Ireland vs Wales - This weekends BIG GAME...!

First topic message reminder :

Venue: Aviva Stadium Date: Sunday, 5 February Kick-off: 1500 GMT

Coverage: Watch live on BBC One, BBC One HD & online from 1400 GMT; full commentary on BBC Radio 5 Live Sports Extra; text commentary on BBC Sport website & mobiles.

Referee : Wayne Barnes (England)

Touch judges : Dave Pearson & Stuart Terheege (both England)

TV : Geoff Warren (England)

IRELAND : 15 - R Kearney; 14 - T Bowe, 13 - F McFadden, 12 - G D'Arcy, 11 - A Trimble (Ulster); 10 - J Sexton, 9 - C Murray; 1- C Healy, 2 - R Best, 3 - M Ross, 4 - D O'Callaghan, 5 - P O'Connell (C), 6 - S Ferris, 7 - S O'Brien, 8 - J Heaslip.

Replacements: 16 - S Cronin, 17 - T Court, 18 - D Ryan, 19 - P O'Mahony, 20 - E Reddan, 21 - R O'Gara, 22 - D Kearney.

WALES : 15 - L Halfpenny; 14 - A Cuthbert, 13 - J Davies, 12 - J Roberts, 11 - G North; 10 - R Priestland, 9 - M Phillips; 1 - R Gill, 2 - H Bennett, 3 - A Jones, 4 - B Davies, 5 - I Evans, 6 - R Jones, 7- S Warburton (C), 8 - T Faletau.

Replacements:16 - K Owens, 17 - P James, 18 - A Powell, 19 - J Tipuric, 20 - Lloyd Williams, 21 - J Hook, 22 - Scott Williams.

valjester wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:

Being capable of doing something and consistently doing it are completely different things. I for one once ran a half marathon and could do it every week. In the past 5 years I've done it once. Ferris and O'Brien of course can turn over the ball. I have season ticket at Ravenhill and see Ferris do it time and again. The issue is doing it consistently. Neither, nor Heaslip for that matter, do it consistently. We struggle at the breakdown consistently time and time again. The best three players do not the best unit make. Why are we the only serious rugby nation arrogant enough to believe we are different?

They do it consistently for their clubs, they do it consistently for Ireland over the past few years. As others have pointed out, France, South Africa, England yesterday, don't play without a 7 you are describing. Besides the last two Welsh games it is usually an area of strength for us. The last few times we have played Australia, even when they had Pocock, we were able to go toe to toe with them at the breakdown. It is impossible for us to compete at the breakdown is we are losing yards every single time they run at us.

Yeah but we would play a 7 if we could and it would have helped a lot

Priestland played exceptionally well because it was obvious he was still carrying a bad injury but still created more than enough chances for the backs.

He should be on the bench next week along with Roberts,they deserve a rest and played very well under the circumstances.

viewtothegym wrote:Priestland played exceptionally well because it was obvious he was still carrying a bad injury but still created more than enough chances for the backs.

He should be on the bench next week along with Roberts,they deserve a rest and played very well under the circumstances.

His place kicking was off today but i thought that he ran the game very well. Along with North i thought he was Wales' best player.

So disappointed with that performance. When the provinces are going so well I'm afraid it points to the coaching. Maybe I'm wrong but I am seriously worried about Irelands future under Kidney.

Agree about Priestland, besides his kicking he carried strongly and set up the power runners very well again. I say he starts again against Scotland, only this time without kicking duties. Once his form with the boot picks up again he may be reconsidered.

Fairly pleased with Hook, nothing special but at least did the basics right this time.

Well we have no really physical centres. Downeys the closest but is not good enough. We should just play SOB at 12. Hell make his tackles, hell make yards, hes probably faster than Darcy and Darcy doesnt pass anyway so there wont be a noticeable difference in distribution. Problem solved

Spence is a very physical centre, if we wanted to look at that type of player. However knowing Kidney he would stick him in at 12 as part of a limited game plan, when really he is a 13. I have said before, and I will say again, that Spence and Marshall as a centre partnership looked like the future. I doubt it will work out just like that, but in terms of a creative 12 and physical 13 that is the answer. That will obviously be a good bit of time away though, so for now we have to work with what we've got.

