2015-16 Season

[Snipe Watson]

The only thing that will keep Paddy out of the second specialist 10 slot is the fact that he is not kicking for Ulster. I remain convinced that Paddy is not place kicking for Ulster for some unpublicised reason, possibly to do with his back. It's not as if Ruan is in deadly form with the boot and it would be foolishness to have anyone else kick.

[Dave]

There are too many guys ahead of Diack and he doesn't cover 7, especially not at international level. It's Hendo who will be the guy covering 2nd row and backrow. Heaslip, SOB, POM, Henry and Murphy will be on the boat. If Ruddock can get fit, he would be going too. Tommy O'Donnell will be hard to leave out also.

[mikerob]

I can definitely see wee PJ being in the RWC squad as the starting OH for the games against Romania and/or Canada.

Joe may have Madigan on the bench as a replacement for Sexton but I don't think he trusts Madigan to start and run a game.

[ruckover]

Madigan doesn't start at 10 enough for Leinster to justify starting him there for Ireland. He has next to nothing on his CV to suggest that he can manage a big game from fly-half, and any evidence that does exist isn't exactly complimentary. Joe rightly knows that unless he starts 10 for Leinster on a regular basis it would be foolishness to start him there for Ireland - if he did think he was a starting option he would have started against Italy in the 6N.

[Snipe Watson]

Madigan doesn't start at 10 enough for Leinster to justify starting him there for Ireland. He has next to nothing on his CV to suggest that he can manage a big game from fly-half, and any evidence that does exist isn't exactly complimentary. Joe rightly knows that unless he starts 10 for Leinster on a regular basis it would be foolishness to start him there for Ireland - if he did think he was a starting option he would have started against Italy in the 6N.

Correct Ruckie and furhtermore, if Joe saw Madigan as a 10, he would be starting at 10 for Leinster. No question about that.
What punters need to realise is that it's no longer a 15 man game and bench players are not necessarily the second best in their position as it was in days of yore. Bench players are there to cover multiple positions if possible and Madigan is there as a utility back. Paddy only plays 10.

[Dave]

It's a start fight between PJ and Keatley.

[Rooster]

Madigan doesn't start at 10 enough for Leinster to justify starting him there for Ireland. He has next to nothing on his CV to suggest that he can manage a big game from fly-half, and any evidence that does exist isn't exactly complimentary. Joe rightly knows that unless he starts 10 for Leinster on a regular basis it would be foolishness to start him there for Ireland - if he did think he was a starting option he would have started against Italy in the 6N.

Correct Ruckie and furhtermore, if Joe saw Madigan as a 10, he would be starting at 10 for Leinster. No question about that.
What punters need to realise is that it's no longer a 15 man game and bench players are not necessarily the second best in their position as it was in days of yore. Bench players are there to cover multiple positions if possible and Madigan is there as a utility back. Paddy only plays 10.

Lets face it though it should not take a lot of game management to beat either Canada or Romania

[Snipe Watson]

Madigan doesn't start at 10 enough for Leinster to justify starting him there for Ireland. He has next to nothing on his CV to suggest that he can manage a big game from fly-half, and any evidence that does exist isn't exactly complimentary. Joe rightly knows that unless he starts 10 for Leinster on a regular basis it would be foolishness to start him there for Ireland - if he did think he was a starting option he would have started against Italy in the 6N.

Correct Ruckie and furhtermore, if Joe saw Madigan as a 10, he would be starting at 10 for Leinster. No question about that.
What punters need to realise is that it's no longer a 15 man game and bench players are not necessarily the second best in their position as it was in days of yore. Bench players are there to cover multiple positions if possible and Madigan is there as a utility back. Paddy only plays 10.

Lets face it though it should not take a lot of game management to beat either Canada or Romania

Correct and Madigan may start against one or both of them, but that still doesn't make him second choice flyhalf.

[Deraless]

This frickin footie better not go to penalties

[MattMo]

Correct Ruckie and furhtermore, if Joe saw Madigan as a 10, he would be starting at 10 for Leinster. No question about that.
What punters need to realise is that it's no longer a 15 man game and bench players are not necessarily the second best in their position as it was in days of yore. Bench players are there to cover multiple positions if possible and Madigan is there as a utility back. Paddy only plays 10.

Madigan would be out of his depth internationally at 13, wing or fullback, even though he used to regularly play at 15. This was confirmed by Felix Jones being on the bench for Ireland, rather than a wing option.

That makes him a 10/12 option only, making me wonder why he would be better than PJ, as he has been playing 10/12 for Ulster in the past few games, and looks more than comfortable at 12.


MattMo

[jackthelad]

Correct Ruckie and furhtermore, if Joe saw Madigan as a 10, he would be starting at 10 for Leinster. No question about that.
What punters need to realise is that it's no longer a 15 man game and bench players are not necessarily the second best in their position as it was in days of yore. Bench players are there to cover multiple positions if possible and Madigan is there as a utility back. Paddy only plays 10.

