Ireland v England - Post-match warmdown

by **George Carlin** Sun 01 Mar 2015, 5:03 pm

First topic message reminder :

Ireland v England - Post-match warmdown - Page 9 Irelan13

Ireland 19 - 9 England

A continuation of the match thread.

Be respectful please. Your mothers would be proud.

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 9:11 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I'm saying you can't win because you never have when it really matters in a world cup, beating teams in the autumn internationals will soon be forgotten when push comes to shove. Just like the Welsh, the Irish can't do it on the biggest stage, all the teams I said will beat you, have.

You've done it once and have been trying ever since - both in footballing terms and rugby.

Should you stop trying because the Gods of Haven't Been Winning It Recently are against you?

This logic that always comes up around this subject is farcical. Spock would frown Wink

Before New Zealand won it the second time, they couldn't win it the second time! And they were laughed out of it as the World's biggest chokers. And fans of sides with much worse decade by decade records than them were the ones doing the sneers. "We won one and yous can't win two, yas pu-ssies!"

It's a joke Harrier.

Start at the beginning is my philosophy. Before computers there were pens. Before the wheel there was women who knew their place and stayed at home in the cave to make the dinner! The first time always happens. It's as inevitable as a sunrise. So why not us?

by **Notch** Mon 02 Mar 2015, 9:43 pm

I feel for England if this is true. They had the momentum at the end;

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/international/six-nations-timekeeping-controversy-in-ireland-s-match-with-england-1.2123522

Maybe it's our luck, preserving the 10 point margin, though if we get two wins whether or not they could engineer a late score will be academic.

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 9:49 pm

Notch wrote:I feel for England if this is true. They had the momentum at the end;

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/international/six-nations-timekeeping-controversy-in-ireland-s-match-with-england-1.2123522

Maybe it's our luck, preserving the 10 point margin, though if we get two wins whether or not they could engineer a late score will be academic.

2 minutes were added to the game?

Why would that need commiserations to England? It means if true that the game should have been over earlier, not that it should have gone on two minutes longer.

by **Notch** Mon 02 Mar 2015, 9:50 pm

No two minutes less because the clock should have been stopped but wasn't.

by Guest Mon 02 Mar 2015, 9:56 pm

It's 2 minutes extra. The clock was apparently stopped for a break in play, and not restarted for 2 minutes later than it should have been.

It would have been controversial if England had have been awarded their try at the end Shocked

by **Notch** Mon 02 Mar 2015, 9:58 pm

Oh, then I completely withdraw my comments.

by theslosty Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:01 pm

I noticed that at the time, thought it was just a BBC issue though.

by FecklessRogue Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:02 pm

That was a surprisingly easy win. Wales should be much tougher after a confidence boosting win in Paris, which puts our win at home to France in perspective.

Both Earls and Fitzgerald are playing brilliantly for their provinces, injury woes behind them. And they're both finding space, beating defenders and making breaks. And both doing it in teams that aren't actually playing very well. I'd keep the backline as is for Wales because they're big and strong defensively.

But the skills of Earls and Fitzy are the last pieces of Joe's jigsaw. Commitment to the cause has never been a problem for Ireland, and anyone can be taught to chase kicks. Outside those attributes, the outside backs are not doing it for me so far lads. We can do better and there are in form players putting their hands up.

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:07 pm

theslosty wrote:I noticed that at the time, thought it was just a BBC issue though.

My sister.............. who is half blind but who resists wearing specs all the time for some reason, she noticed it too and mentioned that the clock in the stadium was reading wrong or something. I wasn't bloody listening to her because I didn't damn well care at the time.

by Blanko Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:18 pm

Do none of you work? Very Happy

It takes me an hour to read this never mind find time to write with the prolific ability some of you have.

Just sayin !

I enjoyed the read though.

by Sin é Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:32 pm

SecretFly wrote:You have to factor in a guy like Paul O'Connell too. He isn't young but he's a talisman. He isn't fast but he's full of grit. If he's still playing International, then it's a no brainer that you use him, have him, be led by him.

