Dan is our back up 6 and we had Casey for 3. He has an agenda against Casey though.
1 Like
You think everything is an agenda.
Moving your 3 out after losing your 6 just isn’t ideal in my opinion. It’s too much disruption.
Lads, Coughlan isn’t related to a 6.
Dan is always our backup 6. There is no doubt about that.
That was obviously the right call.
3 Likes
2 Likes
You’re very transparent and what you’re saying is fairly stupid. Dan the recognised back up 6, it’s no disruption bring in Casey, he could as easily have started. Moving Hayes to 6 would be far more disruptive.
1 Like
Moving a wingback in to six is no way as disruptive as moving out your full back.
All very straightforward, the two lads are just playing silly buggers. Something something split season will be next.
Ideally you’d have Ronan Lynch ready to go as a ‘like for like’ replacement but that ship has sailed.
1 Like
Especially when Waterford only had 2 men inside anyway.
Dan doesn’t have Hannon’s wrists but neither does anyone else really. Hannon had barely touched the ball tbh, but obviously it was a loss not to have him to play out in the second half.
1 Like
It definitely wasn’t the right call imo.
Kyle was being avoided at all costs at half back. You move him at six and you sort out waterfords puck out strategy fairly easily.
By moving Dan out you are then disrupting both lines mid game which is far from ideal.
It undermines the good points you make when you come out with such stupidity.
What can’t you understand about not moving both your six and three ? It’s very common. Were you ever involved any team ever hurling or football? It’s a massive no no.
Could ALTC be parachuted in?
Fuck I have no recollection whatsoever of that game. Fair play boss. I stand corrected
1 Like
We had no problems in the full-back line, that line was not disrupted in the slightest. We didn’t even have a traditional full-back at any point because Waterford were so deep so talking about your ‘full-back’ is nonsense.
Kyle is an attacking platform from 7, at 6 he is limited going forward. Why would we do that to ourselves 15 minutes into the game? And he can’t do with Hannon does anyway. Dan is our backup 6 and played very well.
I think Kyle has played at 6 once under Kiely, Dan has played there multiple times.
3 Likes
Kyle was not a factor today simply because the ball wasn’t going to go near him.
Kyle went in six for a spell v Kilkenny in 2019 and was excellent.
It would have totally disrupted the Waterford puck out. Anything is better than swapping your three out and disrupting both lines of the defence.
I don’t know you what you don’t understand about Dan being the back up to Hannon and Casey being the closest player on the bench to the starting team anyway, it was the least disruptive move by a long way. You wanted to try something that hasn’t been tried since the last time we lost a game, four years ago.
Losing your six and then moving your three mid game is the most disruptive by a distance.
Unfortunately you’re significantly underselling how bad he was. His puckouts were terrible and he did nothing better.
At least try to be less transparent when you’re playing silly buggers.