Growing up I loved the television programme Only Fools and Horses and one of my favourite moments was when Trigger proudly pronounced that he had the same broom for 20 years, only to then disclose that it had 10 new heads and 12 new handles during that time. Same broom though.
The sketch resonated in the context of the Ireland rugby team. New players are coming through, a combination of injuries and cyclical turnover. Edwin Edogbo is an example of somebody being fast-tracked partly out of necessity but mostly due to his sheer size and, with it, his potential.
His modest body of work at club level reminds me of the way Paul O’Connell was introduced to the national team. Eddie O’Sullivan saw something then in the same way that Andy Farrell has identified something in Edogbo.
Did Ireland restore confidence ahead of Twickenham showdown?
Beyond the genuine new faces are refreshed ones: Rob Baloucoune, Jeremy Loughman, Thomas Clarkson and Craig Casey. This is a different-looking team from 12 months ago, never mind 24. However, if the system, the structure and the constraints remain unchanged, are we really looking at something new? Or are we just looking at a new handle on the same broom?
READ MORE
Against Italy, the dichotomy that Irish rugby faces in how the national side plays within the one game was there for all to see. In the first half it was possession-based, predictable and one that employed a lot of kicking off the back foot.
After the interval the clouded thinking lifted and Farrell’s side pursued continuity in keeping the ball rather than kicking it away, attacking space, more fluent and instinctive in their patterns. Tadhg Furlong and Tadhg Beirne offered examples of offloading that drew out the attacking instincts of those around them. Jamison Gibson-Park and Jack Crowley did the rest.
It felt like watching a different team. The game rewards teams that keep the ball alive. Bordeaux Bègles backs coach Noel McNamara’s words have stuck; “zero ruck” tries are the north star we need to be moving towards. Ireland took a step in that right direction after the interval.
There is lots of room for improvement but that should be exciting as well. My sense is that this is happening behind closed doors and away from prying eyes. The direction of travel is clear, even if the destination is still some way off. Which brings me back to the question of whether we’re asking the right things of this squad.
Farrell must ignore the external noise, and I think he will do that, and instead focus on the things he can control in both the way he wants the team to play and the players best suited to achieve those goals.
The Italian match provided plenty of information. Some players took their opportunity, others raised red flags in performance terms. In a World Cup cycle with 18 matches or so remaining before the tournament in Australia, that information is priceless, if it’s used correctly.
The Irish rugby landscape is not the same as in some of the other top countries. When we compare Ireland to France, England and South Africa we must acknowledge the constraints within our system. We do not have comparable depth to rebuild a squad the way France can, or to select for a specific game plan the way England do.
We produce a certain type of player profile, and every now and then you get an Edogbo. Outside of that, we must make the best of what we have. It is impossible to separate the player from the system that built them.
Gibson-Park’s impact against Italy was striking and instant, as he changed the point of attack. Ireland were up and running, literally. His pass selection and the timing of delivery is intrinsic to the tempo of Ireland’s attack. It’s difficult to replicate, which is why I’m advocating going against my own instinct about not wrapping players in cotton wool.
He needs to be minded carefully between now and the World Cup. That’s not a controversial statement; it’s a planning reality. However, it raises an immediate question. If nobody is genuinely challenging for the starting jersey, who is the backup?
Craig Casey has had his opportunities and done very well from the bench for Ireland but has struggled to translate his club form to the national team when given the starting role.
Nathan Doak has shown real growth to his game at Ulster. Starting the Ulster scrumhalf against Wales might offer more answers than another outing for Casey at this stage. Gibson-Park needs to be fresh and firing for the matches that matter most. Finding a natural successor behind him is not a “nice-to-have” concept, it’s essential.
A similar conversation is emerging around Sam Prendergast. The evidence points towards him being a highly effective impact player rather than a starting outhalf, someone who can change a game when plan A isn’t working, as he showed in the final 20 minutes against France, while working alongside Crowley. That might be one of the answers to the questions that Farrell faces. Not every player needs to be a starter to be indispensable.
There was bravery to Farrell’s selections against Italy, the visitors a team on the rise. The Ireland head coach gave players a chance. In doing so it very nearly left the door open for Italy. The Irish bench rescued the result.
There is still plenty of road to run in the Six Nations. Ireland’s lack of bonus points could yet be a factor as they, Scotland and Italy will be monitoring each other’s results closely.
England in Twickenham is a daunting task at the best of times, and the manner of their loss to Scotland will leave them sore and a little rattled. Whether Ireland can capitalise on that discomfort will tell us something important about the current status of the squad.
Farrell’s benchmarking process will illustrate whether players have the capacity to play at this level or they don’t. The coaches create parameters of play, ask questions but the answers must come from the players. That’s how it should be. That’s what trust looks like.
It doesn’t really matter about the semantics, whether it’s an old broom or a new broom, as long as it is fit for purpose.
