What makes the current Ireland squad so good?

Hi all, I hope you're all doing well!



​After some seriously impressive performances during the Six Nations Ireland certainly left an impression on the rugby world. So much so that it got me thinking about why their squad is so strong at the moment.



So I made this short video breaking down and analysing some of the players within the current squad. Please feel free to give it a watch and hopefully, it'll make you laugh a bit but I understand it won't be everyones cup of tea!






Do you think Ireland has one of the best squads in world rugby? Who do you think is their most important player?



I'd love to discuss it below!:nod:



Thanks!

What makes the current Ireland squad so good?

They have good players?

Good players with out doubt, and the use of the "project player" route (Lowe, Stander and Gibson Parks just a couple of hugely successful ones)

The other bonus is that they "mostly" play for Leinster so train with each other week in week out...play together and can manage theyre playing time etc.

Some moan about that but hey its working both at Champ Cup level and International level for Ireland so whos to knock it.

But is it really working when you get to the top level? How many World Cups have Ireland won (how many World Cup semi finals have they made)? They can rightly show their 6 Nations form and point to their No1 world ranking, but until they have won the World Cup against the Southern hemisphere teams, no one is going to rate them as the actual best team in the world.

Likewise Leinster in the Champ cup, despite being able to effectively pick an Ireland XXIII being beaten by La Rochelle in back to back finals reinforces the opinion expressed by some that they are chokers at the top level. The financial strength of the game in Ireland allows them to keep all their top players playing at home where their game time is strictly monitored, etc; they can recruit project players to fill any talent gaps, and they can employ the best coaches. But ultimately all the money does is give them the best opportunity to do as well as they can, but the best has consistently not been good enough. So I would go with the Ireland squad is good, but not "so good".

nlpnlp wrote:But is it really working when you get to the top level?  How many World Cups have Ireland won (how many World Cup semi finals have they made)?  They can rightly show their 6 Nations form and point to their No1 world ranking, but until they have won the World Cup against the Southern hemisphere teams, no one is going to rate them as the actual best team in the world.

Likewise Leinster in the Champ cup, despite being able to effectively pick an Ireland XXIII being beaten by La Rochelle in back to back finals reinforces the opinion expressed by some that they are chokers at the top level.  The financial strength of the game in Ireland allows them to keep all their top players playing at home where their game time is strictly monitored, etc; they can recruit project players to fill any talent gaps, and they can employ the best coaches.  But ultimately all the money does is give them the best opportunity to do as well as they can, but the best has consistently not been good enough.  So I would go with the Ireland squad is good, but not "so good".

Meh, Leinster have still won the second most champions cups of all time and are up there with the most final appearances. Losing the cup by a point against a good side is more an indication that you are a good side too than not. As for the world cup at the last two world cups when Ireland have been at their strongest they have faced NZ at the quarter finals and yet at the last RWC they were within a whisker of winning that game.

The world cup for me isn't the be all and end all anyway like some people like to make it out to be. I personally feel that almost all international matches count and its a bit disingenuous to suggest they don't. Cup competitions like the RWC are great at deciding who is the best at winning knock out cup competitions but probably aren't the best format for deciding who the best side really is given the side of the draw you are on can have a massive bearing and given the fact that every team has a different route to the final. If you truly believe that the RWC definitively decides who is the best in the world then you should probably be prepared to believe that Argentina and England are better than France and Ireland but that wouldnt make much sense.

Last RWC, Ireland beat the winners and were a whisker away from beating the other finalist. Their failure doesn't make them anything but a very good side.

My personal opinion is that they are a team that consistently has very good players, are extremely well coached and organised, but maybe lack the one or two truly X-factor players that would put them 'over the top'. Obviously the likes of Dories and vdF are cracking players, but are they the best in the world in their position? In the conversation yes, but not clearly better than anyone else. The last absolutely undoubted world class player Ireland had was BOD, but since then they've shown what is achievable with 15 / 22 very good players.

Furlong and Sexton were World Class at their best.
I would accept neither were at their peak at the last world cup

Last RWC, 6 of the 8 teams that made the QFs were very close to each other in performance terms.

Only two games were decided by more than one score - Wales losing to Argentina and Argentina losing to New Zealand.

South Africa famously won all their knockout games by 1 point; arguably any of NZ, France, Ireland or England had enough to win the tournament had a couple of moments gone the other way.

For instance, the Boks were very lucky that Etzebeth didn't pick up a red card for his tackle on Atonio in the QF - which was almost identical to the one that (ultimately) earned Owen Farrell a red in the Wales warm up game. That one decision alone could have produced a completely different tournament outcome.

Of the teams in contention, though, I'd argue that Ireland were the ones who looked least likely to pull off a win. I remember feeling that the game was slipping away from them in the second half. I would say that they had two key weaknesses: 1) over the past 8 years they have tended to have a very good gameplan, but not enough backup options when they come up against a team that's worked out how to counter it; 2) the years finally seemed to tell on Sexton, who looked a bit off his best when it came down to it.

geoff999rugby wrote:Furlong and Sexton were World Class at their best.
I would accept neither were at their peak at the last world cup

I might agree regarding Furlong - certainly one of the players as an England supporter I always wished was one of ours (always though the same about Paul O'Connell, as the ultimate PITA to play against).

Sexton for me even at his best falls a little short, although that might be because the first half of his career overlapped with Daniel Carter, as one of the true all time greats...

geoff999rugby wrote:Furlong and Sexton were World Class at their best.
I would accept neither were at their peak at the last world cup

For me Dan Sheehan is the best hooker in the world. I wouldn't swap him for anyone else.

Good shout - certainly the equal of his contemporaries

Unfortunately yet again despite having pretty much every advantage possible, come the big game Ireland's best players came up short against Toulouse. It isn't a question of bottling it - they just weren't good enough. And I don't think they can have any complaints about the refereeing as they seemed to get most of the decisions (Caelen Doris seems to have inherited Ritchie McCaw's cloak of invisibility).

Individually there are some great players, but collectively there is just something missing.

nlpnlp wrote:Unfortunately yet again despite having pretty much every advantage possible, come the big game Ireland's best players came up short against Toulouse.  It isn't a question of bottling it - they just weren't good enough.  And I don't think they can have any complaints about the refereeing as they seemed to get most of the decisions (Caelen Doris seems to have inherited Ritchie McCaw's cloak of invisibility).

Individually there are some great players, but collectively there is just something missing.

Lol, Carley was unfortunately quite bad in my view. He and his team missed missed quite a number of obvious things. Possibly one of the the worst refs around at the moment.

I'm not sure what the advantages you refer to are but I'm sure its nothing that hasn't been whinged about ad nauseum before.

Was at the match and enjoyed it, very entertaining. Definitely the two best team in Europe and it doesnt hurt too much to lose to a great side like Toulouse. 15-15 at full time wasn't much of a surprise.

The Spurs stadium was very nice but it took ages to get into the stadium, very very slow access and impossible to get a drink. After queuing for ages the pie I got was really good to be fair. It isnt really suitable as a rugby stadium though as the in goal area is tiny.

There also wasn't a mens toilet anywhere on the level I was on, was told the best way was to go down to the lower tier. Wasn't that impressed with the stadium for those reasons but otherwise its very nice and super modern. London transport in general is also a headache, Stanstead express was cancelled and replaced by an 90 minute bus instead of the usual 45 minute train the day I left and there were similar transport issues to Heathrow. Flights in and out were super expensive as was accommodation.

Hopefully the EPRC spreads the finals out a lot more. Five finals in England and none in Italy and just two in Wales, Scotland and Ireland together is not acceptable especially for a tournament that is apparently founded on merit.