Ireland review of Italian Game

Ok I've watched the game twice so far and will probably watch it again later on tonight!
A definite improvement for sure. Much better in a number of different facets of play. Would like to point out the media have gone a bit (and may go further) overboard on this win but for sure it was a good game from our point of view.

Healy: 6.5
Pretty good in the scrum apart from a penalty conceeded. He was really good in defence in my opinion and hit rucks like crazy. I thought he didn't get enough of the ball in terms of carrying but what he did get was positive yardage.

Best: 7
Good lineout throwing, excellent defence and great at getting up and competing for the ball. Slowed down a lot of Italian ball and acted as a number 7 almost in his linking play. Good use of choke tackles too.

Ross: 6
Conceeded a few penalties in the scrum but carried better than in the last number of months and was a nuissance whenever the Italians tried setting a maul. Another who really went for the choke tackles.

O'Callaghan: 6
I'd have liked to have seen Ryan's mobility but DOC did well. He was another player who used the choke tackles and was hitting rucks like a man possessed. Tackled hard too.

O'Connell: 8.5
Peerless in the lineout. Serious work when it came to counter rucking, I was very impressed with him here and most surprisingly he was a much better carrier than previously in terms of leg drive and more importantly lines of running.

Ferris: 6.5
He did well, not as great re:carrying as he is for Ulster not being used wide enough still but did really well when he was making some good breaks and yards. Massive defense and work at the breakdown.

O'Brien: 6
Gave away a few too many penalties but he also slowed down a lot of ball and was good at linking some plays and making an extra few yards in moves. Didn't carry as much or effectively as last year and wasn't his best performance.

Heaslip: 8
Made a lot of turnovers and rips off the Italians. He also made the "hard" yards. Was exceptionally impressed with his performance, it was very well rounded and he was one of the most positive lads in green.

Murray: 5
Good tackler, good around the fringes, but very slow at getting the ball out, a step before passing, it just slows our game down so much and hamstrings our backs a bit. He needs to go back to what he was doing last august. He has the potential to be outstanding.

Sexton: 8
Not great in the first half with a couple of aimless kicks and the backs weren't going forward although not enitrely his fault. In the second half he was great, his range of passing and pace to the gainline make him so dangerous. His defence was very good and his goalkicking was excellent.

Trimble: 6.5
Took his try well and did very well under the high ball. He defended well and looked dangerous when the ball came his way but he didn't appear hungry enough IMO I'd like to have seen him come of his wing more.

Darcy: 6
Played pretty well in compassion to his other recent performances. Some good carrying and he defended pretty ok nothing huge to write home about but he looked better than before (it could be because it was against Italy no disrespect intended.)

Earls: 6
Wasn't wild on him really again. He ran some great support lines off Best and Ferris during the game which were beautiful and defended well. his attack was fairly limited though I thought. Off the Ferris offload too he made a break with Bowe outside, he didn't pass, ok, he didn't even look though....not a centre.

Bowe: 7
He finished his tries well and made a few breaks, also made yards outside the defence. His defence was pretty ok too and he did well chasing kicks too. Still would like to see him come inside more often.

Kearney: 8.5
I think one of our best players. great fielding of the ball and his counter attacking was exceptional. he joined the line well from depth and injected more pace into the line than any of our other players. Defence was good too and he looked pure class.

Bench:
Court did grand took his try really well
Cronin looked good from touch and got on the ball well in attack
Ryan looks pure class IMO and should start. Athletic, the way he out POC in space is something DOC just wouldn't dream of.
POM was good and majorally aggressive!
Reddan was outstanding and should start next week. Quick passing/service is the lifeblood for Sexton & co.
Rog missed a kick to touch and kicked some at McLean and Massi. Could have had a better impact.
McFadden didn't do much, glad he was in at 14 rather than 13.

All in all it was good, better than good but not so good as excellent. It is safe to say that attacking rugby is the way to go? When we play with speed width and aggression we look really good. Scrum wasn't as good as expected but lineout was very good imo. Defence was alright for the most part, but can be improved. Attack was poor during the first half but Reddan really spiced it up when he came on.

Any thoughts? Should the team be changed? Who were you happy with? Were the tactics right?

Hi Pete!

Definitely higher than 6.5 for Ferris! He was our best player along with Kearney and Sexton! BBC MOTM. He was involved in at least two tries and almost created another for Bowe. Maybe his best Ireland display yet?

