It's so frustrating watching Ireland now. You know once they get near the 5 metre line, they are not going to score.
Anyone else get annoyed with RTÉ? WhenMurray went off " the hill just got steeper". Screw you Nugent, I thought Marmion did great.

Bet against Ireland with wales outscoring Ireland by 13 or more. Shock horror wales did it. So I am better off but Joe cut this barrelling rubbish, if you wouldn't mind

Have to say I am at a loss with Joe schmidt. So he does not include tommy Bowe in his squad and has the potential reserves of trimble, Gilroy, toh, Conway. The second trimble gets injured bowe is back and has leapfrogged all the newbies. Jesus Joe, you an utter pain in the arse. Indeed if payne hadn't had some bruising out of the treviso game last weekend he would have started in front of ringrose this weekend. What can you do to cut a break with such a coach

Dillane was mistakenly left off the list earlier he's in the squad for the rest of the 6 nations

Hard to argue on form really imho.

But not sure re Quinn Roux. Perhaps concern re the English scrum or just want him for training?

Was it a sidestep or a sidesaunter?

I guess Joe doesn't like sidestepping props

ThisYearWillBeDifferent wrote: Kieran, Tiernan and Quinn in 36-man Ireland squad.
www.connachtrugby.ie/ireland-squad-for-f...rounds-of-6-nations/

Poor enough representation but based on form we don't have a lot to complain about.

Kieran, Tiernan and Quinn in 36-man Ireland squad.
www.connachtrugby.ie/ireland-squad-for-f...rounds-of-6-nations/

Darragh wrote:

Mark Mostyn wrote:

Darragh wrote: I think for me it is not a direct question of entertainment vs getting a result. It's not as transparent as that for me.

It's about having tools to score points. Tries are worth more than kicks.

The good teams typically have a back three that get tries. Look at Scotland this year and the transformation in their results that their back three are striking regularly?

We haven't had that type of back three with any great consistency and i wouldn't say we have a potent back three.

It's just my opinion though but I would prefer to pick players who can strike as opposed players perceived to make the minimal number of mistakes.

IMO our problem isn't so much personnel as it is our awful attacking strategy in the opponent's 22. Italy weren't able to defend our one-out runners and our wingers got 5 tries in that game. We can't bludgeon better teams like that. i'm surprised people were so enthusiastic people were about the France game given the amount of wasted red zone opportunities. I'd be interested to see our stats for scores from visits to the opponent's 22 since the 22. It reminds me of Wales bashing away at 14 man Australia for 30 odd phases in the World Cup.

That's a fair point actually. I look at the way Henshaw is deployed for Ireland and he is effectively a non-passing battering ram for Ireland. It was much more creative with us.

Still, I would love to see more exciting players given a go in the back three. Hopefully we see some interesting excitement during the summer tour, but Schmidt is so pragmatic and conservative at times, I don't hold much hope.

Think the problem with the Japan tour is that nothing is proved. You end up highlighting players, highlighting really good plays, but ultimately a poor tour against poor teams. So nothing is achieved. An then it reverts to the norm.

Darragh wrote:

Mark Mostyn wrote:

Darragh wrote: I think for me it is not a direct question of entertainment vs getting a result. It's not as transparent as that for me.

It's about having tools to score points. Tries are worth more than kicks.

The good teams typically have a back three that get tries. Look at Scotland this year and the transformation in their results that their back three are striking regularly?

We haven't had that type of back three with any great consistency and i wouldn't say we have a potent back three.

It's just my opinion though but I would prefer to pick players who can strike as opposed players perceived to make the minimal number of mistakes.

IMO our problem isn't so much personnel as it is our awful attacking strategy in the opponent's 22. Italy weren't able to defend our one-out runners and our wingers got 5 tries in that game. We can't bludgeon better teams like that. i'm surprised people were so enthusiastic people were about the France game given the amount of wasted red zone opportunities. I'd be interested to see our stats for scores from visits to the opponent's 22 since the 22. It reminds me of Wales bashing away at 14 man Australia for 30 odd phases in the World Cup.

That's a fair point actually. I look at the way Henshaw is deployed for Ireland and he is effectively a non-passing battering ram for Ireland. It was much more creative with us.

Still, I would love to see more exciting players given a go in the back three. Hopefully we see some interesting excitement during the summer tour, but Schmidt is so pragmatic and conservative at times, I don't hold much hope.

Yeah it'll be interesting to see how Leinster use him. It's so established now that he'll be bashing it up from first phase ball (especially 5m scrums) that teams will be preparing for just that so if we use him as a decoy we should be able to catch them out.

Who knows what'll happen with the Japan tour, I think Zebo is our only back 3 player with a hope of travelling so it's not like he'll be forced into making changes

Mark Mostyn wrote:

Darragh wrote: I think for me it is not a direct question of entertainment vs getting a result. It's not as transparent as that for me.

It's about having tools to score points. Tries are worth more than kicks.

The good teams typically have a back three that get tries. Look at Scotland this year and the transformation in their results that their back three are striking regularly?

We haven't had that type of back three with any great consistency and i wouldn't say we have a potent back three.

It's just my opinion though but I would prefer to pick players who can strike as opposed players perceived to make the minimal number of mistakes.

IMO our problem isn't so much personnel as it is our awful attacking strategy in the opponent's 22. Italy weren't able to defend our one-out runners and our wingers got 5 tries in that game. We can't bludgeon better teams like that. i'm surprised people were so enthusiastic people were about the France game given the amount of wasted red zone opportunities. I'd be interested to see our stats for scores from visits to the opponent's 22 since the 22. It reminds me of Wales bashing away at 14 man Australia for 30 odd phases in the World Cup.

That's a fair point actually. I look at the way Henshaw is deployed for Ireland and he is effectively a non-passing battering ram for Ireland. It was much more creative with us.

Still, I would love to see more exciting players given a go in the back three. Hopefully we see some interesting excitement during the summer tour, but Schmidt is so pragmatic and conservative at times, I don't hold much hope.

Darragh wrote: I think for me it is not a direct question of entertainment vs getting a result. It's not as transparent as that for me.

It's about having tools to score points. Tries are worth more than kicks.

The good teams typically have a back three that get tries. Look at Scotland this year and the transformation in their results that their back three are striking regularly?

We haven't had that type of back three with any great consistency and i wouldn't say we have a potent back three.

It's just my opinion though but I would prefer to pick players who can strike as opposed players perceived to make the minimal number of mistakes.

IMO our problem isn't so much personnel as it is our awful attacking strategy in the opponent's 22. Italy weren't able to defend our one-out runners and our wingers got 5 tries in that game. We can't bludgeon better teams like that. i'm surprised people were so enthusiastic people were about the France game given the amount of wasted red zone opportunities. I'd be interested to see our stats for scores from visits to the opponent's 22 since the 22. It reminds me of Wales bashing away at 14 man Australia for 30 odd phases in the World Cup.

I have high hopes for Stockdale.

I think for me it is not a direct question of entertainment vs getting a result. It's not as transparent as that for me.

It's about having tools to score points. Tries are worth more than kicks.

The good teams typically have a back three that get tries. Look at Scotland this year and the transformation in their results that their back three are striking regularly?

We haven't had that type of back three with any great consistency and i wouldn't say we have a potent back three.

It's just my opinion though but I would prefer to pick players who can strike as opposed players perceived to make the minimal number of mistakes.

dobby wrote:

Borders no.2 wrote: Really in terms of entertainment its a poor value for money

Very much so. Where I was, if Ireland did anything the crowd were waiting to go ballistic. Very much why they love Ringrose. At least he adds some excitement to this team