Six Nations: Wales - Ireland Post Match Discussion

First topic message reminder :

Wales 22 - Ireland 30

Wales:
Tries - Cuthbert (47 min), Halfpenny (58 min), Mitchell (75 min)
Convs - Halfpenny 2/3
Pens - Halfpenny 1/1

Ireland:
Tries - Zebo (10 min), Healy (23 min), O'Driscoll (42 min)
Convs - Sexton 3/3
Pens - Sexton 3/3


Match Stats:
http://www.espnscrum.com/six-nations-2013/rugby/match/133782.html

One of the biggest things we learned this weekend was that Gordon Darcy still has something to offer. He will be a big loss this weekend if missing despite the streams of people who give out about his selection in every game.

I also think that the Andrew Trimble question was fairly put to bed also.

Kidney got those calls right. As I mentioned in a post yesterday I see do the logic in the backrow call (with Best and centres filling in as 7s) but I dont think it did enough yesterday to absolve from the criticism regarding Henrys selection especially if Darcy is out next week.

I've read that Earls is going to see a specialist. We could be missing Keith Earls, Gordon Darcy and Luke Marshall.

The Fly is seeing extinction in the near future...what if the team do well for the rest of the championship...he wont have anything to moan about. Come to think of it neither will about 50% of the Irish posters on here.

I hope he will be supporting Ireland to do well in the remainder of the tournament. Hope he doesnt secretly want them to do badly (maybe there is something about the name)

A bit leftfield but I think James Downey would be a good option for inside centre v England.

I don't know, I think the selection of Gilroy was exposed as he's not yet the finished article in terms of decision making or kick returning and he will be targeted.

However, we can't now drop him. I expected him to play like he did, and there were elements of the game where he did very well too. He played like you'd gather he would from his form for Ulster. At this stage, in terms of bringing him along as a player, the worst thing would be to drop him. If you pick a player who is still raw like Gilroy you have to back him if he shows that rawness- it's anticipated, or it should have been. He needs time and patience and if you aren't willing to give him it; why did you reach past more experienced, dependable players in the first place?

It leaves me in the ludicrous situation of saying we can't drop Gilroy next week, whilst if Ulster were to play with a full deck of players to chose from he would be on the bench for me. C'est la vie.

red_stag,

well played on saturday to you boys, should be a cracking game in Dublin.

I hope you aren't missing all those centres for the game, would be a real pity if injuries played a huge part in what should be a fantastic match.

But, if you are, who would you pick at 12? and who would you least like to see line up against them? does a possible return of tuilagi worry you? or do you think that BOD will be too wily for however england pick and dont really care about what england do?

woudl be great to hear an irish perspective on this.

if i don't speak to you before saturday, good luck.

xx

I'd like to see McFadden or McSharry come in to centre. No need to look outside the squad at this stage.

D'arcy just has a dead leg does he not?

My biggest fear is that if we win the Grand Slam we will give Kidney a new contract, no questions asked.

As the call over McLaughlin and Anscombe shows, even successful sides can improve with the input of new ideas.

Notch wrote:I don't know, I think the selection of Gilroy was exposed as he's not yet the finished article in terms of decision making or kick returning and he will be targeted.

However, we can't now drop him.

Why would we drop him? He saved a certain try with a huge hit on Halfpenny and almost scored another. Was involved in setting up Healy's try too.

His kicking out of hand wasn't always the best but generally scared the life out of the Welsh backs along with Zebo. Made a great break in the second half too.

No idea why anyone would consider dropping him.

Notch wrote:My biggest fear is that if we win the Grand Slam we will give Kidney a new contract, no questions asked.

As the call over McLaughlin and Anscombe shows, even successful sides can improve with the input of new ideas.

If we win the GS, does he not deserve a contract extension? Even if its only a year extension. There aren't really great options for new coaches atm.

Omlette,

I wouldn't like to see Downey - realistically I expect Darcy to play.

However if we are I'd include David McSharry - he's a Connacht player. Doesn't have the same skill set as our other option Fergus McFadden but I think he's a better option.

