606v2 picks the best Irish RWC 22: BACKS BENCH

Ok guys, this is the last article of the series it's kinda Petered out but ah well may as well see it to the very end.
Hope you have enjoyed bits of it.

The idea of this series is to establish the first choice front row, second row, backrow, halfbacks, centres, back3, forwards subs and backs subs. These debates I may leave a little longer than the previous series as more can be said about them. The idea is to chose the best 22 that we have be it on form, experience, partnerships, balance, fitness whatever.

Perhaps think of this as the team you want to line out against Australia

IN THE SERIES PLEASE LOOK AT THE PLAYERS WHO HAVE BEEN/YOU THINK WILL BE PICKED LATER IN THE SERIES, AS TO CREATE BALANCE IN THE TEAM
eg: Playing Flannery would mean needing a work horse somewhere else in the pack as Best does a lot of the donkey work.

IF A PLAYER IS IN OUR SQUAD PLEASE TAKE FOR GRANTED THAT THEY CAME THROUGH THE WARM UPS AND THUS HAVE SOME FORM (IF NOT A LOT) AND ARE SOMEWHAT FIT. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION.

We are going to use the squad that we (the 606v2 community) have chosen.

Healy, Ross, Buckley, Court
Best, Cronin, Flannery
O'Connell, O'Callaghan, Cullen, Ryan
Ferris, O'Brien, Wallace, Jennings, Heaslip
Reddan, Stringer, O'Leary*
Sexton, O'Gara
O'Driscoll, Darcy, Wallace
Bowe, Earls, Trimble, Kearney, Jones, McFadden

*O'Leary just beat Murray yesterday evening in the poll by one vote.

So far the team is

Healy-Best-Ross
O'Connell-O'Callaghan
Ferris-Heaslip-Wallace
Reddan-Sexton
Darcy-O'Driscoll
Trimble-Earls-Bowe

Court, Flannery, Cullen, O'Brien

This is for places on the bench, should be a toughie...brace yourselves......

O'LEARY: Very physical. Good in defence and would keep the game tight if necessary. Not a good passer and slow at getting the ball out of the rucks as well as being slow at making decisions, these decisions can tend to be the wrong one more often than with other 9's. As a bench player good if we are winning probably bad if we are loosing because he would slow the game down.
STRINGER: One of the best passers as a 9 in the world. He would definitely inject pace into the game coming off the bench but wouldn't offer tha much else. Also if Reddan was carted off early is Stringer capable of playing a competitive international game for 70+ mins.
O'GARA: Very good at reading the game from the stands and once on the pitch seems to slip in seemlessly as opposed to needing some time to get into gear. Great kicker and game manager. Can be a very positive impact.
WALLACE: Versatile so he can play 10, 12 and at a stretch 15. Good while not excellent kicking, good hands and his defence has improved hugely. Good distributor so would open up the game from 12 at least.
KEARNEY: Safe under the high ball and brings a long seige gun kick. Wouldn't be the player who would win you the game with a fantastic counter attack but brings a different approach to Earls who is starting at 15.
JONES: Untested internationally, and his tempermeant will need to be tested. Is the kind of player who can win a game, good under the high ball, solid defence, great counterattacking.
MCFADDEN: Could be useful on the bench due to his versatility 11-14. Quick, solid in defence, good distribution and ball carrying, good kicking from hand and brings another excellent goal kicking option.

Enjoy

Remember...

a) think of balance of the whole team
b) assume if they are in the squad they have some form and some fitness (not necessarily full fitness or good form)
c) play nice and no provincial stuff, attack the arguement not the person making it
d) to place your votes
e) back up your points with examples, clips etc if possible

repeat from top:
Ok guys, this is the last article of the series it's kinda Petered out but ah well may as well see it to the very end.
Hope you have enjoyed bits of it.

Stringer, O'Gara, McFadden (though I'd have picked Fitz given the chance). Gives us most options.

I went Stringer, ROG, Jones. I think Jones can win us a game and I also believe if neccessary Earls can play in the same number of positions as Fitz or McFadden. He can be put to 13 and BOD to 12 or either wing while inserting Jones in at 15.

Stringer,O'Gara and McFadden. Stringer offers something the other scrum halves don't, O'Gara is a no brainer and McFadden covers most of the backline positions.

