Ireland Summer tour.

First topic message reminder :

So now we know who's off with the Lions, who you like to see tour with Ireland? I was hoping that some of the regular wingers would have went as I'd like to see Byrne and the young Munster winger get a crack this summer. Fingers crossed they still will. My starting XV this summer would be:
Healy, Cronin, Ryan, O'Connor, Ryan, Conan, Van der Flier, Heaslip, Marmion, Jackson, Sweetnam (sp), Olding, Ringrose, Byrne, O'Halloran.

Great win this morning. Leavy and Conan are establishing themselves as the undisputed future 7/8 combination for Ireland, injury permitting. They combine extremely well and have very few weaknesses in their game.

Leavy looking for better than VDF?
Think a leavy at 6 Conan and VDF back row could be quite a thing of beauty

carpet baboon wrote:Leavy looking for better than VDF?
Think a leavy at 6 Conan and VDF back row could be quite a thing of beauty

Others on here (profitus I think was one) told me that Leavy was a better player than van der Flier but injury problems had hampered his progress. Now that he is fully fit, I think that I agree. While van der Flier is an excellent player with a huge work rate, Leavy could be a world class player. Similar story with Conan. I also think now that we have depth we have no need to move players out of position.

Obviously the likes of van der Flier, O'Donoghue etc pose a threat, but I'm not sure they're as good. The competition is great though.

I think there are very few positives to take from this tour so far, some new combinations and caps tried out and a bit more variety in attack but overall the US and Japan haven't offered much and when they do click Ireland look vulnerable, maybe doesn't help having your defence coach elsewhere but still not great

With so much inexperience in the side I think this tour has been very positive. The USA made so many mistakes that outing wasn't as good a learning experience as Japan. Key players now have a taste of what it's like to play in the heat and the country.
New caps have come into winning sides so that is good for their confidence. Joe will have been able to compare some options for his long term RWC squad so all good.

It was a good win although they stopped playing in the second half. Japan were bad though and coughed up some soft scores.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:Leavy looking for better than VDF?
Think a leavy at 6 Conan and VDF back row could be quite a thing of beauty

Others on here (profitus I think was one) told me that Leavy was a better player than van der Flier but injury problems had hampered his progress. Now that he is fully fit, I think that I agree. While van der Flier is an excellent player with a huge work rate, Leavy could be a world class player. Similar story with Conan. I also think now that we have depth we have no need to move players out of position.

Obviously the likes of van der Flier, O'Donoghue etc pose a threat, but I'm not sure they're as good. The competition is great though.

Yeah I've always been a Leavy fan. VDF is still a good international player but as you say, Leavy could be world class. Conan coming on a lot too and I like the way he is always looking for support and keep the ball alive.

Final match lineup.

15. Alan Tynan (Young Munster/ Munster)
14. Michael Silvester (Dublin University/Leinster)
13. Gavin Mullin (UCD/Leinster)
12. David McCarthy (Garryowen/Munster)
11. Calvin Nash (Young Munster/Munster)
10. Conor Dean (St. Mary's College/Leinster)
9. Jack Stafford (Shannon/Munster)
1. Jordan Duggan (Naas/Leinster)
2. Ronan Kelleher (UCD/Leinster)
3. Charlie Connolly (Dublin University/Leinster)
4. Fineen Wycherley (Young Munster/ Munster)
5. Oisin Dowling (Lansdowne/Leinster)
6. John Foley (Shannon/Munster)
7. Paul Boyle (Lansdowne/Leinster) (capt)
8. Caelan Doris (St. Mary's College/Leinster)

Replacements:

16. Adam Moloney (Shannon/Munster)
17. Joey Conway (UL Bohemians/Munster)
18. Greg McGrath (Lansdowne/Leinster)
19. Jack Regan (UCD/Leinster)
20. Gavin Coombes (Young Munster/Munster)
21. Jonny Stewart (Queen's University/Ulster)
22. Ciaran Frawley (UCD/Leinster)
23. Mark Keane (Instonians/Ulster)