Is Earls back next week? Honestly I think Earls would have made a difference, coming from a guy who has wanted him to not touch the 13 shirt in the past.

I'm Optimist wrote:So disappointed with that performance. When the provinces are going so well I'm afraid it points to the coaching. Maybe I'm wrong but I am seriously worried about Irelands future under Kidney.

I said it 3 years ago and prayed I was wrong. Phhooke religion.

Gibson, wanted to ask you this, as you are a huge advocate of playing a natural 7. Who is it you would want to see start there? And who gets dropped out of Heaslip, Ferris and SOB?

Also, why do you/anyone else think a 7s job is to secure ball? To me that is a rugby basic that every player on the pitch has to be able to do. A 7 is there to disrupt, slow down and turnover ball.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Spence is a very physical centre, if we wanted to look at that type of player. However knowing Kidney he would stick him in at 12 as part of a limited game plan, when really he is a 13. I have said before, and I will say again, that Spence and Marshall as a centre partnership looked like the future. I doubt it will work out just like that, but in terms of a creative 12 and physical 13 that is the answer. That will obviously be a good bit of time away though, so for now we have to work with what we've got.

Is Earls back next week? Honestly I think Earls would have made a difference, coming from a guy who has wanted him to not touch the 13 shirt in the past.

Rory,
Nothing will change until Kidney is gone. But, keep on dreaming about players who will never make it, in the meantime.

We could have had Spence,Cave, O Malley, Marshall, a whole academy of possibles, playing at the same time, but they would not have stopped Roberts and Davies today.

BOD was missed. In every possible way. He has been carrying us for years.

Tupric looked good to when he come on, a very hard team to come up against and away from home.
Bradley was daft he let the adrenaline go to his head and lost it,he may be banned for the rest of the six nations which is real shame because he played the best he could in a long while.

Tipuric was excellent when he came on. I was worried he might be too small for Test rugby, but not on today's evidence.

I must admit I feared the worst when Tipuric came on. He done well though.

Me to i thought Heaslip Ferris and O'Brien would throw him around like a rag doll in the ruck.

Gibson wrote:

Rory,
Nothing will change until Kidney is gone. But, keep on dreaming about players who will never make it, in the meantime.

We could have had Spence,Cave, O Malley, Marshall, a whole academy of possibles, playing at the same time, but they would not have stopped Roberts and Davies today.

BOD was missed. In every possible way. He has been carrying us for years.

And why do you think that is Gibson? Why could nobody stop Roberts/Davies/North in your opinion, no matter who we played? Is that because we don't have the players capable, or because of the way we are coached, or what? I thought Trimble defended brilliantly against these guys, so I don't think it is the first option. They are hardly unstoppable.

Take a player's legs away and he's not going anywhere. Italy went too high on Malzieu yesterday and made it easy for him to hand them off.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

Gibson wrote:

Rory,
Nothing will change until Kidney is gone. But, keep on dreaming about players who will never make it, in the meantime.

We could have had Spence,Cave, O Malley, Marshall, a whole academy of possibles, playing at the same time, but they would not have stopped Roberts and Davies today.

BOD was missed. In every possible way. He has been carrying us for years.

And why do you think that is Gibson? Why could nobody stop Roberts/Davies/North in your opinion, no matter who we played? Is that because we don't have the players capable, or because of the way we are coached, or what? I thought Trimble defended brilliantly against these guys, so I don't think it is the first option. They are hardly unstoppable.

They are unstoppable if you lack courage and leadership and allow them to run at you. Too often the Irish backs especially allowed North and company to build up a head of steam. No wonder they ran right over us at times. North's try was exceptionally poor defence, and Davies' second was as well. I know recently that BOD has had his detractors, but when has that guy ever taken a backwards step. He runs out of defence and meets the opposition head on. McFadden and D'Arcy were way too passive.

Then it is a pretty pathetic attitude if the players lack the courage. They shouldn't be on that field in that case.

I highly doubt that the coaches told the players to allow a set of dangerous Welsh backs to run at them. What genius would say 'Right lads, you see that Roberts fella? What we want you to do is just stand there, hold out your arm and allow him to run at you.' Its nonsense. O'Driscoll, for his faults, often sprints out of the defensive line in order to make the big hit.

