getting a lot of time and doing well for the most part. Saying nothing can be taken from that game and the selection was wrong is bull****. It just shows people have turned on Schmidt already which is ridiculous.
 
I've had a change of heart on Zebo. Sometimes he doesn't fancy hard graft and his positional sense needs work but i'd accommodate him all the same. We're crying out for players who can influence the game with moments of quality. Zebo has that. Rob Kearney doesn't.

I am a big critic of Zebo but he played very well today. The game suited him considering how poor the Italian defense was but he made many gainline breaking runs which was impressive. However, I wouldn't trust him in defense at all. His positional play is fairly poor, which is understandable given how inexperienced he is at fullback. I wouldn't trust him to start against any of the SANZAR teams or England or Wales.
Also, if you want someone who can "influence the game with moments of quality", you need Fitzgerald, not Zebo.
 
What about the the style of play? What about Stander, Dillane, VDF, Marmion, Bealham, Zebo, Madigan and Ruddock all getting a lot of time and doing well for the most part. Saying nothing can be taken from that game and the selection was wrong is bull****. It just shows people have turned on Schmidt already which is ridiculous.

How many are realistic though. And you may not agree but Schmidt still has to change stuff. Style is still unproven.
Stander fully deserved spot (@8) but would he have got in with no injuries.
VDF the same.
Madigan doesn't deserve to be ahead of PJ and today doesn't change that.
Dillane only getting time because of injury.
Marmion the same. These aren't Schmidt planned calls.
Zebo will begone if RK fit again so same.
Ruddock isn't progressive he's in squad long time and hasn't cemented spot.
Bealham is a project in hope he comes good.
So again saying those getting load of time (some of them haven't) as a progressive plan is complete bull.

Today's result against probably the worst Italy team to play Ireland in last 10 years doesn't mean we have turned corner.
 
I am a big critic of Zebo but he played very well today. The game suited him considering how poor the Italian defense was but he made many gainline breaking runs which was impressive. However, I wouldn't trust him in defense at all. His positional play is fairly poor, which is understandable given how inexperienced he is at fullback. I wouldn't trust him to start against any of the SANZAR teams or England or Wales.
Also, if you want someone who can "influence the game with moments of quality", you need Fitzgerald, not Zebo.

Again I agree and disagree.
Today proves nothing. But RK defence has been desperate too. I wouldn't trust him much now either. Luke Fitz isn't 15. By this too. I know he's played 15 a bit but he sees his future as a centre or wing
 
Last edited:
How many are realistic though. And you may not agree but Schmidt still has to change stuff. Style is still unproven.
Stander fully deserved spot (@8) but would he have got in with no injuries.
VDF the same.
Madigan doesn't deserve to be ahead of PJ and today doesn't change that.
Dillane only getting time because of injury.
Marmion the same. These aren't Schmidt planned calls.
Zebo will begone if RK fit again so same.
Ruddock isn't progressive he's in squad long time and hasn't cemented spot.
Bealham is a project in hope he comes good.
So again saying those getting load of time (some of them haven't) as a progressive plan is complete bull.

Today's result against probably the worst Italy team to play Ireland in last 10 years doesn't mean we have turned corner.
None of those players deserve to be in a fully fit team...

Nothings proven but it's there, this is a sign of a progressive gamesn everyone has wanted. Just because people think there's too many Leinster players they're ****** and refused to see scoring 58 points as positive. Pathetic.
 
None of those players deserve to be in a fully fit team...

Nothings proven but it's there, this is a sign of a progressive gamesn everyone has wanted. Just because people think there's too many Leinster players they're ****** and refused to see scoring 58 points as positive. Pathetic.

Nobody mentioned Leinster bias. Just that facts are.
Italy were awful. And based on today it's impossible to say anything was progressive as Italy were so bad. 58points is a good score but nothing special against that Italy today. And to try and say any different is pointless. There's nothing pathetic about people disagreeing with you. People just haven't seen progress yet. There's no evidence either YET that plan is expanding as today isn't a marker. Whether you agree or not a lot feel like that and just because they disagree with you doesn't make them pathetic.
CJ Stander is fully deserving to be in adult fit team in many people's eyes.
 
