Editor's Note: This transcript was automatically transcribed, so mistakes are inevitable. You can contribute by proofreading the transcript or highlighting the mistakes. Sign up to be amongst the first contributors.
This week's weekly pothole is Shane Hagen. For all our Patreon users, we have 20 minutes of extra bonus content available to you from this episode over on Patreon, as well as the full interview with Shane Horrigan. For everyone else, here is Shane Horgan on the weekly blog.
Potholes and penguins with Barry and Driveby. Now, delighted to welcome to the show for the weekly pothole, Mr. Shane Horrigan, now the Touhy. Ladd's right had a disagreement on second captains a few weeks ago. And it was it was lovely listening.
I was listening to the Touhy and trimbach said something like, how do we judge in these these Irish Timoner? We do. We want them to be, you know, very expansive and proud of us. But at the same time, we know we need them to not be too risky, don't play too much ball and kick a little bit more. And I was there. Oh, that's a good point. Tranby and then Shaggy comes in and he came back with a roar.
Yes. We want to do both of those things.
And he was there. He's doubling down, is doubling down. All the chips were in. Oh, chips are in every push on the table. I do. My credibility at that point was just about to go out the window. So you got to go hard.
That's where we're psyche's.
He'd come on to my territory under the captain's podcast. I was like, no, no, no.
I was it was a culture shock for me because any time by and I would spend maybe ten, fifty percent of our our shows discussing rugby, analyzing, if you will. And it was a culture shock for me because we've never once disagreed.
I'd say the most confrontational thing anybody's ever said is, oh, I can see what you mean, like just politely disagreeing, like really passive aggressive.
But nothing makes for good broadcasting then consensus.
Yeah. Yeah, I know. You're probably right. Yeah, you're right. Yes. There was none of that.
It was I was loving it. It was great. And to be fair, you both had had very good points. And it's I think it was after the French match. Was it before the English match.
It was after the Welsh game. Oh was it. Well, just France in France. Yeah. Yeah.
And, you know, you were both kind of disappointed, but still hopeful in your voices. But now after the Georgia game, she and I haven't heard you talk to that old.
What are your thoughts?
Actually, the Georgia game, it was so bizarre and I don't know how to analyze it. You know, the first half I did think I saw some shoots of hope, you know, especially that try and the ball dropped off by. And who was it who dropped the ball off the Santa farro? Yeah, I just saw that's exactly what we want to be doing in that area, because too often we're just one go around the corner, round the corner and go pick and go pick and go.
And against the good teams, we turn the ball over. I guess the bad teams we score tries. And I think, well, if this is something new, if this is a new departure for trying something else and we try it against the better teams, I think we'll have real success. I was really buoyed by that. I thought our kicking game was a bit better, that we were kicking for territory and not afraid to kick the ball out, go after the line.
So a couple of things are not bad.
And then the second half just absolutely collapse into into rubbish. So it couldn't say they couldn't connect a couple of phases. So I couldn't even see what they were trying to do from a patent perspective or from a, you know, overall philosophy perspective. And it was kind of really worrying because it was a huge amount of nervousness and and, you know, what's been described as performance anxiety around the game. And that shouldn't be the case with Georgia.
I find it really, really hard to watch the second half.
Whenever we got on to talk about it, I kind of realized I don't think I really concentrated or watched that second half at all. It was so bad. I think I must've just been on the phone the whole time because I couldn't remember much of what happened.
It was so boring. It was the most boring forty minutes of rugby I've seen in a long time. Having said that, the first half, there were there were moments where it looked, you know, that little I know you can appreciate this, Shuggie, with the forwards come around the corner and a little bit of a crossover.
He's bottum. Yeah, but did you notice they did it like four times in a row.
Their oh is the one thing, right.
I make sure it counts. Schrems, you've hit the nail on the head there. That's it. They've they've done something. They've trained for one element they've practiced and then that's it. Like it's variation and it's and it's then taken the options on the variations as well. And I'm just a little bit worried that we've got a coach and a number of players now that are all about being diligent and hard working and tough and a great aggressive and abrasive. And we're not thinking in that slightly more sophisticated way every time we got the ball because we've shown against England, our teams in Europe against Sarasohn.