I understand the thinking behind McF and to be honest I don't really disagree with you selections but would it not make more sense to have 1 of the 15's on the bench as the Earls can move anywhere McF could move to. And if our 15 gets injured it means we have Kearney/Jones there rather than Bowe.

If he was picked I would have had Fitz on the bench.

Murray, ROG, Fitzgerald

Yeah if Murray had been picked I would have gone for him too

Out of the options I've gone for TOL, ROG and McFadden.

I think if ROG is on the bench then Wallace shouldn't be as it leaves us short of cover in the outside backs. McFadden (who I don't think will make the plane) gets the nod due to his ability to play wing and centre.

I wouldn't have a specialist fullback on the bench either but if I started with Jones or Kearney then I would have Trimble or Fitzgerald on the bench. If you have Kearney on the bench then you have to have Wallace instead of ROG otherwise there is no cover at centre.

TOL offers a different style of SH from the bench so I'd have him ahead of stringer but if Murray was selected I'd be tempted to go with him.

roddersm wrote:Out of the options I've gone for TOL, ROG and McFadden.

I think if ROG is on the bench then Wallace shouldn't be as it leaves us short of cover in the outside backs. McFadden (who I don't think will make the plane) gets the nod due to his ability to play wing and centre.

I wouldn't have a specialist fullback on the bench either but if I started with Jones or Kearney then I would have Trimble or Fitzgerald on the bench. If you have Kearney on the bench then you have to have Wallace instead of ROG otherwise there is no cover at centre.

TOL offers a different style of SH from the bench so I'd have him ahead of stringer but if Murray was selected I'd be tempted to go with him.

If the team selected is picked you have to have a specialist full back on the bench. Earls gets injured then jones/kearney comes on in a direct change. Anyone else gets injured earls moves and specialist full back comes on. If earls gets injured and you bring on mcfadden then things get messy.

valjester wrote:

roddersm wrote:Out of the options I've gone for TOL, ROG and McFadden.

I think if ROG is on the bench then Wallace shouldn't be as it leaves us short of cover in the outside backs. McFadden (who I don't think will make the plane) gets the nod due to his ability to play wing and centre.

I wouldn't have a specialist fullback on the bench either but if I started with Jones or Kearney then I would have Trimble or Fitzgerald on the bench. If you have Kearney on the bench then you have to have Wallace instead of ROG otherwise there is no cover at centre.

TOL offers a different style of SH from the bench so I'd have him ahead of stringer but if Murray was selected I'd be tempted to go with him.

If the team selected is picked you have to have a specialist full back on the bench. Earls gets injured then jones/kearney comes on in a direct change. Anyone else gets injured earls moves and specialist full back comes on. If earls gets injured and you bring on mcfadden then things get messy.

I agree completely.

I went for Stringer, ROG and Kearney.

valjester wrote:

roddersm wrote:Out of the options I've gone for TOL, ROG and McFadden.

I think if ROG is on the bench then Wallace shouldn't be as it leaves us short of cover in the outside backs. McFadden (who I don't think will make the plane) gets the nod due to his ability to play wing and centre.

I wouldn't have a specialist fullback on the bench either but if I started with Jones or Kearney then I would have Trimble or Fitzgerald on the bench. If you have Kearney on the bench then you have to have Wallace instead of ROG otherwise there is no cover at centre.

TOL offers a different style of SH from the bench so I'd have him ahead of stringer but if Murray was selected I'd be tempted to go with him.

If the team selected is picked you have to have a specialist full back on the bench. Earls gets injured then jones/kearney comes on in a direct change. Anyone else gets injured earls moves and specialist full back comes on. If earls gets injured and you bring on mcfadden then things get messy.

+1

I don't want to see Wallace or Bowe at 15 if it can be helped. I went for Jones.

If a centre gets injured Jones comes on and earls moves to centre
If a wing gets injured Jones comes on and earls moves to wing

Stringer, ROG, Kearney. Need FB cover and Earls can go anywhere else in an emergency. If Earls isn't reliable under the high ball you need plan B

Stringer as scrum half replacement for me. I wouldn't have him as a starter but from the bench he is certainly the best option. Due to the quality and speed of his service he can quicken up a game if that what is needed. On the other side of the coin, due to his experience he has the ability to close out a game if that is what is needed.

