Ireland's November 2013 Series

Ireland v Samoa at Aviva Stadium
Saturday, November 9, kick-off 5.45pm

Ireland v Australia at Aviva Stadium
Saturday, November 16, kick-off 5.45pm

Ireland v New Zealand at Aviva Stadium
Sunday, November 24, kick-off 2pm

Whats the point of the Sunday matches?

Ireland had loads of them for the 6 nations too yet no one likes them.

Tough November given that all three teams are currently ranked above Ireland.

That said less than 2 wins will be failure.

If two means Samoa and Australia, well so be it. I'd take it.

If one meant New Zealand, well so be it. I'd take that too.

If one meant Samoa then we'd still have a lot to work on.

If one meant Australia then we'd be in that usual place for Ireland - do something good when you least expect it, but an isolated jesture; one of our once a year 'performances'.

Then again, we don't know where those sides facing us will be at come November and we certainly can't predict where we'll be with our new coach only just arrived.

I'd take 60-0 beatings from Australia and Samoa on the chin if it meant we could beat New Zealand by 1 point.

I think this is going to be a poor series for us as the coach will only have just got the players together. With that in my mind I kind of wish we had 4 games rather than 3 to give the coach more time with the guys even if it was against Fiji or Canada or someone.

I think the coach is going to be under a fair bit of pressure to deliver results pretty quickly from the media which is quite unfair.

Not much time for a smooth transition as the coach will have less than 2 years to the RWC.

i dont buy that thing must get worse before getting better.

i think a fresh voice and coaching team will see improved performances and results quite quickly provided we are not utterly decimated by injuries.

2 wins from 3 and a good performance v NZ please

dublin_dave wrote:i dont buy that thing must get worse before getting better.

Nor do I.

Ireland haven't been playing with any sort of coherent gameplan, therefore if the team is given some direction they shouldn't be any worse and more than likely they will be better.

I'm glad we don't have you first up. With a new coach looking increasingly likely, I think it'll be a good idea to get a good look at how Ireland play before we have to play them. With games against France, England and Ireland, it's good practice for 2015.

Indeed, if Schmidt is the new coach, then there is extra incentive. The first Irish coach to beat NZ looks good on your CV, especially if you have your eye on the NZ job.

Meanwhile Hansen is mindful of the fact no doubt that Ireland is shaping up to be a quarterfinal opponent in the 2015 RWC. Giving your opponent self belief and hope is not a good move so close out from the RWC. They had 3 chances in NZ and just narrowly missed out on a win in the second test. It doesn't matter for Ireland how many they lose. All that matters is securing that first win. Then the aura of invincibility is broken and you approach games with a different mindset. Or at least you find yourselves in a game with a different mindset: it doesn't matter if we're behind, we can beat these feckers.

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Not much time for a smooth transition as the coach will have less than 2 years to the RWC.

I think this is enough time. Rarely do we actually see a coach taking a full 4 years to develop a RWC team. Introducing new players takes time but the nuts and bolts of a winning game plan is really an 18 month thing - no longer.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Indeed, if Schmidt is the new coach, then there is extra incentive. The first Irish coach to beat NZ looks good on your CV, especially if you have your eye on the NZ job.

Meanwhile Hansen is mindful of the fact no doubt that Ireland is shaping up to be a quarterfinal opponent in the 2015 RWC. Giving your opponent self belief and hope is not a good move so close out from the RWC. They had 3 chances in NZ and just narrowly missed out on a win in the second test. It doesn't matter for Ireland how many they lose. All that matters is securing that first win. Then the aura of invincibility is broken and you approach games with a different mindset. Or at least you find yourselves in a game with a different mindset: it doesn't matter if we're behind, we can beat these feckers.

You're so right kia. It is a psychological hurdle that makes the hill look always much steeper than it would look had that 'one win' been in the bag. New Zealand would still win the bulk of the meetings I'm sure, but knowing a victory is doable would allow Irish teams to relax more into a game and try moreso to win rather than often trying not to lose by too much. A different dynamic would operate if that one elusive win came.