If Keith Earls is injured then McFadden would be on the bench. I'd like to see this team:

01 Cian Healy
02 Rory Best
03 Mike Ross
04 Donnacha Ryan
05 Mike McCarthy
06 Sean O'Brien
07 Chris Henry
08 Jamie Heaslip
09 Conor Murray
10 Jonathan Sexton
11 Simon Zebo
12 Gordon Darcy / Dave McSharry
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Craig Gilroy
15 Rob Kearney

16 Sean Cronin
18 David Kilcoyne
18 Declan Fitzpatrick
19 Donnacha O'Callaghan
20 Peter O'Mahony
21 Eoin Reddan
22 Ronan O'Gara
23 Fergus McFadden

And yes Tuilagi does worry me. I rate him extremely highly and I think that he could rival O'Driscoll for a place on the Lions starting team. O'Driscoll can do some things that Tuilagi isn't capable of doing but the opposite is also true.

Notch wrote:My biggest fear is that if we win the Grand Slam we will give Kidney a new contract, no questions asked.

As the call over McLaughlin and Anscombe shows, even successful sides can improve with the input of new ideas.

It would be a selection on form. McLaughlin achieved nothing. No medals to show for his time at Ulster.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Notch wrote:My biggest fear is that if we win the Grand Slam we will give Kidney a new contract, no questions asked.

As the call over McLaughlin and Anscombe shows, even successful sides can improve with the input of new ideas.

If we win the GS, does he not deserve a contract extension? Even if its only a year extension. There aren't really great options for new coaches atm.

On the basis of the last five games he would, but the Six Nations is an unpredictable tournament and winning a one-off Slam doesn't reflect what it takes to be a truly dominant side in international rugby. Look at Wales with their two Slams and 33% win rate in the Six Nations.

Whether or not we do well this year I don't see Kidney as the man to take us into the Top 3 of the world rankings and keep us there consistently. If he gets an extension, at the very least we need to change the coaches around him. I think it is a moot point anyway. There were enough frailties shown in the second half to make me think a Slam/Championship would be a pleasant surprise at this point.

red_stag wrote:

Notch wrote:My biggest fear is that if we win the Grand Slam we will give Kidney a new contract, no questions asked.

As the call over McLaughlin and Anscombe shows, even successful sides can improve with the input of new ideas.

It would be a selection on form. McLaughlin achieved nothing. No medals to show for his time at Ulster.

McLaughlin took Ulster from a side who couldn't get out of their HEC group for 10 years to a HEC final, a mid table Rabo side to a Rabo SF.

Anscombe has taken things a step further but he inherited a side in a very good place so it is extremely disrespectful, not to mention off topic, to say McLaughlin achieved nothing.

rodders wrote:

red_stag wrote:

Notch wrote:My biggest fear is that if we win the Grand Slam we will give Kidney a new contract, no questions asked.

As the call over McLaughlin and Anscombe shows, even successful sides can improve with the input of new ideas.

It would be a selection on form. McLaughlin achieved nothing. No medals to show for his time at Ulster.

McLaughlin took Ulster from a side who couldn't get out of their HEC group for 10 years to a HEC final, a mid table Rabo side to a Rabo SF.

Anscombe has taken things a step further but he inherited a side in a very good place so it is extremely disrespectful, not to mention off topic, to say McLaughlin achieved nothing.

Rodders,

You know what I mean. I think its inaccurate to compare winning a Six Nations Grand Slam to not winning a Heineken Cup.

red_stag wrote:Omlette,

I wouldn't like to see Downey - realistically I expect Darcy to play.

However if we are I'd include David McSharry - he's a Connacht player. Doesn't have the same skill set as our other option Fergus McFadden but I think he's a better option.

If Keith Earls is injured then McFadden would be on the bench. I'd like to see this team:

01 Cian Healy
02 Rory Best
03 Mike Ross
04 Donnacha Ryan
05 Mike McCarthy
06 Sean O'Brien
07 Chris Henry
08 Jamie Heaslip
09 Conor Murray
10 Jonathan Sexton
11 Simon Zebo
12 Gordon Darcy / Dave McSharry
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Craig Gilroy
15 Rob Kearney

16 Sean Cronin
18 David Kilcoyne
18 Declan Fitzpatrick
19 Donnacha O'Callaghan
20 Peter O'Mahony
21 Eoin Reddan
22 Ronan O'Gara
23 Fergus McFadden

And yes Tuilagi does worry me. I rate him extremely highly and I think that he could rival O'Driscoll for a place on the Lions starting team. O'Driscoll can do some things that Tuilagi isn't capable of doing but the opposite is also true.