If nothing else its simple physics. Why allow Roberts to build up a head of steam . Be aggressive in the tackle. We see if far too seldom from this Ireland team. Tackle and defend like they did against England did last season, of Australia in the World Cup. They could do alot worse that learn a lesson from Connaught playing against Quins in the HC

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Also, why do you/anyone else think a 7s job is to secure ball? To me that is a rugby basic that every player on the pitch has to be able to do. A 7 is there to disrupt, slow down and turnover ball.

Rory, maybe I'm in danger of stating the obvious but the 7s job is to win the ball because by the nature and structure of the game they should be in the position to do so. Flankers are not called 'breakways' for nothing. At scrum time the only player in the scrum realistically able to get to the breakdown first is the openside. Everyone else is still in the scrum, the blindside is on the other side and the backs are 10 yards behind the base of the scrum. In a normal situation the 7 should therefore be challenging the outside half when the ball is passed out from the scrum. If a back does get there first e.g. a centre then the 7 would probably be the first forward there. Similarly, in the lineout the 7 often, but not always, stands at the back. If it's overthrown then he's first to get it but if it's caught and passed then he's the player to race up on the first receiver and the one who had to challenge for it first. It doesn't have to be the 7 obviously, but a second row would be jumping and a prop lifting. Best to have your fastest player there to close down the first receiver.

That is off the set piece Griff, where the 7 gets there first to secure ball, which should happen yes and I should have noted that. But in open play, the 7 obviously cannot be at every breakdown and therefore the pack and backs must secure the ball. Now I thought the breakdown was terribly reffed in general, but there were times Ireland players were standing watching like school boys. My 9 would have given me a boot in the back for that.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:I highly doubt that the coaches told the players to allow a set of dangerous Welsh backs to run at them. What genius would say 'Right lads, you see that Roberts fella? What we want you to do is just stand there, hold out your arm and allow him to run at you.' Its nonsense. O'Driscoll, for his faults, often sprints out of the defensive line in order to make the big hit.

If nothing else its simple physics. Why allow Roberts to build up a head of steam . Be aggressive in the tackle. We see if far too seldom from this Ireland team. Tackle and defend like they did against England did last season, of Australia in the World Cup. They could do alot worse that learn a lesson from Connaught playing against Quins in the HC

Obviously. However the coach is in charge of who he selects, and as D'Arcy got bounced by Rougerie last year and has many times since by bigger more physical players, and since McFadden is known to be defensively liable at 13, it was pretty obvious what would happen and everyone was saying beforehand that the centres was our weakness. BOD does not play blitz defence actually, that is what Wales do and they come up in a line, not as individuals. BOD is very very good at his positioning and he is very good at closing the opposition down. He does not simply sprint out of his line..

BOD used to act as a "shooter", sprinting out of the line to make the big hit and was very effective because he always hit his man. But then teams became wise to it and started looking to exploit the space behind him, so the defensive tactics had to change. It's always evolving.

geoff999rugby wrote:Sorry Rodders I though D'aRcy and McFadden were poor

Who would you have played Geoff that would have done better? Wallace? Spence? O'Malley?

McFadden had a hand in both tries and D'arcy was solid if unspectacular. At the end of the day if you get 17st players running at 14st players then eventually something will give. Who else that we could have picked would have made that tackle on North?

I think its time to accept, begrudgingly that Wales have a better 1st xv than us. They certainly have better backs and there strengths match up well against ours. We have marginally better forwards but they have far better backs. We had to work incredibly hard to get over then gainline and take far more risks, whereas once again Wales did it so easily with their big strike runners.

I think Wales are the best team in the NH right now and will prove that over the next 6 weeks.

We need to regroup and try and win our remaining games and to be honest I believe we can do that but we need to cut out the unforced errors.

Well Wallace did tackle Croft into touch to be fair Rodders

Seriously though, when D'Arcy is consistently weak defensively and McFadden isn't a good defender at 13, was anyone really surprised? Wallace has been pretty damn solid at 12 lately, I certainly would have given him the chance. If we were going to play a game where we have to defend the whole game and "kill Wales" as Kidney wanted, then we might as well have just put two rocks in midfield.