And certainly against teams like South Africa and I think a ways and times as well going into that areas just not very smart for us. So we're not going to get a good result.
So what would you suggest? You know, what would you like to see or have seen Farrell do when he took over? Because there was a lot of, you know, the reasons that people put him in. There was consistency, right, to keep George Schmidt's ideas going, but they had stopped working right at the time the World Cup had come along. So what would you have liked to have seen him from from the bat, let's say, from the Six Nations in February?
And that's the key issue, that he was a continuity coach to come on and keep on doing what Joe Schmidt was doing at a time when Joe Schmidt was at the top of the world. But that change happened really quickly. And I actually think that Joe Schmidt would be a better coach to adapt to the new circumstances. But instead, I think what what Antifa has done is just continued on and maybe tweaked a little bit, but not significantly enough. I think you've got to think about things in almost wholesale change.
And I'm not talking about wholesale change in players because we only have a limited to the players. But we I think we really need to look at having two first receivers. So two playmakers, somebody who's really comfortable with clopping in a faster receiver. If the if the flyhalf is on the deck, somebody who's very demanding of the ball and a channel wider and can make decisions out wider, whether that be, you know, bringing in other players and forwards or linking wider to the wings and fullbacks.
And then I think we roll into the sort of player that Tyburn is, a player who's, you know, I think a real thinker of the game. So every time he gets the ball, he's thinking about what is the best move I can put on here? Is it pass? Is it, you know, drop the ball off? Is it taken inside shoulder? Is it offload the ball? A guy with a sophisticated skill set and I think we should be building around those type of players and that type of philosophy, which is quite a departure from what we've been doing.
OK, so Kieran Farley's name has been thrown around quite a lot. I know he hasn't played a huge amount, but he's played 12 for he's been quite impressive. And obviously board members and Mongo doing such a good job for New Zealand and Slade might have that that option for England outside Farrall or when third plays outside Forde. So is that what you're suggesting? Like at the moment, especially the weekend we were, in my opinion, two twelves in in the centre, which I you know, I think Farad has been playing a thirteen, but I really see him as more of a twelve.
I'm not sure I'd like to hear your opinion on that. But is that is that kind of what you're suggesting, someone like like hearing from Olly? Yeah, it is I think he'd be a real option and I'd like to see the way he plays is a caking option as well. I think that's one of the things that we've seen develop over the last 18 months, even a little bit longer, that the the requirement that outside or backs or bikes outside the tent have to be able to kick the ball.
And England have really capitalized on that over the last two years. And Ireland has unfortunately come Acropora at them because of it. So, you know, having that having someone you can distribute at 12 again, someone who can sit in at 10 and direct things when the tent is not around, I just think it opens up a completely different set of possibilities. And, you know, if you look at the the type of players we have and particularly the ball carrier as we have, I think we would really benefit from that, that sort of system.
And I would have liked to seen it quite a while ago. And the perfect person I would have thought for that role was Jobi Carbury when he was first. And I just thought, you know, even to you, a year, 18 months ago, you had sex in a 10 Joey Kabia, 12 as a second playmaker. And I think you've got a world of trouble for any defense.
And what about Ringrose could do that, didn't he?
No, I don't think he could not 12. He's a different type of player and am not sure the same rule.
Like I'm not saying change position, but just sends out a little bit more responsibility to get him up at first receiver in the other side of the rock.
Yeah, I'd love to see him do that, but he doesn't seem to be the type of person who pushes himself forward into that type of role. It's almost when the ball comes to me, I'll do what I do and I do it really well. And he does. And I don't think, one, we have enough plays where we get the ball into his hands or two, he's maybe demanding enough of it. And I think one of the things that all of us benefit from when when Brian was playing at 13 was the coaches consideration that he's our best player.
