Rugby World Cup - other team/games and general chat

First topic message reminder :

I couldn't see a topic to discuss general WC stuff and non home nations games.......

Now we do...

Some performance from wales.
Well done to them.

Australia on the other hand (sadly) look to be out now for the first time ever on the pool stage.

Always had a soft spot for Australia, hopefully they can bounce back and improve in the next few years.

Again, we’ll done wales.

Well I winder what Drew Mitchell will be saying now!! Lol

Fantastic performance. I do like Eddie having egg on his face, after his pre match comments. Australia were second best overall and Wales looked pretty comfortable in defence bar a few breaks. I thought we had a bit of hard lines in the earlier scrum calls too. Certainly the second call against Thomas.

Anyway, so much better than I could ever have imagined. I didn't ever feel comfortable though, until around 70 minutes.

Jac Morgan is special. Hope Biggar isn’t too bad. I’ll be honest, I didn’t feel comfortable when Anscombe came on after the last game, but he was fantastic after the first miss.

I find it hard to like Gatland for his style sometimes, but you can’t argue with how he sets us up for WCs.

Commiserations to the Australian posters.

Australia's decline has been a long time coming not just in this game. They haven't won the bledisloe in over twenty years.
The Oz top down structure leaves them nowhere to go and a culture of playing second fiddle to NZ/SA has rotted the whole 'elite' structure.

The abandonment of the wider club game in Oz has been suicidal. If you had told OZ fans twenty years ago that they would be in this position, they would have said that you were being ridiculous, or worse.

Gatland has gone back to his Wasps model, it isn't pretty but it's certainly effective. The modern game eats up teams that try to play a running game and Warburton summed it up - Wales will play no rugby in their own half. Argentina have been pretty average this far and will need a big step up to challenge Gatland' s model.
Eddie Jones just looks like he has lost his coaching mojo.

Full circle for Jones in some respects. He got the England job after we failed to qualify from the 2015 pool in similar circumstances. Then, it was a close 28-25 loss to Wales, and a heavier 35-13 defeat to Australia. Jones has now led Australia to a 15-22 loss to Fiji, and then a blowout 40-6 to Wales.

Congratulations to Wales. Gatland's reputation was under a some pressure, after the disappointment of the last Lions tour, not much impact in NZ, and a rocky start back with Wales. This win has reaffirmed his coaching credentials.

That was such a strange game.  Australia had all the possession in the first half, but still ended up behind.  And they had some real good chances. Then just cratered in the second half.  Good on Wales.  Hoping Biggar is not hurt too bad.

That was the best performance I have seen from Wales in a while. Congratulations Welsh supporters.

Weird game last night. Australia looked really threatening early doors but after those early penalties did cause Wales much concern and as the first half went on and the scoreboard was against them the belief seemed to evaporate.

I don't know how good Wales are as I don't think they really had to go beyond third gear in that game. Cantered to a convincing victory, that's going to send the Welsh squad's confidence through the roof.

Looks like Irelands points move to 93.79 in the world rankings and SA drop to third behind France. Probably still a four horse race.

Collapse2005 wrote:Looks like Irelands points move to 93.79 in the world rankings and SA drop to third behind France. Probably still a four horse race.

For now. But those four horses meet each other in the QFs. Two of them will drop out at that point, and the other two’s chances will depend a lot on how much those QFs take out of them physically and mentally.

In the Ireland / NZ side of the draw, Wales are likely to be the SF opponent and seem to be coming into the sort of form where they will present problems for either side. On the France / SA side of things, the likely opponent is England and we really don’t know where they are right now, or who the match day squad will be, or what their tactics will be or whether they are capable of raising their game to that level. except that their fitness is a lot better than in the warm ups.