Right this may seem controversial but I think the Irish players put more effort into their provinces and it's the opposite with Welsh players.

roddersm wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Sorry Rodders I though D'aRcy and McFadden were poor

Who would you have played Geoff that would have done better? Wallace? Spence? O'Malley?

McFadden had a hand in both tries and D'arcy was solid if unspectacular. At the end of the day if you get 17st players running at 14st players then eventually something will give. Who else that we could have picked would have made that tackle on North?

I think its time to accept, begrudgingly that Wales have a better 1st xv than us. They certainly have better backs and there strengths match up well against ours. We have marginally better forwards but they have far better backs. We had to work incredibly hard to get over then gainline and take far more risks, whereas once again Wales did it so easily with their big strike runners.

I think Wales are the best team in the NH right now and will prove that over the next 6 weeks.

We need to regroup and try and win our remaining games and to be honest I believe we can do that but we need to cut out the unforced errors.

Ireland, on paper, and on an individual basis should be better than Wales. The provincial form book suggests this. But Wales are much more than the sum of their parts. We are less than ours. That said, if Saint-Andre can marshall this French team then I would back them every day of the week against any other Six Nations team. Then again, they are French. It's such a lazy cliche, but in regards to French rugby absolutely correct.

Also, Kidney could do alot worse than to pick players in their proper positions. McFadden is not a 13. Nor is Bowe. Nor is Trimble.

It is pretty stupid to think we are individually better than Wales after seeing what they have done to us with ball in hand. It is individuals like North, Roberts and Davies who have been causing us such trouble, specifically in the midfield.

I'm not surprised Rory, it was always my fear...see my post from this morning before the game.

I don't think we had any other fit options that would have done better definsively.

We weren't able to get go forward ball or retain the ball for long enough to keep Wales under pressure and it told. To be honest we were very lucky to still be in the game a half time and Wales could have won by far more.

They are a much better side than us right now and we have no answer to their power and pace.

Griff wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Also, why do you/anyone else think a 7s job is to secure ball? To me that is a rugby basic that every player on the pitch has to be able to do. A 7 is there to disrupt, slow down and turnover ball.

Rory, maybe I'm in danger of stating the obvious but the 7s job is to win the ball because by the nature and structure of the game they should be in the position to do so. Flankers are not called 'breakways' for nothing. At scrum time the only player in the scrum realistically able to get to the breakdown first is the openside. Everyone else is still in the scrum, the blindside is on the other side and the backs are 10 yards behind the base of the scrum. In a normal situation the 7 should therefore be challenging the outside half when the ball is passed out from the scrum. If a back does get there first e.g. a centre then the 7 would probably be the first forward there. Similarly, in the lineout the 7 often, but not always, stands at the back. If it's overthrown then he's first to get it but if it's caught and passed then he's the player to race up on the first receiver and the one who had to challenge for it first. It doesn't have to be the 7 obviously, but a second row would be jumping and a prop lifting. Best to have your fastest player there to close down the first receiver.

Sorry Rory, I'm probably teaching granny to suck eggs. You're right, I was just describing set peice there. Maybe the 7 has more of a roaming role in open play? I'm clutching at straws now! But, away from the set peice, a good 7 being one of the quickest forwards, it does give him the option to roam and wait for a team member to make a hit and then go in as second defender to poach. I know any player could do it but if a coach is defining roles then maybe it's the 7 who is given the job?

Anyway, I'm off on one a bit due to too much beer and now wine so I'm probably not making much sense!

Cymroglan wrote:Right this may seem controversial but I think the Irish players put more effort into their provinces and it's the opposite with Welsh players.

Its not controversial. It's the truth.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:
Ireland, on paper, and on an individual basis should be better than Wales. The provincial form book suggests this. But Wales are much more than the sum of their parts. We are less than ours. That said, if Saint-Andre can marshall this French team then I would back them every day of the week against any other Six Nations team. Then again, they are French. It's such a lazy cliche, but in regards to French rugby absolutely correct.

Also, Kidney could do alot worse than to pick players in their proper positions. McFadden is not a 13. Nor is Bowe. Nor is Trimble.

Who would you have picked at 13 then, O'Malley? You think he would have faired better defensively?

I'm not so sure we are better on an individual basis, in some positions yes but where are the Norths and Roberts in Irish rugby? In certain positions they are superior and we haven't found and gameplan to negate that power advantage.

