Ireland vs South Africa 8th of November

First topic message reminder :

In six days time Ireland will host South Africa in their first test of the November tours. South Africa will have to lift themselves for this one as the standard under Meyer has ben exemplary in Europe, he is yet to lose a test match and the Six Nations champions gets first shot at breaking Meyer's unbeaten streak over the Six Nations teams.

It seems both teams are effected by injuries so their depth will be severely tested.

South African players unavailable due to injury.

Props - Marcel v d Merwe, Frans Malherbe
Hooker - Schalk Brits, Callie Visagie
Locks - Pieter Steph du Toit, Flip v d Merwe
Back Row - Frans Louw, Willem Alberts, Siya Kolisi, Arno Botha
Halfback - Fourie du Preez, Ruan Pienaar (Pending a fitness test)
Midfield - Jaque Fourie

Irish players unavailable due to injury.
Props - Healy, Moore, Ross (Questionable)
Hooker - Cronin, Best (questionable)
Locks - Tuohy, Ryan
Back Row - Henderson, Murphy, O'Brien
Halfback -
Flyhalf - Sexton (Questionable)
Midfield - Darcy (questionable)
Back Three - Kearney, Earls, Trimble, Fitzgerald, McFadden, Bowe (questionable)

Ireland has been rather successful against South Africa in the last decade, managing wins in 2004, 2006 and 2009.

South Africa 31 - 17 Ireland
South Africa 26 - 17 Ireland
Ireland 17 - 12 South Africa
Ireland 32 - 15 South Africa
Ireland 15 - 10 South Africa
Ireland 21 - 23 South Africa
Ireland 12 - 16 South Africa

Likely matchday 23 for South Africa.

1. Tendai Mtwarira
2. Bismarck du Plessis
3. Jannie du PLessis
4. Eben Etzebeth
5. Victor Matfield
6. Marcell Coetzee
7. Oupa Mohoje
8. Duane Vermeulen
9. Francois Hougaard
10. Handre Pollard
11. Brya Habana
12. Jean de Villiers
13. Jan Serfontein
14. Cornal Hendricks
15. Willie le Roux.

Subs
16. Coenie Oosthuizen
17. Adriaan Strauss
18. Julian Redelinghuys
19. Bakkies Botha
20. Schalk Burger
21. Cobus Reinach
22. Johan Goosen
23. Patrick Lambie/Damien de Allende

Likely Irish matchday 23. (Help please)

Ireland will be keen to beat the Springboks, even though they are unlikely to meet them in earlier rounds of the RWC it will give them validation and confidence for the Rugby World Cup. Under their new coach I expect them to throw the ball around and attempt to run the SPringboks off their feet, Ireland is also more used to the conditions and could use that to their advantage, I suspect the territorial game will be part of their plans.

It is easier sad than done though, the only team in recent years that managed to run the Springboks off their feet was New Zealand, and that was at altitude. South Africa these days play more adventurous rugby and at a great pace as well, newcomer Handre POllard will be on his first trip to Europe, so it might take him a while to adapt, but once on song he will be the danger man, South Africa attacks a lot flatter without Morne Steyn which does provide more hesitation in opposition defences and creates more space for their outside backs.

One issue with South Africa this season has been their inconsistency in performances, and they will have to be on song from the start.

Springbok coach Heyneke Meyer has warned his team they will need to be at their best if they are to keep their unbeaten record under his management in the northern hemisphere intact.

Meyer singled out the team’s first fixture against Ireland as a crucial one to kick off the team’s four week tour, and one which is the most tricky of all their fixtures.

The Boks know they cannot focus on the Twickenham showdown before getting past the tricky Irish, who have been a team that has plagued them at this time of year under previous coaches.

The Boks will know all too well how a poor opening performance can set the trend for the tour, and with chances to experiment getting less and less ahead of the World Cup, it is imperative that the team kick off the tour on a high note.