But if you use him, you have to be sensitive to the kind of gameplan he can realistically adapt to. He's said it himself more than once that he's not the quickest around the field but as Nachos says, a genuine expansive game needs forwards that can play virtually equally as well as backs. It's the NZ way, forwards are mobile, have pace, have slick handling and they join in the back moves rather than simply setting a platform for them.

So I think too our current gameplan is directed with a degree of sympathy for our Leader. It's one he can play a full part in, one his age and limited mobility can cater for over an 80 minute period. And for now, it isn't hampering us.

Fly, POC hasn't slowed down. He still gets to the rucks like he always did. And if he was decrepid, you would think Schmidt would be whipping him off at 60 mins and not playing the full 80 minutes like he usually does.

by Blanko Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:32 pm

FecklessRogue wrote:That was a surprisingly easy win. Wales should be much tougher after a confidence boosting win in Paris, which puts our win at home to France in perspective.

Both Earls and Fitzgerald are playing brilliantly for their provinces, injury woes behind them. And they're both finding space, beating defenders and making breaks. And both doing it in teams that aren't actually playing very well. I'd keep the backline as is for Wales because they're big and strong defensively.

But the skills of Earls and Fitzy are the last pieces of Joe's jigsaw. Commitment to the cause has never been a problem for Ireland, and anyone can be taught to chase kicks. Outside those attributes, the outside backs are not doing it for me so far lads. We can do better and there are in form players putting their hands up.

No room for them right now although I would probably have one of them on the bench for Scotland. I just don't trust either to maintain the discipline JS schemes need. Likely it's the system rather than the players that are dictating how open or not type of rugby Ireland play.

You can only beat whos in front of you and in all 3 games Ireland were IMO easily better than their opposition for the first 2/3 of the game. Sexton leaving each appears to affect us. Maybe that's perception and not reality but they seem to relax, if Ireland could just keep their pedal to the metal to the end these games would not have been as close.

by Sin é Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:35 pm

You don't think Luke Fitzgerald is capable of following a Joe Schmidt gameplan?

by Pot Hale Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:39 pm

Sin é wrote:You don't think Luke Fitzgerald is capable of following a Joe Schmidt gameplan?

Not since Joe told him he coulda been a contenda for the centa......

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:43 pm

Sin é wrote:
SecretFly wrote:You have to factor in a guy like Paul O'Connell too. He isn't young but he's a talisman. He isn't fast but he's full of grit. If he's still playing International, then it's a no brainer that you use him, have him, be led by him.

But if you use him, you have to be sensitive to the kind of gameplan he can realistically adapt to. He's said it himself more than once that he's not the quickest around the field but as Nachos says, a genuine expansive game needs forwards that can play virtually equally as well as backs. It's the NZ way, forwards are mobile, have pace, have slick handling and they join in the back moves rather than simply setting a platform for them.

So I think too our current gameplan is directed with a degree of sympathy for our Leader. It's one he can play a full part in, one his age and limited mobility can cater for over an 80 minute period. And for now, it isn't hampering us.

Fly, POC hasn't slowed down. He still gets to the rucks like he always did. And if he was decrepid, you would think Schmidt would be whipping him off at 60 mins and not playing the full 80 minutes like he usually does.

You misquote my meaning wilfully, Sin. I say, sir, you are a cad, sir! Desist or I shall be drawn to call you out for a duel at dawn! That or a damned good thrashing!

by Blanko Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:43 pm

Sin é wrote:You don't think Luke Fitzgerald is capable of following a Joe Schmidt gameplan?

Just my opinion. Nope I dont. When I say game plan I dont just mean "don't throw the ball around". I mean make every tackle, back up your neighbor, and take it to the opposition when you don't have the ball.

I think Fitz and Earls are great just not in a match against the top 6 or 7 sides in world rugby. Just my opinion. I know there's soooo many more that think differently.