Why would you drop our most effective ball carrier in the forwards for 60 minutes and add someone who was clearly ineffectual when they came on?

red_stag wrote:

Notch wrote:My biggest fear is that if we win the Grand Slam we will give Kidney a new contract, no questions asked.

As the call over McLaughlin and Anscombe shows, even successful sides can improve with the input of new ideas.

It would be a selection on form. McLaughlin achieved nothing. No medals to show for his time at Ulster.

I think that is a ridiculous exaggeration. Taking a team who had never gotten out of their pool in 12 years to a Final is not nothing. But, at the same time, it wasn't enough and it shouldn't be considered as enough. The HEC and Six Nations aren't an analogue here. In the international game, the Six Nations is more like the Pro12. Nice to win it, but you've judge yourself against the competitions with the best teams not merely the best of the rest.

I just think it's ridiculous if we have a run of good games suddenly we forget the last few years. Is Kidney going to be the man to mastermind our first win over NZ? Take us to at least the semi-finals of the next RWC? Win a tour match in the SH? A Six Nations win would be great but it no longer has the same credibility in the international game it once did. We'd only have to beat one side in the Top 4 of the Word Rankings, and it would be at home we'd face them. If thats the limit of our aspirations then that will be the limit of our achievements.

By all means if he's successful in the next few weeks let him go out with his head held high and his legacy secured. Winning the Six Nations would be a great opportunity for us as it would allow the next coach to inherit a successful side- therefore making the job a more attractive proposition for a lot of coaches. We could maybe attract bigger names in March/April than we will be able to in a year when Kidneys Ireland revert to type again.

red_stag wrote:

rodders wrote:

red_stag wrote:

Notch wrote:My biggest fear is that if we win the Grand Slam we will give Kidney a new contract, no questions asked.

As the call over McLaughlin and Anscombe shows, even successful sides can improve with the input of new ideas.

It would be a selection on form. McLaughlin achieved nothing. No medals to show for his time at Ulster.

McLaughlin took Ulster from a side who couldn't get out of their HEC group for 10 years to a HEC final, a mid table Rabo side to a Rabo SF.

Anscombe has taken things a step further but he inherited a side in a very good place so it is extremely disrespectful, not to mention off topic, to say McLaughlin achieved nothing.

Rodders,

You know what I mean. I think its inaccurate to compare winning a Six Nations Grand Slam to not winning a Heineken Cup.

Its inaccurate to compare a provincial coach and their achievements to an international one anyways, no idea why we are discussing this.

Lets judge Kidney after the tournament. We are one game in but are a better place than last year at the same point. Not liking the negativity on here but each to their own....haters gonna hate......

DOD wrote:

red_stag wrote:Omlette,

I wouldn't like to see Downey - realistically I expect Darcy to play.

However if we are I'd include David McSharry - he's a Connacht player. Doesn't have the same skill set as our other option Fergus McFadden but I think he's a better option.

If Keith Earls is injured then McFadden would be on the bench. I'd like to see this team:

01 Cian Healy
02 Rory Best
03 Mike Ross
04 Donnacha Ryan
05 Mike McCarthy
06 Sean O'Brien
07 Chris Henry
08 Jamie Heaslip
09 Conor Murray
10 Jonathan Sexton
11 Simon Zebo
12 Gordon Darcy / Dave McSharry
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Craig Gilroy
15 Rob Kearney

16 Sean Cronin
18 David Kilcoyne
18 Declan Fitzpatrick
19 Donnacha O'Callaghan
20 Peter O'Mahony
21 Eoin Reddan
22 Ronan O'Gara
23 Fergus McFadden

And yes Tuilagi does worry me. I rate him extremely highly and I think that he could rival O'Driscoll for a place on the Lions starting team. O'Driscoll can do some things that Tuilagi isn't capable of doing but the opposite is also true.

Why would you drop our most effective ball carrier in the forwards for 60 minutes and add someone who was clearly ineffectual when they came on?

Beacause I dont like Cork people. If we had anyone else I'd have Ross off too

rodders wrote:Its inaccurate to compare a provincial coach and their achievements to an international one anyways, no idea why we are discussing this.