Last edited:
How many are realistic though. And you may not agree but Schmidt still has to change stuff. Style is still unproven.
Schmidt has to change some of his selections but our backline play has certainly improved drastically. We've been creating a lot of space and making a lot of line breaks this year but haven't been clinical enough. Today we finished these chances off and offloaded a lot more.

Stander fully deserved spot (@8) but would he have got in with no injuries.
Stander didnt deserve to start at 8 before the 6N and still doesn't. It's doubtful that he'd have got in the starting XV if we had everyone fit due to the sheer quality of our backrow. POM SOB and JH have been a worldclass backrow for us over the last 2 years and have won us 2 6Ns. Stander probably would have made the bench, due to being able to cover both 6 and 8.

Madigan doesn't deserve to be ahead of PJ and today doesn't change that.
100% agree. And since Madigan did decent enough today, he will definitely be given another shot next week. What I don't understand is the argument from Schmidt is that he's picked due to versatility. When McFadden originally came on for Henshaw, he went into centre. Why bother having Madigan if you won't play him at centre? He definitely is a better centre than full back so the only position that Madigan genuinely covers is 10 which further baffles me as to why Jackson isn't getting in considering he's far better at 10 than Madigan.

Zebo will begone if RK fit again so same.
I'd rather RK than Zebo against the Scots as the Scots will challenge us more in defense than the Italians. Zebo's positional play is all over the shop and RK is far superior in positional play than Zebo.

Ruddock isn't progressive he's in squad long time and hasn't cemented spot.
He hasn't cemented a spot as he is behind a world class backrow. Ruddock is a serious unit and it is a serious testament to our strength in depth in the backrow that, with everyone fit, he probably wouldn't be in the match day 23. He might not even start for Leinster eventually if JVdF continues to improve.

So again saying those getting load of time (some of them haven't) as a progressive plan is complete bull.

Today's result against probably the worst Italy team to play Ireland in last 10 years doesn't mean we have turned corner.
The 6N is the main financial resource for the IRFU so it is a win at all cost scenario when we play in the 6N. However, playing the likes of White, Madigan, McFadden, Reddan etc over Furlong, Jackson, Gilroy, Healy, TOH, McCloskey, Ringrose, Marmion, McGrath etc doesn't benefit the team as certain players (like McFadden) weaken the team compared to their team mates.
Although the result may not be groundbreaking, the performance will inspire confidence in the Irish set up that they're moving towards the correct gameplan attackingwise as they are finishing off their chances.
 
Schmidt has to change some of his selections but our backline play has certainly improved drastically. We've been creating a lot of space and making a lot of line breaks this year but haven't been clinical enough. Today we finished these chances off and offloaded a lot more.


Stander didnt deserve to start at 8 before the 6N and still doesn't. It's doubtful that he'd have got in the starting XV if we had everyone fit due to the sheer quality of our backrow. POM SOB and JH have been a worldclass backrow for us over the last 2 years and have won us 2 6Ns. Stander probably would have made the bench, due to being able to cover both 6 and 8.


100% agree. And since Madigan did decent enough today, he will definitely be given another shot next week. What I don't understand is the argument from Schmidt is that he's picked due to versatility. When McFadden originally came on for Henshaw, he went into centre. Why bother having Madigan if you won't play him at centre? He definitely is a better centre than full back so the only position that Madigan genuinely covers is 10 which further baffles me as to why Jackson isn't getting in considering he's far better at 10 than Madigan.


I'd rather RK than Zebo against the Scots as the Scots will challenge us more in defense than the Italians. Zebo's positional play is all over the shop and RK is far superior in positional play than Zebo.


He hasn't cemented a spot as he is behind a world class backrow. Ruddock is a serious unit and it is a serious testament to our strength in depth in the backrow that, with everyone fit, he probably wouldn't be in the match day 23. He might not even start for Leinster eventually if JVdF continues to improve.