We are not blessed with really world class centres right now. RH may be the real deal and Olding/McCloskey may get there but for now Henshaw and Payne are doing what's expected with few mistakes

by The Great Aukster Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:45 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I'm saying you can't win because you never have when it really matters in a world cup, beating teams in the autumn internationals will soon be forgotten when push comes to shove. Just like the Welsh, the Irish can't do it on the biggest stage, all the teams I said will beat you, have.

At last, an English poster who calls it like it is. The fawning pleasantries from all those English pundits trying to put a gloss on England's toothless defeat, by saying that Ireland were contenders weren't fooling anyone. Ireland beating an ordinary England doesn't make them contenders by any stretch of the imagination.

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 10:50 pm

Blanko wrote:
Sin é wrote:You don't think Luke Fitzgerald is capable of following a Joe Schmidt gameplan?

Just my opinion.

Don't insult Sin again. He doesn't like it when people joke about opinions. He gets the strange feeling those people think they have facts. And there isn't one fact that sin hasn't already filed away in his research library. You'll rue the day you had an 'opinion' if you keep this up, Blanko Wink

by Sin é Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:03 pm

Blanko wrote:
Sin é wrote:You don't think Luke Fitzgerald is capable of following a Joe Schmidt gameplan?

Just my opinion. Nope I dont. When I say game plan I dont just mean "don't throw the ball around". I mean make every tackle, back up your neighbor, and take it to the opposition when you don't have the ball.

I think Fitz and Earls are great just not in a match against the top 6 or 7 sides in world rugby. Just my opinion. I know there's soooo many more that think differently.

We are not blessed with really world class centres right now. RH may be the real deal and Olding/McCloskey may get there but for now Henshaw and Payne are doing what's expected with few mistakes

Joe Schmidt was Luke Fitz's coach for a couple of years in Leinster. Luke was persuaded by Joe Schmidt himself to stay at Leinster (with the promise that he would help him to transition into a centre). Schmidt rates Luke.

Earls is playing super stuff at the moment. He is a great rucker and Ireland could really do with his pace as both Kearney & Bowe wouldn't be the quickest.

by Sin é Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:06 pm

SecretFly wrote:
Sin é wrote:
SecretFly wrote:You have to factor in a guy like Paul O'Connell too. He isn't young but he's a talisman. He isn't fast but he's full of grit. If he's still playing International, then it's a no brainer that you use him, have him, be led by him.

But if you use him, you have to be sensitive to the kind of gameplan he can realistically adapt to. He's said it himself more than once that he's not the quickest around the field but as Nachos says, a genuine expansive game needs forwards that can play virtually equally as well as backs. It's the NZ way, forwards are mobile, have pace, have slick handling and they join in the back moves rather than simply setting a platform for them.

So I think too our current gameplan is directed with a degree of sympathy for our Leader. It's one he can play a full part in, one his age and limited mobility can cater for over an 80 minute period. And for now, it isn't hampering us.

Fly, POC hasn't slowed down. He still gets to the rucks like he always did. And if he was decrepid, you would think Schmidt would be whipping him off at 60 mins and not playing the full 80 minutes like he usually does.

You misquote my meaning wilfully, Sin. I say, sir, you are a cad, sir! Desist or I shall be drawn to call you out for a duel at dawn! That or a damned good thrashing!

No misquote here: 'one his age and limited mobility'.

I just don't see that. He is getting to an awful lot of rucks very quickly. That doesn't suggest limited mobility to me.

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:09 pm

Sin é wrote:
No misquote here: 'one his age and limited mobility'.

I just don't see that. He is getting to an awful lot of rucks very quickly. That doesn't suggest limited mobility to me.

You're misreading my quote, Sin - and knowingly so. I'm not going to indulge. Wink

by The Great Aukster Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:10 pm

Sin é wrote:Earls is playing super stuff at the moment. He is a great rucker and Ireland could really do with his pace as both Kearney & Bowe wouldn't be the quickest.

I agree - Earls best position is in the back three where he can use his pace to the greatest effect. I suppose Zebo could move to 15 to accommodate him?

by FecklessRogue Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:22 pm

Our worst performer has been Bowe so far in my opinion. Not being racist against Monaghan. Can't fault him for effort. But he's just lucky Trimble is injured and Earls and Fitzy play on the other side. As well as not being in any kind of form I also noticed he was really, really, really tired for the last ten minutes. To the point where he actually couldn't chase the kicks. He's 31 now you know.

