Madigan...potential bolter for the Lions?

Sexton seems to be the first choice 10 for the Lions in most peoples eyes, but who will tour with him is certainly up for grabs. Priestland is no doubt going to push Sexton all the way. Laidlaw, Farrell and Flood dont exactly fill me with much enthusiasm.

I expect a big year from Madigan and it seems not just I rate him ahead of ROG as second choice 10 for Ireland. I just hope Kidney gives him a good run out in the AI's. I know he played full back for Leinster at the weekend but I'd like to see him play 12 (is he too small?), D'arcy is finished and has been for a couple of years now.

Has he got any chance of touring?
Could he play 12 for Leinster and possibly Ireland?

I think Hook will go as the "4th choice" flyhalf

Very interesting...

They are only taking 2 FHs apparently, so Madigan would be a very bold call.

No coach on the planet would take a 10 who has no test pedigree because it is too crucial a position. Sexton and Farrell/Biggar with Laidlaw as backup

Only taking 2 10's is quite daft I think unless one of the 9's is Laidlaw. You can not expect two players to play every single match when they have 2 a week.

Bold call? Yes. But I would like to explain about why I don't think it would be a necessarily risky choice.

The great thing about Madigan is that he has no real weakness. He goes against the general stereotype that flair players cannot do some of the basics, he is not a so-called "flawed genius". And for quite some time some of Madigan's play has been genius.

This is just not one, two or three good games.
Before this year, Madigan showed plenty of promise despite the limited opportunities he had received. Unfortunately these performances were, rightly or wrongly, dismissed, usually because he was not playing at 10, or not considered to be playing on an important enough stage.
In 2013, however, he has really stepped up to the mark. In nearly every game this year he has been Man of the Match or at least Leinster's best player.
I do not know of a better linebreaking fly-half in the Northern Hemisphere and Madigan is definitely the best passer of a ball in Ireland, whether it be spectacular offloads or incredibly accurate, fast longer passes.

But more crucially, he has added plenty of steel. He is strong in defence for a fly-half and explains why he can play 12 and 15. His kicking rate in 2013 is phenomenal.
33 out of 35. 94% if you prefer.
Compare this with "Iceman" Owen Farrell,. 77%.
Not bad, but this is the point where I start to question where Farrell, and others, are better than Madigan. Defence, by a smidgen maybe?

But then you will point to Madigan's "no test pedigree".
Whilst I can't really dispute this, first of all he was comfortably the best Irish player on the pitch in the dire game against Italy. But this isn't really the point because his assured, yet dynamic performance that day was nothing that didn't surprise me.
Whilst Farrell gets praised again and again for his apparent composure, he displayed acts of petulance and frustration against both France and Wales. This isn't an attack on Farrell, after all he is only 21, but merely highlights the invalidity of the argument that Madigan is "too inexperienced" to travel.
Madigan has always been a composed player and I for one am confident he could handle at least being in the mid-week side.

If Gatland does take just two 10s I will have to accept that Madigan will not travel. Yet it is worth reminding that Madigan can play 12 and 15, and this counters the possibility of Laidlaw being a back-up 10. Gatland attended the Wasps-Leinster game, and I have no doubt who had impressed him most that night. Christian Wade also did alright, I suppose.

This is not the first time I have argued Madigan's case, and unfortunately, probably not the last.
And just in case it helps to take a fraction any accusations that I may be biased , I do want to see Madigan start ahead of Sexton as the Irish 10.

If there is a Bolter then by nation

Ireland- Madigan, Henderson
England- Wade, May?
Wales- are the any bolters? They all seem so established. Tipuric is the closest I can think of but hardly a Bolter IMO
Scotland- Matt Scott a bit of a Bolter even though he is 1st choice. Looks decent IMO.

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Only taking 2 10's is quite daft I think unless one of the 9's is Laidlaw. You can not expect two players to play every single match when they have 2 a week.

Agreed. They tried it in '09 and ended up calling up Hook as an injury replacement for a different position and then playing him almost exclusively at 10 if my memory serves me correctly. All it takes if for say your replacemnt test 10 to pick up a knock and you either have to play your test starter midweek or a player out of position and potentially suffer a demoralizing defeat as a result. I would take three 10's, probably Sexton (10/12*), Farrell (10/12/13*) and Bigger (10) or maybe Madigan (10/12*/15) as somebody with a different style.

* denotes other positions that they can cover if required but not ideal.

Sexton and Farrell are nailed on I think. Remember Farrells daddy is one of the coaches but hes a fairly good player anyway. Wilkinson is an outsider because of his involvement in the top 14 finals.

I don't think Gatland will pick Madigan simply because he is not an established international. He is able to cover a few positions so who knows, maybe he'll get a place as a utility back.