Hey I didnt bring it up Notch did. Im poking holes in it same as you.

DOD wrote:The Fly is seeing extinction in the near future...what if the team do well for the rest of the championship.

I hope he will be supporting Ireland to do well in the remainder of the tournament. Hope he doesnt secretly want them to do badly (maybe there is something about the name)

It may surprise you, but when someone is annoyed by a performance it means they are angry. And if they are angry it means they're not happy. That's how it's always gone with me anyway. I'll let the actors in here speak for themselves about mood and how you might pretend to have one in a pub and then go home and bury a chair into a wall at home

Anyway, I'll repeat what I want for Ireland, DOD, since I've been away for a bit and people might have forgotten both my views and indeed me (with all the very official and formal 'Secret Fly' addresses I get each time I come back ) Thanks for your familiar "Fly" memory of me at least, DOD!

I want Ireland playing to their potential. I believe their potential is of a higher grade than many here seem to think. No I don't believe we have 'less players' to choose from since the good ol days of yonder Golden Generation years. We have more players, we have them operating on a more consistently professional level than ever before and we still decide, through our age old desire to be less than what we are in real terms - the comfortable underdogs - to have them fit patterns designed for sides that were getting wooden spoons back in the fair old days of the Golden Geese. We don't need to play so cautious, we don't need to almost throw away a great victory by allowing Wales back up to the standards they see themselves at (way above us BTW as they're not so meek in crowing about ability). The Welsh want to be the best - we want to be professional. "Good victory. What a first half!!!! But boy!!!!!!!!!!! that second half of delicious defence was just absolutely mouth watering." I guess it's all a case of perception and beauty being in the eye. Pardon moi for mine but it'll remain steadfast with Munster coach, Leinster coach or Kiwi coach;) If Ireland kill off the rest of the cast this season with some scintilating stuff then I'll be a very happy man...dare I say it, I'd even bet I'd be happier than you, DOD - which is a tall ask but I'm an ambitious man.

red_stag wrote:

rodders wrote:Its inaccurate to compare a provincial coach and their achievements to an international one anyways, no idea why we are discussing this.

Hey I didnt bring it up Notch did. Im poking holes in it same as you.

Because the point is this; just because a coach does well, doesn't mean his limitations will prevent you from doing better in the future. We might only win 1 or 2 more games and he goes. Or we might win a Slam and he stays. But either way, I've seen enough to think we can do better.

red_stag wrote:

DOD wrote:

red_stag wrote:Omlette,

I wouldn't like to see Downey - realistically I expect Darcy to play.

However if we are I'd include David McSharry - he's a Connacht player. Doesn't have the same skill set as our other option Fergus McFadden but I think he's a better option.

If Keith Earls is injured then McFadden would be on the bench. I'd like to see this team:

01 Cian Healy
02 Rory Best
03 Mike Ross
04 Donnacha Ryan
05 Mike McCarthy
06 Sean O'Brien
07 Chris Henry
08 Jamie Heaslip
09 Conor Murray
10 Jonathan Sexton
11 Simon Zebo
12 Gordon Darcy / Dave McSharry
13 Brian O'Driscoll
14 Craig Gilroy
15 Rob Kearney

16 Sean Cronin
18 David Kilcoyne
18 Declan Fitzpatrick
19 Donnacha O'Callaghan
20 Peter O'Mahony
21 Eoin Reddan
22 Ronan O'Gara
23 Fergus McFadden

And yes Tuilagi does worry me. I rate him extremely highly and I think that he could rival O'Driscoll for a place on the Lions starting team. O'Driscoll can do some things that Tuilagi isn't capable of doing but the opposite is also true.

Why would you drop our most effective ball carrier in the forwards for 60 minutes and add someone who was clearly ineffectual when they came on?

Beacause I dont like Cork people. If we had anyone else I'd have Ross off too

ah fair enough...nothing wrong with that. If it was anything to do with the performances last weekend I would have been worried for you...anyhow how are things in kn...erland or Mordor as its known as down here...


Four more years for DK...lets hear it lads.

Does anyone thing that Justin Tipuric will get cited for his cowardly stamp on sextons face. Hopefully it should be the end of his tournament

tecphobe wrote:Does anyone thing that Justin Tipuric will get cited for his cowardly stamp on sextons face. Hopefully it should be the end of his tournament

Anyone have footage?