IRELAND v Japan - Ajinomoto Stadium, Tokyo, Japan:
15. Andrew Conway (Munster) 2 caps
14. Keith Earls (Munster) 61 caps
13. Garry Ringrose (Leinster) 10 caps
12. Luke Marshall (Ulster) 10 caps
11. Jacob Stockdale (Ulster) 1 cap
10. Paddy Jackson (Ulster) 24 caps
9. Kieran Marmion (Connacht) 15 caps
1. Cian Healy (Clontarf) 69 caps
2. James Tracy (Leinster) 3 caps
3. John Ryan (Munster) 8 caps
4. Kieran Treadwell (Ulster) 1 cap
5. Devin Toner (Leinster) 49 caps
6. Rhys Ruddock (Leinster, captain) 15 caps
7. Josh van der Flier (Leinster) 8 caps
8. Jack Conan (Leinster) 3 caps

Replacements:
16. Niall Scannell (Munster) 6 caps
17. Dave Kilcoyne (Munster) 19 caps
18. Andrew Porter (Leinster) 1 cap
19. James Ryan (Leinster) 1 cap
20. Sean Reidy (Ulster) 1 cap
21. John Cooney (Ulster) uncapped
22. Rory Scannell (Munster) 2 caps
23. Tiernan O'Halloran (Connacht) 5 caps

Good to see plenty of rotation in the squad, would have preferred to see McGrath get another start at 9 though

Marshall and ringrose both have 10 caps? That suprised me.

06:40 Irish time? Not looking forward to this RWC all of a sudden.....

Any reason why Healy is listed as a Clontarf player? Everyone else is given their province

McGrath isn't playing because he picked up a knock.

Golden wrote:06:40 Irish time? Not looking forward to this RWC all of a sudden.....

Any reason why Healy is listed as a Clontarf player? Everyone else is given their province

You will just have to travel to Japan for it in that case. Well worth it IMO.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:McGrath isn't playing because he picked up a knock.

I thought I read yesterday he was fit for the game

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Golden wrote:06:40 Irish time? Not looking forward to this RWC all of a sudden.....

Any reason why Healy is listed as a Clontarf player? Everyone else is given their province

You will just have to travel to Japan for it in that case. Well worth it IMO.

Yeah, I am going to go, never been to a RWC and getting to see Japan is a great two birds/1 stone scenario.

marty2086 wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:McGrath isn't playing because he picked up a knock.

I thought I read yesterday he was fit for the game

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Mg3wfkwAuQ

Apparently he is reasonably fit (as with Leavy) but it is "precautionary".

wolfball wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Golden wrote:06:40 Irish time? Not looking forward to this RWC all of a sudden.....

Any reason why Healy is listed as a Clontarf player? Everyone else is given their province

You will just have to travel to Japan for it in that case. Well worth it IMO.

Yeah, I am going to go, never been to a RWC and getting to see Japan is a great two birds/1 stone scenario.

I am planning on going too, just have to rope a few mates into it. Most of who would only have casual interest in the game.....

marty2086 wrote:IRELAND v Japan - Ajinomoto Stadium, Tokyo, Japan:
15. Andrew Conway (Munster) 2 caps
14. Keith Earls (Munster) 61 caps
13. Garry Ringrose (Leinster) 10 caps
12. Luke Marshall (Ulster) 10 caps
11. Jacob Stockdale (Ulster) 1 cap
10. Paddy Jackson (Ulster) 24 caps
9. Kieran Marmion (Connacht) 15 caps
1. Cian Healy (Clontarf) 69 caps
2. James Tracy (Leinster) 3 caps
3. John Ryan (Munster) 8 caps
4. Kieran Treadwell (Ulster) 1 cap
5. Devin Toner (Leinster) 49 caps
6. Rhys Ruddock (Leinster, captain) 15 caps
7. Josh van der Flier (Leinster) 8 caps
8. Jack Conan (Leinster) 3 caps

Replacements:
16. Niall Scannell (Munster) 6 caps
17. Dave Kilcoyne (Munster) 19 caps
18. Andrew Porter (Leinster) 1 cap
19. James Ryan (Leinster) 1 cap
20. Sean Reidy (Ulster) 1 cap
21. John Cooney (Ulster) uncapped
22. Rory Scannell (Munster) 2 caps
23. Tiernan O'Halloran (Connacht) 5 caps

Good to see plenty of rotation in the squad, would have preferred to see McGrath get another start at 9 though

Rotation my arse. David Kilcoyne didn't get to start a game while 69 caps Healy gets to start them all.

