Munster Rugby - Semi Conscious, the Series Finale??? - 2020/21

[wixfjord]

I don't think starting Casey/H Byrne together for their first test match is a good idea and H Byrne is ahead of Healy in the pecking order.

I think this tournament, and that word should be used loosely, should be used as a development tournament.

The likes of sexton, Healy, Murray, Earls, POM, Stander etc should not be given game time.

With regards to the pecking order, I suppose that is subjective, and the only opinion that matters in terms of selection will be the selectors.

However, IMO, Healy is further along the line than Byrne, and is more likely to get meaningful game time over the next 2 years, unless he passes his brother out.

Well it's not really subjective though since H Byrne was picked as a development player just like Craig Casey right?

Why do you think Healy is further along than Byrne?


You can use the tournament as a 'development' opportunity without leave out 6 of your key leaders imo. As you argued last week, you need experience AND youth in a team, particularly at test level.

[munster#1]

I don't think starting Casey/H Byrne together for their first test match is a good idea and H Byrne is ahead of Healy in the pecking order.

I think this tournament, and that word should be used loosely, should be used as a development tournament.

The likes of sexton, Healy, Murray, Earls, POM, Stander etc should not be given game time.

With regards to the pecking order, I suppose that is subjective, and the only opinion that matters in terms of selection will be the selectors.

However, IMO, Healy is further along the line than Byrne, and is more likely to get meaningful game time over the next 2 years, unless he passes his brother out.

Well it's not really subjective though since H Byrne was picked as a development player just like Craig Casey right?

Why do you think Healy is further along than Byrne?


You can use the tournament as a 'development' opportunity without leave out 6 of your key leaders imo. As you argued last week, you need experience AND youth in a team, particularly at test level.

Over the years we have seen these development players rotated a fair bit, and picking Byrne and not Healy as a tackle bag holder is not a clear indicator.
If he is selected ahead of him in a full squad, then you will know a coaches real thoughts.

I am basing my opinion on what I have seen of both players to date. Healy has looked a much more rounded player IMO.

Taking those players out is hardly starving a team of leadership. Many have suggested that Ryan should be captain already. There will still be plenty of experience in the team.
Ireland will learn nothing if they go into this selecting the usual squad.

With Sexton clearly in decline, we need to see if Byrne is ready to take the 10 jersey.
at 1. We have poor depth at the moment. We know what 100 cap Healy can do, but why about the other options.

We have a glut of backrowers that I would like to see given gametime, Ireland rely heavily on Stander, let’s see if any of the younger players can step up.

We seen this weekend that we are lacking quality behind our first choice in many positions. The drop off is massive in many positions. The only way to build depth is by giving players minutes at International level.

[wixfjord]

Byrne has been selected at least twice now in development squads, including in April. It's clearly a sign that, like Baird, Lowe, Casey etc he's thought of as high potential and is ahead in the picking order.

I mean that's not even in question. It's not like he's just picking random guys. The purpose is to choose high potential lads and give them exposure.

Funny enough, from what I've seen with Healy/Byrne I would say the opposite. Healy is physical and a great kicker, but hasn't much in terms of an attacking game of his own.

The reason Byrne is ahead of him in Farrell's eyes (and will likely usurp his brother), besides having more gametime is actually because he's more rounded. He has that kicking game but also is a serious threat ball in hand.

On the other point, we will also learn nothing if we take out all our leaders at one time and throw in a group of young guys to play England and Wales.

As you've said, we need a mix.

[wixfjord]

To ask a specific question, where exactly do you think Healy is 'more rounded' than Byrne?

[mildlyinterested]

Byrne's been rated higher than Healy all they way up and remains so, apart from of course some Munster people.

[ronk]

I don't think starting Casey/H Byrne together for their first test match is a good idea and H Byrne is ahead of Healy in the pecking order.

I think this tournament, and that word should be used loosely, should be used as a development tournament.

The likes of sexton, Healy, Murray, Earls, POM, Stander etc should not be given game time.

With regards to the pecking order, I suppose that is subjective, and the only opinion that matters in terms of selection will be the selectors.

However, IMO, Healy is further along the line than Byrne, and is more likely to get meaningful game time over the next 2 years, unless he passes his brother out.