“We have a proud record and we haven’t lost a game there. But we have a proud record and this is probably the toughest tour we have faced to the Northern Hemisphere. I truly believe Ireland is an unbelievable team, they were unlucky not to beat the All Blacks last year.

“They’ve got a great coaching staff, a lot of in-form players and their defence is great. They’ve got a good kicking game in those conditions."

That's it boys, enjoy the discussion.

quinsforever wrote:

Bullsbok wrote:The only positive outcome from this game is that the Boks WILL beat England next week and thats very important come world cup time . Prior to yesterday they hadnt lost in the NH since 2010 and would have inevitably started taken wins here for granted. Since the Irish assured us we dont  have that luxury the boys in Green and Gold will bring the same hunger and desperation to win , that they reserve for the All blacks . I'm not a betting man but England Springboks will be one i'm betting on for sure .The English will play a similar gameplan to our and with Farrell instead of the brilliant Sexton torturing us , i'm very confident .

Lambie looks likely to start hopefully with Reinach (although thats asking for much on my part) Strauss will replace Bismarck in another "rotation" and JPP will be on in place of Hendricks . I also fancy Goosen to be on the bench to provide another flyhalf option  

yes, i've heard your confidence before. you havent played england since 2012 AIs where SA won by a point. England are a lot better now than then, and have plenty of first choice players coming back from injury.

So i think you are dead wrong. England will be relishing the game at HQ and will feel confident. England beat Ireland in what should have been the decider in the 6Ns in Feb in a very tight match. You obviously havent been following english rugby much.

I hope the SA squad go into the game as confident as they did against ireland and as you seem to be for them against England.

England beating Ireland 9 months ago doesnt mean they will beat us . We beat the all blacks a month ago and that doesnt guarantee we'll beat you

quinsforever wrote:it's amazing what all that rest that the irish centrally contracted players get, can do for peak performance

Looking at the SA try I think it was the one major mistake we made all afternoon, we didnt engage the maul until too late (no one seemed to know what they were doing) and it was a soft try in the end.

Anyhow I hope Joe sticks with Henshaw and Payne as our primary centre pairing going forward. They deserve a shot against Aus (also given the size of the Aus centres)....that is going to be a cracking game as well.

kingraf wrote:Also, I do wonder whether we've actually progressed this year. This must be the first year in the Meyer era we could have lost every single RC match we played. We would have lost to the Welsh had it not been for a boneheaded shoulder charge, and we've just been shellacked by Ireland's second maybe third team. Just seems to be that the car might be rolling backwards, with that victory over the All Blacks nothing more than an illusory red herring. Maybe it was less an improvement on our part, and more the law of averages, combined with a boneheaded shoulder charge, combined with the fortune of being at altitude to kick at 55m?

No we haven't progressed, another year on and the senior players are one season too far, Meyer will not win the world cup with these guys, they showed in 2011 they can't adapt, they have shown it in most of their matches this year and especially yesterday.

ME-109, Do you really see Payne as a 13? I would actually move Hensaw to 13 and bring in another 12, maybe even Madigan at 12...

TJ wrote:

quinsforever wrote:it's amazing what all that rest that the irish centrally contracted players get, can do for peak performance

 

Long may it continue...its a mirror of the NZ system and allows us to get the best out of the players for the development of the national team. Some other countries should try it. They might even get out of their own 22 playing against 14 men sometime..

quinsforever wrote:it's amazing what all that rest that the irish centrally contracted players get, can do for peak performance

Yeah.  We're developing the product line even further now with the new income stream from the ERCC... and we're trying out the idea of resting our Centrally Contracted players actually during high-calibre International contests too!  We'll be resting Paulie, Kearney, Heaslip and Sexton during the 6N. The King Class Cotton Players will be taken out of deep freeze at the end of July next year.

Nachos Jones wrote:ME-109, Do you really see Payne as a 13? I would actually move Hensaw to 13 and bring in another 12, maybe even Madigan at 12...