O'Gara as the replacement doesn't need to be debated. I think he offers the most impact from the bench out of all the possible subs we have regardless of position.

I chose McFadden as I think his versatility offers us the most across the backline and if one of the centres go down, he's the player I'd most like to come in.

MBTGOG wrote:Stringer as scrum half replacement for me. I wouldn't have him as a starter but from the bench he is certainly the best option. Due to the quality and speed of his service he can quicken up a game if that what is needed. On the other side of the coin, due to his experience he has the ability to close out a game if that is what is needed.

O'Gara as the replacement doesn't need to be debated. I think he offers the most impact from the bench out of all the possible subs we have regardless of position.

I chose McFadden as I think his versatility offers us the most across the backline and if one of the centres go down, he's the player I'd most like to come in.

The only problem with stringer as sub is if there is a repeat of the wales match.
As I said earlier I think mcfadden on the bench is a huge risk if earls gets injured.
Also he has played much rugby in the centre this year for leinster and none at
international level.

Yeah I agree with Val there is no real fullback cover if Earls is injured unless you want Bowe or Wallace at 15. We need fullback cover

valjester wrote:

MBTGOG wrote:Stringer as scrum half replacement for me. I wouldn't have him as a starter but from the bench he is certainly the best option. Due to the quality and speed of his service he can quicken up a game if that what is needed. On the other side of the coin, due to his experience he has the ability to close out a game if that is what is needed.

O'Gara as the replacement doesn't need to be debated. I think he offers the most impact from the bench out of all the possible subs we have regardless of position.

I chose McFadden as I think his versatility offers us the most across the backline and if one of the centres go down, he's the player I'd most like to come in.

The only problem with stringer as sub is if there is a repeat of the wales match.
As I said earlier I think mcfadden on the bench is a huge risk if earls gets injured.
Also he has played much rugby in the centre this year for leinster and none at
international level.

What happened in the Wales match?

MBTGOG wrote:

valjester wrote:

MBTGOG wrote:Stringer as scrum half replacement for me. I wouldn't have him as a starter but from the bench he is certainly the best option. Due to the quality and speed of his service he can quicken up a game if that what is needed. On the other side of the coin, due to his experience he has the ability to close out a game if that is what is needed.

O'Gara as the replacement doesn't need to be debated. I think he offers the most impact from the bench out of all the possible subs we have regardless of position.

I chose McFadden as I think his versatility offers us the most across the backline and if one of the centres go down, he's the player I'd most like to come in.

The only problem with stringer as sub is if there is a repeat of the wales match.
As I said earlier I think mcfadden on the bench is a huge risk if earls gets injured.
Also he has played much rugby in the centre this year for leinster and none at
international level.

What happened in the Wales match?

Reddan went off after 30 seconds and stringer had to play the whole match.

Also Paddy Wallace ended up at 15 for the end of it

valjester wrote:

MBTGOG wrote:

valjester wrote:

MBTGOG wrote:Stringer as scrum half replacement for me. I wouldn't have him as a starter but from the bench he is certainly the best option. Due to the quality and speed of his service he can quicken up a game if that what is needed. On the other side of the coin, due to his experience he has the ability to close out a game if that is what is needed.

O'Gara as the replacement doesn't need to be debated. I think he offers the most impact from the bench out of all the possible subs we have regardless of position.

I chose McFadden as I think his versatility offers us the most across the backline and if one of the centres go down, he's the player I'd most like to come in.

The only problem with stringer as sub is if there is a repeat of the wales match.
As I said earlier I think mcfadden on the bench is a huge risk if earls gets injured.
Also he has played much rugby in the centre this year for leinster and none at
international level.

What happened in the Wales match?

Reddan went off after 30 seconds and stringer had to play the whole match.

So are we picking players for impact or in the event a player goes off early?

MBTGOG wrote:So are we picking players for impact or in the event a player goes off early?

Ideally for impact, in which case there'd be a good argument to select McFadden. But with no recognised fullback in the starting 15 as it is I think it'd be prudent to select one on the bench.

MMC wrote:

MBTGOG wrote:So are we picking players for impact or in the event a player goes off early?

Ideally for impact, in which case there'd be a good argument to select McFadden. But with no recognised fullback in the starting 15 as it is I think it'd be prudent to select one on the bench.