Poor Munster.

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:IRELAND v Japan - Ajinomoto Stadium, Tokyo, Japan:
15. Andrew Conway (Munster) 2 caps
14. Keith Earls (Munster) 61 caps
13. Garry Ringrose (Leinster) 10 caps
12. Luke Marshall (Ulster) 10 caps
11. Jacob Stockdale (Ulster) 1 cap
10. Paddy Jackson (Ulster) 24 caps
9. Kieran Marmion (Connacht) 15 caps
1. Cian Healy (Clontarf) 69 caps
2. James Tracy (Leinster) 3 caps
3. John Ryan (Munster) 8 caps
4. Kieran Treadwell (Ulster) 1 cap
5. Devin Toner (Leinster) 49 caps
6. Rhys Ruddock (Leinster, captain) 15 caps
7. Josh van der Flier (Leinster) 8 caps
8. Jack Conan (Leinster) 3 caps

Replacements:
16. Niall Scannell (Munster) 6 caps
17. Dave Kilcoyne (Munster) 19 caps
18. Andrew Porter (Leinster) 1 cap
19. James Ryan (Leinster) 1 cap
20. Sean Reidy (Ulster) 1 cap
21. John Cooney (Ulster) uncapped
22. Rory Scannell (Munster) 2 caps
23. Tiernan O'Halloran (Connacht) 5 caps

Good to see plenty of rotation in the squad, would have preferred to see McGrath get another start at 9 though

Rotation my arse. David Kilcoyne didn't get to start a game while 69 caps Healy gets to start them all.

Neither did Scannell, Cooney, Reidy, Ryan or Porter, Bealham will get all of 15 mins this tour. So Im not sure what your bitching is about, most players have gotten game time over the 3 games

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Poor Munster.

Whats the point if he is only there to hold tackle bags for Healy. Since he would be scrummaging against John Ryan who he trains with week in week out, he isn't going to learn a whole lot there.

Healy has about 70 caps - does he really have to start against Japan x 2 and USA x 1?

GunsGermsV2 wrote:Poor Munster.

I almost spilt my coffee. This was rather hilarious.

Decent team. He could have rotated more but it allows some continuity anyway. Good to see Porter, Treadwell, Stockdale and Ryan get any go.

profitius wrote:Final match lineup.

15. Alan Tynan (Young Munster/ Munster)
14. Michael Silvester (Dublin University/Leinster)
13. Gavin Mullin (UCD/Leinster)
12. David McCarthy (Garryowen/Munster)
11. Calvin Nash (Young Munster/Munster)
10. Conor Dean (St. Mary's College/Leinster)
9. Jack Stafford (Shannon/Munster)
1. Jordan Duggan (Naas/Leinster)
2. Ronan Kelleher (UCD/Leinster)
3. Charlie Connolly (Dublin University/Leinster)
4. Fineen Wycherley (Young Munster/ Munster)
5. Oisin Dowling (Lansdowne/Leinster)
6. John Foley (Shannon/Munster)
7. Paul Boyle (Lansdowne/Leinster) (capt)
8. Caelan Doris (St. Mary's College/Leinster)

Replacements:

16. Adam Moloney (Shannon/Munster)
17. Joey Conway (UL Bohemians/Munster)
18. Greg McGrath (Lansdowne/Leinster)
19. Jack Regan (UCD/Leinster)
20. Gavin Coombes (Young Munster/Munster)
21. Jonny Stewart (Queen's University/Ulster)
22. Ciaran Frawley (UCD/Leinster)
23. Mark Keane (Instonians/Ulster)

Just noticed that I used the wrong thread.

