Scotland v. Ireland

[TerenureJim]

Cat amongst the pigeons but anyone else think it's a little wrong that a player of POM's ability will likely loose out to Stander? Putting it out for debate, maybe it needs its own thread.

[Laighin Break]

So Sexton taking a limited part in training, with Kearney filling in

[FLIP]

Cat amongst the pigeons but anyone else think it's a little wrong that a player of POM's ability will likely loose out to Stander? Putting it out for debate, maybe it needs its own thread.

POM isn't as good as any of the incumbent players in each back row position. So it's not wrong at all.

[Golf Man]

As someone else pointed out - Ryan and Toner worked just fine v New Zealand - would have no concerns about that. Toner/Henderson with Dillane on the bench is probably the optimum - but Ryan has shown the best form of all 4 (as well as Dillane being out for 6/7 weeks).

POM/Stander - I'm a huge huge POM fan, but Stander has probably been Irelands best player in the last year, and he is also in great form - practically undroppable atm - that said Schmidt may go with a horses for courses selection - our advantage on Scotland is definitely in the pack - but without POM our lineout could become an area to target. Maybe you are talking about Standers nationality? VdF will amlost certainly be in the 23 - unless Schmidt is happy that POM can cover 7 (which again I wouldn't dismiss - he was happy for Ruddock to play there and I think POM would be far more suited than him)

[Oldschoolsocks]

So, on the subject of Stander and should he be picked ahead of POM.

Hmmmm... on one hand he's qualified for Ireland under current rules, so yeah if he's better and suits the game plan pick him.
On the other hand, he is South Africa, not Irish so should he be blocking a player born and bred in Ireland?

There's clearly no rules that cross different codes, so you have anomalies where Brad Thorne for example capped for Australia in RL and New Zealand in RU, then you have Ed Joyce and Eoin Morgan who have both played cricket for Ireland and England.

In light of the examples above is it not reasonable for world rugby to put some kind of system in place to tie players to countries?

So I fall in the side of " Stander has invested a significant portion of his career into qualifying to represent Ireland after being told he had no future in South African international rugby and should be available for selection on an open basis for Ireland."



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fourthirtythree]

I always wondered why O'Mahony wasn't played more at 7 given how much other players are shifted around and how much of the role he plays anyway rather than traditional six.

And yes I think the question about Stander was related to his project player status rather than his ability or form which are obviously both deserving of his starting status. It is an unusual situation for a project player in that he is in a position we are not hugely short of locally raised talent and is keeping out a player of the calibre of O'Mahony who recently has been our best player in the 6N. It's unusual and hasn't happened before to my memory but it's hardly surprising that it would at some point if we accept the project player rule and if it is successful. And you have to say that with Stander it really has been successful.

And surely Simon Ryan and Toner are currently the two locks with an impact sub of Henderson or Dillane.

[Laighin Break]

I can understand people not liking that a South African is keeping out an Irishman, but once he's been capped for Ireland, I don't think it's right to keep someone out on that basis. He made the commitment to Ireland, and we happily accepted him, and now he's not allowed to play international rugby for another other team.
Either don't cap them, if it's felt that we're well covered in that position, and make it clear to them that that's the case, or cap them and then they have as much a right to that jersey as a homegrown lad.

[Golf Man]

I can understand people not liking that a South African is keeping out an Irishman, but once he's been capped for Ireland, I don't think it's right to keep someone out on that basis. He made the commitment to Ireland, and we happily accepted him, and now he's not allowed to play international rugby for another other team.
Either don't cap them, if it's felt that we're well covered in that position, and make it clear to them that that's the case, or cap them and then they have as much a right to that jersey as a homegrown lad.