Let's get the ball to him. And what moves our what gameplan do we have to have to make sure he gets as many touches as possible? Now, I don't think anybody is really looking at outside Sexton to see how can we get the ball to those channels and do some damage out there. I actually don't think there's enough demand personalities to say, why isn't the ball coming out here more often? I'm stand on my wing or I'm starting a fullback or some other outside centre.
I'm getting nowhere near the involvements I should be.
Hmm. Where do you reckon that came from? The Joe Smith era? Like we're suffering the consequences a little bit of maybe the Joe Schmidt era where lads were almost afraid to to make mistakes or like, you know, step or step up a little bit too much or that they were it was so structured and so set in stone what they were doing that lads were afraid to express themselves by themselves and step out of line. And now we're seeing Andy Farrell suggesting maybe he wants to go down that line, but that the players are so out of practice soon at that maybe they haven't developed that side.
I'd be interested in what Jim has to say about this, because that was never my experience of being coach of the Joe Smith. Now, I wasn't coach the international level by hand, but it was never a case of of fearing getting the ball. And he was very demanding on wanting you to accept responsibility. But there did seem to creep into Ireland near the end that the players were so preoccupied with not making mistakes that they weren't willing to accept an acceptable amount of risk.
I mean, we've talked about it a few times with with Schmidt. He I think he's another level for any other coach I've ever I've ever worked with.
And it's because the detail and the reason why he was there's stuff that teams are still doing now with that little play in the back in the inside, one or two other things that he introduced, he came up with them.
He was so creative, so innovative. So I find it strange that people think that what he implements in the team is is kind of constrained or narrow minded or it's just the complete opposite of what I what I imagine. Schmidt and I, it's a shame that things finish the way they did with him. But up until that he had so much success that I think it's a really that's a real shame that that's where he's considered so true.
Where did that narrative come from? Because I've heard it everywhere you look, you hear murmurings come out from from players. I think personally, like I'd hear players saying, Jesus, it was a nightmare and can wait till it's gone. And obviously, you know, you will be name anyone like that. But that's genuinely where it comes from.
It's unpleasant. I'm not saying be in being coached in that environment was really uncomfortable. Really unpleasant in this way. Danielsson find it unpleasant.
It is difficult and I don't know if this part of Murray came out today and said the channels of communication are much more clear, much, much more effective in the new regime. And he the example he cites was a young player can no stop in a walk through and say, well, let's stop. I don't know that it's not that a player.
I couldn't say that, although they couldn't back in the previous setup, but they just never did. You never, ever went into a walk through not knowing your stuff. Occasionally, whenever it happened, they were shamed and like it was the worst thing ever. So that never happened again. Like it was put on that. But on that.
Should they not know their stuff in the walk through? Exactly. No. So I think and I think the problem might be here that it's maybe easier for players. But hang on a second. Look at the results. LUDs, you know, it might be easier.
You might be might be under pressure to know exactly what you're doing. And I thought it was a some really dangerous examples of that against England a couple of weeks ago where there was a researcher from the very first restarts at half time, there was no block pillar in order to protect the kicker, our actressy.
Yeah, I do remember that, that no one's going to notice. Yeah, there was there was the whole game. The whole game. The accuracy at the breakdown at the moment is terrible. Like that's why we would turn the ball over. That's where the ball is low. That's why I was on stage in the second half. We had in the first half we had six men in Iraq and England had none. So it's all right. And oh, no, he's overloading us with details.
We need a bit more freedom. That's not what freedom is. You know, the freedom to to play loose. It's almost counterintuitive. You actually have to be precise. And that will allow you to manipulate the picture to be able to play loose. But you can't play loose if you've got forty men on the field in a defensive line known in the rock and you run into the area that they defend most viciously, it's insane.
Yeah. How were you ever coached by by Plumtree. No, so wasn't so he he came in, obviously, Juju brought him, Andrew, to create an environment that's tense, right? It definitely gets the best out of the players, but it can't be unpleasant. It can be tense. And there's a stressful ness of camp. Right. And I can appreciate that. The last movie sort of go ahead is nice to have things a little bit more relaxed and in a setup like South Africa with Rosia Ausmus, certainly they weren't relaxed whenever they're trained and they're kicking the crap out of each other non-stop.