England and Wales, at times, looked hopeless and pitiful before the world cup. Both have continued to improve and are now in complete control of their pool. Both seem like confidence teams right now and they have the momentum. Both are playing Gatlandball too! They will challenge the 4 main horses but I 100% cannot see them causing an upset.

mikey_dragon wrote:England and Wales, at times, looked hopeless and pitiful before the world cup. Both have continued to improve and are now in complete control of their pool. Both seem like confidence teams right now and they have the momentum. Both are playing Gatlandball too! They will challenge the 4 main horses but I 100% cannot see them causing an upset.

I put it more down to conditioning and time as a squad than confidence, though that's undoubtedly a factor. Both have newly returned coaches who have had to go back to basics on tactics and conditioning, and both have a reptuation for conditioning their teams to finish a tournament strongly (and accepting some risk in the early games).

Where I disagree is that I could see either or both causing an upset. In a one-off game, surprises can happen. It will depend a lot on whether the top4 teams arrive at the SFs battle-hardened or battle-damaged. France (and possibly South Africa) look to be in the latter category, with some significant players injured. Ireland and NZ look likely to be in better shape - and my money would be on Ireland as long as they don't lose too many players in the next few rounds.

Wales certainly have upped the ante on conditioning. This kick to the opposition and tackle them to death looks tiring but they keep doing it. Apparently Nick Knowles is a big fan too.

I see your point as it's a one-off game. I think France and Ireland are probably too good. Surprisingly, NZ and SA are starting to look vulnerable. France seem to have their injuries well covered, the depth might be better than SAs who's lack of hooker and kicker hurt them vs Ireland. France also don't seem like the France of old who would crumble under the occasion. NZ look like a frightened team when they play another top-end nation, but it wouldn't surprise me to see them bring it all together over the next month.

Dupont apparently is having a cushioning face mask fitted this week, with a view to playing in the quarter final.

That would be a massive boost to France and may well be the difference in getting them over the line in what could be the hardest game they play in the whole tournament.

mikey_dragon wrote:Wales certainly have upped the ante on conditioning. This kick to the opposition and tackle them to death looks tiring but they keep doing it. Apparently Nick Knowles is a big fan too.

I see your point as it's a one-off game. I think France and Ireland are probably too good. Surprisingly, NZ and SA are starting to look vulnerable. France seem to have their injuries well covered, the depth might be better than SAs who's lack of hooker and kicker hurt them vs Ireland. France also don't seem like the France of old who would crumble under the occasion. NZ look like a frightened team when they play another top-end nation, but it wouldn't surprise me to see them bring it all together over the next month.

I was just talking to a knowledgeable friend who had the opposite opinion - he thinks that NZ have probably got their ropey game out of their system and they're his tip to win the tournament. I am not so sure - I think they have possibly the most dangerous backline in the tournament, but their pack is not what it once was and if you can stop them getting front foot ball they are vulnerable.

Likewise with the Boks. Marx is a huge loss, and if a team can hold them until Mbonambi goes off, they can struggle to impose their gameplan and don't really have an option to keep the scoreboard ticking over. With my quartered specs on, I think they would be a better side if they picked Esterhuizen instead of de Allende - he doesn't give away much physically, but gives them the second playmaking option that they lack with Am out. But they don't seem keen to do that, and I think it harms their chances.

I still see Ireland as favourites. For France, if Dupont is back for the QF, then it should boost their chances - but at this level he only needs to be slightly off his game and the team could suffer. With Ntamack also out, they are very dependent on him.

BigGee wrote:Dupont apparently is having a cushioning face mask fitted this week, with a view to playing in the quarter final.

That would be a massive boost to France and may well be the difference in getting them over the line in what could be the hardest game they play in the whole tournament.

When Harinordoquy wore his monstrous mask, it was protecting his broken nose. The mask was designed to spread any impact to his forehead and cheeks. It must be much harder to protect a cheek in the same way, as there aren't as many decent anchor points.