This

While some are completely opposed to the residency status quo (and there probably is a merit in linking it to citzenship, although thats quite difficult) I think that there is a big commitment for these guys. Particualrly the guys who decide at a young age to come - ie coming at 21/22. The issue is being overblown - Stander is the only residency qualified player in a 40 man squad - and if you look at the next in line in the various positions

Kilcoyne, Cronin, Ross, Roux, McCarthy, JoD, Murphy, Reidy, Cooney, Carberry, Adeolokun, Healy, Payne, Olding, Sweetnam -> there are 2 projects in there

Thats 3 out of 55 players

Sure there have been a couple of easy caps given out - Diack, Ah You etc - but there have always been easy caps - maybe Copeland or Dom Ryan might have an extra cap or two - tahts the level of argument - since the project players really came on board (rteally Schmidt era tbh) - what Irish player has missed out on caps?

And once they qualify and start playing - then any argument goes out the window

[Oldschool]

He complimented him plenty well in the tests against New Zealand.

+1 Ryan is a great SR to have alongside somebody like Toner.
With Toner Ryan Dillane and Henderson we're well covered.

[Oldschool]

As someone else pointed out - Ryan and Toner worked just fine v New Zealand - would have no concerns about that. Toner/Henderson with Dillane on the bench is probably the optimum - but Ryan has shown the best form of all 4 (as well as Dillane being out for 6/7 weeks).

POM/Stander - I'm a huge huge POM fan, but Stander has probably been Irelands best player in the last year, and he is also in great form - practically undroppable atm - that said Schmidt may go with a horses for courses selection - our advantage on Scotland is definitely in the pack - but without POM our lineout could become an area to target. Maybe you are talking about Standers nationality? VdF will amlost certainly be in the 23 - unless Schmidt is happy that POM can cover 7 (which again I wouldn't dismiss - he was happy for Ruddock to play there and I think POM would be far more suited than him)

The BR is a tough call - POM or SOB will lose out - that's a nice problem for a coach to have.
Leinster have used VDF quite a bit in the lineout to which doesn't help POM's cause, but tbh I think POM is a more savvy operator than SOB.

[CiaranIrl]

I can understand people not liking that a South African is keeping out an Irishman, but once he's been capped for Ireland, I don't think it's right to keep someone out on that basis. He made the commitment to Ireland, and we happily accepted him, and now he's not allowed to play international rugby for another other team.
Either don't cap them, if it's felt that we're well covered in that position, and make it clear to them that that's the case, or cap them and then they have as much a right to that jersey as a homegrown lad.

This

While some are completely opposed to the residency status quo (and there probably is a merit in linking it to citzenship, although thats quite difficult) I think that there is a big commitment for these guys. Particualrly the guys who decide at a young age to come - ie coming at 21/22. The issue is being overblown - Stander is the only residency qualified player in a 40 man squad - and if you look at the next in line in the various positions

Kilcoyne, Cronin, Ross, Roux, McCarthy, JoD, Murphy, Reidy, Cooney, Carberry, Adeolokun, Healy, Payne, Olding, Sweetnam -> there are 2 projects in there

Thats 3 out of 55 players

Sure there have been a couple of easy caps given out - Diack, Ah You etc - but there have always been easy caps - maybe Copeland or Dom Ryan might have an extra cap or two - tahts the level of argument - since the project players really came on board (rteally Schmidt era tbh) - what Irish player has missed out on caps?

And once they qualify and start playing - then any argument goes out the window

While I agree with you generally, I do also think that there's a line somewhere, and if we cross it, I'll start to have a real problem with all this. If JGP kept Murray out of the world cup starting team, Aki kept Ringrose out, Tyrler B. pushed Carbery out, Tom McCartney blocked whoever from coming through etc., it would start to look pretty awful.

Yeah, they have made a commitment, but a commitment largely derived from rejection at-home. I can accept one or two, but four or five wouldn't be cool.

While some of the early projects didn't work out, it does appear that the current generation are a different breed entiely. While you can argue that it drives standards up, we have to be very careful.

[Golf Man]

As someone else pointed out - Ryan and Toner worked just fine v New Zealand - would have no concerns about that. Toner/Henderson with Dillane on the bench is probably the optimum - but Ryan has shown the best form of all 4 (as well as Dillane being out for 6/7 weeks).