But they do seem to have and we talked about this with O'Connel. There's the scientist in the art, the artist, and there's a slightly more slight, more emphasis on, I suppose, in your emotion, do the talking last detail. But that's fine for South Africa. And if you've got one hundred and twenty kilometers here and are going to run over the blood, we can do that.
Yeah. We just don't have the makeup to do it. So we have to think through the game. We have to outsmart opposition and we have to do that by detail.
We don't have that guy that you dumped the ball off to and to make a break. You know, we don't have them at the moment. We did in a period we had Draycott could do that. Even Darris could do it. Then you have definitely someone like Feris would make a break out of nothing. Sean O'Brien could make aphorist. It could make a break.
I think Dave Wallace, you dump them off the ball and make yards. But if you look at the ball carriers we have at the moment.
I'm not sure that we have now you could give the ball to C.J. on Iran, not someone hard. But I don't know if he'll find a gap as well as he should and then offload the ball, so I kind of forgot the point I was making there. Plumtree Whenever you get someone like Plumtree you add that into an already detailed environment, then you can add a layer of just slightly more, a slightly more human nature or a slightly more relaxed nature.
And I'm not saying you go from one extreme to the other, I'm just telling you slightly compliment what is already a good setup. And Plumtree I thought that that Simon should be dead, that I thought Pharrell did that. But maybe you just Miss Schmidt a little bit.
Yeah, like there is all that, but then, you know, the the simple side of how you break down a defense is what is the overriding, frustrating thing for me when I'm watching them against England and against every side.
You you have a little bit of microplace like the one you're talking about, the one the Faraldo, which is which is nice. But what outside of that do you think we could be doing? Like what I've enjoyed watching Monsur just to say we're a little bit this this year. You know, we could we could see how poor Monsur have been over the last few years and creating stuff. And it's always been the argument that, oh, maybe we don't have the players to do.
And you watched them over the last two months and they have literally switched and a switch and just going, OK, from now on, nine times out of ten, we've got a back door option. We're hitting the back door option, we're throwing the pass. Whereas before nine times out of ten, they would have taken the hit on or Dave Kuskokwim might have carried instead of giving the pass. And it was always it's one of those things where you you don't know what's missing until you actually see it being done.
And he wants to do it. I know it's against pro 14 teams that aren't as good, but it's it's given the whole team a new lease of life and a new confidence. And they mightn't go on and win the competition, but they're going to be better players from it. So that's what I would have liked to seen Ireland doing, is just trying to bring in a new style of of playing in terms of breaking teams down, or we're not just having these WANTO carries or shifting on these simple passes because it's so obvious.
And that's not something that should take a season or a year to do, which people have been claiming right now.
And our number one issue is one out runners, because it's the area where every team defends the best. Why are we running into that area? It's the most difficult yards. As Jim says, we're not Sarafa Commute's. We only have so much body weight and so much power. So we do have to think a little differently about how and where we break the line. And that is the area to do it. But for some reason, we keep on doing on.
And the other thing that exacerbates the problem is and again, I really like your insights on this because I can't figure it out why we spend so much time given the ball in that one channel to a stationary pod. They aren't actually even holding onto the ball. They actually stand up flat way for the ball. And I know, you know, they say recycling fast puts one of those recycler fast. And even if they do, it doesn't matter because everyone's still on their feet.
So why are we stationary? You know, if you look at the most successful carriers that have at the moment and we see the New Zealanders we see in South Africa, we see Saracen's. And as a result, England, they as players hit the ball a pace like they're going to break the line. And there is a little bit more risk of all of that. It means you have to challenge your skills a little bit more. And also you've got another player flying towards you potentially.
But the momentum that you have with taking some speed onto that ball will allow you to to break to break the line, especially if you do it outside that first channel.
Yeah, that that feeds off the touchline. Off nine is the most thankless curry you'll ever make. And there's very few guys can do it really well. The first person pops into my head as Nic Williams or Marcel could see you.