I'd go 9 for Kearney and 8.5-9 for Sexto and Fez.

D'arcy 7- 7.5, thought he had a great game.

I'd like to see Reddan and Ryan start against France but think Kidney will keep the same side.

Scoreline flattered us I thought. We were poor enough in the first half but improved out of sight when Reddan came on and we started producing quicker ruck ball.

More than a little harsh on ferris there Pete. He was up there with POC for me.

One thing i dont like is our bloody obsession with the choke tackle. It is a decent weapon to have in the locker but Sexton tried it on Barbieri 8metres from our own line and as a consequence he bullied his way to within a metre and generated the quick ball that saw us concede.

Im not blaming Johnny for the try as of course it was a ballsed up lineout but in what world is that the right situation to employ that tackle by a 10 on a backrow. Warburtons tackle on Tuilagi showed how good going low and timing a tackle around the legs/ankles can be.

I dont know if this is a coaching thing but for every time the choke tackle works there is another time when we give up 10 yards. The net result is that often we are too upright in the tackle instead of lower and more dynamic.

Im still not seeing any grand plan to unleash our backs.

SOB just doesn't seem to be the player he was last year and I think he badly affects the balance of the backrow. When Ryan and the new back row boy came on Ireland had a better shape and more go forward.

I thought Darcy played well but wasn't sure how he well he did in attack. He defended well but what else did he really do? he was solid but that was it IMO.

I agree re: Ferris now that you say that. Wouldn't go 8.5 but yeah 6.5 is a bit low.

I'd start Ryan and reddan too. I really think it would make a serious difference to our team if we started those two and went to play attacking, wide, quick ruck ball rugby

I thought Darcy missed that tackle mainly, he didn't actually touch the guy while Sexton should have had a hand there but ah well more than a bit nitpicking.

I agree that we should use the chop tackle more often. Especially against France, I'm scared of their lines of running

Ireland also seem to run too much first phase ball - with tight defences this isn't always the best strategy - I think they need to play a bit more percentage rugby rather than trying to create things 90% of the time

Pete D'arcy made a couple of good line breaks, one brilliant one in the first half.

Good points on the choke tackle. In fairness we have a few guys there who execute it really well and we did get at least 3 turnovers.

Its smart play under the current laws as its very difficult to slow the ball down or get turnovers in the rucks now without being penalised.

It is a high risk ploy and can backfire as you do lose ground but we have a lot of stocky guys with high lower body strength who can get under the ball so we are taking advantage of that.

Ruby I think SOB is a marked man this season with his carried. I think hes doing ok though. His work rated is excellent even if hes not catching the eye.

When we play terrible we get two tries against the sweethearts of the competition and probably favourites to win the Slam, Wales.

When we play with a touch of forward momentum with a smidgen of aggression and a dollop of attacking creativity, we score five tries against Italy. A side that has allegedly improved no-end in the last year or two but a side we normally struggled against when we had the Golden Generation performing at allegedly the peak of their powers back in the noughties.

Can we improve? There's certainly a lot that can be done to improve - yes.

Was it a little hint of what Ireland could be if a real gameplan is nailed down and regimentally coached? Yes, a taster.

Was it polished? No - it was still ragged and it still had players a little confused about what was happeneing around them. Most importantly it still seems to be a little alien to this side to be ready for moments of improvisation from some of our more creative players. When Kearney ignites for example...he needs instinctive high quality support burning down the road after him ready to unburden him of his 'wow' factor and sustain it with speed and precision towards the opposing tryline.

Beauty in isolation might get high rating points for the individual player but it needs clinical support to give it substance. We really need to tighten up our senses about response times to moments of creativity.

This Italian team has gone backwards big time IMO and resemble what they were 5-6 years ago

RubyGuby wrote:Ireland also seem to run too much first phase ball - with tight defences this isn't always the best strategy - I think they need to play a bit more percentage rugby rather than trying to create things 90% of the time

Yes good point. We are actually pretty poor off the set piece these days. Everything goes into multi phase attacks but we do have a habit of going wide too early and with Murray a lot of the ruck ball has been slow. When Reddan came on we showed what we can do with quick ball but yes we need to be patient and show composure with slow ball and against organised defences. We have a lot to work on.

Thought darcy was very good. He made his first break in what must be nearly two years. Kearney was my MOTM then ferris then sexton. Heaslip was much improved but 8 is a bit high I think. Second half was a really good performance but at half time I was thinking not again. Was a poor first 40.