The 6N is the main financial resource for the IRFU so it is a win at all cost scenario when we play in the 6N. However, playing the likes of White, Madigan, McFadden, Reddan etc over Furlong, Jackson, Gilroy, Healy, TOH, McCloskey, Ringrose, Marmion, McGrath etc doesn't benefit the team as certain players (like McFadden) weaken the team compared to their team mates.
Although the result may not be groundbreaking, the performance will inspire confidence in the Irish set up that they're moving towards the correct gameplan attackingwise as they are finishing off their chances.

On top I don't think we've expanded back play enough. But as I said I'm not saying nothing changing just its still a jury out thing.

On Stander many like me think he's ahead of Heaslip and a better 8 now. But you see it differently. It's a debatable area and every point probably will have valid back up.

On Madigan we are in agreement to that area.

On Zebo vs RK it's like this. Yes RK has better positional at moment. But if we progress with Zebo he will learn better and become more comfortable in positioning. It's more do we sacrifice a bit of positional for attack.

Regards Ruddock. I'm big fan and agree with you on your points.

On last bit today wasn't financially boosted by the result. Crowd were very flat as was reported across various media outlets. We need to trust more youngsters. Again next week we should get over Scotland but I'd settle for a struggle being adventurous and trying new guys in some areas. Yes there is times to be conservative but next week with nothing at risk isn't 1.
 
I agree with Alpha Bro, some people have their knives sharpened when it comes to Schmidt and nothing is going to change that. They're choosing absolute pessimism because it suits their agenda. I suspect provincial bias is at the heart of it.

For the record, I don't agree with Schmidt on lots of calls but i respect his view that some continuity should exist. I respect his view because he's a proven entity as a coach and his success with Ireland.

Saying we're stagnant is ludricous. Ireland are showing a clear change of emphasis in attack. I choose to be optimistic. Our more influential players come back, Farrell gets into his job and the players perfect the new game plan by converting all these line breaks. The right man is in charge anyway.
 
The business in which Schmidt refuses to consider arguably his best full-back and best young full-back as full-backs is pretty weird, particularly given how often he trumpets the virtues of versatility. I guess he must really absolutely not rate any of the other possible centre options, which is partially fair, but the full-back options are pretty weak as well and neither Henshaw or Payne will be troubling any world XVs in their current positions. The business in which Henshaw seems locked into 12 is pretty weird too.

As for what you get out of playing Italy - confidence and cohesion, gains that are particularly well spent on youngsters. Furlong, Herring, McCloskey and Anyone But Trimble/McFadden could have all got something out of that match that will be utterly wasted on White, Cronin, Payne, Trimble and McFadden. And I really doubt they were essential to victory somehow.

For all my outrage over McCloskey, shunning Furlong for Nathan bloody White is probably even more insane.


And if people want to play the provincial bias card, I'll play it right back. It's such an amazing coincidence how 95pc of Schmidt's defenders are Leinster fans after all. Just like it was an amazing coincidence that 95pc of Kidney's defenders were Munster fans. There's a lot of twisting and distortion to try and deflect legitimate criticism of Schmidt simply because some Leinster fans still love him; they might want to consider why non-Leinster fans who were really excited for Ireland when he took over and really impressed and happy at the two 6N wins are now very heavily critical of what he's doing rather than burying their heads in the sand while screaming bias. If these people were biased, criticism would have started a lot earlier.

Here's the truth. Beating Italy doesn't count, never did count, and probably won't for the foreseeable. They're a Tier 2 country in all but name and no one in their right mind gets excited about beating Tier 2 countries. That has nothing to do with bias; it's just a fact of rugby for the demanding.

Ireland are now on a run of failing to win 4 major games. Fair enough to anyone who considers the reasons and timing of those losses sufficient to excuse that; but if you can't see why some people really don't rate that, you're wilfully blind.

A clear change of emphasis in attack is nothing without the change being effective. Until it's effective, criticism will continue.