Sexton's face might have that, Guns.

the entire match is on bbc iplayer. I noticed at the time watching it in the pub. Ive watched back a few time now on the Iplayer the more you view the worse it looks. Its around the 58th minute mark in the build up to halfpennys try. Also if you look at the build up to Cuthberts try there is clear obstruction in midfield

Tec - I don't think there was clear obstruction. A dummy runner was used but Cuthbert was going to score anyway due to the hole Earls left.

I'd have to see the Sexton one again. At the time I thought it was accidental.

There was a dummy runner but there was no obstruction. No Irish defender who was trying to tackle Cuthbert was prevented from doing so by Roberts.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:There was a dummy runner but there was no obstruction. No Irish defender who was trying to tackle Cuthbert was prevented from doing so by Roberts.

Exactly.

If you watch it again he looks down and there is contact with the foot to the face on more than one occasion. The welsh 12 runs directly into the Irish player trying to drift across opening the hole for Cuthbert to run into.

Don't think so Tec. I'd be absolutely fuming if Ireland scored that try and had it called back for an obstruction.

If you look at it again you don't really get a good view until the replay. from behind the posts. Upon viewing the match again on Iplayer it looks to me like Poitre decided to make the match competitive in the second even the most marginal of calls went the way of Wales. Rory Best was man of the match for me.

tecphobe wrote:It looks to me like Poitre decided to make the match competitive in the second even the most marginal of calls went the way of Wales.

Ah we're going down that route are we. The whole "the referee intentionally went for the other team" approach.

red_stag wrote:

tecphobe wrote:It looks to me like Poitre decided to make the match competitive in the second even the most marginal of calls went the way of Wales.

Ah we're going down that route are we. The whole "the referee intentionally went for the other team" approach.

Seriously some of the calls he gave were unreal in the second half. Wales were loads better in the second but some of his calls were baffling. The stamp to the face of sexton was even mentioned on commentary by Eddie butler. Im chuffed Ireland won, their has been loads of talk how Ireland capitulated in the second half. I dont think that was the case wales got better yes but Poitre definitely helped with how he reffed the breakdown in the second.

Red_stag,

Cheers for that. -Iif downey is that far down the list you must have some good centres... lets hope D'arcy is fit though.

good luck

xx

tecphobe wrote:

red_stag wrote:

tecphobe wrote:It looks to me like Poitre decided to make the match competitive in the second even the most marginal of calls went the way of Wales.

Ah we're going down that route are we. The whole "the referee intentionally went for the other team" approach.

Seriously some of the calls he gave were unreal in the second half. Wales were loads better in the second but some of his calls were baffling. The stamp to the face of sexton was even mentioned on commentary by Eddie butler. Im chuffed Ireland won, their has been loads of talk how Ireland capitulated in the second half. I dont think that was the case wales got better yes but Poitre definitely helped with how he reffed the breakdown in the second.

Tec I'll not argue with him making poor calls. Rory Bests yellow comes to mind.

However thats not what your saying - that he made a few bad calls. Your suggestion is that a professional referee intentionally had an agenda where he based his decisions on what will make Wales do well and Ireland do badly.

tecphobe wrote:the entire match is on bbc iplayer. I noticed at the time watching it in the pub. Ive watched back a few time now on the Iplayer the more you view the worse it looks. Its around the 58th minute mark in the build up to halfpennys try. Also if you look at the build up to Cuthberts try there is clear obstruction in midfield

iplayer isnt available in ireland :-(

Tec,

i agree about Rory Best, comfortably Irelands best player. The BBC were a bit silly about BODs performance, yes he played well but what was all the rubbish commentary going on about after that box kick he attempted...

i don't agree about the ref though. wales were on the offensive and playing all the rugby in the last 30 mins. in my opinion refs should give the team playing all the rugby the benefit of 50/50 calls. it encourages teams to play... no bias or 'evening it up' just good positive play from wales being correctly allowed to continue.

xx

red_stag wrote:

tecphobe wrote:

red_stag wrote:

tecphobe wrote:It looks to me like Poitre decided to make the match competitive in the second even the most marginal of calls went the way of Wales.