I think he deserves a go at it. He started to grow into the game (as did Henshaw) and overall I thought they were very solid. They are also both very decent attacking players and hell why not. I was surprised that Joe picked them (pleasantly) but the coach seems to know what he wants and seems to see it in both of them.

I thought that Payne was solid but he really did look out of place at 13. I am not against him being there, I just feel that he is a far better 15.

Henshaw looked comfortable from minute 1 of the match and was putting in some big hits. I see him as the future Ireland 13 more than anyone else.

quinsforever wrote:it's amazing what all that rest that the irish centrally contracted players get, can do for peak performance

No argument there! Days like yesterday are what it's all for. The provinces, the clubs, the schools, the grassroots- all building towards that.

I would like to see the combination continue. I really don't see what bringing D'Arcy back would do for us.

Appreciate that trying out a few different combinations ahead of the 6N may be on the cards, but that Payne/Henshaw combo worked well. Payne looks doubtful for Georgia though.

Notch wrote:There could have been a yellow for Coetzee at the start in my view, leading with the elbow into the throat of the opponent. He was lucky. I don't believe for a second there was nay intent there at all nut still dangerous play. I have no complaints about the outcome, stone cold penalty, but yeah it could have very easily been a yellow. Was borderline.

But the yellow that was given was farcical.

Why was the yellow farcical? I was at the game so didnt get to see a replay but at the time looked like Strauss intentionally went for the man and not the ball. Possibly a bit of a soft yellow but a knock on against Ireland would have been really harsh.

Notch wrote:

quinsforever wrote:it's amazing what all that rest that the irish centrally contracted players get, can do for peak performance

No argument there! Days like yesterday are what it's all for. The provinces, the clubs, the schools, the grassroots- all building towards that.

For me it was great to see Bowe show his class one again for his try. Ireland's greatest ever winger? Such a classy player.

Henshaw had a laugh about the idea of the shock to his system at having to hit such big men, the size of which he hadn't seen before.  But after a few hits he said he got used to it (very important words and why it's good that we have so many injuries to more familiar faces)  
Getting used to the levels required to compete at this level is invaluable to both Payne and Henshaw.  Now they have to show that they can handle it continuously and improve more as familiarity sets in.  
One big game a year is the habit we're trying to break remember.  We're getting there but concentration is required to leave good games quickly behind us and maintain a ruthless streak into the next one.

GunsGerms wrote:For me it was great to see Bowe show his class one again for his try. Ireland's greatest ever winger? Such a classy player.

He's been out of form a bit at Ulster, so great to see him prove he is still a test match animal.

GunsGerms wrote:

Notch wrote:There could have been a yellow for Coetzee at the start in my view, leading with the elbow into the throat of the opponent. He was lucky. I don't believe for a second there was nay intent there at all nut still dangerous play. I have no complaints about the outcome, stone cold penalty, but yeah it could have very easily been a yellow. Was borderline.

But the yellow that was given was farcical.

Why was the yellow farcical? I was at the game so didnt get to see a replay but at the time looked like Strauss intentionally went for the man and not the ball. Possibly a bit of a soft yellow but a knock on against Ireland would have been really harsh.

Poite used the TMO and clearly (in my eyes) Kearney never had control of the ball. It would have been a harsh penalty in my eyes. There was nothing really wrong with what Strauss did, to me it just looked like he tried to slap the ball out of Kearneys hands. It was a build up of infringements that got the yellow card, not the act itself.

quinsforever wrote:

Notch wrote:

quinsforever wrote:it's amazing what all that rest that the irish centrally contracted players get, can do for peak performance

No argument there! Days like yesterday are what it's all for. The provinces, the clubs, the schools, the grassroots- all building towards that.