I accept that bias might weight my view on the players and who should be selected and who shouldn't. What happens on the pitch? That's just rugby. It works or it doesn't. The idea you need to be biased to think Ireland isn't working at the moment is absolutely staggering because, you know, 4 major games without a win.
 
I think some people need to realise the difference between a fit player and a form player.

People saying some of the players who started yesterday wouldn't get in to a full fit Irish team - they those injured player may not be in as better form (in my view many ain't)
 
I agree with Alpha Bro, some people have their knives sharpened when it comes to Schmidt and nothing is going to change that. They're choosing absolute pessimism because it suits their agenda. I suspect provincial bias is at the heart of it.

For the record, I don't agree with Schmidt on lots of calls but i respect his view that some continuity should exist. I respect his view because he's a proven entity as a coach and his success with Ireland.

Saying we're stagnant is ludricous. Ireland are showing a clear change of emphasis in attack. I choose to be optimistic. Our more influential players come back, Farrell gets into his job and the players perfect the new game plan by converting all these line breaks. The right man is in charge anyway.
Nobody is sharpening knives for pettiness. It's because they just don't agree with areas of Schmidts plan. No one has even mentioned provincial bias only yourself and Alpha. And like many I don't see the clear change in attack as for first 3 games it wasn't there and yesterday was a waste of time. Even Schmidt said that in his press conference.

Peats points are bang on in how people see it. And Schmidt does have faults and deservingly is under pressure. He isn't doomed but isn't immune to critism
 
Nobody is sharpening knives for pettiness. It's because they just don't agree with areas of Schmidts plan. No one has even mentioned provincial bias only yourself and Alpha. And like many I don't see the clear change in attack as for first 3 games it wasn't there and yesterday was a waste of time. Even Schmidt said that in his press conference.

Peats points are bang on in how people see it. And Schmidt does have faults and deservingly is under pressure. He isn't doomed but isn't immune to critism
Peat's points are fair, apart from Italy not counting for anything, that's bull****. I haven't blindly defended Schmidt, I've called him out on a few calls this championship. But to ignore the type of rugby we played yesterday and to discard all the debuts as being down to injury is wrong and a sign of people being set in their ways about Schmidt.

He failed to win four in a row, two of those were in France and London, all with a banjaxed team. It's not good enough but it's understandable in the time that it came. What Schmidt is doing is exactly what Eddie Jones is doing, altering the style of play and slowly giving new guys a shot, luckily for Jones he didn't have injuries to three of his best forwards.

Calls for youth just for the sake of youth are panicky too, calls for Gilroy are a prime example, Schmidt doesn't rate him as highly as Trimble and possibly McFadden too although that can be down to versatility. Waiting to comeback this summer we have Bowe, Fitzgerald and Kearney with Earls already around, there's three options there who are, in Schmidt's and my opinion, better than Gilroy and will be available for the next World Cup. Work on them, get them settled and then bring in the back up in a couple years time.

At the moment Schmidt is building the core of his team and the style of play he wants to use going forward and he's doing it without his best second row and back row who'll be available in four years, not an easy task. He's still played McGrath, Furlong, Dillane, Toner, Stander, Ruddock, Van der Flier, Murray, Marmion, Madigan, Henshaw, McCloskey, Earls, D Kearney and Zebo who will all almost certainly go to the next World Cup. Four of those guys are new caps, another one didn't go to the World Cup. He's got another 10 international windows to bring in fifteen more, and he's had at least three probables in his squads this year too, I half fancy his chances of doing that.

Its not all right obviously, if Ross Byrne doesn't quite turn out to be Sexton mk 2 and Madigan continues to be consistent in inconsistency Jackson will be our 10 in the next World Cup, he should have got game time. Nathan White is 34 years old and about as pleasing on the eye as the sock groundhog keeps under his bed, the young and sexy Furlong should have been in yesterday and next week. Reddan should never have been on a bench either. That and not winning is what he's got wrong while he is doing a lot right too. As I've said previously it takes a while for Schmidt's gameplans to click, in the past it's always been three games, we've got a team high in confidence that they can score tries off of yesterday's game, if they can win and run in a few next week things will be looking a whole lot better going to SA and show that this new style of play, that absolutely everyone wanted, has legs.
 