When Sam Burgess played the NFL final with his face in a mess, adrenalin and competitive spirit overode the pain and, probably, better judgement. Dupont will be desperate to play, and will have some painkillers. However, if doctors think he could suffer permanent damage, say to his eye, if he suffers another heavy impact to that injury, you wonder if that's a risk worth taking.

mikey_dragon wrote:Wales certainly have upped the ante on conditioning. This kick to the opposition and tackle them to death looks tiring but they keep doing it. Apparently Nick Knowles is a big fan too.

I see your point as it's a one-off game. I think France and Ireland are probably too good. Surprisingly, NZ and SA are starting to look vulnerable. France seem to have their injuries well covered, the depth might be better than SAs who's lack of hooker and kicker hurt them vs Ireland. France also don't seem like the France of old who would crumble under the occasion. NZ look like a frightened team when they play another top-end nation, but it wouldn't surprise me to see them bring it all together over the next month.

SA looking vulnerable because they didn't kick their goals? Pollard will be back this week vs Tonga, the7-1 split without Marx isn't beneficial.

You will see Deon Fourie no more. Van Staden will be the back up hooker. The other real loss for SA is Kriel doesn't have the attacking nous of Lukhanyo Am.

Other than that I can't see how the result of this weekend makes the Boks look vulnerable. The match vs Ireland was balanced on a knife's edge, improvements the Boks need to make are twofold. Kick their goals and be sharper at the breakdown for 80 minutes.

SA certainly are not done yet, but I do think they would have preferred to play NZ than France.

France have not really had to play their full hand yet but theh will need to jn thd quarter final, which will effectively be a final for bogh teams.

Now Danty and Baile are back and firing, they will be a lot stronger and the mood music is suggesting Dupont will play as well.

France are still my favourites to win the whole tournament.

BigGee wrote:SA certainly are not done yet, but I do think they would have preferred to play NZ than France.

France have not really had to play their full hand yet but theh will need to jn thd quarter final, which will effectively be a final for bogh teams.

Now Danty and Baile are back and firing, they will be a lot stronger and the mood music is suggesting Dupont will play as well.

France are still my favourites to win the whole tournament.

SA has a much better record vs France than NZ, we haven't won back to back tests vs NZ since 2009. From my perspective I prefer France, have said sopreviously.

France are still my favourites, but it depends on what role Dupont can still play in the competition. South Africa second favourites. NZ third and Ireland fourth. But it's all very thin margins. Still not convinced on Ireland as they've never won a World Cup KO game in their history.

Anyone outside of that would be a shock.

Old man

Is Van Staden a significantly better hooker than Fourie? If so, great, but begs the question why wasn't he filling that role on Saturday night?

Do you have any update on Vincent Kock's recovery? I think he is needed back for the quarters to bolster the bomb squad scrum strength.

Old Man wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Wales certainly have upped the ante on conditioning. This kick to the opposition and tackle them to death looks tiring but they keep doing it. Apparently Nick Knowles is a big fan too.

I see your point as it's a one-off game. I think France and Ireland are probably too good. Surprisingly, NZ and SA are starting to look vulnerable. France seem to have their injuries well covered, the depth might be better than SAs who's lack of hooker and kicker hurt them vs Ireland. France also don't seem like the France of old who would crumble under the occasion. NZ look like a frightened team when they play another top-end nation, but it wouldn't surprise me to see them bring it all together over the next month.

SA looking vulnerable because they didn't kick their goals? Pollard will be back this week vs Tonga, the7-1 split without Marx isn't beneficial.

You will see Deon Fourie no more. Van Staden will be the back up hooker. The other real loss for SA is Kriel doesn't have the attacking nous of Lukhanyo Am.

Other than that I can't see how the result of this weekend makes the Boks look vulnerable. The match vs Ireland was balanced on a knife's edge, improvements the Boks need to make are twofold. Kick their goals and be sharper at the breakdown for 80 minutes.