Think the most promising thing was kidney didn't just change the halfback at 60 minutes but used the subs to alter the game in a positive way when it was required. Think it's the first time we've seen that from him.

All in all I think it was a good performance and worth remembering that both France and England were put under a lot of pressure by Italy as well and but for s charge down England would have lost.

For next week Ryan and redden to start, possibly o mahoney. Murray was just too slow and Ryan has been immense all season

Exactly, Ireland have all the players to go through phase after phase after phase using those big lumps to drive them through the middle then striking when they've sucked more defenders in. Its just that they seem intent on running everything all the time, bit like Wales a few years ago.

SecretFly wrote:When we play terrible we get two tries against the sweethearts of the competition and probably favourites to win the Slam, Wales.

When we play with a touch of forward momentum with a smidgen of aggression and a dollop of attacking creativity, we score five tries against Italy. A side that has allegedly improved no-end in the last year or two but a side we normally struggled against when we had the Golden Generation performing at allegedly the peak of their powers back in the noughties.

Can we improve? There's certainly a lot that can be done to improve - yes.

Was it a little hint of what Ireland could be if a real gameplan is nailed down and regimentally coached? Yes, a taster.

Was it polished? No - it was still ragged and it still had players a little confused about what was happeneing around them. Most importantly it still seems to be a little alien to this side to be ready for moments of improvisation from some of our more creative players. When Kearney ignites for example...he needs instinctive high quality support burning down the road after him ready to unburden him of his 'wow' factor and sustain it with speed and precision towards the opposing tryline.

Beauty in isolation might get high rating points for the individual player but it needs clinical support to give it substance. We really need to tighten up our senses about response times to moments of creativity.

I couldn't agree more tbh. great post. it's all about being on the same wavelength.

Darcy made on break as far as I am aware and it was against an odd Italian defense due to the loose ball but he did do well in that instance. Thought Earls was basically invisible for most of the game

Yes, Golden, I'll give credit to Kidney. He gave the subs time to effect a change in tempo...he gave them real time to be of value not just as a set of fresh legs but as players who could offer some strategic variation on the game.

RubyGuby wrote:Exactly, Ireland have all the players to go through phase after phase after phase using those big lumps to drive them through the middle then striking when they've sucked more defenders in. Its just that they seem intent on running everything all the time, bit like Wales a few years ago.

Yes good comparison ruby. We have become a bit like Wales last year (pre rwc warm ups) where everything was predictable and lateral. Wales went back to the drawing board and brought in new players and a new game plan.

I think we have good player but the game plan and attacking patterns just aren't there. Individual brilliance from BOD and Bowe has masked that for a while.

I think Reddan and Ryan would make a big difference. Possibly O'Mahoney at 7 too but I'm not as concerned about our back row as some are.

I think it made a world of difference that the pack as a unit had a much improved game, especially in the second half when they blitzed the Italians at the breakdown. It made it much easier for Reddan to get quicker ball away. I feel slightly sorry for Murray- it is easier for any 9 to get the ball away quicker if the rucks are cleared out quickly and allows for faster recycling. Italy in the first half helped slow down the ball, counter rucked effectively, and limited Murrays options for him. Murrays slow service was not always his fault.

When the ball is static and there aren't many gaps available you really have to question Sexton's game management. I really wonder sometimes if he has the 'rugby brain' to be a truly world class 10.

SOB was really very average at best. He didn't carry the ball often nor effectively. His breakdown play is fairly limited, though very much improved over last season. He is a more rounded player than this stage last season, but the problem is his strength is his ball carrying and his ability in broken play and he has not shown that at all so far. I think we should give POM a look against France, perhaps 30 minutes or so from off the bench. It's not about 'balance' or someone being better, but perhaps just bringing something different to the backrow unit.

Much improved performances from Darcy who I thought was pretty good, though I know that will pain many posters here. Bowe remains for me the best winger in the northern hemisphere due to his lines or running. He doesn't rely on pure strength, but uses intelligence and not brute force to create space for himself. That is why he has yet to be 'found out' at international level since he fully emerged under Kidney. Kearney was my MOTM and has been tremendous. His improvement in counter attacking is astonishing since he returned from injury. He no longer kicks aimlessly, or just runs the ball back into the crowd. Really pleased to see him back playing near to his potential. Rory Best I thought was our best forward, even better than POC. His work at the breakdown continues to be excellent, he consistently carries the ball well and shoes real verve and leadership through example.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:I think it made a world of difference that the pack as a unit had a much improved game, especially in the second half when they blitzed the Italians at the breakdown. It made it much easier for Reddan to get quicker ball away. I feel slightly sorry for Murray- it is easier for any 9 to get the ball away quicker if the rucks are cleared out quickly and allows for faster recycling. Italy in the first half helped slow down the ball, counter rucked effectively, and limited Murrays options for him. Murrays slow service was not always his fault.