Ah we're going down that route are we. The whole "the referee intentionally went for the other team" approach.

Seriously some of the calls he gave were unreal in the second half. Wales were loads better in the second but some of his calls were baffling. The stamp to the face of sexton was even mentioned on commentary by Eddie butler. Im chuffed Ireland won, their has been loads of talk how Ireland capitulated in the second half. I dont think that was the case wales got better yes but Poitre definitely helped with how he reffed the breakdown in the second.

Tec I'll not argue with him making poor calls. Rory Bests yellow comes to mind.

However thats not what your saying - that he made a few bad calls. Your suggestion is that a professional referee intentionally had an agenda where he based his decisions on what will make Wales do well and Ireland do badly.

Poite did what he always does and gave the team going forward the rub of the green even if that means some bizarre calls such as the Best yellow and the O'Brien tackle into to touch penalty.

I personally don't like to slate ref's, but I think you raise a fair point, tec.
Not for Cuthberts try, Earls out of position for that one, but for North (think it was him anyway?), and Tip' using Sextons face as a treadmill.
I really hope Tip' doesn't get a citing though. Wales have a chance to beat England which may be to our (Ireland's) advantage.

Trust me, tecphobe, I'd rather be in your position complaining about the ref after a win than facing the prospect of going to Paris on the back of yet another defeat.

red_stag wrote:

tecphobe wrote:

red_stag wrote:

tecphobe wrote:It looks to me like Poitre decided to make the match competitive in the second even the most marginal of calls went the way of Wales.

Ah we're going down that route are we. The whole "the referee intentionally went for the other team" approach.

Seriously some of the calls he gave were unreal in the second half. Wales were loads better in the second but some of his calls were baffling. The stamp to the face of sexton was even mentioned on commentary by Eddie butler. Im chuffed Ireland won, their has been loads of talk how Ireland capitulated in the second half. I dont think that was the case wales got better yes but Poitre definitely helped with how he reffed the breakdown in the second.

Tec I'll not argue with him making poor calls. Rory Bests yellow comes to mind.

However thats not what your saying - that he made a few bad calls. Your suggestion is that a professional referee intentionally had an agenda where he based his decisions on what will make Wales do well and Ireland do badly.

Tongue in cheek often does'nt come across well on here. Sometimes ref's tend to favour the home team unconsciously that's not to accuse them of bias its just the way it is

It's still a game with rules Omelette...not a game of 'Let us win coz we're nicer to look at'.

Wales were nice to look at but old dogged Ireland were taking in the plaudits too for how they defended against that onslaught - a lot of the time with just 14 men.

I was impressed by the ceaseless efforts of Wales but some of my countrymen tell me that defence is also part of the game and many people like it...and like to watch it in operation. So a 50/50 call? Should it benefit the people enjoying Wales or the people enjoying Ireland defending against them?

SecretFly wrote:
I want Ireland playing to their potential. I believe their potential is of a higher grade than many here seem to think.

I want us to play to our potential too but Championships are about winning.

There isn't much between the home nations and France, therefore to go to one of our main rivals backyard and scalp them first up is a big result for us. A year ago the reverse result sent Wales on their way to a GS and the margin of our win was more convincing than theirs was.

With due respect I think quite a few posters on here are letting their dislike for Kidney cloud their judgement a bit. This was our best result, and arguably performance, in a couple of seasons.

If you add the Argentina result in this is the first time we've achieved two decent results back to back in a long time.

First chance to comment - well done Ireland, performance in the first half was superb, an intensity Wales clearly didn't expect (for some reason). Also heroic defence 2nd half. Better team won on the day, although the strength of the shift of the momentum in the 2nd half was a bit strange.

Wales are bizarre. They are just so clumsy and laboured at the moment. Even when in the ascendancy in terms of territory and possession, we were poor.

I didn't see the Tipuric incident, but it doesn't sound like him, he's not a dirty player. I hope he didn't deliberately set out to hurt Sexton.

As regards Poite, I'm no fan, and we are always more conscious of the injustices against us. For example, Ireland got away with being offside at kicks and throwing in wonky and closing the gap at the lineout a lot. Both teams spot where things aren't being policed and try to exploit it. I also thought the Cuthbert try could have been called for crossing.