All the Boks players were pulled from curry cup games and rested from all games in preparation for this game. The spin from one SA news report was that as a result they were undercooked. Put whatever spin you want on it Ireland won because we out thought SA while tactically SA werent as astute.

Nachos Jones wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Notch wrote:There could have been a yellow for Coetzee at the start in my view, leading with the elbow into the throat of the opponent. He was lucky. I don't believe for a second there was nay intent there at all nut still dangerous play. I have no complaints about the outcome, stone cold penalty, but yeah it could have very easily been a yellow. Was borderline.

But the yellow that was given was farcical.

Why was the yellow farcical? I was at the game so didnt get to see a replay but at the time looked like Strauss intentionally went for the man and not the ball. Possibly a bit of a soft yellow but a knock on against Ireland would have been really harsh.

Poite used the TMO and clearly (in my eyes) Kearney never had control of the ball. It would have been a harsh penalty in my eyes. There was nothing really wrong with what Strauss did, to me it just looked like he tried to slap the ball out of Kearneys hands. It was a build up of infringements that got the yellow card, not the act itself.

It was a tackle in the air but it was not really a tackle... Strauss gets off the ground for a start and tries to get near the ball, clumsily flails at it and knocks over Kearney. It was clumsy not intentional. Thats why it was a harsh card.

Now the Springboks were very indisciplined and threw in a few more high shots etc. for good measure. So I'm not so sure that a yellow was undeserved across the balance of the entire game. But for that incident, yes it was harsh- especially because Poite hadn't issued a team warning to the Boks that I had heard.

Doesnt matter if you get off the ground if you go for the man and not the ball. It seemed Strauss intentionally went for Kearney. It was his own fault really even if it was harsh.

My take on it is this GunsGerms, Strauss goes up in the air but not in line with Kearney. He see's Kearney lose control of the ball and tries to slap it out of his hands. He has made contact with Kearney but Kearney was already in a bad position and was always going to fall awkwardly, hence he didn't have full control of the ball.

In real time, it looked dodgy and I understand exactly why Poite went to the TMO but on the replays, that is what I make of the situation.

I think (don't quote me) that Poite also said that the yellow was for accumulation of infringements and not for the act itself. It was odd given, as Notch said, SA weren't on a team warning. Poite, as he has done many times, just got fed up and took action. It was a wrong decision and could not have come at a worse time for SA. I am not saying that it lost SA the match but it certainly had an impact.

For me, the correct decision would have been to award Ireland the penalty (even that I think would have been harsh) and assign a team warning to SA.

Yeah fair enough. It doesnt really matter if you have control of the ball though. In any case I agree it was a bit harsh but since Payne was sent off in the hcup I reckon the best policy is just to avoid contact in the air altogether.

Its just my take on it and I am probably wrong but I don't like they way rugby is heading when you can no longer compete for the ball in the air for fear of being carded.

Nachos Jones wrote:For me, the correct decision would have been to award Ireland the penalty (even that I think would have been harsh) and assign a team warning to SA.

Yeah. Poite is always good for a few of these in a game though isn't he?

Nachos Jones wrote:Its just my take on it and I am probably wrong but I don't like they way rugby is heading when you can no longer compete for the ball in the air for fear of being carded.

Actually I completely agree with you on that. Under the rules the yellow was arguably justified under common sense it wasnt at all.

Aah common sense and Poite should never find themselves in the same sentence.

GunsGerms wrote:

Nachos Jones wrote:Its just my take on it and I am probably wrong but I don't like they way rugby is heading when you can no longer compete for the ball in the air for fear of being carded.

Actually I completely agree with you on that. Under the rules the yellow was arguably justified under common sense it wasnt at all.

The thing is Kearney did something similar near the start. Now that was also just a penalty, and the difference between the two in Poites mind was obviously the fact that South Africa had committed many offences, but if he's going to give a yellow on that rationale he should issue a warning first.