Yea sorry I don't buy that. Plenty of times the ball was presented and ready to go and he delayed getting it away or took it on himself. He's doing exactly what TOL has been doing in recent seasons and taking an age to get the ball out and allowing defences to realign, meaning you have to set up more and more phases.

RTE showed a great example where we'd made a linebreak and the ball was recycled quickly and a certain try was on if he'd got it away but instead he took it on himself up the blindside and the chance was lost.

Murray can pass the ball away very fast in one movement but he isn't doing this right now and it is killing our attacks. He is a brilliant talent but we need to start with Reddan until Murray learns to produce quick ball. Hopefully Strings comes back to Munster to help him develop.

roddersm wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:I think it made a world of difference that the pack as a unit had a much improved game, especially in the second half when they blitzed the Italians at the breakdown. It made it much easier for Reddan to get quicker ball away. I feel slightly sorry for Murray- it is easier for any 9 to get the ball away quicker if the rucks are cleared out quickly and allows for faster recycling. Italy in the first half helped slow down the ball, counter rucked effectively, and limited Murrays options for him. Murrays slow service was not always his fault.

Yea sorry I don't buy that. Plenty of times the ball was presented and ready to go and he delayed getting it away or took it on himself. He's doing exactly what TOL has been doing in recent seasons and taking an age to get the ball out and allowing defences to realign, meaning you have to set up more and more phases.

RTE showed a great example where we'd made a linebreak and the ball was recycled quickly and a certain try was on if he'd got it away but instead he took it on himself up the blindside and the chance was lost.

Murray can pass the ball away very fast in one movement but he isn't doing this right now and it is killing our attacks. He is a brilliant talent but we need to start with Reddan until Murray learns to produce quick ball. Hopefully Strings comes back to Munster to help him develop.

Dont get me wrong Rodders, i am not saying that Murray is blameless by any stretch of the imagination here. He is mostly to blame. I am just pointing out that it is not entirely his fault and the pack in the first at times did not help him. More often than not, he didnt help himself. He just doesnt have the experience even at provincial level to know when to make the right choices.

There is a certain irony that he was brought into the side because of his faster passing so we know he can do it. Quite why he isn't seems a mystery.

Agreed rodders. I hope it comes with gametime and part of me does want to persist with him but we can't ignore the reddan/sexton combination any longer. The are a myriad of excuses that can be used like Italy tiring, reddan being fresher but the bottom line is that our best performances of the past year have come with reddan and sexton in tandem.

Murray did defend well though and his positional play I thought was pretty good.

Standulstermen wrote:Agreed rodders. I hope it comes with gametime and part of me does want to persist with him but we can't ignore the reddan/sexton combination any longer. The are a myriad of excuses that can be used like Italy tiring, reddan being fresher but the bottom line is that our best performances of the past year have come with reddan and sexton in tandem.

Murray did defend well though and his positional play I thought was pretty good.

Personally I am astonished that Reddan hasn't been in the team consistently over the past two season. Quite why Kidney prefers a Munster/Leinster combo in possibly the most important combination on the pitch in puzzling.

I think you have underscored both Ferris and Kearney. Ferris was my MOTM followed by Kearney then Sexton. Pretty much agreed with you on the rest of it.

The performances off the bench were probably the biggest positive, Donnacha Ryan has laid a huge claim to partner POC. DOC is outstanding at executing the choke tackle and is possibly our best exponent of it, that's probably why he's getting the nod ahead of Ryan - but I don't think that's a good enough reason for him to be picked. Since nailing down a second row berth with Munster he has turned into a new player. More than any other his impact was huge yesterday. He's very aggressive but he brings speed and mobility to the second row that DOC just doesn't have the physical capability to match. If Ryan doesn't start next week I'll be disappointed as I feel he's more than earned it.