No you didn't. Sine was just complaining about the under-representation that Munster have to put up with!

The Great Aukster wrote:No you didn't. Sine  was just complaining about the under-representation that Munster have to put up with!

I mean when they are losing out to Clontarf he definitely has a point

Not seen all of either game. Who of the young lot impressed?

carpet baboon wrote:Not seen all of either game. Who of the young lot impressed?

James Ryan didn't get long on the pitch but he really stood out. More than justified the hype and I reckon will be first choice for Ireland by the time the world cup comes around.

Other young/new/inexperienced players to have a good series were
Niall Scannell, he is looking like a top class hooker now.
Leavy, will challenge the first team soon enough.
Conan, was excellent.
McGrath, you can see he has worked hard on his passing and kicking.
Stockdale, took his try well.
Porter, did well for someone learning how to play tighthead.
John Ryan, looks cemented as 2nd choice tightheads now.

Don't think there was anyone who you can say they really put their hands up, the opposition wasn't what was expected though Ryan for having never played for Leinster did look assured and one to watch

Ringrose I thought was subdued, can be expected given it's his first full season. Hopefully a well earned break to be fresh for the new season

Conan and Earls were probably the two who looked dangerous throughout the games, Jackson showed touches of class on Saturday

Think the pay off will be what they take away from it and use to develop more than what was shown over the 3 games

I think the player of the series was a tie between Earls and Conan. I've been saying for a while that Conan is a better player than Heaslip despite what Jamie's biggest fans say. His all around game is excellent and he is possibly the best ball carrier in Irish rugby. To my mind, he and Leavy are going to be the future 8 and 7 for Ireland respectively, and possibly sooner rather than later.

The back row competition is insane. Jordi Murphy is yet to return (a Schmidt favourite) so I have no idea who will miss out. Conan and Leavy have made themselves undroppable at the moment. So who misses out?

I thought that Ringrose was excellent. His defence is very good, well beyond his years in a position like 13, and he took his attacking opportunities well, which were scarce. In general Ireland are poor at creating space for the wider channels. The 13 and back three have to work very hard to create the space themselves. Against a weaker opposition, Earls really got a chance to shine in this regard. Just think what he could do with some more width?

Rory_Gallagher wrote: In general Ireland are poor at creating space for the wider channels. The 13 and back three have to work very hard to create the space themselves. Against a weaker opposition, Earls really got a chance to shine in this regard. Just think what he could do with some more width?

The game at the weekend was depressing in that regard. It's clear at this stage that Schmidt has no intention of changing from his risk free strategy even though the players are there to play a more expansive game plan.

profitius wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote: In general Ireland are poor at creating space for the wider channels. The 13 and back three have to work very hard to create the space themselves. Against a weaker opposition, Earls really got a chance to shine in this regard. Just think what he could do with some more width?

The game at the weekend was depressing in that regard. It's clear at this stage that Schmidt has no intention of changing from his risk-free strategy even though the players are there to play a more expansive game plan.

We scored 140 points over 3 games. We ran nearly everything, offloaded out of contact more than I have ever seen an Irish team do. Now, our forwards do not work off the 13 channel like NZ do but other than that, please clarify with specifics what a more expansive game plan looks like?

In my mind there were three aims going into the tour:

1. Find ready replacements for 8, 9 and Back three - Conan, Marmion, and McGrath all played either fantastic or very well. Back 3 is still a concern for me as by far the best player was Earls who already has a place. In general positive return.
2. Carberry as 3rd choice FH - only played 1, multiple knockdowns. He needs alot more Leinster time at 10 before he can be trusted there for Ireland.
3. Show a dynamic offloading game. Despite poor opposition 47 points a match is a good return and more tries came from offloads than I've seen in an irish team before.
4. Get a sense of what RWC in Japan will be like - feedback from the irish camp was that while there were problems (traffic on match days etc) they have a much better idea of what to expect.

Overall 1,3,4 were successful, 2 was a failure. Other positives like Ryan, Scannell and Leavy are great to see and I expect at least 2 of those to be on the plane in 2019.

