Six Nations: England v Ireland - Post Match Discussion

Triangulation wrote:The masterclass was England 2003 - Wellington vs the ABs

We went down to 13 men for the best part of 10 minutes with Dayglo and Back i think yellow carded.

We went upfield with a series of forward drives.

We won that period 6-0 i believe.

rodders wrote:

Triangulation wrote:The masterclass was England 2003 - Wellington vs the ABs

We went down to 13 men for the best part of 10 minutes with Dayglo and Back i think yellow carded.

We went upfield with a series of forward drives.

We won that period 6-0 i believe.

Did Owen Farrell eat up 8 minutes with his penalty kick build up then too?

rodders wrote:

Triangulation wrote:The masterclass was England 2003 - Wellington vs the ABs

We went down to 13 men for the best part of 10 minutes with Dayglo and Back i think yellow carded.

We went upfield with a series of forward drives.

We won that period 6-0 i believe.

Did Owen Farrell eat up 8 minutes with his penalty kick build up then too?

Triangulation wrote:
Martin Johnson was asked what was going through his head at the time. He answered " my spine". Gold!

Triangulation wrote:The masterclass was England 2003 - Wellington vs the ABs

We went down to 13 men for the best part of 10 minutes with Dayglo and Back i think yellow carded.

We went upfield with a series of forward drives.

We won that period 6-0 i believe.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:There are so many things to say about that Irish performance but I don't know about you Rodders, I just cant be bothered to talk about it. Kidney doesn't learn from his mistakes tactically and in his selections. Just as we have lost to Wales on the previous three occasions we have demonstrated how easy we are to defend against. Get the defensive line up quickly and we will be too clueless to do anything. England played perfectly fine. They offered absolutely nothing in attack and still won the match. They didn't even really have to work that hard for it either. The score flattered us and England's victory was well deserved. I'm not sure how Robshaw won man of the match. He put in alot of work but I thought Parling was absolutely outstanding.

It is exactly the performance I envisaged. Kidney has castrated his players from using their brains in a match. You see Ulster and Leinster invariably being able to change tactics when the going gets tough to win matches they should have lost. Ireland have not done that once since 2010. I'm glad you picked up on D'Arcy Rodders because I was screaming at him there. Even though he has lost alot of his gas that was a gaping hole, and even if he had have been tackled he could have created an overlap and a chance for Gilroy and Kearney (I think) to break.

Other than that we'll let the usual crowd of provincial infighters do their usual on ROG (embarrassing and sad), Healy (thuggery), Heaslip (the most underperforming Irish players since the last Lions tour now captain), unbalanced backrow (expecting Healy and Best to do the breakdown work so three backrowers can carry the ball ineffectually- how badly do we miss David Wallace?), refusal to change centres when D'Arcy offers no creativity, etc, etc, etc.

The biggest thing though I noticed was the booing of Farrell when kicking. I hate it. Its footballesque behaviour. I was sitting with my dad and some of his friends watching the match and they were all talking before it about how at the height of the Troubles England came across the play Ireland in Dublin when Scotland and Wales refused. Most of us know about it- it was a brave and incredibly important gesture. Then to hear supposedly 'respectful' fans booing the English kicker shows absolutely no class.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Poorfour wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Barney McGrew did it wrote:Watch the game again without the tension. I thought England were relatively comfortable (even when a man down, and later without a proper lock and an 'ankled' Cole, plus an unlucky bounce and hesitant Manu) and played as much as was necessary. When England 2003 or SA 2007 (final) played like that it was called smart controlled rugby. They did enough.

I have no problem with the style, but this was no England c. 2003 performance....thats my point.
Those teams dominated scrums lineouts and mauls and had forwards taking the ball...forward. They also had backs capable of hurting any opposition when given the chance. This England side...didnt.

They got away with a win here in a style of game that doesnt show their best. Its no disgrace to not be a perfect side or attain the standards of the golden age, Im just a bit bemused to find people sucked into thinking this was some kind of super human performance simply because other (heavily slated) England sides have lost against better opposition in similar circumstances.