Sorry for the the colloquial references that.
So there's only a few types of laughs can do that. If you can't do it, you can't just hair as hard as you possibly can into a space, and yet not even necessarily in a quick ball and and feet up to your nine and get going again. Then you have to kind of look at the step points. And I think it's whenever players get caught in between, run it really hard and spaces and trying to play, make and try to tap on.
Or there's a lot of plays back inside actually at the minute. But I think is whenever they get caught in between, they their run hard. I mean neither play and they actually just get smashed. And it looks as though yeah.
And I get your point. And that initial phase after the rock on the touchline is a difficult one and maybe you do have to go in there. But I still think there's an opportunity to do something a little bit more interesting. But I would say more than that, when we're in the phase after that phase dreamz or the phase after that, the treys after that. And that's when we see that slow parred, flat standing and then giving the ball.
It's just it's just depressing.
I think it sucks. The energy stocks, the energy out of the viewer, even watching that, just the only thing that was not what was said there by going out the back.
I don't think going out the back is the option either is. I don't think that's the silver bullet that we're looking for. And the example I'm thinking is Ireland at Twickenham not the most recent time in in March time. And if we went out the back a few times. Actually, I think we we forced a few times on to allowing you just come up and smash large, long passes and that was just read time and then we didn't get anywhere with that.
So we're not going anywhere whenever we're trying to be creative in tight and we're not going anywhere. Whenever we throw those risky passes, I just don't know what the answer is.
But I think this is really the crux of it. And there's no silver bullet for this. This is an overall philosophy and a game plan and a trust in players to say, you have to read what's going on here in terms of a game. And I don't I'm not with these players. I think we should be going out the back door and going wide every time. And we play a wide, wide pattern. I'm not interested. Not rugby either.
I don't find that. I don't think it's particularly successful. I don't find it really interesting either. But I do see a proper very game plan where if the picture that you're being shown, no matter where you are, the pitch is that there's big space. And behind that, you boot the ball into that space. You know that that you go after it. And if it goes off the pitch, it goes off the pitch. I don't mind.
But then you're in the 20 to the opposition. Have the ball, they kick the ball back to you. What's the best case scenario for them? Right. Just say they keep it in touch. And if they go as far as the halfway it goes to our winger, we've got a winger fullback. We should have a cent or two back and have a full back on the opposite side. We can actually switch to intimidate, to get into midfield or go back down the short side.
All of a sudden we've got a bit of broken play. We can get an off load there. We're in behind. And there's something interesting happening like we've seen, you know, with the England team do many times. So, you know, I'm not a slave to we should be moving the ball wide and we should be playing Babar's rugby. Not at all. But I do think that we need a real variety in what we're doing. And if something's working, keep on doing it and something isn't working.
You don't do it.
The game moves in styles and goes in fashion at times. Right. Someone will reinvent a new way to play. Schmidt was always quite good at doing that right when he really tightened up our rocking. And that idea of playing five really, really hard, really tight and effective phases. And then we we either break the line or we get rid of the ball. Eddie Jones always seems to be able to adapt his game plan to to evolve or to play against whoever they're up against and get on top of them.
And have we taken a step backwards now? Would Farrell like is he do you think he has the ability to to. Is he that innovative that he could actually come up with a game plan? Or is it are we kind of seen his hand here that maybe doesn't work to this point?
He doesn't look like an innovator now. If he loses the game, if he wins the game in Scotland, I think we'll sort of bundle along as we have been and Irish teams have done before. So actually, it's a decent result. We had a win against Wales, causing then a strong France strong George, our tricky and I could continue on that could go on to the World Cup almost, you know, that sort of sequence of events or we can sort of lose.
And I spoke about this earlier today, that Andy Farrell comes into the RFU because he'll have questions to answer and go. Right. This is my plan. This is my strategy for changing Ireland from the team they are at the moment and to a team that can be more successful in the World Cup than they were last time round and get back to the level of success they had against Joe with Joe Smith and Declan Kidney before him. So that's that's something that may have to happen up to this point.