Notch wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Nachos Jones wrote:Its just my take on it and I am probably wrong but I don't like they way rugby is heading when you can no longer compete for the ball in the air for fear of being carded.

Actually I completely agree with you on that. Under the rules the yellow was arguably justified under common sense it wasnt at all.

The thing is Kearney did something similar near the start. Now that was also just a penalty, and the difference between the two in Poites mind was obviously the fact that South Africa had committed many offences, but if he's going to give a yellow on that rationale he should issue a warning first.

Exactly. Kearney, under the letter of the law, should have also seen a yellow card.

It was cumulative.  There was at least one or two yellows earlier that didn't get a yellow.  So you might say Poite allowed the game to bed down and gave time to players to cut out the cynical stuff.  He warned both Captains about the niggles.  It's not great English but it was English enough for both sides to know he was in a mood to clamp down harder on the cumulative stuff from there on in.  After that, you're not being honest if you know Poite (and both sides have REASON to know him) and still get surprised when he pulls a fast card.

Excuse me, are you guys playing tiddlywinks in Europe?

There are three instances where Poite had a tizz over.

The first was Coetzee which was referred to the TMO, he himself reluctantly admitted the hand grabbed Heaslip's jersey first and it was a fend off.

Then there was the high tackle which Duane was penalised for.

And then there was the supposed tackle in the air.

If that is cumulative then rugby is truly becoming soft.

Now that you mention it SecretFly, I do remember Poite saying something to both Captains but I did hear it well enough to understand if he was giving both captains team warnings.

Poite simply makes very odd decisions, his reading of the breakdown is, shall we say, unique.

I just feel it was the wrong decision but very understandable coming from Poite and his history...

I will say again, Poite is a useless referee.

Let me explain how clueless he is, Ireland does not commit to the maul, so Sa can't drive forward otherwise it will be obstruction, then Ireland sends a players around the back of the "non maul" as technically there is no offside line and he tackles the ball carrier.

He seals the ball off and Poite calls scrum to Ireland.

Now lets look at the law, in a tackle situation the tackler must release the ball and roll away, Ireland does not do that, if Poite was sharp and knew the law he would have penalised Ireland by applying the normal tackle law.

On the contrary, rugby is getting harder and thats why the rules are getting stricter and stricter. Back in the amateur days you could let guys 'settle it on the pitch' and so on because they were basically ordinary blokes. They wouldn't hurt each other so badly.

Now we have unbelievably powerful guys playing the game, we need to be a lot stricter on a lot of things because these guys are easily strong enough to kill a man if their strength is channeled in the wrong direction. Every collision gets more dangerous the more powerful players get. Thats why the IRB are making the rules more and more tight I think.

But I would have liked to have beaten South Africa 15 on 15, and I agree a yellow was harsh indeed.

How did you guys rate Toner yesterday? I thought that he had his best game for Ireland and brought a lot of physicality to his game. Have always doubted him but yesterday he played out of his skin.

As for Heaslip, you all know I am one of his biggest critics but I haven't seen him play that well for Ireland for many years. It was a proper performance from him.

Biltong wrote:Now lets look at the law, in a tackle situation the tackler must release the ball and roll away, Ireland does not do that, if Poite was sharp and knew the law he would have penalised Ireland by applying the normal  tackle law.

He calls scrum to Ireland because he calls it as a collapsed maul. How did Ireland know it would be called a maul? They did every bit as much in-depth analysis on Poite's interpretation of that situation as they did on the Boks lineout.

Fail to prepare? Prepare to fail.

Biltong wrote:Excuse me, are you guys playing tiddlywinks in Europe?

There are three instances where Poite had a tizz over.

The first was Coetzee which was referred to the TMO, he himself reluctantly admitted the hand grabbed Heaslip's jersey first and it was a fend off.

Then there was the high tackle which Duane was penalised for.

And then there was the supposed tackle in the air.

If that is cumulative then rugby is truly becoming soft.

