MATTER OF FACTS
Expansive ideals are all well and good in theory, but when your national team is struggling, pragmatism becomes essential…
PRAGMATISM has been a lucrative philosophy for Ireland’s national teams. The greatest story in Irish sport was inspired by the unbending certainty Jack Charlton brought with him to the job of managing the soccer team.
The fact that Charlton pursued a relatively rudimentary style while in charge of a generation that included some of the most talented players to represent Ireland became a point of increasing tension.
It remains true, however, that the Irish soccer side reached levels of consistent achievement under Charlton that had never been met before, and none of his successors have managed since.
The division between functional and inspired is a feature of the rugby culture, too, with New Zealand in particular, but also France celebrated for upholding the game’s dreamier principles.
Because Ireland were for so long off the highest standards of the Test game, there was little in the way of wailing about the style employed by generations of sides.
It was only with success that grander designs emerged.
Eddie O’Sullivan oversaw Ireland’s dramatic improvement at the turn of the century with a game that
‘THE CLAMOUR FOR DRAMATIC CHANGE COULD RUIN YOUNG CAREERS’
built on the foundation implemented by Warren Gatland before him.
By 2009, though, and the Grand Slam under Declan Kidney, Ireland’s tactics were highly refined but founded on pragmatism; the big tactical innovation was the choke tackle designed by Les Kiss, the defence coach.
There were no banners complaining about that, but over a decade on, and after Joe Schmidt proved himself the best coach Ireland have yet had, demands for more sophistication are growing.
Schmidt’s game-plan relied on excellent set-pieces, a sound defence and an accurate kicking game, with box kicks a particular strength. That was good enough to win two championships, including a Grand Slam, and culminated in the brilliant year of 2018.
By 2019, rivals had adapted, Ireland had been worked out and a miserable season degenerated into familiar disaster at the World Cup.
Now, after defeat to France a week ago, a consensus has formed that Ireland need to be more adventurous. The ease with which French players off-loaded out of tackles has prompted a question: why not us?
Culture is the simple answer, of course. Players are coached from childhood in off-loading in France (and in the southern hemisphere), whereas earthier virtues are preached here.
Environment is worth remembering as a contributor, too; winters in this part of the world are wet and windy, conditions that have traditionally seen coaching rely on safer tactics, many of which involve having as little of the ball as possible. It brings to mind an interview Jurgen Klopp gave to a German newspaper three months after taking over at Liverpool.
Klopp spoke about the effects of the windy weather on his plans.
It caused some traditionalists to splutter, of course, but it was an indicator of how sensitive the plans of leading sports teams can be.
The cultural and environmental reasons for Ireland’s traditionally perfunctory style of rugby is unlikely to impress those agitating for dramatic change, and who want to see it start in Rome in six days’ time.
Yet the value of pragmatism should not be too easily discarded.
Andy Farrell did not sound like a man determined to pursue a higher path when he spoke in recent days, and in this his approach is markedly different from his counterpart in charge of the soccer side.
Stephen Kenny has had a largely uninspired start to his time in charge of the national team, even with all the qualifications and excuses that are applied around injuries and the effects of Covid-19.
Up to now, he has been determined to implement a more expansive gameplan for Ireland. And unlike in the rugby example, Kenny has good reason beyond the philosophical to do so. The soccer team have been struggling for half a decade, and basic tactical plans haven’t been working. Kenny’s problem is that his hasn’t yet, either.
He won’t be changing.
‘It’s hugely important that people connect with the team, that they relate to the team and are inspired by it; that the players go and display the full extent of their talent without fear; that they have the conviction to fulfil that talent and their potential,’ he said in 2019.
That determination has been restated by the manager since, but his dedication to greater ambition comes with a higher risk of failure.
If Andy Farrell is fired by the zeal that is clearly fuelling Kenny, his is an internal flame. His regime has been described as less intense than Schmidt’s, with the players charged with more decision-making and, overall, a reduced reliance on a well-drilled, coach-led system.
It has only worked sporadically so far, and not at all in games against England. There were definite improvements against France that should be recorded, but these were mostly centred on the line-out and the scrum.
As with Kenny, injuries have been a complication, but they are a fact that all coaches and teams must accept. What is most interesting is the immediate impact that Paul O’Connell has made as forwards’ coach. It has surprised many, given his lack of coaching experience, but there is convincing evidence already that he is a high-class addition. Should Ireland continue to excel in the areas under his control, he will soon be mentioned as an Ireland coach of the future.
Farrell will insist that is a conversation for long into the future, and it is surprising to see next Saturday’s game set up as a make-or-break fixture for his regime.
Mike Catt, his attack coach, is held responsible in some quarters for the ineffectiveness of Ireland’s creative game. Catt is liked by the players and is an impressive figure who enjoyed a terrific playing career.
But in Ireland’s first two games of the championship, there has been little in the way of the dynamic or the unexpected. Had Ireland won in Cardiff, or managed to wrench victory off the French in Dublin, there
would be much less agitation about this aspect of Ireland’s game.
It is argued that modern defences, as well as rule interpretations, make the game favoured by Schmidt unfit for the modern age. Yet Ireland only lost to France by two points, and Billy Burns missed an easy penalty in the first half. Glaring defensive errors by Jamison Gibson-Park and James Lowe were as critical to French scores as off-loading or clever support lines.
Ireland haven’t been great, but they haven’t been too far away, either.
They are not world-beaters, but anticipating the World Cup two and a half years before it starts is to fall for the same four-year cycle thinking that has failed Ireland repeatedly since 1999.
Pragmatism need not be a failing, and by the sounds of what Farrell said earlier in the week, he will be guided by it in the coming days. ‘We can’t throw any kid — not just Harry (Byrne) — you can’t throw any kid in by just guessing,’ he said, addressing the odd clamour for Ireland to start with an out-half who made his tenth start for Leinster on Friday. ‘You’ve got to have them in the environment or they’ve got to earn the right to get into this environment.
‘Why? Because the guys that are in the environment, they’ve worked bloody hard to get here as well.’
That is a view that could look hopelessly out-dated come the end of this Six Nations.
Farrell’s Ireland are not wowing the nation, but the clamour for a dramatic change of direction, led by unproven players, is a risk that could ruin young careers.
Pragmatism can be derided as safe and cynical, the route chosen by a coach looking to protect himself.
But pragmatism has been at the root of Ireland’s approaches on their best days — in two codes.