That's a bit more of a challenging series of games than last autumn. Then it seemed like the IRFU were more worried about losing their second tier seeding for the RWC; i.e. the non-cap/doesn't count game v Fiji (despite hammering them).

There are some good players coming through for Ireland though. It will be an entertaining series of games I reckon.

I think Ireland will lose all 3 of those... New coach and new players coming in, lack of front row... Not so unlikely is it.

It depends on what Schmidt does with the squad. Will he go for a more radical approach that might cause short term pain for longer term benefits? Or will he keep some of the more experienced heads around for this.

I don't know

mikey_philVIII wrote:I think Ireland will lose all 3 of those... New coach and new players coming in, lack of front row... Not so unlikely is it.

Well, losing to two of them is something a lot of NH sides can do regularly
So that leaves Samoa. Yeah, we could lose that one too of course.

But if Schmidt gets a handle on the team and is able to mix and match a little to his liking then I'm almost certain we won't be losing most of the games in the old familiar way of recent years. (Attack for 10 minutes here and there, or through one half and then suck up pressure in robust defence.) We'll lose differently if we do lose all three...and that, believe it or not, will be a bit of a bonus as the new coach and perhaps new players get acquainted. I'll prefer wins but if we lose playing in-your-face rugby, there's a future.

Does anyone know off the top of their head how long the coach will have with the team before the Samoa game?

He usually gets a 2 week stint at the start of the season I think and then a week before the Nov internationals,don't quote me on that though.

Will Joe reinstate BOD as captain then?

rodders wrote:Will Joe reinstate BOD as captain then?

He might take it from Heaslip and give it to a 'neutral' (someone who ain't O'Driscoll). But stripping Heaslip immediately would be counter-productive and give media newshounds excuses to say there is controversy even at the beginning. Pages and pages of junk would follow with the usual 'gasps' of astonishment. I half hate/half laugh at the bloody Captaincy melodrama huffing and puffing that goes on. Heaslip might last a while and be given another chance to make the position his own.

Kind of left us in an awkward one there, has Kidney. Hard to take the captaincy off Heaslip without humiliating him.

He should have give a few different players the armband in the autumn. But for me if O'Connell is there, its ludicrous to have Heaslip as Captain.

Best thing Schimdt can do is give to someone like POC or keep it with Heaslip and have the BOD, POC and Bests guide him on and off the field

I wouldn't worry about Schmidt getting the team prepared for November, he knows a big portion of the squad and from what I've heard and read he good with the details and connecting with his players and a lot of players will be rejuvenated under a new regime and others will be trying to stand up

Notch wrote:Kind of left us in an awkward one there, has Kidney. Hard to take the captaincy off Heaslip without humiliating him.

He should have give a few different players the armband in the autumn. But for me if O'Connell is there, its ludicrous to have Heaslip as Captain.

Heaslip will remain captain. See no reason to take it off him. Its not ludicrous given that POC is 33 and constantly injured. Heaslip by contrast is one of the few players that plays almost every game plus he is only 29.

The Heaslip captaincy was blown so much out of proportion.

Notch wrote:Kind of left us in an awkward one there, has Kidney. Hard to take the captaincy off Heaslip without humiliating him.

Well the easiest way would be to just drop him

#Henry4Captain

I don't think that Heaslip had been terrible this season but he hasn't been great either, just okay. What happened to the dynamic ball carrier of a few years ago? Granted, he does all the basics well and is more of hard nosed number 8 now but he definitely isn't having the same impact on the game. If he stays as captain does schmidt feel obliged to play him regardless of form? Backrow is an area of strength for Ireland and I'm not sure if Heaslip will be assured of his place. Maybe this is why he shouldn't remain as captain. I doubt it would destroy his confidence, in fact, I think it would drive him on to prove people wrong.

The players around him have changed which is also relevant.

O'Mahony and O'Brien are OK but nowhere near as effective as having Ferris and Wallace as your wingmen.