The truth is also that Kidney wants Ireland to play like one of the provinces (Munster), when the majority of the team aren't suited to playing that sort of game. We need a coach outside of Ireland I feel.

You just pipped me to that post Gibbo - Some fans saying Ireland threw it away today need to stand back for a day or 2. IMO Wales dominated posession for most of the game whilst Ireleand huffed and puffed. Phillip Mathews called it right 10 minutes from the end when Wales were losing as he said he can only see Wales winning this. A 1 point Irish win would have glossed over a lot of things. This was far from a complete performance from Wales when you look at lineouts and poor kicking. I'm not quite sure where Ireland go from here as they have some fantastic players but in all honesty they didn't really desrve to win today and the best team won I'm afraid. Us welsh fans have been there so you boys in green shouldn't panic, this is a decent welsh team.

I (unfortunately) agree Ruby. Well played sir.

Wales have bigger backs. The obvious tactic to nullify them is to starve them of possession. I think we have the players to do that. They just have to be given the right gameplan and trained to implement it with accuracy and enthusiasm.

Constantly kicking the ball to the oppositions big backs is a stupid idea. Yet that is what we've done for the last three encounters with Wales. And we'll probably constantly kick to the the lethal French back three in 6 days too. And the result will be the same.

When will the IRFU lose patience with Deccie? It's looking like three years of disappointment now.

roddersm wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Sorry Rodders I though D'aRcy and McFadden were poor

Who would you have played Geoff that would have done better? Wallace? Spence? O'Malley?

Just because there is no adequate replacement doesn't alter the fact that they were poor. Just maybe we have no one good enough ?

For next week things are desperate - Sexton or McFadden for 12
Earls or Bowe for 13.

In truth whatever combination we put out will creek

roddersm wrote:
McFadden had a hand in both tries and D'arcy was solid if unspectacular.

McFadden certainly have a hand in one of the Welsh tries. The guy is a 12 not a 13. Every time he plays 13 for Ireland he gets shown up defensively

Feckless Rogue wrote:Wales have bigger backs. The obvious tactic to nullify them is to starve them of possession.

Yes but to execute that tactic you need far superior forwards and the ability to retain posession for long periods and we have neither. Wales have our number right now and if we played the 10 times they'd beat us at least 8 on this evidence. We could have won today, as we could have in the RWC but both times we have been the inferior side.

If we really were gutsy, like Wales, we would look to our younger players with potential. North was hardly a well known player when he first played for Wales, same with the likes of Faletau. If we are in this position where our current centres are pathetic, why are we so scared of playing entirely new players? How can it be any worse than it is now? I know for a fact some of the players we have available right now would do a better job than what D'arcy and McFadden did today.

Wales deserved to win, well done!

It was a close game that could have gone either way so to suddenly start making wholesale changes is daft. Ireland's back three were generally good despite Bowe's mistake palming the ball into touch. Also the suggestion to replace Best is strange as he was right up there with POC as Ireland's best forward, and the tight five in general did their job well.

All the talk about a natural openside is also largely nonsense - Ireland conceded 7 turnovers whereas Wales conceded 8 - hardly match changing. The biggest shortcoming in the Ireland team is undoubtedly in midfield. D'Arcy is no longer a threat and is increasingly falling off tackles. McFadden was physically overpowered but couldn't make up for it the way BOD does with nous. Ireland simply aren't posing any problems at 12 and 13 for the opposition. If the centres are hard to stop or contain they draw the focus of the opposition defence - neither Gatland nor his backrow probably gave Ireland's a second thought.

Not sure what the solution is - other that it's not D'Arcy and McFadden

roddersm wrote:

Cymroglan wrote:Right this may seem controversial but I think the Irish players put more effort into their provinces and it's the opposite with Welsh players.

Its not controversial. It's the truth.

I think it is complete bunk. The problem isn't effort its no game plan and whose to blame for that the coach. We kicked away ball when it was complete madness. The kicking wasn't even that good.

My team for next week:

Healy, Best, Ross, POC, Ryan, Ferris, Heaslip, POM/ Henry, Murray, ROG, Trimble, McFadden, Earls, Bowe, Kearney
Subs: Court, Cronin, Tuohy, SOB, Reddan, Sexton, Kearney jr.