Yep and it’s proven to be costly. Not sure why you’d call me out on it when all fans, including you have even said it. I’m aware Pollard is coming back, there is no guarantee he will be ready or able to hit the ground running. Anscombe needed a full game to get back to the level required. Yes and also the hooker situation, two of the three are flankers. I doubt MVS is better at it than Fourie. They seem vulnerable to the other 3 best teams now that their depth is being tested, and as proven versus Ireland. I think they’d still beat most other teams.

BigGee wrote:SA certainly are not done yet, but I do think they would have preferred to play NZ than France.

France have not really had to play their full hand yet but theh will need to jn thd quarter final, which will effectively be a final for bogh teams.

Now Danty and Baile are back and firing, they will be a lot stronger and the mood music is suggesting Dupont will play as well.

France are still my favourites to win the whole tournament.

It looks like France have the forwards to beat SA. Based on the last match versus NZ, I’m not sure if they do. Springboks dominated the All Blacks in all facets of play, including the scoreboard.

Rugby Fan wrote:

BigGee wrote:Dupont apparently is having a cushioning face mask fitted this week, with a view to playing in the quarter final.

That would be a massive boost to France and may well be the difference in getting them over the line in what could be the hardest game they play in the whole tournament.

When Harinordoquy wore his monstrous mask, it was protecting his broken nose. The mask was designed to spread any impact to his forehead and cheeks. It must be much harder to protect a cheek in the same way, as there aren't as many decent anchor points.

When Sam Burgess played the NFL final with his face in a mess, adrenalin and competitive spirit overode the pain and, probably, better judgement. Dupont will be desperate to play, and will have some painkillers. However, if doctors think he could suffer permanent damage, say to his eye, if he suffers another heavy impact to that injury, you wonder if that's a risk worth taking.

I just went on the internet to find any good pics or renditions of what a likely repair to Dupont's Zygomatic Arch could look like.  Not for the squeamish.  My point is that simply surgically implanting a plate does not mean Dupont is good.  Those tiny screws also create fracture points whilst healing.  Doing this just to highlight the short term risks and what it looks like.  

I understand he cannot wear larger protection, but as long as the padding is less than 5 mm thickness he is legal.  5mm of foam (remember it has to be soft) may or may not do much, but would clearly be better than nothing.  

I wonder if they will draft something out of the same mix of materials they use in the N-Pro head guard, which enables a WR-legal soft head guard to absorb a lot of force.

But the injury will still be horribly painful to play with and I worry that it won't be properly protectable.

sensisball wrote:Old man

Is Van Staden a significantly better hooker than Fourie? If so, great, but begs the question why wasn't he filling that role on Saturday night?

Do you have any update on Vincent Kock's recovery? I think he is needed back for the quarters to bolster the bomb squad scrum strength.

Fourie I think started because it was tactical, Jacques and Rassie thought that if they had as many flankers in the squad as possible they could nullify Irelands excellence at the breakdown but it didnt work. When you loose your hooker, Marx, who is basically your best ruck poacher I think they thought they needed to fill that gap.

doctor_grey wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

BigGee wrote:Dupont apparently is having a cushioning face mask fitted this week, with a view to playing in the quarter final.

That would be a massive boost to France and may well be the difference in getting them over the line in what could be the hardest game they play in the whole tournament.

When Harinordoquy wore his monstrous mask, it was protecting his broken nose. The mask was designed to spread any impact to his forehead and cheeks. It must be much harder to protect a cheek in the same way, as there aren't as many decent anchor points.

When Sam Burgess played the NFL final with his face in a mess, adrenalin and competitive spirit overode the pain and, probably, better judgement. Dupont will be desperate to play, and will have some painkillers. However, if doctors think he could suffer permanent damage, say to his eye, if he suffers another heavy impact to that injury, you wonder if that's a risk worth taking.

I just went on the internet to find any good pics or renditions of what a likely repair to Dupont's Zygomatic Arch could look like.  Not for the squeamish.  My point is that simply surgically implanting a plate does not mean Dupont is good.  Those tiny screws also create fracture points whilst healing.  Doing this just to highlight the short term risks and what it looks like.  