You're not the ref.  Poite was.  
You know Poite.  New Zealand knows Barnes.  We knew Kaplan and know Poite.  
You gotta know your refs, Bilt.  

He talked with both Captains.  That infered he was upgrading incidents in his mind.  Quick decisions without emotion to come.  That's him.  Warnings mean something in rugby especially when given by highly styilised referees who have their own unique ways of reffing.  

We might debate the version of tiddlywinks being played but that's irrelevant to how the ref is viewing the tiddlywinks.  It's the duty of coaches and players to know the ref they play under.  ME said earlier that POC knew to keep his mouth shut and not complain so much.  Yes, he learned how to handle Mr Ruthless Poite.  The ref doesn't play rugby the way SA would like to play it, he judges it according to his thinking and he warned the captains that he was getting impatient.

Notch wrote:On the contrary, rugby is getting harder and thats why the rules are getting stricter and stricter. Back in the amateur days you could let guys 'settle it on the pitch' and so on because they were basically ordinary blokes. They wouldn't hurt each other so badly.

Now we have unbelievably powerful guys playing the game, we need to be a lot stricter on a lot of things because these guys are easily strong enough to kill a man if their strength is channeled in the wrong direction. Every collision gets more dangerous the more powerful players get. Thats why the IRB are making the rules more and more tight I think.

But I would have liked to have beaten South Africa 15 on 15, and I agree a yellow was harsh indeed.

Notch, 15 on 15 wouldn't have made any difference, SA were outplayed and Sexton gave a master class, having Strauss sent of had no impact on the credibility of the result.

My issue is not with the results, but the completely incompetence of Poite.

Notch wrote:

Biltong wrote:Now lets look at the law, in a tackle situation the tackler must release the ball and roll away, Ireland does not do that, if Poite was sharp and knew the law he would have penalised Ireland by applying the normal  tackle law.

He calls scrum to Ireland because he calls it as a collapsed maul. How did Ireland know it would be called a maul? They did every bit as much in-depth analysis on Poite's interpretation of that situation as they did on the Boks lineout.

Fail to prepare? Prepare to fail.

You are missing the point, and yes I have already mentioned numerous times that SA failed to adapt.

The point is Poite does not know the law.

Biltong wrote:Excuse me, are you guys playing tiddlywinks in Europe?

There are three instances where Poite had a tizz over.

The first was Coetzee which was referred to the TMO, he himself reluctantly admitted the hand grabbed Heaslip's jersey first and it was a fend off.

Then there was the high tackle which Duane was penalised for.

And then there was the supposed tackle in the air.

If that is cumulative then rugby is truly becoming soft.

The rules are there for a reason. The game is becoming more physical all the time and more dangerous. For all we know the rules could have prevented some players being in wheelchairs now or worse. The players by now should know whats off limits so no point blaming the referees at this stage.

Nachos Jones wrote:How did you guys rate Toner yesterday? I thought that he had his best game for Ireland and brought a lot of physicality to his game. Have always doubted him but yesterday he played out of his skin.

As for Heaslip, you all know I am one of his biggest critics but I haven't seen him play that well for Ireland for many years. It was a proper performance from him.

I fail to understand Heaslips critics. He is probably the most consistant player to ever play for Ireland.

Toner is class.

I have written a few articles on this, this one was specific to why SA lost due to their inability to adapt.

There are a few simple facts that we must acknowledge about our beloved Springboks.

They are not smart enough to adapt, they simply do not have the ability to learn during a match, the problem here is that they do not observe what their opponents are doing, whether it be at the breakdown, defence, the maul or tactical kicking.

When the opponent is not committing players to your setup to create a maul, you stop using it, when they outsmart you by sending a player around your “non maul” to seal the ball off, then you stop doing it.

The alternative is you go to the referee and query why the defender is allowed to seal the ball off and not roll away if it is not a maul as the normal tackle rules apply.

Either way, you need to adapt to it immediately.