Madigan would be out of his depth internationally at 13, wing or fullback, even though he used to regularly play at 15. This was confirmed by Felix Jones being on the bench for Ireland, rather than a wing option.

That makes him a 10/12 option only, making me wonder why he would be better than PJ, as he has been playing 10/12 for Ulster in the past few games, and looks more than comfortable at 12.


MattMo

Goal kicking is the difference. PJ isn't that great any more....... Doak, Ulster's laughably titled 'kicking coach'...(anyone who watched him butchering the art of goal kicking at Malone will wonder how) has ruined his natural style.

[Russ]

Doak out

[Fly Half]

The argument for PJ not being part of the 31 man RWC squad goes as follows:

He only plays 10 and he's not a good goal kicker.
Madigan plays 10/12/15 and is (usually) a good goal kicker.

Jackson isn't an impact sub because he's so similar to Sexton. Madigan offers something different from the bench.

Jackson could manage all the pool games adequately up until le crunch against France - so could Madigan. So the only game where Jackson would be superior to Madigan in the pool stages because he's better at game management would be against France. So with only 31 players in the whole squad is it worth including Jackson just in case Sexton couldn't start against France? That is a luxury that Joe is unlikely to invest in, especially as it might allow him to take 9 locks/backrows rather than 8. If Sexton gets a tournament ending injury, Jackson can always be called in to take over at short notice.

The same argument applies to Diack - consider the locks and backrows.
The two starting locks and bench are likely to be POC, Toner and Henderson - if one of them gets injured who steps in?
The three starting backrows and bench is likely to be POM, SOB, Heaslip and Murphy. That leaves only one more squad place to cover both lock and backrow. Is it better to have a specialist like Tuohy who only plays lock and will only rest either POC or Toner, or a utility like Diack who can rest any one of five players depending on circumstances. Joe has already played Diack at 6, 8 and lock so it looks to me as though that is who he is considering.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

The argument for PJ not being part of the 31 man RWC squad goes as follows:

He only plays 10 and he's not a good goal kicker.
Madigan plays 10/12/15 and is (usually) a good goal kicker.

Jackson isn't an impact sub because he's so similar to Sexton. Madigan offers something different from the bench.

Jackson could manage all the pool games adequately up until le crunch against France - so could Madigan. So the only game where Jackson would be superior to Madigan in the pool stages because he's better at game management would be against France. So with only 31 players in the whole squad is it worth including Jackson just in case Sexton couldn't start against France? That is a luxury that Joe is unlikely to invest in, especially as it might allow him to take 9 locks/backrows rather than 8. If Sexton gets a tournament ending injury, Jackson can always be called in to take over at short notice.

The same argument applies to Diack - consider the locks and backrows.
The two starting locks and bench are likely to be POC, Toner and Henderson - if one of them gets injured who steps in?
The three starting backrows and bench is likely to be POM, SOB, Heaslip and Murphy. That leaves only one more squad place to cover both lock and backrow. Is it better to have a specialist like Tuohy who only plays lock and will only rest either POC or Toner, or a utility like Diack who can rest any one of five players depending on circumstances. Joe has already played Diack at 6, 8 and lock so it looks to me as though that is who he is considering.

He's not going to take only 2 people who can play 10. The choice is between Keatley and the GP.

[Rooster]

The argument for PJ not being part of the 31 man RWC squad goes as follows:

He only plays 10 and he's not a good goal kicker.
Madigan plays 10/12/15 and is (usually) a good goal kicker.

Jackson isn't an impact sub because he's so similar to Sexton. Madigan offers something different from the bench.

Jackson could manage all the pool games adequately up until le crunch against France - so could Madigan. So the only game where Jackson would be superior to Madigan in the pool stages because he's better at game management would be against France. So with only 31 players in the whole squad is it worth including Jackson just in case Sexton couldn't start against France? That is a luxury that Joe is unlikely to invest in, especially as it might allow him to take 9 locks/backrows rather than 8. If Sexton gets a tournament ending injury, Jackson can always be called in to take over at short notice.

The same argument applies to Diack - consider the locks and backrows.
The two starting locks and bench are likely to be POC, Toner and Henderson - if one of them gets injured who steps in?
The three starting backrows and bench is likely to be POM, SOB, Heaslip and Murphy. That leaves only one more squad place to cover both lock and backrow. Is it better to have a specialist like Tuohy who only plays lock and will only rest either POC or Toner, or a utility like Diack who can rest any one of five players depending on circumstances. Joe has already played Diack at 6, 8 and lock so it looks to me as though that is who he is considering.

He's not going to take only 2 people who can play 10. The choice is between Keatley and the GP.

I think FH is on the right track with his thoughts, 31 is a pretty small squad and Joe will bring in cover if needed through injury, that is good as he will keep those players active at home so if Jackson is in reserve he will actually be playing for us to keep him match fit.