Both Court and Cronin impressed. I was expecting our scrum to be under a lot more pressure on their introduction but they both performed admirably. Cronin's throwing at the lineout is improved no end over the past year or so and both were very good in the loose - delighted for Court to get the try, it wasn't hard to see how much it meant to him.

I though POM was excellent. Both he and Ryan brought a tenacity that wasn't there earlier in the game - like with Munster the 2 of them seem to hunt as a pair to cause havoc. I would hope that he gets at least one start over the remaining games.

Reddan has to start in France - Murray was very ponderous and I think Reddan deserves it.

Lastly - if O'Gara is being brought on then it should not always be at the expense of Sexton. He seems quite comfortable at 12 and I think he does his confidence the world of good to be playing the full 80.

Standulstermen wrote:Murray did defend well though and his positional play I thought was pretty good.

Absolutely stand. Murray is a fantastic talent and ticks all the boxes. In isolation hes better than Reddan in every respect.

However the bottom line is that your attack won't function if the scrum half doesn't produce quick ball and isn't on the same wave length as the fly half and back row.

Reddan just links much better right now. Murray needs to go back to basics and focus on getting the ball out to Sexton first and foremost rather than taking the ball on himself or slowing it down and waiting for forwards to come in and take the ball on.

Yeah that example by rte was good in my opinion. Agree with what is being written about Ryan and kearney too, very good showings.

roddersm wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:I think it made a world of difference that the pack as a unit had a much improved game, especially in the second half when they blitzed the Italians at the breakdown. It made it much easier for Reddan to get quicker ball away. I feel slightly sorry for Murray- it is easier for any 9 to get the ball away quicker if the rucks are cleared out quickly and allows for faster recycling. Italy in the first half helped slow down the ball, counter rucked effectively, and limited Murrays options for him. Murrays slow service was not always his fault.

Yea sorry I don't buy that. Plenty of times the ball was presented and ready to go and he delayed getting it away or took it on himself. He's doing exactly what TOL has been doing in recent seasons and taking an age to get the ball out and allowing defences to realign, meaning you have to set up more and more phases.

RTE showed a great example where we'd made a linebreak and the ball was recycled quickly and a certain try was on if he'd got it away but instead he took it on himself up the blindside and the chance was lost.

Murray can pass the ball away very fast in one movement but he isn't doing this right now and it is killing our attacks. He is a brilliant talent but we need to start with Reddan until Murray learns to produce quick ball. Hopefully Strings comes back to Munster to help him develop.

Here's the deal...and Rodders used an example that I can pin the deal to.

If you have a structure (a gameplan! - Dear Lord, I'm tiring of using that word but I have to keep using it until I see one on display)...IF you have a structure you want to use and call it Blueprint Ireland and sign it off with your signature, Declan Kidney.... if you have that, then Murray's slow delivery verses Redden's fast delivery should not be tolerated. It was the same when O'Leary was playing it slow and Stringer was playing it fast. There shouldn't be a clear and present distinction in how fast a scrum-half distributes a ball if there is a stringent gameplan being adhered to.

It's all very well saying a big scrum half gives more versatility in a tough International environment than a smaller guy who limits himself to producing quick ball. Again, the fact that the bigger player offers more in defence and possible attack than the smaller scrumhalf shouldn't reduce the obligation on any scrumhalf who comes into this Irish side to produce quick ball when it is required.

Producing quick ball is not a skill, it's not something you say one scrum half is good at and the other isn't. That kind of bunk used to infuriate me when the old O'Leary debates took place. Producing quick ball is a drill demanded by a specific gameplan that requires a high tempo to be sustained. It's not the scrumhalf's job to decide how he conducts that aspect of his game...it is a vital cog in a well oiled plan and every scrumhalf who puts on the Irish shirt should have the ability to play it fast when directed to.

[I'd offer Murray some reprieve by suggesting maybe he was in actual fact directed to take it easy, as going on Kidney's own words the plan was to first breakdown Italy and then attack the remnants]

But in any case, we will need a player of Murray's stature..so it is imperative he's given clear direction from coaches. So if it is his fault rather than it being directions from above, then he simply needs to be told in no uncertain terms that he has to speed things up to allow his backs into the game. Then we will have two scrum halves that can set pace to our game and not have to wait for one to come off a bench.

Look its good to have a scrum half like Boss,TOL or Murray who can take the ball on when its slow and Scrappy and also tie in the opposition backrow with the ability to break....BUT when the ball is presented quick and you have an attacking platform the ball has to go straight away to the fly half or acting 1st reciever, no delays, no looking around for options, no taking two steps before passing, no kicking it away.

