Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Featured
2024 Guinness Six Nations
Where do teams stand ahead of the WC?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Leinster Fan" data-source="post: 938651" data-attributes="member: 76349"><p>I can't agree with the idea that we failed to sufficiently develop depth during this tournament. </p><p></p><p>If you go through the team</p><p>1: Kilcoyne got loads of exposure, has broken into the 23 where a few years ago he wasn't near the squad. Major success.</p><p>2: Best was poor generally, we need to try other options, we gave Cronin a start against Italy and it didn't go well, but to be fair we didn't have Best on the Australia tour and that really helped depth there for Herring and Scannell </p><p>3: Porter and Ryan both got decent exposure</p><p>4/5: Can't see how anyone could criticise us here, Dillanne and Roux both got loads of time. I'd have liked to see more Beirne but he was injured to be fair. Toner's age is hardly a problem, he's playing the best rugby of his life and he's had barely any injuries in his life.</p><p>Backrow: We're sorted here, the problems are more about form than personnel, Conan actually looked really good in green as well which was great to see. It's not like there are players in the country who are better than the 8 guys we have</p><p></p><p>9: Schmidt might have shown to much faith in Murray, but he deserved a chance to show show better form. Like Australia with Best, we went through November without him so maybe Schmidt felt we didn't need to experiment too much. And to be fair as has been pointed out our 2/3rd choices were injured for some or all of it.</p><p>10: Carbery got most of the game against Scotland, Carty had a few chancesnans they both looked good. </p><p>Centre: Farrell got a few games. Not great though, I want Henshaw back. We're really overreliant on Ringrose.</p><p>Back three: Larmour looked good. Other than that we can't realistically replace Stockdale but that's never been on the cards. Larmour established himself as a viable alternative to Earls/Kearney and there's an off chance he might replace one of them. Henshaw was an obvious mistake here.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Ringrose I suppose but he's been injured a lot. Maybe when he's out we need to look at Carbery playing 15. It won't matter if like against Wales our backs don't get any meaningful opportunity to attack because we're getting destroyed up front and 9/10 are having career-worst performances.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Leinster Fan, post: 938651, member: 76349"] I can't agree with the idea that we failed to sufficiently develop depth during this tournament. If you go through the team 1: Kilcoyne got loads of exposure, has broken into the 23 where a few years ago he wasn't near the squad. Major success. 2: Best was poor generally, we need to try other options, we gave Cronin a start against Italy and it didn't go well, but to be fair we didn't have Best on the Australia tour and that really helped depth there for Herring and Scannell 3: Porter and Ryan both got decent exposure 4/5: Can't see how anyone could criticise us here, Dillanne and Roux both got loads of time. I'd have liked to see more Beirne but he was injured to be fair. Toner's age is hardly a problem, he's playing the best rugby of his life and he's had barely any injuries in his life. Backrow: We're sorted here, the problems are more about form than personnel, Conan actually looked really good in green as well which was great to see. It's not like there are players in the country who are better than the 8 guys we have 9: Schmidt might have shown to much faith in Murray, but he deserved a chance to show show better form. Like Australia with Best, we went through November without him so maybe Schmidt felt we didn't need to experiment too much. And to be fair as has been pointed out our 2/3rd choices were injured for some or all of it. 10: Carbery got most of the game against Scotland, Carty had a few chancesnans they both looked good. Centre: Farrell got a few games. Not great though, I want Henshaw back. We're really overreliant on Ringrose. Back three: Larmour looked good. Other than that we can't realistically replace Stockdale but that's never been on the cards. Larmour established himself as a viable alternative to Earls/Kearney and there's an off chance he might replace one of them. Henshaw was an obvious mistake here. Ringrose I suppose but he's been injured a lot. Maybe when he's out we need to look at Carbery playing 15. It won't matter if like against Wales our backs don't get any meaningful opportunity to attack because we're getting destroyed up front and 9/10 are having career-worst performances. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Featured
2024 Guinness Six Nations
Where do teams stand ahead of the WC?
Top