I don't mean to be a moaning Michael.

a) But it wouldn't be a rugby forum if there wasn't somebody calling for changes in selection to make things better.

b) Earls and Fitz are in form are they not?

by Pot Hale Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:27 pm

FecklessRogue wrote:Our worst performer has been Bowe so far in my opinion. Not being racist against Monaghan.

Racist against Monaghan???

If that a new Irish race?

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:29 pm

I breathe a sigh of relief. I'm afraid to talk sometimes here (okay maybe a tall story that one but bear with me) for fear of upsetting the natives wot do be upset when you criticise an old servant of old in the good old days of yore.

But Bowe.........................

I did ask a specific question about him yesterday and nobody decided to answer it.

Good point, Feckless for bringing it up. I'll leave you now alone to take all the flak that will come your way. Wink

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:30 pm

Pot Hale wrote:
FecklessRogue wrote:Our worst performer has been Bowe so far in my opinion. Not being racist against Monaghan.

Racist against Monaghan???

If that a new Irish race?

You can be racist by outlining a player's dress sense in this country.

by Sin é Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:35 pm

The Great Aukster wrote:
Sin é wrote:Earls is playing super stuff at the moment. He is a great rucker and Ireland could really do with his pace as both Kearney & Bowe wouldn't be the quickest.

I agree - Earls best position is in the back three where he can use his pace to the greatest effect. I suppose Zebo could move to 15 to accommodate him?

Earls won't be put on the left wing because unlike Zebo & Fitzgerald, he has a right boot.

Earls has been playing in the centre since he has come back from his injury, so its highly unlikely that he will be moved to the right wing and he is probably too small to be competing for balls against George North.

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:38 pm

Sin é wrote:

Earls is probably too small to be competing for balls against George North.

Depends how high the balls are................ If he chased down North's own then he might have a field day with possession

by Sin é Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:39 pm

FecklessRogue wrote:Our worst performer has been Bowe so far in my opinion. Not being racist against Monaghan. Can't fault him for effort. But he's just lucky Trimble is injured and Earls and Fitzy play on the other side. As well as not being in any kind of form I also noticed he was really, really, really tired for the last ten minutes. To the point where he actually couldn't chase the kicks. He's 31 now you know.

I don't mean to be a moaning Michael.

a) But it wouldn't be a rugby forum if there wasn't somebody calling for changes in selection to make things better.

b) Earls and Fitz are in form are they not?

The way the narrative goes:

Game v Italy - Zebo good, Bowe bad. (This is down to how much ball Zebo got on his wing).
Game v France - Zebo bad, Bowe good. (This is down to how much ball Bowe got on his wing).
Game v England - Zebo good, Bowe bad. (This is down to how much ball Zebo got on his wing).

I expect the narrative against Wales to be Tommy had a stormer, Zebo poor!

by FecklessRogue Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:39 pm

I can take it Fly. I'm completely safe in the knowledge that I have a limited knowledge of rugby and may be corrected at any moment. Unlike Sin e, I simply do not do my research. That's why I've never won an argument against him (technically nobody has ever finished an argument with him). But with Bowe. I think I'm right.

Pot Hale. I've bumped into some modern professional rugby players from every province and I'm pretty sure they're a different species. Could be wrong on that.

by Exiledinborders Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:40 pm

Ireland were the better team and used effective tactics. However if every team played like Ireland it would be the death of rugby. It really is dreadful stuff to watch.

by SecretFly Mon 02 Mar 2015, 11:47 pm

Exiledinborders wrote:Ireland were the better team and used effective tactics. However if every team played like Ireland it would be the death of rugby. It really is dreadful stuff to watch.

The furious breakdown work?
The laser targeted kick chase?
The stopping in the tracks of fast men about to bolt but who end up on their pants instead?
The bang, bang, bang assault on any clear thinking an opponent tries to produce when they're rushed into making rash decisions and silly errors?

