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

[Amiga500]

So now we'll have dad's army out next week "as you couldn't drop anyone 'cos they performed so well"...

then it'll be "ah, but South Africa is no place to play kids"...

after that, "You don't blood youth against the All-backs"...

etc
etc
etc


Once again, injury is Irelands best f__king selector when it comes to blooding new players. Pathetic.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

snip

Your interested in facts I see, the new buzzword. Here's a few facts, apart from France which was dreadful Ireland have run over 350 meters in all their games we ran more meters than Wales (373) with slightly less possession and Italy (500+) and made 428 to England's 458 with far less possession. Another fact is we are running more and kicking less than previous years and one last fact is that when you said we used a kick tactic and nothing else in those first two games you were making it up. So please don't get offended at that, because that accusation was fairly accurate. Also there is little need to get offended at the 'pathetic' comment as it was directed at those ignoring Schmidt changing his style of play not provincial bias.

Everything to do with selection is an opinion, this is factual.

 

[Peat]

This is going round and round in circles so I'll try and only hit up the bits I see as being really salient.

Peat's points are fair, apart from Italy not counting for anything, that's bull****.

I'll stand by that all day long. The disparity of quality between Italy and, say, Wales, means I don't see how you can assume a plan that works against Italy will work against Wales - nevermind a RC team.

I've never assumed whomping Italy meant anything for England, I'm not going to start doing that for Ireland.

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.

The rate of injury means that it's the prime selector everywhere to be fair; it makes it very hard to argue things one way or the other for me.

The test comes when the injured player comes back; guess we'll have to see how South Africa looks. Actually, that one will probably be injury plagued to hell, maybe the Autumn.

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.

Nobody is calling for youth just for the sake of youth and to say people are is just an awful misrepresentation of the truth.

People are calling for young players because they believe they are better and would help the team perform better. Obviously Schmidt disagrees, but he is not infalliable and the logic of some of the calls is pretty strong; players with stronger attacking skillsets to execute a more attacking game plan.

I am reminded of Lancaster a little. He created a first rate stifling team but floundered when attempting to add a first rate attack to it, as too many of the stifling players were unsuited to the attacking plan. I see the same thing happening with Schmidt. If he wants Ireland to attack more, he needs more players with the gifts to be first rate international attackers.

If he does somehow make his plan fit the assembled players, then fair play to him, he's clearly a better coach than I thought he was. That or I'm being overly cruel to some of the players. But I think with the players he's got, he's looking for the ribeye cut on a chicken while ignoring the cow staring at him through the window.

 

[corny]

Calls for youth just for the sake of youth are panicky too,........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.

The contradiction?

This is whats bugging me. Everyone just assumes we should pick younger fellas, across the board. No one seems to give a thought to who does the better job in the here and now. Schmidt is under no illusion, the IRFU demands he wins games in the 6N's, not play fantasy football.

White might not be sexy but there's no way i'm accepting any poster on here knows more about which option is better than Feek and Schmidt. Its logical to assume they think White is the better scrummager and thats the bottom line for Schmidt.

- - - Updated - - -

How in the name of jaysus have some not recognised the change in attacking intent?

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

The contradiction?

This is whats bugging me. Everyone just assumes we should pick younger fellas, across the board. No one seems to give a thought to who does the better job in the here and now. Schmidt is under no illusion, the IRFU demands he wins games in the 6N's, not play fantasy football.

White might not be sexy but there's no way i'm accepting any poster on here knows more about which option is better than Feek and Schmidt. Its logical to assume they think White is the better scrummager and thats the bottom line for Schmidt.

Ah there's other factors there, White is too old and not good enough to justify giving a cap. If the two were the same age it'd still be a 50/50 call. But it's fair to assume it's the fault of the IRFU than Schmidt.

 

[corny]

Ah there's other factors there, White is too old and not good enough to justify giving a cap. If the two were the same age it'd still be a 50/50 call.