Offloading has nothing to do with width. It also has a lot to do with the individual skills of some of the players (in particular, Conan and Leavy in the pack). We rely on one out runners breaking tackles, if that doesn't work we kick the ball. The point is that we don't create much width and rarely create overlaps.

So we learned Keith Earls is still the scourge of tier 2/3 nation defenses and we have some good depth at back row.

Did anything else come out of the tour?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Offloading has nothing to do with width. It also has a lot to do with the individual skills of some of the players (in particular, Conan and Leavy in the pack). We rely on one out runners breaking tackles, if that doesn't work we kick the ball. The point is that we don't create much width and rarely create overlaps.

We don't always need width, Irelands wingers and full backs are some of the best at coming in on a line around rucks and mauls yet we rarely see it these days espeecially with the wingers.

Earls doing it in the first game against Japan shocked me because it seemed it was almost outlawed

wolfball wrote:

profitius wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote: In general Ireland are poor at creating space for the wider channels. The 13 and back three have to work very hard to create the space themselves. Against a weaker opposition, Earls really got a chance to shine in this regard. Just think what he could do with some more width?

The game at the weekend was depressing in that regard. It's clear at this stage that Schmidt has no intention of changing from his risk-free strategy even though the players are there to play a more expansive game plan.

We scored 140 points over 3 games. We ran nearly everything, offloaded out of contact more than I have ever seen an Irish team do. Now, our forwards do not work off the 13 channel like NZ do but other than that, please clarify with specifics what a more expansive game plan looks like?

The main criticism of Ireland these last few years have been lack of width. That makes Ireland easier to defend against. Most teams these days are looking to go wide to stretch teams.


I wouldn't pay too much attention to the 140 points. We usually give Italy a big beating in the 6 nations but when it comes to playing top teams its a different story. They have the defence to stop our ball carriers easily.


You could say Schmidt thinks defence wins games but surely we should be using these games to develop an attacking structure too and add another dimension to the team. If Gatland was in charge of the team playing like that there'd be uproar.

I can't believe you could have watched the last season of rugby and missed how much more expansively Ireland are playing.We kick far less and the only place we are still too narrow is the final ten to fifteen metres.
It's a work in progress but we're definitely getting there and beating some the best teams in the world while we're at it.

I can't believe that anyone could say that Ireland play an expansive game. Bizarrely, we have played with the most width in our own 22, passing the ball to from one touchline to the other and making approximately one metre of gain before kicking it in the next phase anyway.

Look, playing an expansive game means creating space for the wider channels. Ireland rarely utilise this tactic and instead rely on one out runners punching holes. When we come up against an aggressive defence, we struggle. That is the pattern we always find ourselves in. One out runners making breaks, offloading and running in broken play are not the same thing as creating overlaps. Why can't we add this weapon to our arsenal? Instead we can only utilise the kick chase or the big ball carriers.

That's just so wrong I wonder what you're watching. We kick less than any other team we come up against. We aren't really expansive yet but we're getting there. We could go the Argentina route and lose constantly while trying to adapt,I prefer the way Schmidt has gone,3rd in the world rankings,beating NZ,England,Oz and S.A. In the space of a year and playing some good rugby.

We are more expansive,we are still very narrow when we get near the try line but I'm confident that will improve just as every other area Schmidt focuses on does.

Again - what does kicking less have to do with creating overlaps? If we "aren't really expansive yet" then why are you telling me that I'm wrong for saying...we don't play an expansive game?

Guys there is a reason we have no outside backs in consideration for the lions tests, we have very average backs now BOD is retired and Bowe and Kearney are past their best.

I think the expectations about how we play are not realistic. We have a solid set piece, world class back row and are strong in air - add that to the best box kicking 9 in world rugby then it is pretty obvious where are strengths lie and it isn't scoring tries out wide against tier 1 sides.

It's nice to see us throw the ball around on the summer tours but the skill levels, athleticism and strike threat are still behind the top 5-6 sides therefore we need to play a tighter game in the big tests.