What part of yesterday's game was dreadful? There were two teams there. What did England's game look like in relation to the one Ireland played?

It seems to be the running line of some here that Ireland should engage the opposition in the game the opposition want to play.

Nope. England came to play the game they intended to play and couldn't play it. That's their problem. They're the side who've watched Ireland play for a full year now and still didn't have a plan to impose their game on the day.

by **Notch** Tue 03 Mar 2015, 12:06 am

Exiledinborders wrote:Ireland were the better team and used effective tactics. However if every team played like Ireland it would be the death of rugby. It really is dreadful stuff to watch.

I personally enjoy watching Ireland play. We don't play like that all the time but when we do its great to see the sheer accuracy involved- all the things that annoy me about watching Ulster absent. It's fantastic. We did do some pretty intricate stuff in the backs that England dealt with comfortably, so I'm glad we focused more on the stuff they didn't cope with as well!

by Exiledinborders Tue 03 Mar 2015, 7:10 am

SecretFly wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:Ireland were the better team and used effective tactics. However if every team played like Ireland it would be the death of rugby. It really is dreadful stuff to watch.

The furious breakdown work?
The laser targeted kick chase?
The stopping in the tracks of fast men about to bolt but who end up on their pants instead?
The bang, bang, bang assault on any clear thinking an opponent tries to produce when they're rushed into making rash decisions and silly errors?

What part of yesterday's game was dreadful? There were two teams there. What did England's game look like in relation to the one Ireland played?

It seems to be the running line of some here that Ireland should engage the opposition in the game the opposition want to play.

Nope. England came to play the game they intended to play and couldn't play it. That's their problem. They're the side who've watched Ireland play for a full year now and still didn't have a plan to impose their game on the day.

I have accepted it was effective. I do not doubt Ireland's right to use the tactics. I am just saying that if teams follow suit and stop even trying to score tries by passing it will not get rugby any new supporters and will lose those it has.

by Hood83 Tue 03 Mar 2015, 7:48 am

SecretFly wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:Ireland were the better team and used effective tactics. However if every team played like Ireland it would be the death of rugby. It really is dreadful stuff to watch.

The furious breakdown work?
The laser targeted kick chase?
The stopping in the tracks of fast men about to bolt but who end up on their pants instead?
The bang, bang, bang assault on any clear thinking an opponent tries to produce when they're rushed into making rash decisions and silly errors?

What part of yesterday's game was dreadful? There were two teams there. What did England's game look like in relation to the one Ireland played?

It seems to be the running line of some here that Ireland should engage the opposition in the game the opposition want to play.

Nope. England came to play the game they intended to play and couldn't play it. That's their problem. They're the side who've watched Ireland play for a full year now and still didn't have a plan to impose their game on the day.

I think you're right, and it worries me. I expected us to train to nullify the up and under, and then Schmidt to have totally thrown us by planning for a different game. But in the end he didn't have to. Or perhaps that's a worry for both teams. Can England counter that type of kick chase heavy game, can Ireland play another game if it gets found out? Someone mentioned it probably wouldn't be as effective against a team like Australia and I think they're right.

The major concern for England beyond that is rucking. Just when I think we've nailed it, a team dominates us in this area. We have to have a plan for teams rucking that far past the ball.

I thought it was quite a good game to watch because of Ireland's intensity...but the up and unders tactic? No thanks. Hugely skilful and impressive, just not my thing. But damn effective.

by ME-109 Tue 03 Mar 2015, 8:08 am

Sin é wrote:
FecklessRogue wrote:Our worst performer has been Bowe so far in my opinion. Not being racist against Monaghan. Can't fault him for effort. But he's just lucky Trimble is injured and Earls and Fitzy play on the other side. As well as not being in any kind of form I also noticed he was really, really, really tired for the last ten minutes. To the point where he actually couldn't chase the kicks. He's 31 now you know.

I don't mean to be a moaning Michael.

a) But it wouldn't be a rugby forum if there wasn't somebody calling for changes in selection to make things better.

b) Earls and Fitz are in form are they not?