That's fair enough but on the subject of scrum half I'm wondering. The rule seems to change all the time. Ryan was being selected for impact yet Stringer is being ruled out if he has to come on early. I know if a lock had to come on early, I'd far prefer Cullen to Ryan.

It's a bench, it has to give impact but cover injuries, act if you are coach and make the decision I guess

Stringer then still for me. Plenty of experience starting and playing full games at this level.

MBTGOG wrote:Stringer then still for me. Plenty of experience starting and playing full games at this level.

+1
plus his impact off the bench is much greater than TOL's IMO

MBTGOG wrote:

MMC wrote:

MBTGOG wrote:So are we picking players for impact or in the event a player goes off early?

Ideally for impact, in which case there'd be a good argument to select McFadden. But with no recognised fullback in the starting 15 as it is I think it'd be prudent to select one on the bench.

That's fair enough but on the subject of scrum half I'm wondering. The rule seems to change all the time. Ryan was being selected for impact yet Stringer is being ruled out if he has to come on early. I know if a lock had to come on early, I'd far prefer Cullen to Ryan.

Yeah thats a fair enough accusation. I just would not be confident if stringer had to play for more than 15 minutes against australia. But I suppose that although you should take injuries into consideration they should be the most important thing. I'd still thing tol could make an impact from the bench if not in the same manner that stringer would. But truth be told I'd be happier with murray on the bench.

Les Kiss cited that one of the main reasons they won the grandslam was the fact that in the 60th min or so they could remarkably up the tempo by using stringer

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Les Kiss cited that one of the main reasons they won the grandslam was the fact that in the 60th min or so they could remarkably up the tempo by using stringer

Or like in the Scotland game,they could spring on TOL for defensive duties when the scores were tight.

That's true too I guess

Thank god this is over now

20. Stringer 21. ROG 22. Jones

First to pick them selves and Jones as their is no other Fullback cover in that team. I would want him to start really as there could be more flexability on the bench.

Well right not Jones and McFadden are tied so not quite over yet Curry! haha

[quote="pete (buachaill on eirne)"]Well right not Jones and McFadden are tied so not quite over yet Curry! haha[/quote]

Any chance that was your doing to keep this going

Not at all I got sick of this over a week ago when all the provincial moaning started just wanted to finish it off.

As soon as one person has more votes it's a done deal.

Chin up Pete.

They were great articles and have really made this place for me over the past few weeks.

They have killed time for me and I really enjoyed the first week of them but I felt they got ruined then by the squabbling and the fact they were hidden away off the main page. Well not so much hidden but many people didn't find them. Oh well.

Three of them drawing now.

Pete,

You need to get used to that on here. I try to get involved in the other areas of rugby on here because the Irish stuff just annoys me.

Yera, that's always going to happen when it's something that people feel so strongly about. I can think of 1 poster each from Leinster and Munster that derailed the whole thing but I'm not going to mention names.

I think the subsection thing really killed the momentum of it and that's what contributed to the bickering as there were fewer people contributing. As a result you have the same few people giving the same opinions over and over again.

So I suppose to finish this off you could have a post featuring the team and bench we've chosen and get people to talk about the tactics they'd suggest to beat Australia with? That'd get it on the main page too.

Yeah was thinking that MMC. Even just to round it off and put a full stop on the end of it.

It annoys me too, because I want to talk about Irish rugby but some seem very aggressive in their opinions and also are quite offensive to other people.

Will put up the team in the next bit and if the 3 way draw isn't resolved I'll just do eenie meenie minie mo!

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Yeah was thinking that MMC. Even just to round it off and put a full stop on the end of it.

It annoys me too, because I want to talk about Irish rugby but some seem very aggressive in their opinions and also are quite offensive to other people.

Will put up the team in the next bit and if the 3 way draw isn't resolved I'll just do eenie meenie minie mo!

eenie meenie minie mo, pick Rob Kearney cos we need a recognised fullback and Jones isn't ready...

But ya, Munsty's right. The Ireland stuff tends to attract a lot of this type of bickering. But it also attracts some great debate so it's just a case of trying not to rise to the WUMs. 606 v1 was waaaaaaaaay worse for it though, plus it had Henson articles galore, that maiowmaiow character who created 57 million articles a day and various other irritations that haven't transferred across...yet.

That's true thanks goodness.

God bless 606v2!