I find Ruddock very up and down tbh. Leinster have put a decent amount of time and patience into him and he hasn't necessarily delivered, maybe he can but I think you would be taking a chance that might be better used on a local lad?

There is no local lad with the right profile as in age and position. O'Brien will be but he's a few years off the position even with fast-tracking. As for Ruddock I think he is a player who needs to be playing week in and week out to get the best out of him. Forgot about Stander he's another to keep an eye on.

phatguerilla wrote: Good call on copeland he's a handy player.

McKeon is only 22 and only established himself last season but prior to that did get a few sub appearances, there's no reason why SOB couldn't get a few games off the bench at the very least this season. (sidenote would like to see Qualter and Dillane get a lot more goes off the bench this season too - I forget who but didn't one of these start an A game at 8 does anyone know how that went?).

I find Ruddock very up and down tbh. Leinster have put a decent amount of time and patience into him and he hasn't necessarily delivered, maybe he can but I think you would be taking a chance that might be better used on a local lad?

Qualter is well of the pace of first team rugby and Dillane is too skinny

Good call on copeland he's a handy player.

McKeon is only 22 and only established himself last season but prior to that did get a few sub appearances, there's no reason why SOB couldn't get a few games off the bench at the very least this season. (sidenote would like to see Qualter and Dillane get a lot more goes off the bench this season too - I forget who but didn't one of these start an A game at 8 does anyone know how that went?).

I find Ruddock very up and down tbh. Leinster have put a decent amount of time and patience into him and he hasn't necessarily delivered, maybe he can but I think you would be taking a chance that might be better used on a local lad?

All depends on how we go this year, we need to improve to get a decent calibre of player in and our budget could also be cut with the debt

One player I keep coming back to is CJ Stander at Munster. He'll only have 1 year to go to become IQ, and he's not getting much games at all, he must be very frustrated. Cab play anywhere across the back row, best position is 8. Niall Ronan picked ahead of at 7 this week, couldn't go down well with him.

Robin Copeland is someone we should definitely be tracking. Can play 6 or 2nd row as well

Would add real pace to our back row

George seems to be a shadow of himself this year and it's hard to see him getting a new contract. An while McKeown is quality we need at least two No. 8's to compete in the league. So who could we replace him with? Here's my picks.

1. Copeland (Cardiff) - He's I.Q. and being doing well at Cardiff. He might be interested to come back to Ireland to push for International recognition.

2. Donal Leavy/Jack Conan (Leinster) - These guys are meant to be beasts in the Stephen Ferris moles, with Leavy ahead of Conan in the pecking order. The rumour is that if SOB/Heaslip goes to France one of these two will be fast-tracked to the first-team. With there relatively young ages I'd grab one and offer him a senior contract.

3. Rhys Ruddock (Leinster) - He picked Leinster when he had other options but he hasn't being able to best McLaughlin for the 6 jersey. He can play 8 just as easily and is captain material. One to keep and eye on.

4. The Real Sean O'Brien (Connacht) - We know he's quality but is next year to soon? I think so but some gametime wouldn't hurt either.

Any other options?

Thanks Pinky, so out of the 2014's I would say Matt Healy is one that we must keep. A few of the older guys will probably stay on for another year anyway.

Swift4Prez, I've added the info from your list at the top to the new "Stats" section on the main menu. Should make it handy to access when all the debate about signings kicks off again in the new year
I added international eligibility to it as well. Shout if anything is wrong up there.

[quote="its_phil" post=18167

Research and talking to the incredibly knowledgeable people in supplement stores is all that is needed when starting on them.[/quote]

Bit of a bold sweeping statement there its_phil, especially the bit about trusting sales staff that are often on commission.

Have been in a “health food” store in Swords and heard a staff member advise a young lad about 16 that he should be taking about 10g of Creatine a day for the exercise programme he as on.

Best advice I remember was 0.03g per kg, so if his weigh was about 70 kg, that is just over 2 grams and there was no info given to the lad, that I could hear, that he should avoid other sources of caffeine or any advice on the possibility of cramps at night.

You obviously know a store where they really care about the customers but all I am saying is that they are not all like that and not all Gym’s take their supervision of minors as seriously as they should.

Fourdogs wrote:

swift4prez wrote: I think there is some justification against the 15 year olds going into the gym, especially as outside the structure of something like the Academy’s there is little or no control on what they are taking, Supplements, Proteins and Creatine all have their place but can never give you the strength that you get for hard work and without the hard work all you get is bulk and size without the strength and ability to take the hits.

When it is in a controlled environment there should be no issue. The hard work is the gym if you want to bulk up, outside of manual labour. If your taking supplements and not going to the gym all your doing is making your piss more expensive. Research and talking to the incredibly knowledgeable people in supplement stores is all that is needed when starting on them.

Surely its time for this thread to be closed off. Its going back to signings for 2012/13 and now our squad for 2013/14 is settled.

On swiftys original point re size matters and early gym work I think that is already happening in the A schools. I see regular posts on my old schools Facebook page telling each years players(from 2nd yr up) when to report to the gym in UL for their weights sessions. I think introducing weights in a controlled, informed environment is a good thing.kids should be discouraged from working out unsupervised though and their weight and muscle mass carefully monitored.

Exile - the separation by weight thing is interesting; this sounds like the rugby equivalent of what Spurs and a few other clubs are trying in football, whereby players move up to the next age group on their birthday, even if they are still eligible for their current age-grade team for the rest of the season. This means that over a 2 year period a player goes from being the youngest member of a squad to the oldest. The cost is a (slight) decrease in competitiveness for their underage teams, but the benefit is that they don't have 80% of their players with birthdays in January through March anymore, the implication being that the arbitrary nature of age cutoffs was losing them half of the talent they should have been retaining.