I don't like to slate ref's especially when my team loses as it can tend to look like sour grapes. Poitre incidentally has got loads better as a ref as in the past he tended to ref the scrum and not a lot else. One of the things that frustrates me with ref's is inconsistencies especially with in the same match. I also noticed what i only describe as the use of the boot to 'move' players especially in the second half. I thought refs had been told that this wasn't allowed i also noticed players been pulled away from ruck's by the head neck something else that was supposed to be a no no

Secret,

It should benefit the team with the ball, we saw what happened when the rules benefited the team without the ball... it was the horrendous rugby around the world cup in france... kicking kicking and kicking...

You are absolutely right the rules should be the same all over the pitch and in both halves. So with that in mind, having the confidence the ref will give you the 50/50's in your own half means you don't have to kick the ball out of your half the second you get it. this prevents the kick kick kick we saw in and around 2007. these same rules should apply in the oppositions 22, where wales found themselves for the final 30 mins on saturday.

By 50/50 i don't mean turn a blind eye to half the attacking teams infringements, just that, as is the case in all rucks, when there are two people cheating, take a harsher stance with the man killing it...

Make sense?

And i too like a good defense and very much enjoyed the irish effort on sunday, unfortunately reffing an attack too harshly doesn't result in watching more of what we saw on saturday, just watching more kicking...

or at least thats what i feel...

xx

Omelette wrote:Secret,

It should benefit the team with the ball, we saw what happened when the rules benefited the team without the ball... it was the horrendous rugby around the world cup in france... kicking kicking and kicking...

You are absolutely right the rules should be the same all over the pitch and in both halves. So with that in mind, having the confidence the ref will give you the 50/50's in your own half means you don't have to kick the ball out of your half the second you get it. this prevents the kick kick kick we saw in and around 2007. these same rules should apply in the oppositions 22, where wales found themselves for the final 30 mins on saturday.

By 50/50 i don't mean turn a blind eye to half the attacking teams infringements, just that, as is the case in all rucks, when there are two people cheating, take a harsher stance with the man killing it...

Make sense?

And i too like a good defense and very much enjoyed the irish effort on sunday, unfortunately reffing an attack too harshly doesn't result in watching more of what we saw on saturday, just watching more kicking...

or at least thats what i feel...

xx

Why no welsh cards in the first half ?

Regarding kidney. If he did(massive IF) win a grand slam a contract extension would be almost inevitable. If it was my call he wouldn't get it but two grand slams isn't to be sniffed at.

The length of contract should be shorter than previous ones handed out by the IRFU though. Im not sure anyone bar earls did enough to be dropped in all honesty. Keith just had one of those days. He still covers so many positions but maybe McFadden deserves a chance there instead.

Tipuric was reckless. I wouldn't say intenional because thats speculating but as I mentioned he was rucking nowhere near the ball and although I think/hope he wasn't aiming for sextons face that's what he hit

I'm not thinking Kidney at all, Rodders. I'm thinking I liked the first half and the second half was unesessary..and was too similar to regular Irish performances in that regard to ignore the link that this is still the same coaching set up making the same tactical errors. That's a judgement of mine based on the performance I witnessed not on the personality of the encumbant coach. Kidney is not the problem, his ideals might very well be.

The players are as fit as their Welsh counterparts. They didn't excessively put themselves out in the first half - I've seen more sturdier tests of Irish stamina in HEC game halves than I saw operating in the first half of that Welsh game. So they were not drained by the effort of the first half. They created the gap easily enough and should have sustained enough attacking pressure to keep Wales back in their own half for most of the game.
Wales didn't pressure the turn around, Ireland gave it to them because Ireland felt comfortable they had enough to buffer them from the onslaught. And so it turned out. But in actual fact, they didn't respect Wales enough in sitting back and that is not the attitude that will make inroads in World rugby terms against SH opposition. Play always as if you are playing against the best, play always to be ruthless. We had a chance to humiliate Wales and, with all due respect to them, that's what we should have been doing. That's your obligation in the sport - to do as much damage to your opponent as possible as they would undoubtedly try to, and should try to, do to you. New Zealand are 20 points up even before a game starts on reputation alone. If you can be ruthless, be ruthless. PLAY TO YOUR POTENTIAL. Ireland's potential with their tails up was greater than that result.