Peat's points are fair, apart from Italy not counting for anything, that's bull****. I haven't blindly defended Schmidt, I've called him out on a few calls this championship. But to ignore the type of rugby we played yesterday and to discard all the debuts as being down to injury is wrong and a sign of people being set in their ways about Schmidt.

He failed to win four in a row, two of those were in France and London, all with a banjaxed team. It's not good enough but it's understandable in the time that it came. What Schmidt is doing is exactly what Eddie Jones is doing, altering the style of play and slowly giving new guys a shot, luckily for Jones he didn't have injuries to three of his best forwards.

Calls for youth just for the sake of youth are panicky too, calls for Gilroy are a prime example, Schmidt doesn't rate him as highly as Trimble and possibly McFadden too although that can be down to versatility. Waiting to comeback this summer we have Bowe, Fitzgerald and Kearney with Earls already around, there's three options there who are, in Schmidt's and my opinion, better than Gilroy and will be available for the next World Cup. Work on them, get them settled and then bring in the back up in a couple years time.

At the moment Schmidt is building the core of his team and the style of play he wants to use going forward and he's doing it without his best second row and back row who'll be available in four years, not an easy task. He's still played McGrath, Furlong, Dillane, Toner, Stander, Ruddock, Van der Flier, Murray, Marmion, Madigan, Henshaw, McCloskey, Earls, D Kearney and Zebo who will all almost certainly go to the next World Cup. Four of those guys are new caps, another one didn't go to the World Cup. He's got another 10 international windows to bring in fifteen more, and he's had at least three probables in his squads this year too, I half fancy his chances of doing that.

Its not all right obviously, if Ross Byrne doesn't quite turn out to be Sexton mk 2 and Madigan continues to be consistent in inconsistency Jackson will be our 10 in the next World Cup, he should have got game time. Nathan White is 34 years old and about as pleasing on the eye as the sock groundhog keeps under his bed, the young and sexy Furlong should have been in yesterday and next week. Reddan should never have been on a bench either. That and not winning is what he's got wrong while he is doing a lot right too. As I've said previously it takes a while for Schmidt's gameplans to click, in the past it's always been three games, we've got a team high in confidence that they can score tries off of yesterday's game, if they can win and run in a few next week things will be looking a whole lot better going to SA and show that this new style of play, that absolutely everyone wanted, has legs.

But Italy didn't count for much yesterday even Schmidt accepted that. Regards rest the true question is will he revert back to old style and how they approach summer tour. But I don't accept yesterday will massively boost confidence as they know it a poor era for Italy and they missing plenty
 
But Italy didn't count for much yesterday even Schmidt accepted that. Regards rest the true question is will he revert back to old style and how they approach summer tour. But I don't accept yesterday will massively boost confidence as they know it a poor era for Italy and they missing plenty
Considering he hasn't this championship speaks volumes, we've been attempting to play running rugby but have been inaccurate. We saw a bit of accuracy yesterday and did so in a couple phases where we were under pressure like the initial break for Stander's try, it's things like that that boost confidence and hammering a team does too, I've never come off a pitch having won by 40 points thinking the opposition were muck rather that my team are great and can keep on winning against whoever if we get it right.

The first half will stand to Schmidt and the experienced guys and the second half to the younger guys. It's nothing major yet but if it's backed up next Saturday it's definitely not insignificant.
 
How does hammering Italy justify Schmidt's selections? It does the opposite. It proves we had an oppurtunity to try out some of the younger guys and see how they handle the systems against poor opposition. I don't think anyone actually thought the picked team couldn't do a job, it's a good team, and they played very well, but there's nothing like a full test to try people out. McCloskey for instance. Shaky start against England, but really grew into the game with time. Deserved a further look this week. Zebo proved me wrong with his performance, as he attacked the line, worked hard and showed ambition, which regardless of the opposition's quality is good to say because it was a far improved attitude. So I'll hold my hands up and say I was wrong there, but selections like McFadden who it turns out WASN'T brought in for versatility kill me.
The mental gymnastics involved in thinking that yesterday's selections were positive are incredible.
For the record Schmidt is seriously adressing the issues with our gameplan. I think it will click properly before long and that Schmidt is an excellent rugby coach. His man management is the issue for me.
 