I understand he cannot wear larger protection, but as long as the padding is less than 5 mm thickness he is legal.  5mm of foam (remember it has to be soft) may or may not do much, but would clearly be better than nothing.  

I feel sorry for Dupont, he shouldnt play in the quarters if he isnt ready to do so. The weight of a nations expectation will be hard for him to ignore. Cant imagine wearing a mask is the right thing to do.

The message below is from the Bring back the NPC fb page and follows the crushing defeat of Australia by (ironically) Wales, who also should be taking serious note. You would hope Rugby Australia would voluntarily take steps in this suggested new direction but it might need a few more years of 'elite' rugby failing with a Lions tour and RWC in the near short term, for this to happen. I think the change is inevitable.

Rugby Australia’s administrators are to blame for this. And no, not just for replacing their coach a few months out from a Rugby World
Cup (although that certainly doesn’t help).

For the past 20 years, Rugby AU have failed to provide their country with a professional rugby union product that can compete with the NRL, AFL, NBL or A-League.

For the entire living memory of anyone in Australia under the age of 30, the only rugby union product on offer was watching one of 4 or 5 “Super” Rugby teams get smacked around by NZ or South African opposition – and that’s if they were even playing in an appropriate time zone (which half the time they weren’t).

In the competitive sporting marketplace of Australia, why on earth would people want to engage with Super Rugby over one of the country’s many domestic sports leagues – ones where every match was in a good time zone and an Australian winner was guaranteed?

Kids aren’t going to be inspired to join the local rugby union club if they aren’t first inspired by the stars on TV or at the local stadium. They’re even *less* likely to engage with a product if they aren’t exposed to it in the first place, eg. through being brought to games and having it on at home every weekend. Understandably, very few self-respecting Aussie adults would put themselves through supporting an Australian Super Rugby team just to watch them get smacked by foreign opposition week-in-week-out.

Put simply, for 20 years Aussie kids haven’t been inspired to play rugby union and therefore they haven’t. And if Rugby AU can’t attract young Australians into the sport of rugby union, then it’s of little surprise that a few years down the track (i.e. today) the Wallabies will fail to compete with countries whose national teams are stacked with their nation’s best sporting talent.

So where to from here?

If Rugby AU want to reverse the fall and fall of rugby union as both an entertainment product and a participation sport in Australia (which is their job), they need to correctly identify the reasons why people haven’t been engaging with it recently.

And it’s pretty simple – barely anyone wants to engage with a product where:
only a minority of teams are Australian, and
they always predictably lose,
often at inconvenient viewing hours.

Super Rugby is chock full of low-value games, and no amount of rule changes, ticket price reductions or halftime entertainment is going to change that.

Rugby AU need to focus on whatever aspects of Australian rugby union haven’t completely died yet and build up from there in a strengths-based model. Scrap Super Rugby, and instead build up a national league from the best club rugby teams in QLD and NSW. With a TV deal and associated sponsorship under the belt, these clubs and the new Australian national league will be in a good place to give rugby union a competitive footing with the other pro sports leagues in the country.

I’m not the only one saying this, by the way. Gemba Group – one of the world’s most successful sports consultancy companies (who have worked with F1, Premier League and AFL) – pitched this very advice to Rugby AU all the way back in 2020.

Unfortunately, Rugby AU isn’t listening to any of this advice and idiotically going in the exact opposite direction – not only sticking with Super Rugby, but also moving towards a more centralised contracting system. This doesn’t address any of the reasons that rugby union has failed to compete with Australia’s other sports, and as such don’t expect to see any improvements any time soon.

NZR needs to take heed of this too. Like in Australia, rugby union has been in decline as both an entertainment and participation product for school-aged children for at least a decade now – likely also related to Super Rugby’s failure to compete with the NRL and foreign sports leagues like the NBA and Premier League.