Murray can do it but he needs to be coached or he'll end up liabilty like TOL.

SecretFly wrote:When we play terrible we get two tries against the sweethearts of the competition and probably favourites to win the Slam, Wales.

When we play with a touch of forward momentum with a smidgen of aggression and a dollop of attacking creativity, we score five tries against Italy. A side that has allegedly improved no-end in the last year or two but a side we normally struggled against when we had the Golden Generation performing at allegedly the peak of their powers back in the noughties.

Can we improve? There's certainly a lot that can be done to improve - yes.

Was it a little hint of what Ireland could be if a real gameplan is nailed down and regimentally coached? Yes, a taster.

Was it polished? No - it was still ragged and it still had players a little confused about what was happeneing around them. Most importantly it still seems to be a little alien to this side to be ready for moments of improvisation from some of our more creative players. When Kearney ignites for example...he needs instinctive high quality support burning down the road after him ready to unburden him of his 'wow' factor and sustain it with speed and precision towards the opposing tryline.

Beauty in isolation might get high rating points for the individual player but it needs clinical support to give it substance. We really need to tighten up our senses about response times to moments of creativity.

Very nicely written. Lovely phraseology and little insights.

What did people think of Earls at 13? Impressed/not impressed? Average?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What did people think of Earls at 13? Impressed/not impressed? Average?

I'd have to watch the game again, Rory. Which probably means he might have been more prominent. But second game for Ireland, the frustrations of being off so long, the coaching issues (Smal leaving) and Earl's first game.... I'm not so surprised that we began as we ended against Wales but slowly heated up and began to correct errors along the way. France will obviously tell us all where these selections, Earls and any gameplan is at.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What did people think of Earls at 13? Impressed/not impressed? Average?

I wasn't impressed per se... He did very well in defence, bar the odd moment of "oh crap why are you shooting out there!", but in attack he was less than impressive, especially missing the pass to Bowe in the 1st half where Tommy was clear out wide... Still our best option at the minute at 13.

And before anyone says it, no Tommy is not a 13... He does brilliantly coming in off his wing so leave him where he is!

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What did people think of Earls at 13? Impressed/not impressed? Average?

I wasn't impressed per se... He did very well in defence, bar the odd moment of "oh crap why are you shooting out there!", but in attack he was less than impressive, especially missing the pass to Bowe in the 1st half where Tommy was clear out wide... Still our best option at the minute at 13.

And before anyone says it, no Tommy is not a 13... He does brilliantly coming in off his wing so leave him where he is!

I have a huge problem with Earls at 13 in relation to that example. Earls didn't make the pass and granted Tommy didn't have acres of space but you'd reckon he would take the ball on another 5 metres or so in the tackle from behind.

My huge issue with Earls at 13 was that he did not even look to see Bowe. They did a reverse angle in studio and you can see earls just staring down Massi and getting tackled. I think that is indicative of what a winger does and not what a good centre should do. There was only one moment when his defence was sketchy in my opinion.

I like the idea of Bowe at 13 personally

I thought Murray was good, him and Reddan were similar in their effect on the game as Boss and Reddan at Leinster, sometimes you need one to start the game for the other one to have any impact. It’s not that one is better than the other it’s that they have different roles and the team cannot benefit unless they both play to their strengths. So Murray tires the fringe defense and Reddan exploits it. apart from kicking a little bit too much I thought Murray was good at what he needed to do, Reddan came on and made it all look easy then.

Not sure being a good exponent of the choke tackle is enough to win DOC a start against France, for starters we don’t want to force a scrum against these lads. I know we’ve been holding up ok in the scrum these days but France are a level above the Italians in terms of scrummaging. They pushed Scotland around at will yesterday. Best to try to exploit their slight weakness in the lineout, so with that in mind I would suggest we start Ryan.

O’Brien hasn’t been carrying as much lately, probably down to the fact that he’s having to commit to more rucks then he normally does with Leinster. Not sure he deserves to be dropped but it might be a good idea to start with POM and have O’Brien coming on with 30 mins to go to wreak havoc.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:What did people think of Earls at 13? Impressed/not impressed? Average?

I thought he was pretty poor to be honest. He just seems to loiter around on the wing waiting for a scoring pass from someone else rather than look for work and try and create space for others, which as a centre is his job.