Priestland? He's no Dan Biggar.

Pete I suspect one of the 9s will be Laidlaw, but the gossip was; two and out 10s, and a player who can play 10 amongst other positions. That doesn't rule out James Hook as 3rd 10, for instance. Actually Hook might be a good bet.

Tour is a year too early for Madigan. What people have to realise is he's playing for the rolls royce of club sides. Test rugby is when you're taken out of your comfort zone and have to adapt quickly- all of Madigans most impressive performances have taken place surrounded by familiar faces in a dominant team. I believe he can do it at a higher level, Kidney should have given him a chance to prove it, but he hasn't and we don't know enough about how he plays under genuine pressure. I would personally have no fears about him starting a test for Ireland tomorrow, but for the Lions he would be leapfrogging guys who have shown they have the minerals at test level like Farrell or Biggar. I don't think its the right decision to pass over those guys.

If they take a 3rd 10 it will probably be a guy like Hook or Laidlaw who has played other positions at test level. Wilkinson probably won't be in the touring party but I hope he is on the reserve list.

profitius wrote:Sexton and Farrell are nailed on I think. Remember Farrells daddy is one of the coaches but hes a fairly good player anyway. Wilkinson is an outsider because of his involvement in the top 14 finals.

I don't think Gatland will pick Madigan simply because he is not an established international. He is able to cover a few positions so who knows, maybe he'll get a place as a utility back.

For that very reson i think he is not nailed on by a long way.....i think he probably has to perform better and on relflection i am inclined to think Biggar might sneak it based on his 6 Nations perfromances

Farrell splits opinions in even England fans...

But when he starts at ten he has an impressive win ratio for Sarries at all levels and even at England level. That would suggest he knows what to do get the job done. Not bad for a 21 yo.
Now whilst i appreciate Sexton starts...it wouldnt be bad to have someone like Farrell in there to simply close the game down.

But as i have said before as long as the best and form players are picked im happy...i just want the lions to win..so if that means Madigan...then im fine with that.

Madigan could line out at 12 for Leinster tomorrow. Rumours that D'arcy is out. Last chance to impress? Gets to play alongside the probable lions test outhalf

Paddy power seem to think Madigan has a very good chance of going since he is 1/7 to make the sqaud, shorter odds than Biggar and Wilko.

MDB wrote:Paddy power seem to think Madigan has a very good chance of going since he is 1/7 to make the sqaud, shorter odds than Biggar and Wilko.

Maybe Madigan is the "Utility back"

Bold call.

Very harsh on Biggar if he doesn't tour though, Gatland doesn't seem to be much of a fan since he didn't take him to Australia last time (technically Howley's call, but I bet Gatland was involved)

Difficult to read into those odds, most players are very unreasonably priced.
However there is an article on the PP official website which claims Madigan is a "dead cert" to tour.

There must have been someone putting money on Madigan. Its easy to change prices in paddypowers. I've done it myself with only €400.

Only 400? You snob!

SecretFly wrote:Only 400? You snob!

I'm down to €50 now

Worth a shout but with that haircut, he is more likely to be needed as the body double for Kim Jong Un

InjuredYetAgain wrote:Worth a shout but with that haircut, he is more likely to be needed as the body double for Kim Jong Un

Has Kim Jong Un blond hair?

I can't see Madigan going, it's just a season too early for him, similarly with Wade.

Sexton has to travel, as do Farell, Gats doesn't rate Biggar, and Laidlaw and Hook can cover midweek. They'd be my favourites at present!!!

People are talking about Biggar but he really only had one good game V England, every other performance was adequate at best, and v England he had an armchair ride!!

To be honest I'd prefer Madigan to go on the the Irish summer tour. Like Notch said, there are players who are proven test players who are ahead of Madigan. THe tour came a year to early for him.

thebluesmancometh wrote:I can't see Madigan going, it's just a season too early for him, similarly with Wade.

Sexton has to travel, as do Farell, Gats doesn't rate Biggar, and Laidlaw and Hook can cover midweek. They'd be my favourites at present!!!

People are talking about Biggar but he really only had one good game V England, every other performance was adequate at best, and v England he had an armchair ride!!

Meh, Hook just had a fairly average game against Stade with some very dubious kicking. If Madigan has a good game at twelve tomorrow, its possible.

Big Mac Michael wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:I can't see Madigan going, it's just a season too early for him, similarly with Wade.

Sexton has to travel, as do Farell, Gats doesn't rate Biggar, and Laidlaw and Hook can cover midweek. They'd be my favourites at present!!!

People are talking about Biggar but he really only had one good game V England, every other performance was adequate at best, and v England he had an armchair ride!!