POM/Stander - I'm a huge huge POM fan, but Stander has probably been Irelands best player in the last year, and he is also in great form - practically undroppable atm - that said Schmidt may go with a horses for courses selection - our advantage on Scotland is definitely in the pack - but without POM our lineout could become an area to target. Maybe you are talking about Standers nationality? VdF will amlost certainly be in the 23 - unless Schmidt is happy that POM can cover 7 (which again I wouldn't dismiss - he was happy for Ruddock to play there and I think POM would be far more suited than him)

The BR is a tough call - POM or SOB will lose out - that's a nice problem for a coach to have.
Leinster have used VDF quite a bit in the lineout to which doesn't help POM's cause, but tbh I think POM is a more savvy operator than SOB.

vdF will almost certainly be in the 23 - if SOB starts then he has to be covered over and above Stander and Heaslip. If SOB isn't fit then he comes straight in anyway
Medium term - a lot will revolve around SOB - if he is not fully fit then maybe just don't play him or manage his games - we have options

There is no comparison between VdF and POM wrt to the lineout (or v any of the other options actually) - they are all able to catch a ball and so can be used - POM is a proper lineout forward - and probably the best on opposition ball that we have. I wouldn't be surprised if POM ended up covering from the bench ahead of VDF - and in the next year or so we may see Stander at 8 a little bit - for Scotland - whatever Schmidt wants

[Oldschool]

I can understand people not liking that a South African is keeping out an Irishman, but once he's been capped for Ireland, I don't think it's right to keep someone out on that basis. He made the commitment to Ireland, and we happily accepted him, and now he's not allowed to play international rugby for another other team.
Either don't cap them, if it's felt that we're well covered in that position, and make it clear to them that that's the case, or cap them and then they have as much a right to that jersey as a homegrown lad.

This

While some are completely opposed to the residency status quo (and there probably is a merit in linking it to citzenship, although thats quite difficult) I think that there is a big commitment for these guys. Particualrly the guys who decide at a young age to come - ie coming at 21/22. The issue is being overblown - Stander is the only residency qualified player in a 40 man squad - and if you look at the next in line in the various positions

Kilcoyne, Cronin, Ross, Roux, McCarthy, JoD, Murphy, Reidy, Cooney, Carberry, Adeolokun, Healy, Payne, Olding, Sweetnam -> there are 2 projects in there

Thats 3 out of 55 players

Sure there have been a couple of easy caps given out - Diack, Ah You etc - but there have always been easy caps - maybe Copeland or Dom Ryan might have an extra cap or two - tahts the level of argument - since the project players really came on board (rteally Schmidt era tbh) - what Irish player has missed out on caps?

And once they qualify and start playing - then any argument goes out the window

A career in rugby can be quite short - that's why the three year qualification rule is long enough.
Stander has qualified to play for Ireland, after that it's may the best man win.
Countries that want the 3 years increased are doing it for selfish reasons.
Countries like Samoa with limited player and financial resources have most to lose.
Top Table England France NZ and SA have the depth.
Mid Table Ireland Scotland Wales and Argentina are just about OK
The rest need any help they can get.
The South Sea Islanders are worse off, they can least afford to lose players and are being robbed of their best talent by the Top table(mostly).
The rules that need to be changed are to put limits on number of "imports" the Top Table can recruit.
Of course, that has financial implications for the less well off, as we in Ireland know only too well having sent so many of our children to foreign countries to earn a living.

[Oldschool]

I can understand people not liking that a South African is keeping out an Irishman, but once he's been capped for Ireland, I don't think it's right to keep someone out on that basis. He made the commitment to Ireland, and we happily accepted him, and now he's not allowed to play international rugby for another other team.
Either don't cap them, if it's felt that we're well covered in that position, and make it clear to them that that's the case, or cap them and then they have as much a right to that jersey as a homegrown lad.