Thats your call though and with respect you're not qualified to make it. Feek and Schmidt think White is the better option. They've no loyalty to him, they didn't coach him at Leinster. They think he's better than Furlong and if thats correct they're fully justified in picking him.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Thats your call though and with respect you're not qualified to make it. Feek and Schmidt think White is the better option. They've no loyalty to him, they didn't coach him at Leinster. They think he's better than Furlong and if thats correct they're fully justified in picking him.

I agree with that but in the circumstances I think Furlong would be the better call because this is a position that we could potentially be thin on in the next 2 years. The effect is minimal but considering I don't think Furlong would be a match loser in any game, although Schmidt might think he was in the French match, and think he'll bring more to the team than White within three months. Use him then I suppose, its a very minor issue.

 

[Peat]

Ah there's other factors there, White is too old and not good enough to justify giving a cap. If the two were the same age it'd still be a 50/50 call. But it's fair to assume it's the fault of the IRFU than Schmidt.

Ah now, I think he's got you fair and square on there being a contradiction there :lol: criticising others for wanting young players in and saying they're only doing it because they're young, but doing the same with Furlong partially because White's old... come on man, 'fess up.

You're right on Furlong vs White though - not because of age, but simply because Furlong offers what's needed around the pitch for New Schmidt rugby to work, and White doesn't, and I don't think Furlong is sufficiently worse at the scrum for that to matter.

edit: Schmidt did coach White at Leinster.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Ah now, I think he's got you fair and square on there being a contradiction there :lol: criticising others for wanting young players in and saying they're only doing it because they're young, but doing the same with Furlong partially because White's old... come on man, 'fess up.

You're right on Furlong vs White though - not because of age, but simply because Furlong offers what's needed around the pitch for New Schmidt rugby to work, and White doesn't, and I don't think Furlong is sufficiently worse at the scrum for that to matter.

Shhh... Put it down to Leinster bias!

 

[munstermuffin]

Your interested in facts I see, the new buzzword. Here's a few facts, apart from France which was dreadful Ireland have run over 350 meters in all their games we ran more meters than Wales (373) with slightly less possession and Italy (500+) and made 428 to England's 458 with far less possession. Another fact is we are running more and kicking less than previous years and one last fact is that when you said we used a kick tactic and nothing else in those first two games you were making it up. So please don't get offended at that, because that accusation was fairly accurate. Also there is little need to get offended at the 'pathetic' comment as it was directed at those ignoring Schmidt changing his style of play not provincial bias.

Everything to do with selection is an opinion, this is factual.

Firstly you mentioned stats first not me. No buzz word.
As I stated facts can be put anyway in argument so won't go in to circles. If you happy to believe there's progression then that's your belief.
My point and I'd ask this if you can answer.
What did I make up?
Secondly for people you called pathetic I'd ask how?
Am I pathetic as I don't see a major shift in style vs big teams?
I'm not slating Schmidt as maybe there is progress and it will come but as of now the jury still out. On some selection calls I don't agree with Schmidt. Not on provincial bias but more on form.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Facts ≠ stats

What was pathetic is people crying for a new style of play and not acknowledging it at all when it is very obvious.

You said, as fact, that there was no change in style of play just the "kicking tactic".

Continue to be offended if you wish I really don't care. If you want to bring any new argument to the table I might reply but if your reply is to these rather innocuous issues I'll refrain.

By the way, I've never said Schmidt should be under pressure if we fail to win a game in SA and/or the EOYT's he should probably go just that a lot of the criticisms here and in the media are knee-jerk reactions and unwarranted.

 

[munstermuffin]

Facts ≠ stats

What was pathetic is people crying for a new style of play and not acknowledging it at all when it is very obvious.

You said, as fact, that there was no change in style of play just the "kicking tactic".

Continue to be offended if you wish I really don't care. If you want to bring any new argument to the table I might reply but if your reply is to these rather innocuous issues I'll refrain.

By the way, I've never said Schmidt should be under pressure if we fail to win a game in SA and/or the EOYT's he should probably go just that a lot of the criticisms here and in the media are knee-jerk reactions and unwarranted.