Meh, Hook just had a fairly average game against Stade with some very dubious kicking. If Madigan has a good game at twelve tomorrow, its possible.

Of course it is, but kicking wouldn't be eithers responsibility, and utility wise Hook is slightly more usefull off the bench

I can't see Madigan touring, he's not done it on the highest stage so would be a massive gamble.

Sexton & Farrell are nailed on, 3rd choice depends on if Gatland wants an extra scrum half(Laidlaw) or a an extra centre(Hook).

B91212 wrote:

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Only taking 2 10's is quite daft I think unless one of the 9's is Laidlaw. You can not expect two players to play every single match when they have 2 a week.

Agreed. They tried it in '09 and ended up calling up Hook as an injury replacement for a different position and then playing him almost exclusively at 10 if my memory serves me correctly...

Riki Flutey was the "3rd flyhalf" in 2009 but was injured for a good deal of the series. Hook was officially a replacement in 2009 for Halfpenny and the main reason for his selection was goalkicking, since we were down to just Jones and O'Gara with Halfpenny out. However, since Flutey and Earls were both crocked, Hook's ability to cover 10 and centre tipped the balance.

A like-for-like replacement for Halfpenny would have been Armitage (who hadn't got his bad boy reputation at that point, and could cover centre). By all accounts, though, Chris Paterson was also considered, which suggests they wanted cover for Flutey at 10 too. On balance, then Hook was the perfect choice because he knew the other Welsh backs, could kick, and covered at least three positions. Seem to remember he had a decent tour.

You probably do want your fly halves playing every match in the initial stages of a tour. Gatland said he was inclined to go with two so that both got enough game time. Choose three first choice 10s, and either one is on the bench all the time, or else none of them get enough of a run ahead of the Tests. Conversely, at the back end of the tour, you might want to save your halves from wear and tear and use the utility man - unless he has turned out to be a first XV candidate in another position.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I can't see Madigan touring, he's not done it on the highest stage so would be a massive gamble.

Sexton & Farrell are nailed on, 3rd choice depends on if Gatland wants an extra scrum half(Laidlaw) or a an extra centre(Hook).

Playing is a gamble...so why not Lions? It's as good a stage as any. You guys who keep putting The Lions above your own Nations as though Lions was a Nationality in itself. Gambling means you could lose all your money or you could bring in a fortune. That's what a Lions series always is - a gamble

Had a cracking game yesterday, get him on the plane I say! I'd rather him than wilko

Playing well in the Amlin Cup will not "get you on the plane".

He's got pretty much zero International experience, can he cope? Is he up to it? We don't know as he's not been tested against the best

I reiterate.....Madigan will not tour.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Playing well in the Amlin Cup will not "get you on the plane".
He's got pretty much zero International experience, can he cope? Is he up to it? We don't know as he's not been tested against the best

I reiterate.....Madigan will not tour.

Losing past Lions tours does though...

So much for Lions being the mark of quality that keeps you off a plane if you haven't proved yourself at their level.

Madigan will hardly travel with the Lions, I agree; but not for the reasons you throw out.

I think we can agree that if Madigan were English, he would be "the next Dan Carter".

"Losing past Lions tours does though"

I don't get what your trying to say Fly? What has past Lions tours have to do with this squad?

I'm saying Madigan won't tour because he has no International experience and FH is THE key position. It's too early for him.

"I think we can agree that if Madigan were English, he would be "the next Dan Carter""

I don't think we can agree on that all, it's a stupid comment tbh. Madigan looks a real talent but its early days on the Int scene, he needs testing.

Firstly, Madigan was Ireland's best player in the only Test he has played. Whilst that is little test experience, he has come up against sides like Clermont (who would probably contend for the 6N title), and has led Leinster to crucial wins, such as the top-of-the-table clash against Glasgow. Moreover, he has displayed he can still do it when the rest of the team is faltering (Ulster, Glasgow, Italy).

Considering the hype Farrell has received from some quarters of the English media, and that IMO Madigan is a far more talented player, I don't think my last comment was that unreasonable.

I'm not banking on it but Gatland has turned up to a few Leinster games this season, and Paddy Power seem assured he will make the squad, he might just sneak in as the utility back..

Sgt_Pooly wrote:"Losing past Lions tours does though"

I don't get what your trying to say Fly? What has past Lions tours have to do with this squad?

It's perfectly simple, Pooly. You say International level experience is required to prove you won't be a 'gamble' come Lions time. I say a good few of those who will travel will already have proven that International experience didn't exactly add value to their performances on Lions duty...as in losing is losing.
It's all a gamble. Madigan is good enough to be gambled on. He likely won't be - I agree with that - but he's more than good enough to be gambled on. Winning a series is the deal, not showboating players who have 'proven' things at International level. It's not a cat-walk parade for 'best' players' on the islands.... it's a tour to try and win a series.