His work ethic is pretty appalling to be honest, just like it is when he's playing wing. He's got bags of talent but a couple of flashes of skill here and there and being a good finisher is not good enough at this, or even provincial, level.

It is his first game in a while granted but I agree with you, there were times when he stood waiting for the ball in wide areas of the pitch.

I'd like to have seen more tbh. He didn't make any glaring defensive mistakes though so that is good. His kick was pretty delish too in all fairness.
I think the best way to sum him up is he is really good at feeding off others initail good work and taking the ball on then but he is not so good when it comes to creating the same space/opportunity for others

I've had a change of heart regarding Murray, not in terms of his performance as his service has far too slow, but I would start him against France.

I think we need to play it tighter against France, certainly in the early stages and attack them around the fringes. Scotland were able to make plenty of yards up the middle but Murray service needs to be quicker.

Bring Reddan on around 55- 60 min to speed things up.

I'd bring Reddan in against Scotland and England though as I think we can really open those sides up with quick ball.

ROG was very poor when he came on. Missed touch with the penalty and for some bizarre reason was standing back in the pocket for a drop goal in the build up to Courts try(I think). His kicking range seems to be gone and I'm not sure he has it at this level anymore.

I see what you mean Rodders about keeping it tight against France, I think we can keep it tight with reddan though just the ball will be going to a forward quicker than it would with Murray. i just don't like seeing a 9 pick and go into a forward with the aim of making 3 yards max. A picka dn go from a 9 should be with the aim of making a clean break or half break to get an offload.

Murray was poor in that sense. I don't see the point in a 9 picking and going rather than a forward or a 9 passing to a forward to make the drive.

I just want the ball gone from the base of the ruck quicker be that 2 metres from the previous ruck or 40 metres. That is a 9's primary responsibility

Murray was poor no doubt about it Pete, I'm just saying I see the logic of sticking with him against France. I'm not sure its the best game for Reddan to come in as likely we will spend a lot of time defending.

Hmmm.............. I think we played roughly a 60% game with 42 point tally and five tries. However you look at it, that's not a bad restart to a campaign that started off far too casual.

You can't work yourself into a Six Nations. You have to be ready to explode from game one. You can't manage a 6N campaign by holding energy in reserve for the 'most meaningful' games. They all mean everything and teams are now too good to allow leisurely periods during games or games where energy is reserved for higher ranked sides.

Overall, I'm happy that the Irish side played Italy off the field in the second half. It's what I wanted to see because we all too often sink into dross if the opposing side want to play that way. Perhaps a defining change of attitude from 'traditional' Irish values of forever giving a sucker a chance.

But a 40 minute second half of effort against France won't be enough. We'll need to add the extra 30% or so somewhere and bizarrely!!! I suggest it needs to be added in the first half. France won't be softened up or broken down.... it'll require smart inventive rugby for 80 minutes.

Secret fly on paper its a great result but the reality is that we were very poor in the first half. We should have put 50-60 points on Italy.

Because we lost that home game against Wales we can't cut the team any slack now. They've used it up.

We have to win every game now and maximise our points difference and hope Wales slip up.

If we lose again then that's 3 seasons in a row were we haven't even been in the mix for the title and frankly that is not acceptable, particularly as we have one of the most experienced sides in the competition.

roddersm wrote:Secret fly on paper its a great result but the reality is that we were very poor in the first half. We should have put 50-60 points on Italy.

Because we lost that home game against Wales we can't cut the team any slack now. They've used it up.

We have to win every game now and maximise our points difference and hope Wales slip up.

If we lose again then that's 3 seasons in a row were we haven't even been in the mix for the title and frankly that is not acceptable, particularly as we have one of the most experienced sides in the competition.

I didn't cut them slack in the first unforgivable week and I certainly don't cut them slack now, Rodders. First half not good enough, and my allusion to the idea that we can somehow 'break down or soften up' 6N sides is heavy criticsim from me. I believe softening up happens on the scoreboard.
But I'm going on my instincts again, and even though the opposition were a considerable step down from Wales, I've said since before this 6N started that I wanted to see how Ireland approached Italy and France. Italy was better than I expected...less than I wanted. Next up France. More hope than week one on that one.

I think the softening up tripe was just to protect Murray from criticism and paper over the cracks.

Italy were there for the taking from the off. We just didn't show enough composure and the ruck ball was too slow to put them under serious sustained pressure.