McFadden played three positions yesterday... You don't prepare for how the other team are going to playe... That was a win at all costs game and Schmidt did that and more.
 
Considering he hasn't this championship speaks volumes, we've been attempting to play running rugby but have been inaccurate. We saw a bit of accuracy yesterday and did so in a couple phases where we were under pressure like the initial break for Stander's try, it's things like that that boost confidence and hammering a team does too, I've never come off a pitch having won by 40 points thinking the opposition were muck rather that my team are great and can keep on winning against whoever if we get it right.

The first half will stand to Schmidt and the experienced guys and the second half to the younger guys. It's nothing major yet but if it's backed up next Saturday it's definitely not insignificant.

He hasn't what? We played crap first 2 games with kick tactic nothing else. England was improvement slightly but you can't say he won't revert back when he hasn't even left style yet. Also teams ain't stupid I have seen Munster hammer teams in past and get no confidence as they knew opposition was poor. Not 1 person has said how good Ireland were. Main talking points after game are
1. Schmidt's selections and how he missed great chance
2. How awful Italy have gone
3. How much the standard of 6 Nations has fallen

That says enough and again if you think it's significant fair enough but it seems majority don't and Schmidt still has tremendous amount of pressure. And if he reverts to kicking game vs South Africa as well as poor selections in summer the pressure will only build. If Ireland want to be ranked as big team they'll be judged only against big teams regardless of injuries and lately we haven't met standards in style or results. We get away with our style in 6 Nations as it has dropped standard noticeably but against SH teams we will be dismantled as Argentina did and that's the challenge Schmidt faces.
He's a good coach and I'm not calling for him to be sacked it's more that he has to adapt some areas. Yesterday may have been a new expansion the point is it is impossible to judge or know for sure. Ireland could only beat what was in front of them but Italy were shameful and embarrassing.
 
Last edited:
He hasn't what? We played crap first 2 games with kick tactic nothing else.
??? We played crap against France yes but the big criticism was that we finding kick enough... The games we've kicked more than our opposition was against England and Italy but we made more passes and ran more. The stats so far this tournament read that when in possession less than 10% of our actions was to kick. It's been obvious that the old kicking tactics haven't been used this tournament.

Rebut if you want but don't make stuff up Muff.
 
??? We played crap against France yes but the big criticism was that we finding kick enough... The games we've kicked more than our opposition was against England and Italy but we made more passes and ran more. The stats so far this tournament read that when in possession less than 10% of our actions was to kick. It's been obvious that the old kicking tactics haven't been used this tournament.

Rebut if you want but don't make stuff up Muff.

Again you think that and fair enough but yea I thought we were crap vs France. For all possession we had we weren't clinical and offered nothing in attack. Again nothing is made up or I'd ask to point out what I made up again you might not agree but a lot think we have been poor for first ever games with marginal improvement vs England. Thats what overall concensus is. Nothing made up and I know about stats maybe use them smartly and you'll see we've made more passes loosing metres or behind gain line than even Italy this tournament. Also we have had most runs sideways too. So nothing being made up but again if you going to accuse because people don't agree with you maybe show proof rather than just call people pathetic or accuse.

And maybe compare amount of kicks with time in possession for games you'll be suprised. Again nothing made up but well you don't agree fair enough but don't be going around slating people just because they don't agree with you. Fact is you ain't always right he'll I ain't but at least I don't Slam others opinions but you seem to get bit peeved when others don't agree with you.
Facts are from most media and rugby analysts (not me)
Schmidt under pressure as many think we've stalled a bit. Right or wrong that general view. Right or wrong stats can support their case. You'll probably dig out some to make your point. I work in stats at times for Munster and I know how they can be put to tell any story.
 
Last edited:
Top