I would e happy to see the lad chosen.He shows a lot of promise.Will WG take a punt?Hope so.

It's not "show boating top players" by picking proven International players.

Players play Int rugby because they are the best in their respective position in their country, Madigan isn't this currently.

Players like Farrell and Bigger to some extent have proven it on the highest stage, Madigan is unproven. Why take a risk in a pivotal position when you have better proven options.

Madigan has had a few good HC performances but the majority of his best games have been in the Rabo isn't a great standard generally lets be honest.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Players like Farrell and Bigger to some extent have proven it on the highest stage, Madigan is unproven. Why take a risk in a pivotal position when you have better proven options.

I agree it's a risk, but I personally think Madigan has both the temperament and the all-round game that would mean it would be a risk that would pay off.

He more than stepped up to the mark for Leinster in Sexton's absence, and in his first game for Ireland, he was their best player. Whilst it is a gamble, it is one worth taking IMO because I am confident he would rise to the challenge, proving he is a better player than the likes of Farrell and Biggar, maybe even Sexton.

Fair enough Losty, I can't agree but I respect your opinion. He looks a talent but needs to be seen on Int stage imo

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's not "show boating top players" by picking proven International players.

Players play Int rugby because they are the best in their respective position in their country, Madigan isn't this currently.

Players like Farrell and Bigger to some extent have proven it on the highest stage, Madigan is unproven. Why take a risk in a pivotal position when you have better proven options.

Madigan has had a few good HC performances but the majority of his best games have been in the Rabo isn't a great standard generally lets be honest.

I don't know why not! If it doesn't already include three HC winning sides - two of them multiple winners - then it has many players from two GS 6N sides - one of them multiple winners! The Pro12? You talk it, and the players involved in it, down. It's proven itself. 6th place side this season gave the Great Clermont its very toughest test of the season (from either HC or Top14) according to Lee Burn.

You have a more fundamentalist desire to see 'quality' where International sits. Many people watching Clermont and Munster at it yesterday had different views on the passion and ability needed at the top of HC in comparison to the indifference often shown at 6N level.

Different view on 'quality' and when it might show itself. Madigan remains as good a punt as Biggar or Farrell.

I don't really expect him to go, and tbh it might not even be the best thing for his development, regardless of whether it goes well or not.

However, I would be pretty annoyed if:
a) James Hook is chosen instead as a utility back.
b) Christian Wade (for all his talent) or someone else is chosen as the bolter.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's not "show boating top players" by picking proven International player

Players like Farrell and Bigger to some extent have proven it on the highest stage, Madigan is unproven. Why take a risk in a pivotal position when you have better proven options.

Madigan has had a few good HC performances but the majority of his best games have been in the Rabo isn't a great standard generally lets be honest.

If Madigan is unproven how can you say that Farrell and Biggar are better options?Farrell and Biggar have proved to be adequate at best.Madigan has shown the potential to be a top player with a bit of magic which our game greatly needs.Standard International teams have the safety first approach with which the Lions are not encombered.Hope WG goes for it and throws off the shackles of conservatism.

Taff....your answer is your question.

Farrell & Bigger are proven Int performers

I'd definitely take Madigan over Farrell. YEs the latter has international experience, but in that experience all he's shown is an inability to get a backline moving coupled with an above average kicking ability. That's so far from what the Lions need.

Sarge,but how do you know that they are better?

The ironic thing is Farrell isn't even that good a goalkicker. At the moment, it is another area where Madigan is completely outclassing him.

There is a very dogged view out there that International is/must always be a higher standard to club rugby and players who play in it must also be considered step-up players. It's just a generalised view that always has its champions regardless of the notion that sometimes reality can intervene and make the concept less sure-footed.

Truth is sometimes International is very much that step up, yes. But sometimes too many International sides (certainly in NH) would find it difficult to live with the best clubs in top form. Sometimes International being 'best' definer of ability just isn't so.

will greenwood seems to think madser is gonna make it looking at his twitter

If the squad is 36-37, then there are only really two possible bolters in the traditional sense - they are Wade and Madigan. I think that taking Wade instead of someone like Maitland, Zebo or Visser would be a mistake.

However, given that we are currently a little soft in the 12 position, I can think of worse players to take to cover that spot than Madigan, with one eye to him covering 10 if needs be.

Gatland has to be serious about these so-called 'principles'. It's fine to say that missing even the first Lions game in Honkers is likely to prejudice the chances of anyone who won't make that game. However, to then only take two 10's - one of whom could get crocked against any of the Super franchises - and have to fly a replacement around the world, at short notice, mid-tour seems to drive a large German SUV through that rule.