If Reddan had of been on at the start we'd have torn them to shreads, I've no doubt about it. They just couldn't deal with the quick ball in the second half it was nothing to do with tiredness.

If we do the same against France we'll be out of the game by halftime and it won't matter who we bring off the bench.

This Italian team has gone backwards big time IMO and resemble what they were 5-6 years ago.

I thought some of their play was actually very good, they did more than hammer it towards the corners and hope for the best. The Parise try was very well created and had the Irish not killed the ball and conceded penalties when they did there could have been more tries. The big difference between the sides was the 10s, Sexton was excellent in his distribution and points kicking which Italy could not match.

Positive signs for Italy, if they can tweak and improve the squad in certain areas will be a real challenge.

roddersm wrote:I think the softening up tripe was just to protect Murray from criticism and paper over the cracks.

Italy were there for the taking from the off. We just didn't show enough composure and the ruck ball was too slow to put them under serious sustained pressure.

If Reddan had of been on at the start we'd have torn them to shreads, I've no doubt about it. They just couldn't deal with the quick ball in the second half it was nothing to do with tiredness.

If we do the same against France we'll be out of the game by halftime and it won't matter who we bring off the bench.

Correct. The Scottish now run better lines and offload with more assurance than we do. They have their issues but our issue is that someone somewhere believes that this stop/start intensity game we play is cutting-edge, highly effective rugby. It's not. It commands too much energy from our forwards for small scoreboard gains. It negates the role of our backs, keeping their instincts frustrated and their adrenalin levels down as they lull on the fringes waiting for the ball to emerge far too late to have any effect.

Sam I think you were watching last season game by mistake pal?

Italy had 40% territory and posession and only made 3 breaks all game. They conceded more penalties than Ireland.

Where were these Italian tries going to come from? They had one scoring chance all game. What were the Irish penalties they conceded to prevent tries?

As I recall Italy conceded a cynical penalty to prevent Bowe scoring off a Ferris break? They got of lightly in my oppinion. Wales will put 70 points on them.

I thought Italy were very poor but I also think that even if reddan had started we'd need to have built up through the gears into the second half all the same. I think we would have broken them earlier though with reddan as playing a quicker tempo game is obviously going to tire you out more.

reddan would be a much better call than Murray to keep the tempo and intensity up.

THe only way you beat the top teams is to starve them of possessionnand keep it yourself. The only way to retain possession is to win the collisions. Murray s pedestrian delivery from the ruck means that the defence is set and even ferris, sob and POC can't win collisions against to and three men who are setup. This means that after a few phases the box kick or the garryowen are the only options and so the opposition regains the ball.

Reddan speed means that defences can't reset and also that they can't commit as many men to disrupting our ball as they will be out of the defensive line. Murray has a lovely pass he just needs to work on his speed and decision making. It will come with experience .

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:
reddan would be a much better call than Murray to keep the tempo and intensity up.

I'd rather have Redden come on like he did to turn the screw ruthlessly into a side already punch drunk from the efforts of Murray. I simply think direction needs to be given to Murray to speed his delivery up. He can do it. Those who control the tempo of the game (not him, he's too young and still has loads to learn) need to tell him his role. Quick ball, big guy, early onslaught followed by a coup-de-grace coming from Redden when he'll be more effective with less defensive pressures brought to bear on him. No reason why we can't have two lightening fast scrumhalves.

But I think maybe too much of the negativity is falling on Murray's shoulders. He wasn't the only thing going wrong, although because of his prominent role in tempo control, he was the guy I was shouting at most!

Murray must be Mike Phillips's nice little brother - put a rocket up his arse and tell him to get on with it - Both these can be frustrating to watch. Munster must put the rocket up there before each match as he certainly has more edge when he plays for them.

RubyGuby wrote:Murray must be Mike Phillips's nice little brother - put a rocket up his arse and tell him to get on with it - Both these can be frustrating to watch. Munster must put the rocket up there before each match as he certainly has more edge when he plays for them.

Every Irish player has more edge when they're not wearing green, Ruby. International is the proving ground for our Provinces..and on that reckoning, one or two of those International boys have the potential to play for the Provinces. Kearney especially might be up to Provincial with Leinster... if he cuts out the showboating!

I know what your saying Fly - Its the cultural rugby difference between our countrys where playing for Wales is the ultimate whilst playing for the Ospreys is........ just an embarassment.

You know what I mean