The way the narrative goes:

Game v Italy - Zebo good, Bowe bad. (This is down to how much ball Zebo got on his wing).
Game v France - Zebo bad, Bowe good. (This is down to how much ball Bowe got on his wing).
Game v England - Zebo good, Bowe bad. (This is down to how much ball Zebo got on his wing).

I expect the narrative against Wales to be Tommy had a stormer, Zebo poor!

Probably the most accurate comment of the week

by GunsGerms Tue 03 Mar 2015, 8:39 am

Ireland are noticably less attacking and scoring less tries without Trimble and Kearney. Coincidence?

by GunsGerms Tue 03 Mar 2015, 8:44 am

FecklessRogue wrote:Our worst performer has been Bowe so far in my opinion. Not being racist against Monaghan. Can't fault him for effort. But he's just lucky Trimble is injured and Earls and Fitzy play on the other side. As well as not being in any kind of form I also noticed he was really, really, really tired for the last ten minutes. To the point where he actually couldn't chase the kicks. He's 31 now you know.

I don't mean to be a moaning Michael.

a) But it wouldn't be a rugby forum if there wasn't somebody calling for changes in selection to make things better.

b) Earls and Fitz are in form are they not?

Bowe was outstanding in November and decent v Italy and France. He had a quiet game against England. Whoopdy do. He is still outrageously talented and a a certainty for the WC.

Zeeeeeeeeeeeeeebs has had a good tournament IMO too.

by Nachos Jones Tue 03 Mar 2015, 8:45 am

GunsGerms wrote:Ireland are noticably less attacking and scoring less tries without Trimble and Kearney. Coincidence?

Not really as the ball is not getting out to the wings due to the much mentioned 'Schmidt plan'. Personally, I don't think that Zebo or Bowe have played badly at all and I still think they are Irelands best wingers but it is hard for any winger to be attacking or score tries when starved of the ball in open play.

by captain carrantuohil Tue 03 Mar 2015, 8:49 am

There's a certain number 13 who was playing last year and isn't in 2015, Guns. I'd have to say that his absence would be likelier to have made a difference to Ireland's try tally than those of Trimble and particularly Kearney. You cut your coat according to your cloth and Ireland have some pretty crash-hot tailors at the moment.

by GunsGerms Tue 03 Mar 2015, 8:55 am

Nachos Jones wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:Ireland are noticably less attacking and scoring less tries without Trimble and Kearney. Coincidence?

Not really as the ball is not getting out to the wings due to the much mentioned 'Schmidt plan'. Personally, I don't think that Zebo or Bowe have played badly at all and I still think they are Irelands best wingers but it is hard for any winger to be attacking or score tries when starved of the ball in open play.

They are subject to similar game plans as Kearney and Trimble. I think Bowe and Zebo have played well but Trimble and Kearney did marginally better.

by Nachos Jones Tue 03 Mar 2015, 9:02 am

GunsGerms wrote:
Nachos Jones wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:Ireland are noticably less attacking and scoring less tries without Trimble and Kearney. Coincidence?

Not really as the ball is not getting out to the wings due to the much mentioned 'Schmidt plan'. Personally, I don't think that Zebo or Bowe have played badly at all and I still think they are Irelands best wingers but it is hard for any winger to be attacking or score tries when starved of the ball in open play.

They are subject to similar game plans as Kearney and Trimble. I think Bowe and Zebo have played well but Trimble and Kearney did marginally better.

Everyone should know by now how much I rate Trimble, have always been a massive fan of his and felt that he was hard done by a few years ago.
He had an excellent 6N last year but I still firmly believe that Bowe and Zebo are the best wingers in Ireland. Dave Kearney was solid at best and very predicable I felt, did his job well but being outpaced by Croft left a sour taste in many peoples mouths.