Personally, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that NZ Rugby has failed to produce as many stars in recent years as they did in the 90s, 2000s or early 2010s. Unlike a generation ago, in 2023 many of our best athletes between the ages of 15 and 25 are likely dedicating their time to basketball, rugby league and other sports as rugby union has failed to secure itself as the country’s most engaging sport.

NZR has protected the Super Rugby system for many years, I believe in part because of its effectiveness as a controlled, high-performance system that maximises All Blacks preparedness. But if the cost of this system is a loss in grassroots engagement, then in the long run it will fail to work as you won’t have enough adequate talent filtering through into it.

Personally, I think the All Blacks and Wallabies are starting to see the effects of this.

It’s time for both unions to really step up, take a risk, and put grassroots engagement before anything else.

Hopefully it isn’t too late.

France know they need Dupont. Without him I can see SA beating them in the Qtrs.

Its a tough break because if they would have had both Ntamack and Dupont fully fit, I doubt anyone would have beaten them at home.

They do have amazing depth of players in France now but those 2 guys were the best in the world in those positions in my opinion. Without both of those they would be beatable.

Big gamble to pick him if he is not fully fit as you might end up losing him for the rest of the tournament. But I'm guessing they know without him winning that SA game will be much harder.

Injuries I think will play a big part in the Qtrs. I just can see Ireland vs New Zealand and SA and France ending with some players going out. They will be monster games. Hard to say what kind of shape the winning teams will be like in the semi finals.

The draw could really come back to bite those teams. Ireland do look good enough regardless but it will matter if Sexton can stay fit for those final 3 games.

Welshmushroom

You make a good point re Sexton staying in one piece. On at least 2 occasions on Saturday Sexton did his trying to hold a charging backrower up from a standing position thing (it's not really a tackle) and almost got smacked on the head for his troubles when "tackling" Weise. If his head was one inch further over towards the charging no 8 it would have been an HIA at best.

sensisball wrote:Welshmushroom

You make a good point re Sexton staying in one piece. On at least 2 occasions on Saturday Sexton did his trying to hold a charging backrower up from a standing position thing (it's not really a tackle) and almost got smacked on the head for his troubles when "tackling" Weise. If his head was one inch further over towards the charging no 8 it would have been an HIA at best.

People routinely exaggerate how injury prone Sexton is. He was absolutely smashed by Du Toit on multiple occasions because of how brave he is at delaying passes and got up every time. Sexton was also Ireland's second top tackler. He is 38 and has played three full games in a row and very influential in all three. You dont get 120 plus caps for your country and play at age 38 if you are injury prone. He has been one of the top 10s in world rugby and key for Ireland for years and therefore has been targeted by just about every side he is played and is still going strong.

All the fuss about Dupont is justified, but I believe having Dante back will be a big boost for them

Wasn't saying he was prone. All my point is Ireland's chances of winning this world cup is tied into him being fit and available. Without him I just don't think Ireland get over the line. He's as critical to Ireland as Dupont is to France's world cup chance.

On a side note I do fancy at least one of the semi finals to be won by a lesser side. Not sure exactly who that might be though,

Welshmushroom wrote:Wasn't saying he was prone.  All my point is Ireland's chances of winning this world cup is tied into him being fit and available.  Without him I just don't think Ireland get over the line.  He's as critical to Ireland as Dupont is to France's world cup chance.

On a side note I do fancy at least one of the semi finals to be won by a lesser side.  Not sure exactly who that might be though,

Perhaps you werent but it is a common criticism, you might be right though he is fairly key. I think Ireland would need him to beat SA, NZ and France but might get away with it without him against other sides given Ireland in their run of sixteen unbeaten games won v Australia, Fiji, Italy and England without Sexton. Wales its hard to know as they seem to have improved a lot.

Welshmushroom wrote:Wasn't saying he was prone.  All my point is Ireland's chances of winning this world cup is tied into him being fit and available.  Without him I just don't think Ireland get over the line.  He's as critical to Ireland as Dupont is to France's world cup chance.