Sorry I meant stats.

And yes I still think we overly kick as does a lot of others. If it's compared with other teams we do still rely on Murray and Sexton kicks too much. Nothing wrong there. That is a fact in many people's eyes. You might not agree but nothing wrong with people saying that just because they don't agree with you doesn't make them wrong.

Again before yesterday I didn't see a major change in style yes some tweaks but again in many people's eyes nothing obvious. For me jury still out but again nothing pathetic about that just as they disagree. Some people want change of style and just don't see much yet. You might but again it's not a case of agree with you or you brand someone pathetic.

And again I never said you said end bit. But again you've sprouted a lot of stuff that I and many others would call crap but it your opinion and on quick look but you'll have this we've kicked more this tournament than last year's. So would that show kicking is still around. As I said stats can be put any way but again not offended but just more maybe respect others as your not the know all you think you are. I'm not either and I've been here long enough to see plenty like you.
And again I've asked to see proof of what I made up but you haven't balls to answer and where did I mention kicking tactics as fact? Again floor is yours if you have balls to answer with proof

 

[profitius]

Facts ≠ stats

What was pathetic is people crying for a new style of play and not acknowledging it at all when it is very obvious.

You said, as fact, that there was no change in style of play just the "kicking tactic".

Continue to be offended if you wish I really don't care. If you want to bring any new argument to the table I might reply but if your reply is to these rather innocuous issues I'll refrain.

By the way, I've never said Schmidt should be under pressure if we fail to win a game in SA and/or the EOYT's he should probably go just that a lot of the criticisms here and in the media are knee-jerk reactions and unwarranted.

Let's not have any knee-jerk reactions after 1 good performance from 4 either. It was against Italy, who made a bad start and looked demoralised and usually concede a landslide of points at this stage of the tournament.


The performance was a step in the right direction yet if Schmidt had his way, he would have started Rob Kearney which would have resulted in a far smaller win. So the fans were correct in saying that we need an attacking threat from fullback. Payne or Henshaw would have been my choice but I'd certainly have Zebo ahead of Kearney too.


I think it was a missed opportunity to not include the younger players and that shows a major flaw with Schmidt, he doesn't trust young players.


It also looked like the team threw the instruction manual out the window and decided to just play what's in front of them using their own game intelligence.

 

[Groundhog]

Kilcoyne and Conway added to the squad.
Edit: judging by comments on news sites and social media Connacht fans are becoming the most entitled rugby fans in Ireland at a rapid rate. Shouting for Tiernan O'Halloran and Matt Healy in the team. Why would you even want to lose your players to hold bags for a week?

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Kilcoyne and Conway added to the squad.
Edit: judging by comments on news sites and social media Connacht fans are becoming the most entitled rugby fans in Ireland at a rapid rate. Shouting for Tiernan O'Halloran and Matt Healy in the team. Why would you even want to lose your players to hold bags for a week?

No Kearney, it'll be interesting to see if he's in Leinster's team at the weekend.

 

[Peat]

Kilcoyne and Conway added to the squad.
Edit: judging by comments on news sites and social media Connacht fans are becoming the most entitled rugby fans in Ireland at a rapid rate. Shouting for Tiernan O'Halloran and Matt Healy in the team. Why would you even want to lose your players to hold bags for a week?

Because international recognition is a pretty key part of keeping players there; if players don't think they can make it at Connacht, they're not going to stay.

Plus a whole bunch of pride and so on. But that's all irrational stuff. Rationally, in this day and age, international rugby is the key to keeping players in Ireland.

 

[munstermuffin]

Interesting that they are using the NZ Maori team for motion capture, hopefully they can turn out a better game than last time, not that it would be hard

Especially with fact if they are in camp there is financial reward passed on to province through other means. And every players aim is central contract here which of course will only happen with international status.
Also if you can get exposure by having caps it'll raise value abroad if you wish to go that route