If Earls cant make it move Bowe inside, Kearney jr plays and put Hurley on the bench

consign D'aRcy and DOC to the international rest home

roddersm wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:
Ireland, on paper, and on an individual basis should be better than Wales. The provincial form book suggests this. But Wales are much more than the sum of their parts. We are less than ours. That said, if Saint-Andre can marshall this French team then I would back them every day of the week against any other Six Nations team. Then again, they are French. It's such a lazy cliche, but in regards to French rugby absolutely correct.

Also, Kidney could do alot worse than to pick players in their proper positions. McFadden is not a 13. Nor is Bowe. Nor is Trimble.

Who would you have picked at 13 then, O'Malley? You think he would have faired better defensively?

I'm not so sure we are better on an individual basis, in some positions yes but where are the Norths and Roberts in Irish rugby? In certain positions they are superior and we haven't found and gameplan to negate that power advantage.

I meant generally we should be better individually across the board on provincial form. Thats why outside observers in England and France, and in the southern hemisphere all backed Ireland. You are of course absolutely right. Provincial form has lulled us into a false sense of security about our own players. North and Roberts are different to what we have here, but with the right tactics all four Irish provinces have demonstrated that both offensively and defensively we can better them on a consistent basis. It is not on a individual basis that Wales are better than us-it is in units.

I actually would have picked Cave had he been fit. At least have a player who is positionally competent.

Once again though Gatland has done a number of us. Kidney is being out thought too often when it counts. He probably has one match to turn it around and that's in France. Good luck with that one Deccie!

Or lets stop screwing around with players out of position etc and try someone else? Instead of following this whole system of needing to be established at the highest level. Some players are naturally already there, whether physically, or mentally or both. We hold back far too much. At 12 our cupboards are quite bare, but McFadden has been around for ages now and STILL hasn't got the 12 shirt. Well I say this whole fear of starting him at 12 has ruined his career, rather than the people who say throwing a younger player in the deep end will ruin theirs.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:If we really were gutsy, like Wales, we would look to our younger players with potential. North was hardly a well known player when he first played for Wales, same with the likes of Faletau. If we are in this position where our current centres are pathetic, why are we so scared of playing entirely new players? How can it be any worse than it is now? I know for a fact some of the players we have available right now would do a better job than what D'arcy and McFadden did today.

I totally agree. The excuses of 'having not played enough big European games' was shown to be hogwash by the Welsh. And not during Autumn internationals or Six Nations. No, Gatland threw young players into his team in the run up to the World Cup. Players from the so-called 'weakest' Welsh region. O'Malley has been excellent in the last two games for Leinster in Europe. Dan Tuohy, Darren Cave and Chris Henry have been magnificent for Ulster this season. I saw more heart, aggression and pride in the green shirts of Connacht this season than in the past two seasons (vs England and Australia aside) for Ireland. I am certainly not advocating wholesale changes. I would bring in Ryan into the second row and make a change in the backrow. I would probably drop Heaslip and bring in either O'Mahony or Henry at 7 with O'Brien to 8. I would play McFadden at 12 and finally give him a chance at his best position, and either Cave (if fit) or O'Malley at 13. The rest of the back line stays the same. Wales gave us two tactical lessons and a selection lesson in the past six months. It is lunacy to keep doing the same things over and over again and expect different results.

TycroesOsprey wrote:if you werent wumming cheque fair enough but still think iuts an uneeded statement.

I apologise for giving that impression

I don't think Heaslip or any of the backrow should be dropped yet. Why people think playing POM at 7 will solve the whole "natural 7" issue (which isn't an issue), when he isn't even a "natural 7" himself, I will never know.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't think Heaslip or any of the backrow should be dropped yet. Why people think playing POM at 7 will solve the whole "natural 7" issue (which isn't an issue), when he isn't even a "natural 7" himself, I will never know.

Well you could pick him for the reason than Heaslip isn't playing well and hasn't been for the better part of eighteen months.

For the rest of the 6 nations you should be fine with the current backrow. Im not really sure who you should bring in to blood though. I dont really rate POM either. He looks like a Neil Best type flanker to me.

Even though he was the best of the 3 back row players today? Bar one badly missed tackle. Plus he has been playing well for Leinster since the world cup.