On a side note I do fancy at least one of the semi finals to be won by a lesser side.  Not sure exactly who that might be though,

As thngs go it would be one of Wales or England.

I can see Fiji, Japan or Argentina making the QFs but it would be a huge upset for one of them to make the SFs. On the other side of the draw, barring a string of genuine upsets, the only team that can really disrupt the Ireland / SA - France / NZ quartopoly is Scotland - and while them beating Ireland would be a great result for the tournament, it doesn't seem very likely.

Could England beat France or South Africa? Could Wales beat Ireland or NZ? It probably depends on how bruising the Pool A & B QFs are. The winners of those games have a much higher chance of coming into the SFs with key players hors de combat, and that could make all the difference.

lostinwales wrote:All the fuss about Dupont is justified, but I believe having Dante back will be a big boost for them

And Baille. Marchand expected back for Italy too. Mauvaka and Wardi are fantastic replacements. Mauvaka arguably one of the players of the tournament. But you then have more of a drop to the bench. Whereas Maukava and Wardi as replacements is big impact.

1.Baille 2.Marchand 3.Antonio 4.Flament 5.Woki 6.Cros 7.Ollivon 8.Aldritt
9.Lucu 10.Jalibert 11.Villiere 12.Danty 13.Fickou 14.Penaud 15.Ramos

16.Mauvaka 17.Wardi 18.Aldegheri 19.Taofifenua 20.Jelonch 21.Couilloud22.Vincent 23.Jaminet

Potentially that side for Italy. With those two front rows returning, Danty fit and Jelonch back they were creeping towards a good bill of health prior to Dupont's injury. Which just adds to how gut wrenching it is.

Lucu and Jalibert are club teammates it's worth noting. So they know how to play alongside one another. There's no replacement for Dupont though. He's the best player in the world. Losing one of the best halfback pairing around in Ntamack was tough. They weathered it well by shifting the tactical kicking onto Dupont. To then lose Dupont as well is cruel.

Collapse2005 wrote:

sensisball wrote:Welshmushroom

You make a good point re Sexton staying in one piece. On at least 2 occasions on Saturday Sexton did his trying to hold a charging backrower up from a standing position thing (it's not really a tackle) and almost got smacked on the head for his troubles when "tackling" Weise. If his head was one inch further over towards the charging no 8 it would have been an HIA at best.

People routinely exaggerate how injury prone Sexton is. He was absolutely smashed by Du Toit on multiple occasions because of how brave he is at delaying passes and got up every time. Sexton was also Ireland's second top tackler. He is 38 and has played three full games in a row and very influential in all three. You dont get 120 plus caps for your country and play at age 38 if you are injury prone. He has been one of the top 10s in world rugby and key for Ireland for years and therefore has been targeted by just about every side he is played and is still going strong.

I seem to remember it was only early this year that Sexton had to sit out 8 weeks with a fractured cheekbone as he attempted to stop the rampaging Connacht 8, whilst playing for Leinster in a URC game. Head contact caused by Sexton's poor body position i.e. standing almost fully upright, whilst turning his body, and trying to tackle from a compromised position leading to significant head contact and led to his fracture.

He did the same type of tackle on Saturday a few times and one against Weise was very close to another head knock, luckily for Ireland, and Sexton, head contact didn't occur. He needs to keep being lucky if Ireland are to go past the QF.

sensisball wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

sensisball wrote:Welshmushroom

You make a good point re Sexton staying in one piece. On at least 2 occasions on Saturday Sexton did his trying to hold a charging backrower up from a standing position thing (it's not really a tackle) and almost got smacked on the head for his troubles when "tackling" Weise. If his head was one inch further over towards the charging no 8 it would have been an HIA at best.