We saw what happened to Leinster and Munster against Scarlets, when the game breaks up our players aren't at the races.

I think what is unrealistic is to rely on a few good ball carriers to punch holes to make any sort of ground. Then kick the ball away when that fails. The reality is that we reduce our good ball carriers to nothing as they get man marked and we don't have the width/offloading ability to exploit the fact that more defenders are drawn in. Our aerial game is much weaker than it used to be as well.

We now finally have players with pace, power and guile who can play in the back line and it is time to use them properly. For all of Keith Earls' faults, he is a very dangerous runner given a modicum of space. It is clear that he doesn't get much of that for either Munster or Ireland.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Again - what does kicking less have to do with creating overlaps? If we "aren't really expansive yet" then why are you telling me that I'm wrong for saying...we don't play an expansive game?

My 1st post as in reply to profitius where he seems to think Schmidt has not been developing an attacking structure that brings more width to our game.I have never said we are playing expansively,I have pointed out that we are working on it and we are definitely improving.Yo are arguing against a point I never made.

I also have to disagree with your assertion that we struggle against aggressive defenses because we aren't using width in our game,N.Z. showed on Saturday exactly how you deal with an aggressive defense,you go through it not around it.That is basically the template that Schmidt's gameplan is based on,quick rucking and inside balls to keep the defense from just drifiting out wide,now N.Z. played it a different level than we have ever managed and added in a lot more offloading from the forwards but that is downn to skill levels in the forwards,we don't have that skillset yet so can't play it quite so effectively.

Do you really think we can just change to a massively expansive approach without results suffering,would you have given up our top seeding for the WC or the win v N.Z. or away to S.A. in exchange.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I can't believe that anyone could say that Ireland play an expansive game. Bizarrely, we have played with the most width in our own 22, passing the ball to from one touchline to the other and making approximately one metre of gain before kicking it in the next phase anyway.

Look, playing an expansive game means creating space for the wider channels. Ireland rarely utilise this tactic and instead rely on one out runners punching holes. When we come up against an aggressive defence, we struggle. That is the pattern we always find ourselves in. One out runners making breaks, offloading and running in broken play are not the same thing as creating overlaps. Why can't we add this weapon to our arsenal? Instead we can only utilise the kick chase or the big ball carriers.

I'd like to address the bolded text ,I think we can agree that the most space available to our backs is in our own 22 when the opposition need players back to field against a kick.

If as you say in this situation we can only make approximately one metre gain before kicking it away, what makes you think that we can do better when there are more defenders in the line and the option of kicking directly to touch if things go wrong isn't available.?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Again - what does kicking less have to do with creating overlaps? If we "aren't really expansive yet" then why are you telling me that I'm wrong for saying...we don't play an expansive game?

My 1st post as in reply to profitius where he seems to think Schmidt has not been developing an attacking structure that brings more width to our game.I have never said we are playing expansively,I have pointed out that we are working on it and we are definitely improving.Yo are arguing against a point I never made.

I also have to disagree with your assertion that we struggle against aggressive defenses because we aren't using width in our game,N.Z. showed on Saturday exactly how you deal with an aggressive defense,you go through it not around it.That is basically the template that Schmidt's gameplan is based on,quick rucking and inside balls to keep the defense from just drifiting out wide,now N.Z. played it a different level than we have ever managed and added in a lot more offloading from the forwards but that is downn to skill levels in the forwards,we don't have that skillset yet so can't play it quite so effectively.

Do you really think we can just change to a massively expansive approach without results suffering,would you have given up our top seeding for the WC or the win v N.Z. or away to S.A. in exchange.

Paragraph 1 - "I can't believe you could have watched the last season of rugby and missed how much more expansively Ireland are playing.We kick far less and the only place we are still too narrow is the final ten to fifteen metres."
That is the quote you made in response to prof, arguing "how much more expansively Ireland are playing". That is the point I am arguing against, and clearly you are arguing that we are playing a more expansive game. I see no evidence of it, excluding our bizarre exit strategy that usually doesn't work.