For Leinster we are seeing less of Shane Jennings. Rocky Elsom is no longer there and Kevin McLaughlin is for me not showing the form of 2 years ago.

I actually think Heaslip was at his best the season after Elsom left, he was on fire for nearly 18 months afterwards.

Stag, who would you have as our backrow for the AI? Btw, I'm not saying Heaslip should be dropped, but he isn't a certainty anymore because of our depth in the backrow.

Heaslip was interviewed on the Sunday afternoon sports show on RTE1. Said he was happy with his performance over the 6Ns bar possibly the England game. He said he would only change one decision that he made (kicking to the corner instead of taking a shot at goal). He also said that Paddy wasn't sure about wanting to take it.

He says that his coaches are the only people he takes any notice of.

I actually think our best combination is:

06 Peter O'Mahony
07 Chris Henry
08 Sean O'Brien

O'Mahony brings that big of mad dog aggression, Henry is the #7 and O'Brien is the big ball carrier at 8.

However I would have no complaints about O'Brien, Henry and Heaslip with O'Mahony covering from the bench. Given the wringing of hands that will follow a captaincy change so soon I would be inclined to say the latter is the better one to go with overall. However purely on field the top one shades it.

red_stag wrote:I actually think our best combination is:

06 Peter O'Mahony
07 Chris Henry
08 Sean O'Brien

O'Mahony brings that big of mad dog aggression, Henry is the #7 and O'Brien is the big ball carrier at 8.

However I would have no complaints about O'Brien, Henry and Heaslip with O'Mahony covering from the bench. Given the wringing of hands that will follow a captaincy change so soon I would be inclined to say the latter is the better one to go with overall. However purely on field the top one shades it.

Stag Id prefer Henderson to POM myself, think hes a more dynamic ball carrier in the Ferris mould and would take a lot of pressure of SOB and open things up more for him. Henry is a player I think Ireland need going forward as hes such as a pest at the breakdown

We have a dynamic ball carrier in O'Brien. Henderson isn't needed. I think people are just excited by a new face and want him included.

He isn't good enough yet to get past Diack, Henry and Williams at Ulster (in my opinion).

Just don't see that it would be that good to have him starting.

Stag, I do like that backrow, not the biggest but no shortage of power. I do think we need to play a combination that will compliment each other rather than three individuals basically trying to play the same role.

Gretgael1 wrote:Stag, I do like that backrow, not the biggest but no shortage of power. I do think we need to play a combination that will compliment each other rather than three individuals basically trying to play the same role.

Exactly best team rather than best players.

01 Cian Healy
02 Rory Best
03 Mike Ross
04 Donnacha Ryan
05 Paul O'Connell (c)
06 Peter O'Mahony
07 Chris Henry
08 Sean O'Brien
09 Conor Murray
10 Ian Madigan
11 Andrew Trimble
12 Luke Marshall
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Tommy Bowe
15 Simon Zebo

16 Richardt Strauss
17 Dave Kilcoyne
18 Stephen Archer
19 Iain Henderson
20 Jamie Heaslip
21 Isaac Boss
22 Jonathan Sexton
23 Rob Kearney

We'll make mincemeat of out them Aussies and Samoans. . . . . .as for the All Blacks . . . . . .no comment!

red_stag wrote:We have a dynamic ball carrier in O'Brien. Henderson isn't needed. I think people are just excited by a new face and want him included.

He isn't good enough yet to get past Diack, Henry and Williams at Ulster (in my opinion).

Just don't see that it would be that good to have him starting.

Stag how well did it work out in the 6N only having SOB doing the heavy lifting? It was seen a mile off by every team

Henderson has been starting the big games for Ulster ahead of Diack and doing a good job as well

Marty, I don't think our ball carrying was the reason we lost matches in the 6 Nations. To me Chris Henry is the answer along with O'Brien who will be a primary ball carrier. I would have O'Mahony (at 6) and Heaslip (at 8) ahead of Henderson.