People routinely exaggerate how injury prone Sexton is. He was absolutely smashed by Du Toit on multiple occasions because of how brave he is at delaying passes and got up every time. Sexton was also Ireland's second top tackler. He is 38 and has played three full games in a row and very influential in all three. You dont get 120 plus caps for your country and play at age 38 if you are injury prone. He has been one of the top 10s in world rugby and key for Ireland for years and therefore has been targeted by just about every side he is played and is still going strong.

I seem to remember it was only early this year that Sexton had to sit out 8 weeks with a fractured cheekbone as he attempted to stop the rampaging Connacht 8, whilst playing for Leinster in a URC game. Head contact caused by Sexton's poor body position i.e. standing almost fully upright, whilst turning his body, and trying to tackle from a compromised position leading to significant head contact and led to his fracture.

He did the same type of tackle on Saturday a few times and one against Weise was very close to another head knock, luckily for Ireland, and Sexton, head contact didn't occur. He needs to keep being lucky if Ireland are to go past the QF.

but so what though? He has had the same tackle technique his whole career and has broken his cheek once in 15 years and never had a yellow card as far as I know. For some reason people obsess over his injuries in particular. I just find that strange.

He had a concussion v New Zealand when he got kneed in the head v New Zealand tackling low (or he might have been tackled, cant recall) during 2022. No matter what way you tackle there is a risk of injury, Sexton isn't any different to anyone else in that respect, the spotlight is just always on him because of how good he is.

Collapse2005 wrote:...For some reason people obsess over his injuries in particular...

Any key player is the subject of constant injury speculation. More so, if it he doesn't shirk putting himself in harm way. If he's closer to forty than thirty five then I'm surprised you are surprised people wonder about Sexton's robustness. It's not just fans. Gatland has admitted he left Sexton out of the last Lions tour because he doubted whether his body could take the rigours of the schedule.

He's currently fit and in good form. It sounds like there's been a lot of effort put in to help him stay that way, so here's hoping it works out.

It has been a theme throughout Sexton's career is the point I'm making, if anything I think given his age he is remarkably robust for a 38 year old who tackles very hard and takes the ball to the line.

Gatland admitted he was wrong to leave Sexton out, he got that one badly wrong though Im glad he did.

Collapse2005 wrote:Gatland admitted he was wrong to leave Sexton out...

I believe he has. However, he wasn't alone in wondering whether Sexton could last. Four years ago, many Irish supporters though the idea of relying on Sexton to be first-choice for this World Cup was borderline reckless. As you allude, maybe the fact Gatland didn't choose him for South Africa was a blessing in disguise. It gave him some time away from the coalface, and stoked his desire to prove doubters wrong.

He's made it this far, and has been instrumental in Ireland's success. Still it seems a bit disingenuous to wonder why people speculate about whether he'll get injured. After all, he's only at the tournament after a lengthy lay-off with that groin strain.

Namibia leading 17-5 over Uruguay after 25 minutes. Perhaps their best chance of a maiden RWC victory.

Uruguay right back in the game though and probably looking the better team now

17-12 Namibia

20-12 at HT. Uruguay do look the better, especially at the scrum where Namibia are getting smashed, but the Uruguayan errors keep presenting chances to Namibia who, so far, have been clinical.

Interestingly poised.

Namibia have now lost the plot. Two sent to the bin for the bunker to have a look at. One looks a clear red, the other might be.

Uruguay been looking the fitter and better side since the first half.

Namibia just look clunsy in their tackles and it is costing them.

A far better game to watch than some of the kick fests between top tier teams.

Just to add, red cards don’t ruin games, stupid cardable offences do!

Uruguay have some nice moves

Very surprised that there was adjudged to be mitigation to keep the card at yellow. The tackle was never legal, so why was mitigation applied? (And the height of the ball carrier didn't change, so confused as to what the mitigation could have been)

Really enjoyed that match, felt for Namibia a but, was hoping they'd get their first RWC win

Really surprised Uruguay player didn't get red.