I haven't seen any indications that he is a massive innovator. I've seen that he's someone who's had a good apprenticeship under Joe Smith for what is somewhat a data game plan now and someone who brings a passion and a personality to his coaching because he's definitely admired by the players. I think they like him, I think is well respected. But I just wonder if he's a bit of a go hard. Our coach is that I don't think go harder is what we need at the moment is that my cat's job is in attacking go to Brazil.
I know you don't know what goes on behind closed doors, but that's kind of the more frustrating thing for me is when you see Sepi stuff, when they get a left hand scrum and they they go down blind or just take the wrong option pretty much every time what we've seen over the last few weeks, they're gone where who's who's in charge here? You know who's making those calls? I mean, if that's got to be the attack coach, right?
Yeah. You'd think it's not looking good for the coach.
I don't want to be super negative about this because I you know, I love watching Ireland play. And I do. As I said, I do think it was a couple of shoots and hopefully they're reinforced this week and we can see some positive there's a positive outlook. But I do have massive concerns about my guys are attacking coach.
I'm not sure where his pedigree has got him. The position of the role is in which is a brilliant role for any coach, like it's a dream role to be attacked or backs. Coach for Ireland. It is one of the prized jobs in world rugby. And my car came from three or four years in Italy and didn't win a game. I'm not saying that's all his fault, but not winning a game is not great. And before that he was part of an England team and coaching set up that imploded in the world and the World Cup and didn't get out of their group and their home World Cup.
So I'm not really sure where his pedigree lies here. Now, hopefully he can prove prove is wrong, but up to this point, he hasn't. Trims. It's funny, he's not usually the one. He's not the one people are talking about at the minute. And I think you're right to highlight that because everybody's talking about Pharrell and he seems to be going under the radar until, you know, Shaggy's.
I think this relaxed environment that it's all coming out. So we've asked you for it now. I think we've got enough to shake.
Shane, you're not going to be allowed into the event or your accreditation has been revoked.
And is the hardest part is that when you have to go to be honest about it. But, look, we've we often get a bit too positive on this and or or be passive about it. And, yeah, I get frustrated when I'm watching it. And so I think it is important to to vent. And there is a place where you go too soft on the team or on a coaching ticket.
And I think, you know, everyone pays their money to watch them play. So I don't get me wrong.
You know, I think I'm not just saying this is a completely a coaching issue. I'm not saying that it's one that can't be addressed as well, because coaches get better through time as well. And, you know, everyone does. So you're not the same person as you are in your job the first year as you are your second or third year. And you do evolve and develop. But I think it's becoming clear that this ticket does need to evolve and develop.
And also it can use a hand from the players as well, because no matter what the game plan was in that second half, as we touched on earlier, no matter what it was, it didn't matter because because bring a couple of faces together to try and implement anything shaggy or not.
Actually, that kind of you know, being a pundit now requires a level of honesty that I don't think either myself and Barry have. Right.
But hi, it's fine.
Talking about coaches is one thing, but how how long did it take you after you finished playing to feel a little bit more comfortable just being honest and saying what you thought.
And I always tried to say what I thought and what I definitely was viewing everything through a prism of a recently retired rugby player as well. I am now in some ways, I think that was useful and it's useful for us all. It's because why we can give particular insights that players are people who haven't played rugby on international level before, can't give. And you think about the sort of mindset and you think about the reasons behind the errors. And I still try to always put that forward as well.
And so, you know, I wouldn't be one for ad hominem attacks on someone, you know, on their character or, you know, just to say someone's rubbish or. Exactly. So I wouldn't use that pejorative language. But what I would say is they have done why they have done something wrong. And if they have done something wrong and it's over a period of time, then like anyone in any any job, there's an importance for honesty, of critique.
And also there's very often a result of of underperformance, and that is criticism. And potentially it's like losing your place and like everybody is subject to that in their career as well.
Yeah, I find it really useful to say stuff like he'll be disappointed with that.