I dont see anything that England did in this game we didnt already know they were capable of from last years 6 nations and the SA game. What we did see was the set piece fall apart, england give away a lot of penalties and Ashtons "tackling". Thank god for all ROGs experience getting him selected to be the bench option rather than a kid at the top of their game (like Farrell)

I think we need to look at this in the context of the squad's experience and evolution.

It took SCW's England - a very experienced squad - 4 years to learn how to adapt their game properly to different teams and conditions. People have been comparing Sunday's match to the 2003 game in Dublin, but I think a more apt comparison would be to the 2000 game in Murrayfield. A similarly hostile environment, similarly foul conditions, a similar point in the RWC cycle. Scotland in 2000 were not as individually talented as Ireland in 2013 (though they were the 1999 5N Champions) but were better coached, but the 2000 England squad was already vastly more experienced than the 2013 version.

On that day, England were completely outthought and outmanoeuvred by the Scots. On Sunday, England coped with everything Ireland threw at them. It's also worth comparing this year with last year. England ground out 2 wins, surprised the French with counter-attacking and exploited Ireland's lack of depth at tighthead but didn't have a fully functioning attacking game even in good conditions. A year later, they have an attacking game that works when conditions are OK, but it's asking a bit much to expect them to have it fully functioning when the ball's a bar of soap.

Even the much more experienced Irish backline struggled with the conditions - and were put off by England's defensive pressure. To expect exciting back play from a team with fewer than 250 caps between them and less half a game playing with that XV on the pitch is a bit much.

I think we've seen enough to know that a) the coaches are pretty smart at designing gameplans that will work for the opposition and conditions; b) the squad are actually better at picking them up and executing than the 2003 squad were at the same phase of their development; c) there's enough evidence of improvement to believe that they will learn how to play a more exciting game in all weathers - given time.

I dont expect or feel we need to achieve that, just playing 10 man rugby well would be fine. The problem I have is that this hasnt shown any real development from Englands first game under Lancaster, but has shown their set piece is vulnerable.
The tactical kicking was great, not a lot else was (even farrells goal kicking was flawed).

All teams are going to have good and bad days, I get that. What Im having a hard time understanding is how people are managing to paint one of their worst performances under Lancaster as some kind of heroic evolution toward godhood. To me it was a step back... we've played better 10 man rugby than that.
As it was England mugged a fantastic result anyway, thats just the way things go (see the SA game for the reverse)

Im much happier with the result than what England produced in terms of play.

rodders wrote:

Triangulation wrote:The masterclass was England 2003 - Wellington vs the ABs

We went down to 13 men for the best part of 10 minutes with Dayglo and Back i think yellow carded.

We went upfield with a series of forward drives.

We won that period 6-0 i believe.

Did Owen Farrell eat up 8 minutes with his penalty kick build up then too?

Triangulation wrote:

rodders wrote:

Triangulation wrote:The masterclass was England 2003 - Wellington vs the ABs

We went down to 13 men for the best part of 10 minutes with Dayglo and Back i think yellow carded.

We went upfield with a series of forward drives.

We won that period 6-0 i believe.

Did Owen Farrell eat up 8 minutes with his penalty kick build up then too?

Hopefully yes.
The ABs ate up valuable time trying to get a pushover/penalty try vs our 6 man pack.
It didnt work.
Martin Johnson was asked what was going through his head at the time. He answered " my spine". Gold!

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:For the record Ive gone from a Lancaster (and Farrell ) sceptic to a bona fide bandwagon rider. I just think England are better than what they produced on Sunday, whereas other seem to see it as an affront to the dignity of makind to suggest that it was anything less than the greatest single moment of herosim since Wales last won a game Luke Skywalker faced up to his dad second time of asking.
Im not saying england are bobbins, just they have had better days.

SecretFly wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:For the record Ive gone from a Lancaster (and Farrell ) sceptic to a bona fide bandwagon rider. I just think England are better than what they produced on Sunday, whereas other seem to see it as an affront to the dignity of makind to suggest that it was anything less than the greatest single moment of herosim since Wales last won a game Luke Skywalker faced up to his dad second time of asking.
Im not saying england are bobbins, just they have had better days.

England are better than Sunday? Yes indeed - they are.
Ireland too are better than Sunday.