With the financial crisis IRFU have right now, that might not be an option.

[munster#1]

Byrne has been selected at least twice now in development squads, including in April. It's clearly a sign that, like Baird, Lowe, Casey etc he's thought of as high potential and is ahead in the picking order.

I mean that's not even in question. It's not like he's just picking random guys. The purpose is to choose high potential lads and give them exposure.

Funny enough, from what I've seen with Healy/Byrne I would say the opposite. Healy is physical and a great kicker, but hasn't much in terms of an attacking game of his own.

The reason Byrne is ahead of him in Farrell's eyes (and will likely usurp his brother), besides having more gametime is actually because he's more rounded. He has that kicking game but also is a serious threat ball in hand.

On the other point, we will also learn nothing if we take out all our leaders at one time and throw in a group of young guys to play England and Wales.

As you've said, we need a mix.

You make some very good and valid points, we will just have to wait and see who wins the race to becoming a regular in the Irish senior squad. Great to finally have so many options, all while having Carberry hopefully to return.

I don’t think we need to learn any more. We have learned since the last World Cup that we need to improve.
I would love to see Ireland use this tournament to accelerate the development of as many players as possible.

Look what France and Wales to a lesser extend did during the 6 nations. It may have cost them this 6 nations, but the will likely reap the benefits further down the line.
Looking closer to home, just look why leinster have been doing for the last few years, and what Munster are doing right now.

Thankfully this is not the 6 nations, it is a nothing, hopefully one off tournament used to fill a financial gap.
If not now, then when do you try to rebuild a squad which requires a rebuild.

The likes of Byrne E, Kelleher, Baird, Dorris, Connors, JPG, Casey, Byrne R, anyone at fullback, need a run of high minute games. This would set the Irish squad up very well going into the next 6 nations.

[wixfjord]

Again though, it's not one or the other.

You can play your leaders throughout the series AND give young guys new caps.

The worst thing to do would be to lurch either way - continue to play the same 15 or throw in way too many debutants in one go.

[munster#1]

Again though, it's not one or the other.

You can play your leaders throughout the series AND give young guys new caps.

The worst thing to do would be to lurch either way - continue to play the same 15 or throw in way too many debutants in one go.

I suppose it’s different strokes for different folks.
IMO emitting the small number of players that I listed would not constitute wholesale changes, more like small tweaks. You would end up with a large number of your first choice players available, but you would give inexperienced players a large number of minutes at international level in positions where we need to develop depth or look to replace players who are due to age out.

Again, I respect your opinion, I just have a different opinion on how we should approach this largely meaningless tournament.

[dropkick]

If I was Farrell I'd bring both Healy and Harry in and give them game time in the upcoming games. Try give both experience with a view to playing at least one of them in the 6 nations.


I dont think theres much between the 2. They're both excellent kickers, have good passes, both look composed and cool. Obviously they'll both have their own strengths. I'd like to see more of them before judging. Healy has better hair it must be said. Harry is getting another game tonight which is great to see and Hawkshaw is another one who really impressed me.


Harry was clearly ahead for the U20s but Healy have come on a lot from working under Larkham and he's put on a few kgs too and would be over 15st now by the looks of it.

[wixfjord]

Again though, it's not one or the other.

You can play your leaders throughout the series AND give young guys new caps.

The worst thing to do would be to lurch either way - continue to play the same 15 or throw in way too many debutants in one go.

I suppose it’s different strokes for different folks.
IMO emitting the small number of players that I listed would not constitute wholesale changes, more like small tweaks. You would end up with a large number of your first choice players available, but you would give inexperienced players a large number of minutes at international level in positions where we need to develop depth or look to replace players who are due to age out.

Again, I respect your opinion, I just have a different opinion on how we should approach this largely meaningless tournament.

Ok, so would the following team be good for Twickenham then?

Byrne, Herring, Porter, Beirne, Ryan, JOD, Connors, Doris, JGP, Byrne, Lowe, Aki, Henshaw, Conway, Keenan

Because without Sexton, Healy, Murray, Earls, POM, Stander that's around about what we'd be looking at the moment.

That would be foolish to me, and would be artificially removing some of the guys who have actually won in Twickenham.