I like the sound of this. I was born in June so was always lumped in with the kids 2 years older than me in soccer so I never had the physicality to do well eventually I got sick of it and quit. Happened to lots of kids my age and while I was never a great soccer player I'm sure there were some outstanding kids who could have been great if they had being born in march and not july.

I actually saw a statistical survey showing that most footballers in pro academies are born within a certain window of the year, were they are the eldest kids in any age group they move up into, as there born within certain dates, so they were usually the most developed physically meaning they got picked more, passed to more etc. and while that is not a bad thing your losing your late developers who will come through with a little more time and patience.
Rugby isn't the worst for that to be honest. I have a cousin in Ulster who tells me that the local GAA club is bleeding kids to the Rugby team as the GAA coaches don't know and don't care to know any of the kids names outside the match XV while in the Rugby Club win, lose or draw they'll stick on all the kids for at least 10 mins of a game.
Alot as always depends on the coaches. There are some coaches out there who are to busy inflating there ego by coaching a winning U11 team than focusing on training/developing the kids and getting them to enjoy a sport.

Two follow on points from the boys posts:

Exile - the separation by weight thing is interesting; this sounds like the rugby equivalent of what Spurs and a few other clubs are trying in football, whereby players move up to the next age group on their birthday, even if they are still eligible for their current age-grade team for the rest of the season. This means that over a 2 year period a player goes from being the youngest member of a squad to the oldest. The cost is a (slight) decrease in competitiveness for their underage teams, but the benefit is that they don't have 80% of their players with birthdays in January through March anymore, the implication being that the arbitrary nature of age cutoffs was losing them half of the talent they should have been retaining.

Fourdogs - on your "hard work" theory and kids taking shortcuts, I'd say the preponderance of farm boys in front rows across the world probably proves your point.

swift4prez wrote:
next year id say we need to look at bigger players, ireland as a rugby nation dont have big players as were afraid to send young 15 year olds to the gym and make them lift weights.

henry, 5ft 11, 16st 5
B murphy, 5ft 10, 14 stone
D mcsharry, 6ft 1 1/2, 15st 3.[/quote

swift4prez
Like Salmson, for the most part I agree with a lot of what you say but have a few comments.

All the time in the world in the Gym would never have turn Brian or Henry at 5ft 10/11 into a Roberts at 6ft 4, that is just DNA.

When I played in the 90's as a prop at 5ft 10 and 17 st, any player at like Cuthbert at 6ft 6 and 16st 5 was a 2nd row and not a wing.

I think there is some justification against the 15 year olds going into the gym, especially as outside the structure of something like the Academy’s there is little or no control on what they are taking, Supplements, Proteins and Creatine all have their place but can never give you the strength that you get for hard work and without the hard work all you get is bulk and size without the strength and ability to take the hits.

Take the best No 13 in rugby, BO'D is 5ft 10 & only 14st 10 but I would rather be hit by a run away train than him.

One of the interesting things about Oz Rugby Union was that they were testing a new system were they weren't separating kids not by age but by weight. They were finding that the Polynesian kids who mature faster were killing everyone else and there was a huge drop out rate so with the new system it separates the bigger kids from the smaller meaning that the big guys can't just rely on their weight or bigger stature and must actually focus on speed and technique if they want to make a difference. Something similar could be tried out in Ireland at kids level which could keep kids interested and be a great boon down the road when the playing field levels.

swift4prez wrote: if i have learned anything of late from watching rugby, its, big guys win matches.

It's rare I disagree with you about anything vehemently, but this time I do:

On big players - Philips and Davies are awful examples, their size compensates (to some extent) for their skills deficit. I'll see your big players and raise you Conrad Smith.

Ditto England's big players at U20 level. At this level size is even more of a disguise for a lack in ability; Rodney was the standout player in the world at this level a few years ago. I couldn't give a stuff where Ireland finished in the U20 WC, if Ruddock delivers us 3 international quality players like Henshaw, Marmion and Olding from this years panel, then job done.

As for bulking up 15 year olds in the gym, that's nuts. Look at the effects of carrying too much weight on BOD a few years ago. POC's pubic bone issues are more usually seen in bodybuilders, specifically those carrying more weight than their skeletons should bear. Once kids stop growing throwing weight on is easily (and safely) accomplished.

Lastly, Henry was an emergency stopgap signing who did quite ok, and once released could not get another professional contract, he was pretty much finished when he got here.

What I think we need to work on:
1) Basic skills. That Schmidt could take a HEC winning team and make such improvements to their passing is an indictment of Irish and Northern Hemisphere rugby.
2) Style of play at underage level. Bish bosh schools rugby played under the same pressure levels as HEC knockout stages costs later on. To go back to the Henry example, the problem was players not running supporting lines. At provincial level, Connacht and Munster are appalling in this respect and have been for years, though Leinster and latterly Ulster seem to be getting with the program.
3) Redefining what constitutes game management. If seems in Ireland game management starts and ends with Pienaar, ROG, or Parks kicking a team back into their 22 or dropping a goal. While this has its place, did you notice the difference between the baby blacks and Ireland in the U20s? When Farrell was in the bin, NZ scored 13 points, when they had a man in the bin we got 3. And lost a game we were in control of for the other 60 minutes. This kind of cluelessness extends all the way to the national team.

Anyway rant over, I'll get back to agreeing with you tomorrow