Yeah. Yeah. It's not like them. I haven't seen much of that before. I got I got a hard time after the to lose all star game whenever Jacob didn't have a great game then have a great game.
Even then he had a shocker.
Yeah. Because I did it with you and I did it with you. And you remember we spoke about this and he had an whole game. That's right. And the week. Yeah. And like we all know how good softball is. And he actually reinforced that for me at the weekend, although he is quite frustrating a lot of the stuff he does. But he can beat the first man so easily. It's ridiculous, you know, as almost as easy as anyone I've said.
But, yeah, he had an absolute shocker that day. And you were like, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. He look very well in the jersey. He really felt that jersey. Well he got stabbed by.
Tony Winger going under and I said something like, no one's going to be critical of of of Jews again, step by, but everybody gets step by Kobe. And then I got and then he got stopped again for a second try. Right. Still no one has. Right.
But someone tweeted me after the game, Hammer and me just said, why do not just call it as you see it? And he accused me of trying to keep the players sweet so that they would come on our board and he's not wrong.
My reply to that what I reply, though, to be fair, was that, yes, of course, he got stabbed.
Of course, he's it's bad defense.
But if I just say, oh, he got stabbed that terrible from James Stockdale, every every Tom Dick and Harry Stone at the pub with a pint in their hand, it's going to be able identify that. I think maybe as you're alluding to there, what happened? Who's the opposition? What's the context of what happened? Did he carry some baggage from a previous defensive play? Was there a tag on? I think that's where we can provide a bit more context.
And listen, there's also people make big errors. And we all did. We all did. You know, so that happens as well. And sometimes it's inexplicable and you go, right, that's just bad. You know, it's they've lost a concentration or just a lack of skill. And and that's fair enough as well, because not everyone is brilliant all the time. And, you know, a critique of a player doesn't mean that they're a bad player.
It just means they've potentially made an error or done something wrong or done something that we would disagree with.
But I do get a bit I feel your pain does. I think there's a kind of an expected or an assumption that, you know, we get together with all these players and we know them all and, you know, we're hanging out for beers and wouldn't say anything bad about them or anything critical about them. And also that we have this loyalty to our province. That means that we can only see it through a lens, through the prism, which I know was the case here, James.
But I'm talking more about you and me here as well. I do. I do find it really frustrating, though, and I, I go out of my way to try and kind of play devil's advocate or just present another perspective. Jacob, I think it's a lazy I know we're told by Jacob specifically, but as a as an illustration for other other examples, Jacob, I think it's a lazy narrative to say he's very good in attack, but his defence is poor.
And I think if you show one example of that and one commentator with some sort of some sort of sway or influence presents that I think that plant the seed in the viewer's mind and other pundits mind. And then if you see one thing that then adds to that, then boom, that's it. And that's your reputation. I think it's a bit lazy always to go to that. And I find that really frustrating because as a player, I know how easy it is to get a reputation.
For one thing, if you do it once or twice and then for that to stick, I find really frustrating. So maybe only because maybe have retired more recently. I'm more sympathetic to that. I don't know. But I find that annoying.
Well, let's talk through that, Troy. For Georgia, he was the he was the last line of defense. It's happened to him a few times recently or in the last 18 months. And it's the one thing he said he was working on was actually not selling. I'm not buying the Domy in that circumstance because he drifted off. Now, I can't imagine he was getting a call to drift off under those circumstances because in fact, it's a bit of burn.
I think he did really good step then probably burned. I didn't think he was ever making that tackle. He didn't well, I didn't see any overhead then. He could step on the inside. And that guy, I thought that guy Dommett. So there was obviously a two on one. I don't know who was that guy specifically. But anyway, he made Jacob read off and Billy Byrnes got there. So him getting there and be in a position to get stabbed shows that he was in a position to tackle.
I think he I think under those circumstances, you have to attack the ball carrier and make and make the pass because there's always the chance that ball goes to deck. There's also, you know, if you look at the way Byrne was getting back, he was almost blocked out by the trail runner. So he would have actually been on I think he could have been he could be in a better position to make the tackle there as opposed to scrambling to get across as a last line of defense on the on the on the breakthrough.