It's mad how your tune last week was 'Munster need to mix experience with youth' and this week it's 'let's remove our 6 most experienced players for these test games'

(How is taking 6 guys out of your 23 not 'wholesale' btw?)

[munster#1]

Again though, it's not one or the other.

You can play your leaders throughout the series AND give young guys new caps.

The worst thing to do would be to lurch either way - continue to play the same 15 or throw in way too many debutants in one go.

I suppose it’s different strokes for different folks.
IMO emitting the small number of players that I listed would not constitute wholesale changes, more like small tweaks. You would end up with a large number of your first choice players available, but you would give inexperienced players a large number of minutes at international level in positions where we need to develop depth or look to replace players who are due to age out.

Again, I respect your opinion, I just have a different opinion on how we should approach this largely meaningless tournament.

Ok, so would the following team be good for Twickenham then?

Byrne, Herring, Porter, Beirne, Ryan, JOD, Connors, Doris, JGP, Byrne, Lowe, Aki, Henshaw, Conway, Keenan

Because without Sexton, Healy, Murray, Earls, POM, Stander that's around about what we'd be looking at the moment.

That would be foolish to me, and would be artificially removing some of the guys who have actually won in Twickenham.

It's mad how your tune last week was 'Munster need to mix experience with youth' and this week it's 'let's remove our 6 most experienced players for these test games'

(How is taking 6 guys out of your 23 not 'wholesale' btw?)

I am not trying to claim that we would win this tournament, just starting that my opinion is that we should look at this as a development tournament.

Additionally that team is not far removed from what we had out against France, so no, I do not consider it as wholesale changes.

Given that this discussion seems to be going nowhere, and smiley emojis have now been introduced, I think it’s time to agree to disagree.

For me these are minor tweaks, with the core group still in place to bring on the inexperienced players, for you not so much.

It is ok if we don’t agree with one another, but it would be foolish, and a waste of time to keep dancing this dance.

[wixfjord]

Additionally that team is not far removed from what we had out against France, so no, I do not consider it as wholesale changes.

I mean, besides the fact you're missing four key starters, a former Lions captain and a guy who would probably be starting on the wing?

And replacing them with guys with probably less than 10 caps between all of them? Ah right.

I am not trying to claim that we would win this tournament, just starting that my opinion is that we should look at this as a development tournament.

For the third time now, you can use it as a development tournament while still interspersing the team with guys who give you the right balance of experience. It's not one or the other.

It is ok if we don’t agree with one another, but it would be foolish, and a waste of time to keep dancing this dance.

Yeah I agree on that. I've sort of given you the benefit of the doubt on her for quite a while, but you seem to like making a point, not really giving much evidence to back it up when challenged and then just giving the same strawman over and over!

You've also totally contradicted yourself literally in the last few pages of this thread.

[munster#1]

Additionally that team is not far removed from what we had out against France, so no, I do not consider it as wholesale changes.

I mean, besides the fact you're missing four key starters, a former Lions captain and a guy who would probably be starting on the wing?

And replacing them with guys with probably less than 10 caps between all of them? Ah right.

I am not trying to claim that we would win this tournament, just starting that my opinion is that we should look at this as a development tournament.

For the third time now, you can use it as a development tournament while still interspersing the team with guys who give you the right balance of experience. It's not one or the other.

It is ok if we don’t agree with one another, but it would be foolish, and a waste of time to keep dancing this dance.

Yeah I agree on that. I've sort of given you the benefit of the doubt on her for quite a while, but you seem to like making a point, not really giving much evidence to back it up when challenged and then just giving the same strawman over and over!

You've also totally contradicted yourself literally in the last few pages of this thread.

Ah come on bud, same straw man over and over? Please don’t act like this. If you don’t want to engage with me then feel free to ignore.

I have not contradicted myself at all. You are comparing apples and oranges here. Munster went into a game with probably 3 first choice players, a few squad players and a good number of inexperienced players, this is nothing like that.

I have given my point repeatedly, that I believe that we should make a small number of changes for this Mickey Mouse tournament, and I believe the changes I have suggested is a small number.