Let's have a replay on a dry pitch that acts like grass rather than porridge and we'll take it from there

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:For the record Ive gone from a Lancaster (and Farrell ) sceptic to a bona fide bandwagon rider. I just think England are better than what they produced on Sunday, whereas other seem to see it as an affront to the dignity of makind to suggest that it was anything less than the greatest single moment of herosim since Wales last won a game Luke Skywalker faced up to his dad second time of asking.
Im not saying england are bobbins, just they have had better days.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:For the record Ive gone from a Lancaster (and Farrell ) sceptic to a bona fide bandwagon rider. I just think England are better than what they produced on Sunday, whereas other seem to see it as an affront to the dignity of makind to suggest that it was anything less than the greatest single moment of herosim since Wales last won a game Luke Skywalker faced up to his dad second time of asking.
Im not saying england are bobbins, just they have had better days.

England are better than Sunday? Yes indeed - they are.
Ireland too are better than Sunday.

Let's have a replay on a dry pitch that acts like grass rather than porridge and we'll take it from there

Seems impossible in Ireland with all that rain... that means we'll have to have it at Twickers, right?

Hood83 wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:There are so many things to say about that Irish performance but I don't know about you Rodders, I just cant be bothered to talk about it. Kidney doesn't learn from his mistakes tactically and in his selections. Just as we have lost to Wales on the previous three occasions we have demonstrated how easy we are to defend against. Get the defensive line up quickly and we will be too clueless to do anything. England played perfectly fine. They offered absolutely nothing in attack and still won the match. They didn't even really have to work that hard for it either. The score flattered us and England's victory was well deserved. I'm not sure how Robshaw won man of the match. He put in alot of work but I thought Parling was absolutely outstanding.

It is exactly the performance I envisaged. Kidney has castrated his players from using their brains in a match. You see Ulster and Leinster invariably being able to change tactics when the going gets tough to win matches they should have lost. Ireland have not done that once since 2010. I'm glad you picked up on D'Arcy Rodders because I was screaming at him there. Even though he has lost alot of his gas that was a gaping hole, and even if he had have been tackled he could have created an overlap and a chance for Gilroy and Kearney (I think) to break.

Other than that we'll let the usual crowd of provincial infighters do their usual on ROG (embarrassing and sad), Healy (thuggery), Heaslip (the most underperforming Irish players since the last Lions tour now captain), unbalanced backrow (expecting Healy and Best to do the breakdown work so three backrowers can carry the ball ineffectually- how badly do we miss David Wallace?), refusal to change centres when D'Arcy offers no creativity, etc, etc, etc.

The biggest thing though I noticed was the booing of Farrell when kicking. I hate it. Its footballesque behaviour. I was sitting with my dad and some of his friends watching the match and they were all talking before it about how at the height of the Troubles England came across the play Ireland in Dublin when Scotland and Wales refused. Most of us know about it- it was a brave and incredibly important gesture. Then to hear supposedly 'respectful' fans booing the English kicker shows absolutely no class.

I think it's comments like these that result in so many people having a soft spot for the Irish team and its fans. I hope it doesn't come across as massively patronising to say - nice one.

That said, the noise of your fans was also incredible, sounded an amazing atmosphere, I think it's worth dwelling on that as well. And as an Englishman I personally had no issue with the booing. I see lots of people don't like it but I ask myself - 'would England fans at Twickenham be any better' and the answer I think is a resounding no. They're also some of the most boorish, awful, mute fans around. IMO

Triangulation wrote:Irish supporters,

Do you think that the choke tackle is going to be maintained long term by DK as the mainstay of your defensive strategy?

Should it be?

I can see the success you have had with it in the past. The best examples off the top of my head being vs England 2011 and vs Wallabies at the last RWC (though god only knows how or why the aussies were "suprised" at it. They are on record as saying they were!)


I can also see that with strong back rowers such as SOB and Ferris hopefully returning it can play to stengths.

Surely though you are at risk of being found out now. Everyone knows you're going to try it and will plan accordingly.

We saw vs England that when it goes wrong eg. Heaslip on 36 the tackler can often get caught on the wrong side and penalised for not rolling away.

(not an issue with a collapsed maul but it is a big issue if it is not deemed a collapsed maul due to the tackled player getting to the deck in a timely fashion).

interested to hear peoples thoughts on this.