Yeah, I don't all the way. So I don't I can't remember specifically.
So we can't really play. Second I to sit on the fence between the two. I felt it was he delayed or went a split second too early. He, he, he kind of oh I don't know, you see some players doing that where they almost know that he's not going to get the pass.
It's hard to describe. I love the. Like you, I know both of you are like cowards, brings you want to slag me for defending the Australia player, but I'm slagging the other player.
Yeah. So it's kind of nice. I must be the worst case scenario for you terms that is. Oh, my God, I can't do I have to pick one here.
And I noticed you called him Burn instead of burns. You tried because the identity of the player to become a player.
You should have heard him last weekend when he slated them after the England game because it was the star players. And then after the Georgia game, when there was five All-Star players playing, he was like, I thought I thought, yeah, they're playing really well.
Anyway, you know, it's not only our lads did all right today. It's pretty much you listed the five of the top McClosky Hendee Jacob liberalist in the five.
And then I also listed David Humphreys and Neil Dokes. Well, on the court.
Oh, my God, that's an unbelievable performance. All I've covered so well at it. I've only been into this for the crime. I don't. This is not true. It isn't true. Yeah, it was awful.
Look, that's the most in depth we've ever gone. I'm exhausted. I'm sorry.
I feel as if I brought some rugby to your rugby podcast here. Yeah. Which is not what you want. You've heard of the first time I.
The first time I ever did a second, captain. Sure. What you Shane? I think I did an analogy with East, the film and Monster being against racing. And you were looking at me like I was there was something wrong with me, wasn't it.
It was Jaws. And by the way, it was so good they clipped it up and that way hear it every time I do the bloody analysis, it's like I've never made one of their own beds. And you're like the key one for me. Now we know what you're doing, your own vodcast.
Well, we have to thank your brother Mark, because he is the reason that we do this podcast, because he had me on that and then that sounded OK. And then we were asked to do a slightly wacky rugby show, and I picked the weirdest person I could do with. And there's Andrew Trimble. So thank you to the Hargon family for four.
Sent this up for us on that.
Is the show coming out tomorrow then? I'm not sure. I'm not sure any of our listeners know he's got the George where is George Gibney show? He's kicking back off tomorrow.
Yeah. How proud of you that that's it's been hard listening, but unbelievable work.
Yeah. I can't I can't tell you how proud I am. I was amazingly proud of my brother anyway for loads of different reasons. But this has been something quite extraordinary. I know it's been an incredible commitment for him over a couple of years. And it's, you know, it's a very difficult subject as well. So it's taken its toll. But I think the way he's dealt with it, the I think the subtlety and the gentleness, the kindness and how he's allowed people to tell their stories.
And I think that's come across so strongly. I'm incredibly proud of them. I think it's a bring up piece of work. And I'm looking forward to the second last episode tomorrow and then the last episode, the following week. And yeah, he's a great lad. Yeah, it's unbelievable.
And he is a great lad. He's been brilliant help for us as well. Just just shown us what to do.
Basically, we haven't a clue what we're doing and telling me what to do. So yeah, they go up to him and. OK, thanks for coming on and we really appreciate you taking the time and for school us on our rugby stuff.
So thanks. Thanks a million guys and good luck with the podcast. I'm delighted you're back open on the airwaves again. And any time if you want to take it down a level that's full, yeah.
You can bring me on and we could do some analysis.
Yeah. Brilliant. I see it but I. Bottles and penguins is an independent production. What I mean by that is. It may sound like we don't know what we're talking about. You might even think Barry's hardly played professional rugby in Derby likes hurling. We want you to think that it takes a lot of preparation to sign this unprepared. We work very, very hard. And what we do, we want to make this show the best podcast in the world.
Just a fiver, a month. You can help us do that.
Cotopaxi and account conference, slash potholes and penguins. And you can help me make these two fools look and sound even better than I already am, making them look.