The core group are still in place to bring these players on.
2/3 of the front row, 2/2 of the second row, 2/3 of the backrow, The half back pairing will have 2/3 of the first choice back row from the 6 nation’s in front of them, and the first choice available centre pairing outside them, both with lots of experience.

For me this is a very small number of changes. To you not so much, which is fine.

You have just repeatedly said that my opinion is wrong without actually saying anything, I have attempted to politely as possible end this circular discussion a number of times, as I do not think you are willing to enter a discussion, but I did not want to get personal and say that, so don’t be so patronising saying that you are giving me the benefit of the doubt.

If you have an alternative opinion, by all means express it, but please don’t act like this. If you think you are of such a stature that you feel I need the benefit of the doubt, then please just stop engaging.

[wixfjord]

I've expressed my opinion fairly clearly I think. Numerous times.

So yes, I think I'll take your advice.

[Laighin Break]

Additionally that team is not far removed from what we had out against France, so no, I do not consider it as wholesale changes.

I mean, besides the fact you're missing four key starters, a former Lions captain and a guy who would probably be starting on the wing?

And replacing them with guys with probably less than 10 caps between all of them? Ah right.

Of the four "key" starters, there have been many calls on this forum and further afield to drop 2/3 of them (Stander, Murray and Sexton) and certainly to drop the former Lions captain too.
Stander has really upped it this season but I would definitely be happy to see Conan getting gametime instead of him.
Most people now seem to consider Murray not to be the best scrumhalf in the country, and plenty wouldn't even have him in their top 3, so a replacement there should improve the team.
Sexton is far off the player he once was and will continue downwards unfortunately. Can't imagine his moodiness is a help to the team either. Farrell simply has to start looking into finding a replacement.
Healy is the tricky one. Still comfortably the best loosehead in Ireland, still has a a few years left in him, and there doesn't seem to be an able replacement.
POM (former Lions captain) on the bench - I think plenty of other backrows would have bigger impact than he would.

[munster#1]

Additionally that team is not far removed from what we had out against France, so no, I do not consider it as wholesale changes.

I mean, besides the fact you're missing four key starters, a former Lions captain and a guy who would probably be starting on the wing?

And replacing them with guys with probably less than 10 caps between all of them? Ah right.

Of the four "key" starters, there have been many calls on this forum and further afield to drop 2/3 of them (Stander, Murray and Sexton) and certainly to drop the former Lions captain too.
Stander has really upped it this season but I would definitely be happy to see Conan getting gametime instead of him.
Most people now seem to consider Murray not to be the best scrumhalf in the country, and plenty wouldn't even have him in their top 3, so a replacement there should improve the team.
Sexton is far off the player he once was and will continue downwards unfortunately. Can't imagine his moodiness is a help to the team either. Farrell simply has to start looking into finding a replacement.
Healy is the tricky one. Still comfortably the best loosehead in Ireland, still has a a few years left in him, and there doesn't seem to be an able replacement.
POM (former Lions captain) on the bench - I think plenty of other backrows would have bigger impact than he would.

Some very good points there.
That’s just it, of the players that we are discussing, only stander and Healy could be considered to be players that are arguably at the peak of their abilities.
But when you look past them, there is a considerable drop off in quality and experience.
Sure you have Conan and killer available, but killer is over the 30 mark just like Healy, and Conan has had very limited time to develop at 8 at international level.

The important thing to note, is that even with these changes, we still retain the core group of the first team to assist any of the inexperienced players.

The purpose of giving the next generation game time over the listed players is not to get rid of them, but to develop their successors, with the view of having a stronger squad going into the next 6 nations.

[munster#1]

Good to see Shane Daly and Ryan released back to Munster.
Hopefully we will see both get some valuable games time this week.

There could be a good fight for the 15 jersey this season, especially given Gallagher’s performance last weekend.

[neill_m]

Benetton v Munster P-P on Saturday. More COVID cases in the Italian side's camp.

[munster#1]

Such a shame to see the match postponed.
Obviously from a serious point of view, it is terrible to hear of anyone contracting this virus, and I hope the effected players and their families are safe and well.

But, I have really enjoyed watching Munster over the last few weeks, and the prospect of a weekend without a game is annoying.

It will be interesting to see how this match gets rescheduled, the season is already fairly stacked.