Paragraph 2 - Your example of NZ is a good one. Essentially, they can adapt to an opposition defence. That is not the template Schmidt is using. We often play from static or slow ball and shuffle it out to one out runners. We are clearly trying to put ourselves on the front foot to generate quick ball but it rarely works. We usually resort to kicking the ball away in the end. We rarely have to worry about teams drifting out wide because we don't play with any width. Ireland also do have some very skilful offloading forwards, we just don't use them properly. Quite simply, one out runners getting smashed on the gain line gives very little opportunity to offload (and what difference would it make in such a scenario anyway?)

Paragraph 3 - Why would trying to create space for the wider channels so we can utilise outside backs lead to results suffering? If anything, the last few years have shown the opposite. Munster and Leinster were both ripped to shreds by teams who could do this effectively. It isn't a risky strategy. It just requires a good platform (which we have), quick ball (which we sometimes have) and players who can draw in defenders and pass effectively.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I can't believe that anyone could say that Ireland play an expansive game. Bizarrely, we have played with the most width in our own 22, passing the ball to from one touchline to the other and making approximately one metre of gain before kicking it in the next phase anyway.

Look, playing an expansive game means creating space for the wider channels. Ireland rarely utilise this tactic and instead rely on one out runners punching holes. When we come up against an aggressive defence, we struggle. That is the pattern we always find ourselves in. One out runners making breaks, offloading and running in broken play are not the same thing as creating overlaps. Why can't we add this weapon to our arsenal? Instead we can only utilise the kick chase or the big ball carriers.

I'd like to address the bolded text ,I think we can agree that the most space available to our backs is in our own 22 when the opposition need players back to field against a kick.

If as you say in this situation we can only make approximately one metre gain before kicking it away, what makes you think that we can do better when there are more defenders in the line and the option of kicking directly to touch if things go wrong isn't available.?

1) The defence is usually up quicker to put pressure on the attacking team in such a vulnerable spot

2) The players we currently utilise are not accurate enough (Henshaw at 12 is one of the biggest reasons for this) and Schmidt's favourite back three players are old or slow

3) Because in this scenario it actually is risky, as if the passing isn't accurate then we are immediately under immense pressure

4) The mental aspect of being so close to one's own try line usually does lead to more mistakes or silly passes, especially if the defence comes up quick

Rory_Gallagher wrote:
We now finally have players with pace, power and guile who can play in the back line and it is time to use them properly.

Who? Our best outside backs are dirt trackers for the Lions or Lions rejects. The Scarlets left most of them chasing shadows a few weeks ago.

It's time to get real and stop with the hyperbole. We have decent backs that is it. They work hard and defend well but there isn't the skill levels or pace of some our rivals.

In terms of offloading, well Schmidt encourages offloading if it is on but some of the skills just aren't there at times, which is the fault of the underage systems not Schmidt.

I think Irish rugby is in a good place but there is a lot of work today to get to the next level.

Irrespective of rankings I think we are falling behind the other home nations and this summer should be a wake up call that many of our front range players aren't as good as we like to think.

Yes we are playing much more expansively than when Schmidt took over,it's baffling that you can argue otherwise,it's like you're telling me water isn't wet.

We play off static or slow ball and try to generate quick ball,that's what every team does off slow ball. What else would you suggest,play expansive rugby off slow ball?If we were struggling as much as you suggest,the results we have had wouldn't have us ranked 3rd in the world. I see progress in our game here ,it's not linear but it is there.

Expansive rugby might adversely affect results because it's a style we don't have the players for yet.Payne is the only really dangerous back 3 player we have,Bowe and Kearney both used to be excellent strike runners but time has caught up with them.Ringrose should mature into a player who can improve things,hopefully Sweetnam,Stockdale and some of the younger players can improve things on this regard.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I can't believe that anyone could say that Ireland play an expansive game. Bizarrely, we have played with the most width in our own 22, passing the ball to from one touchline to the other and making approximately one metre of gain before kicking it in the next phase anyway.