I think people are over excited about a new face and that while he would clearly be good and I wouldn't kick up a fuss if he started, I just think there are better backrow combinations available without him.

I'd like to see him playing more as a second row as I think this is where he could really shine.

red_stag wrote:We have a dynamic ball carrier in O'Brien. Henderson isn't needed. I think people are just excited by a new face and want him included.

I think our ball carrying was diabolic in the 6N. Without Ferris we don't have a single first phase ball carrier, which means O'Brien gets sucked into trucking it into big forwards rather than running in the wider channels, or taking quick ball round the fringes, where he is more effective.

Henderson is a must start.

red_stag wrote:Marty, I don't think our ball carrying was the reason we lost matches in the 6 Nations. To me Chris Henry is the answer along with O'Brien who will be a primary ball carrier. I would have O'Mahony (at 6) and Heaslip (at 8) ahead of Henderson.

I think people are over excited about a new face and that while he would clearly be good and I wouldn't kick up a fuss if he started, I just think there are better backrow combinations available without him.

I'd like to see him playing more as a second row as I think this is where he could really shine.

Have to disagree, he has plenty to learn but hes a boy in a mans body who gets over the gain line nearly every time and Ulster seem to see him as Ferris' long term successor at 6

In the 6N Ireland suffered at times from playing in front of and into the defensive lines with little penetration, while we'd all love some creativity the boy brings some brute force

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibS93sanGZc&feature=youtu.be&t=54s

red_stag wrote:

Gretgael1 wrote:Stag, I do like that backrow, not the biggest but no shortage of power. I do think we need to play a combination that will compliment each other rather than three individuals basically trying to play the same role.

Exactly best team rather than best players.

01 Cian Healy
02 Rory Best
03 Mike Ross
04 Donnacha Ryan
05 Paul O'Connell (c)
06 Peter O'Mahony
07 Chris Henry
08 Sean O'Brien
09 Conor Murray
10 Ian Madigan
11 Andrew Trimble
12 Luke Marshall
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Tommy Bowe
15 Simon Zebo

16 Richardt Strauss
17 Dave Kilcoyne
18 Stephen Archer
19 Iain Henderson
20 Jamie Heaslip
21 Isaac Boss
22 Jonathan Sexton
23 Rob Kearney

We'll make mincemeat of out them Aussies and Samoans. . . . . .as for the All Blacks . . . . . .no comment!

Would love to see that, great balance all over the shop. Boss would be my only quibble, let Marmion have a shot

wolfball wrote:

red_stag wrote:

Gretgael1 wrote:Stag, I do like that backrow, not the biggest but no shortage of power. I do think we need to play a combination that will compliment each other rather than three individuals basically trying to play the same role.

Exactly best team rather than best players.

01 Cian Healy
02 Rory Best
03 Mike Ross
04 Donnacha Ryan
05 Paul O'Connell (c)
06 Peter O'Mahony
07 Chris Henry
08 Sean O'Brien
09 Conor Murray
10 Ian Madigan
11 Andrew Trimble
12 Luke Marshall
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Tommy Bowe
15 Simon Zebo

16 Richardt Strauss
17 Dave Kilcoyne
18 Stephen Archer
19 Iain Henderson
20 Jamie Heaslip
21 Isaac Boss
22 Jonathan Sexton
23 Rob Kearney

We'll make mincemeat of out them Aussies and Samoans. . . . . .as for the All Blacks . . . . . .no comment!

Would love to see that, great balance all over the shop. Boss would be my only quibble, let Marmion have a shot

Dont rate POM at all but the rest of the team is ok.

GunsGerms wrote:Dont rate POM at all but the rest of the team is ok.

I didn't really either until the Quins game, but I saw what the Munster lads have been talking about in that game. If he can play like that consistently, controlled aggression (no handbags), strong leg drives in contact, then he can be some player for Ireland.

Try to think of him a bit like the Incredible Hulk in that film The Avengers.

They all thought he was a loose cannon but once they controlled that anger and aggression it really helped them to win.