All that said, neither Bowe or Zebo are seeing much of the ball in open play due to the tactics of kicking and chasing. It has to be frustrating for them as they are both naturally attacking wingers but they are doing their jobs very well. Trimble and Kearney on the wings would be doing no better with the same tactics.

by GunsGerms Tue 03 Mar 2015, 9:05 am

captain carrantuohil wrote:There's a certain number 13 who was playing last year and isn't in 2015, Guns. I'd have to say that his absence would be likelier to have made a difference to Ireland's try tally than those of Trimble and particularly Kearney. You cut your coat according to your cloth and Ireland have some pretty crash-hot tailors at the moment.

Sure when he was playing people were saying he couldnt attack anymore. He and Darcy also ran a lot of crash balls last year.

by GunsGerms Tue 03 Mar 2015, 9:08 am

Nachos Jones wrote:

Everyone should know by now how much I rate Trimble, have always been a massive fan of his and felt that he was hard done by a few years ago.
He had an excellent 6N last year but I still firmly believe that Bowe and Zebo are the best wingers in Ireland. Dave Kearney was solid at best and very predicable I felt, did his job well but being outpaced by Croft left a sour taste in many peoples mouths.

All that said, neither Bowe or Zebo are seeing much of the ball in open play due to the tactics of kicking and chasing. It has to be frustrating for them as they are both naturally attacking wingers but they are doing their jobs very well. Trimble and Kearney on the wings would be doing no better with the same tactics.

They were subject to the same tactics and did do better. Its that simple really.

by captain carrantuohil Tue 03 Mar 2015, 9:09 am

There was also some beautiful sleight of hand in among the crash-balls that created space, the quality that is so absent in the modern game, for the other backs. I'd say that Sexton's understanding with O'Driscoll was another factor that gave Jonny the confidence to vary the play more from 10 than he has this year.

by GunsGerms Tue 03 Mar 2015, 9:11 am

captain carrantuohil wrote:There was also some beautiful sleight of hand in among the crash-balls that created space, the quality that is so absent in the modern game, for the other backs. I'd say that Sexton's understanding with O'Driscoll was another factor that gave Jonny the confidence to vary the play more from 10 than he has this year.

Ireland didnt offload at all last year either. Some very short term memory at play on here.

by Nachos Jones Tue 03 Mar 2015, 9:16 am

GunsGerms wrote:
captain carrantuohil wrote:There was also some beautiful sleight of hand in among the crash-balls that created space, the quality that is so absent in the modern game, for the other backs. I'd say that Sexton's understanding with O'Driscoll was another factor that gave Jonny the confidence to vary the play more from 10 than he has this year.

Ireland didnt offload at all last year either. Some very short term memory at play on here.

Really? I honestly felt that Ireland were offloading last year. They were looking to run the ball when in the opposition half. Maybe I am wrong but that's what I recall, might go back and look at some matches.

by geoff998rugby Tue 03 Mar 2015, 9:19 am

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I would say Ireland have very little chance of winning the world cup, without home advantage that pragmatic style of play won't get you very far and is far too one dimensional to overcome the All Blacks. To be honest I think South Africa will knock you out in the Semi's.

Very very unlikely to meet SA before the final

If Ireland lose to France in the group they will be playing NZ in the QF
If they win the group a SF against the winners of the England group in the SF is the most likely outcome - that is winnable

The France game is absolutely key

by geoff998rugby Tue 03 Mar 2015, 9:22 am

SecretFly wrote:BTW. It's a pity we don't know for definite that was Paul O'Connell's last International in Dublin. He deserved the same 'over-blown' send off O'Driscoll had - but in a sense, if that is his last time down that tunnel as an International player then it was a fitting way to go.

POCs last game will be the ward up match against Wales on the 29th August.

We will give him a send off then - ticket already purchased

by geoff998rugby Tue 03 Mar 2015, 9:23 am

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I'm saying you can't win because you never have when it really matters in a world cup, beating teams in the autumn internationals will soon be forgotten when push comes to shove. Just like the Welsh, the Irish can't do it on the biggest stage, all the teams I said will beat you, have.

Its not O'Sullivan or Kidney in charge now it is Schmidt - that is the crucial difference

by Sponsored content