Look, playing an expansive game means creating space for the wider channels. Ireland rarely utilise this tactic and instead rely on one out runners punching holes. When we come up against an aggressive defence, we struggle. That is the pattern we always find ourselves in. One out runners making breaks, offloading and running in broken play are not the same thing as creating overlaps. Why can't we add this weapon to our arsenal? Instead we can only utilise the kick chase or the big ball carriers.

I'd like to address the bolded text ,I think we can agree that the most space available to our backs is in our own 22 when the opposition need players back to field against a kick.

If as you say in this situation we can only make approximately one metre gain before kicking it away, what makes you think that we can do better when there are more defenders in the line and the option of kicking directly to touch if things go wrong isn't available.?

1) The defence is usually up quicker to put pressure on the attacking team in such a vulnerable spot

2) The players we currently utilise are not accurate enough (Henshaw at 12 is one of the biggest reasons for this) and Schmidt's favourite back three players are old or slow

3) Because in this scenario it actually is risky, as if the passing isn't accurate then we are immediately under immense pressure

4) The mental aspect of being so close to one's own try line usually does lead to more mistakes or silly passes, especially if the defence comes up quick

So basically all your points boil down to the players not being good enough to take advantage of the space available,how do you think that the players will fare better with less time and space further up the field?

rodders wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:
We now finally have players with pace, power and guile who can play in the back line and it is time to use them properly.

Who? Our best outside backs are dirt trackers for the Lions or Lions rejects. The Scarlets left most of them chasing shadows a few weeks ago.

It's time to get real and stop with the hyperbole. We have decent backs that is it. They work hard and defend well but there isn't the skill levels or pace of some our rivals.

In terms of offloading, well Schmidt encourages offloading if it is on but some of the skills just aren't there at times, which is the fault of the underage systems not Schmidt.

I think Irish rugby is in a good place but there is a lot of work today to get to the next level.

Irrespective of rankings I think we are falling behind the other home nations and this summer should be a wake up call that many of our front range players aren't as good as we like to think.    

 

I'm not saying we have world class backs, I'm saying that we actually have backs who can play an expansive game and who actually possess a bit of pace and power. Some are unproven at the top level, but most have shown they have the skillset required if they can develop properly. We also do not need world class backs, the Scarlets themselves only have a few stars scattered in, but they have pace out wide along with backs (and forwards) who can do the basics. They have Jonathan Davies at 13 for goodness sake, whose passing game is a weakness.

If you really want a list...here:

Halfbacks: Murray, Marmion, McGrath, Sexton, Jackson, Carbery, Byrne
Centres: Olding, Marshall, McCloskey, Scannell, Henshaw, Ringrose, Payne
Back three: O'Halloran, Zebo, Conway, Earls, Sweetnam, Stockdale, Byrne

Only a few stars above, my point is that the above players are demonstrably capable of playing a fast paced game, creating space and exploiting it. Selection is key to ensure the best combination, which Schmidt gets wrong. This strange idea that Henshaw at 12 would be the same as Olding or Scannell at 12, or that having a back three of Trimble, Bowe and Kearney is the same as Earls, Zebo and O'Halloran is total madness.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:Yes we are playing much more expansively than when Schmidt took over,it's baffling that you can argue otherwise,it's like you're telling me water isn't wet.

We play off static or slow ball and try to generate quick ball,that's what every team does off slow ball. What else would you suggest,play expansive rugby off slow ball?If we were struggling as much as you suggest,the results we have had wouldn't have us ranked 3rd in the world. I see progress in our game here ,it's not linear but it is there.

Expansive rugby might adversely affect results because it's a style we don't have the players for yet.Payne is the only really dangerous back 3 player we have,Bowe and Kearney both used to be excellent strike runners but time has caught up with them.Ringrose should mature into a player who can improve things,hopefully Sweetnam,Stockdale and some of the younger players can improve things on this regard.

Oh, enough with the condescending "how can you not see this...water isn't wet" crap. It is a reasonable debate to have, rugby pundits in Irish rugby have been having the same discussions. Posters from other countries we have played against on these forums have commented that our attack is blunt. It's a fair opinion to have.