Thats the way we all see O'Mahony. I actually thought he was the real Man of the Match against Quins.

wolfball wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Dont rate POM at all but the rest of the team is ok.

I didn't really either until the Quins game, but I saw what the Munster lads have been talking about in that game. If he can play like that consistently, controlled aggression (no handbags), strong leg drives in contact, then he can be some player for Ireland.

Yes it was a MOTM performance but I just dont think he is physical enough for an International back row player. SOB, Heaslip, Ferris, Henderson, Henry are all so much more physical IMO. If he keeps getting piacked in the Ireland back row we are going to keep getting slaughtered there.

O'Mahony is a bit like Diack. He's a decent player, who will not let you down if picked. That said, if there's a better option that emerges he'll make way long term and I'd be quite worried if our first choice 6 and 8 are O'Mahony and Heaslip in the long run because we do need a ball carrier in the mix- thats why Henderson to lock may not be a done deal just yet.

The likes of Peter O'Mahony and Robbie Diack are good, solid players but they are scaring precisely no-one at test level because they aren't powerful or dynamic enough. They actually have similar strengths- excellent lineout operators, athletic and mobile, tenacious, good breakdown and tackle skills but just lack that extra bit of explosiveness of gain line threat to really worry teams.

O'Mahony is only 23 - Diack is 4 years older, so are really not comparable as O'Mahony is still developing and Diack is probably at his best now.

Since he has just got a Central Contract (unlike Zebo for instance), I'd say he is in the immediate to long term plans of the IRFU.

Sin é wrote:O'Mahony is only 23 - Diack is 4 years older, so are really not comparable as O'Mahony is still developing and Diack is probably at his best now.

Since he has just got a Central Contract (unlike Zebo for instance), I'd say he is in the immediate to long term plans of the IRFU.

No they're not comparable. They just play the same position, have roughly the same strengths and weaknesses and fulfill the same role for their respective teams to roughly the same standard. There is a world of difference.

Lets get one thing straight, Diack isn't in POMs class. I don't know where this myth about POM not being physical enough comes from.

profitius wrote:Lets get one thing straight, Diack isn't in POMs class.

Darn right, Diack is twice the player POM is .

POM certainly does divide opinion, and he had a mixed 6N. However I'd give him a run in the team Kidney-free, because IMO he has been brilliant for Munster this season, their best forward. He is also the best line-out option out of any back rower.

Ideally:
6. O'Mahony
7. Henry/TOD
8. SOB

20. Henderson

POC could help with the lack of a first-phase ball-carrier that rodders mentioned, freeing up SOB in the wider channels.

Anyone think Downey is worth a run?

theslosty wrote:POM certainly does divide opinion, and he had a mixed 6N. However I'd give him a run in the team Kidney-free, because IMO he has been brilliant for Munster this season, their best forward. He is also the best line-out option out of any back rower.

Ideally:
6. O'Mahony
7. Henry/TOD
8. SOB

20. Henderson

POC could help with the lack of a first-phase ball-carrier that rodders mentioned, freeing up SOB in the wider channels.

Have you seen Henderson in the lineout? Dont think Ive seen him lose a lineout, he should have been used against Italy only Ryan kept calling everything to himself

profitius wrote:Lets get one thing straight, Diack isn't in POMs class. I don't know where this myth about POM not being physical enough comes from.

No one doubts POMs physicality but Henderson gets over the gain line more, he knocks big guys back and watching the clip from the Saracens game he beats 4 defenders and it then takes 3 to take him down. POM offers other things Henderson doesnt but what Ireland need is some real ball carrying back rows

Question for you Irish guys:

Looking at the above November programme, I see all games are played at Aviva Stadium.
Does it not cause arguements on the Irish rugby union that the games arent spread a bit around the country? Would it not help promote rugby throuhout the Country if Internationals were played in different areas at some stage?

Footnote: Do not read this post as some sort of snide criticism of Aviva stadium, because it isnt, as in my opinion Lansdowne road is one of the best rugby grounds in the World.