This

While some are completely opposed to the residency status quo (and there probably is a merit in linking it to citzenship, although thats quite difficult) I think that there is a big commitment for these guys. Particualrly the guys who decide at a young age to come - ie coming at 21/22. The issue is being overblown - Stander is the only residency qualified player in a 40 man squad - and if you look at the next in line in the various positions

Kilcoyne, Cronin, Ross, Roux, McCarthy, JoD, Murphy, Reidy, Cooney, Carberry, Adeolokun, Healy, Payne, Olding, Sweetnam -> there are 2 projects in there

Thats 3 out of 55 players

Sure there have been a couple of easy caps given out - Diack, Ah You etc - but there have always been easy caps - maybe Copeland or Dom Ryan might have an extra cap or two - tahts the level of argument - since the project players really came on board (rteally Schmidt era tbh) - what Irish player has missed out on caps?

And once they qualify and start playing - then any argument goes out the window

TBF to Diack I think he got his cap while the frontliners were otherwise engaged and performed very well when he got his chance.
Ah You's cap I forget, but it was probably due to a spate of injuries and I have a vague feeling he didn't set the world on fire.

[wixfjord]

EOS makes a good point about POM and his lineout prowess. By a good distance the best defensive lineout player we have.
I don't think that's enough reason to start him though. I think we'll see Stander, VDF, Heaslip.

[sunshiner1]

Ah You's cap I forget, but it was probably due to a spate of injuries and I have a vague feeling he didn't set the world on fire.

Was given his first cap against Argentina and didn't do great. Has a few more and I remember him doing well against Georgia (who are no slouches in the scrum). Apparently he's doing well up in Ulster in terms of training/dieting etc. has really made a serious effort and is working with Best and Co. on his weaknesses. While I don't think he'll ever be an Irish first-teamer he's committed to Ireland, he does his best to push for a squad place so I say good luck to him.

[paddyor]

really cant see Henderson not starting, hes a big part of the gameplan

Hopefully likes of Stander and Murray will help with being clinical

What gameplan is that?

[suisse]

Ireland have a better team, squad and coaching staff than Scotland. In order for us to lose this game, it would take an incredible performance from Scotland combined with a very mixed day for Best (set pieces) and the half backs and possibly a case of Ireland letting chances disappear close to the Scotland line (as we see too often). We've plenty of leaders and inform players to see us over the line. It'll be tough, but as long as we hold out discipline and the half backs control the game, we should be able to come through with the match points. I can see it being a bit frustrating with Ireland leaving some golden opportunities behind then. PP has Ireland -7. Sounds right

[All Blacks nil]

Another quote from Mike Ross in an Q & A interview with Joe.ie last season.

Q. Who are the other record holders in the squad?

A...............Peter O'Mahony has the best vertical jump [CMJ - counter-movement jump]. He can reach about 63 centimetres from a standing start. That is what makes him such a great line-out jumper. My best vertical jump is 49cm.

POM's ability to steal lineout ball at the front of the lineout is always crucial and sometimes game changing.
With POM at the front and Toner in the middle serious pressure is applied on the opposition lineout.
If Scotland's lineout doesn't function, Ireland will win in a canter. No other backrow option has that ability. Despite most of the back row contenders being in serious form, for that reason I can't see POM out of the MD23

[Golf Man]

TBF to Diack I think he got his cap while the frontliners were otherwise engaged and performed very well when he got his chance.
Ah You's cap I forget, but it was probably due to a spate of injuries and I have a vague feeling he didn't set the world on fire.

Not sure you would say he performed very well he played v Argentina away and Georgia at home in 2014 -> Ah You actually has three caps from around teh same time and was rubbish

Schmidt has used about 90 players I think during his time - I think 8 were residency qualified and about the same were granny rule (although a coupl eof them Marmion and Bealham in particular don't really deserve to be in that category) - don't think thats outrageous number. I don't really have that much of a problem with residency players - it is a commitment on their part, the provinces probably need them and its not like they have taken over the team - 1 in the 40 man squad as it stands