When your opponent keeps hitting numbers to the breakdown, kicking at the ball, lying over it to slow it down, then you adapt and send more numbers in.

When your halfback is not protected and he is continually under pressure you adapt and protect him.

If your opponent keeps rushing up with their defence, alter your attack by chipping in behind them where the space is, alternatively stand just a little flatter, but change your attack, do not keep doing the same thing over and over as only fools do that.

When your line out is being nullified by a smarter team, kick your goals until you take the lead, stop chasing the scoreboard because you are either too arrogant to concede you are being outsmarted, or simply not able to read what is happening.

When your execution is failing on attack, re assess what you are doing, Bismarck conceding two penalties at the breakdown whilst South Africa as Ireland on the ropes is simply unacceptable.

Now for the controversy.

I blame this all on the experienced players who are supposed to be the leaders. These are the same players that failed to adapt in Wellington in 2011. They simply don’t have the grey matter to assess, process and adapt.

Lets face it, this Bok team is not going to win the Rugby World Cup, you may argue this is an over reaction, but the same issues in this game has plagued us against Wales, Argentina, Australia and New Zealand.

Meyer is relying on experienced players as his leadership group and they are not showing the ability to adapt, I therefor say get rid of them all.

Apart from the fact that Matfield is not physical enough, de Villiers have not shown any of the form that made him great last year, there is criticism of form against all the older players.

Forget about winning the World Cup in 2015, it is not going to happen, accept it and move on by building a new team, put a group of youngsters together and build a team for 2019, but start now.

Agree or disagree, but these so called experienced players are not going to take us any further.

profitius wrote:

Biltong wrote:Excuse me, are you guys playing tiddlywinks in Europe?

There are three instances where Poite had a tizz over.

The first was Coetzee which was referred to the TMO, he himself reluctantly admitted the hand grabbed Heaslip's jersey first and it was a fend off.

Then there was the high tackle which Duane was penalised for.

And then there was the supposed tackle in the air.

If that is cumulative then rugby is truly becoming soft.

The rules are there for a reason. The game is becoming more physical all the time and more dangerous. For all we know the rules could have prevented some players being in wheelchairs now or worse. The players by now should know whats off limits so no point blaming the referees at this stage.

Profitius, if the laws are there for a reason why was Kearney not carded?

Poite is inconsistent in his application of the law as well as incompetent. I agree player must be protected, there was no intent to injure Kearney, Strauss went up, realised he was not going to make it, tried to slap the ball and stroked Kearne on his chest, Kearney was leaning backward awkwardly already before the touch of Strauss, he was going to go down either way.

He was once one of my favourite players Guns, just over the last few years he has (in my eyes) not done enough for Ireland and I have been very critical of him. Yesterday was a return to the form that made me sit up and recognise just what a great player he is again. I think it was 09 since I last saw that form from him.

Toner always seemed to be too lightweight in the contact area for me but yesterday he showed just how physical he can be and I was highly impressed with him.

Nachos Jones wrote: I think it was 09 since I last saw that form from him.

What happened to Ireland post '09?

One player guilty for all that lack of form?

I could name a bunch more that underperformed for a three or so years.  Why isolate him?

I'd say he's played his part since Schmidt took over and is now playing a game he recognises - a game with teeth and a game designed to win games rather than one designed to flush all fire from Irish players by constantly gifting possession to the opposition and standing well off the tricks they chose to play with it.
It's a new coach, a meatier Ireland in terms of intent and one clinically coached.  He's back in a real team.  All the players are.  And they're loving the chances it's giving them.

Of course he is not solely to blame for Irelands form. Its just that I held him in such high regard that his form stood out more than any other players.

Maybe I shouldn't praise him on here, as a Munsterman all my words will get twisted

Heaslip became a scapegoat. For me his consistency is incredible. Cant think of any other player currently playing who has contributed more than him. Maybe Poc.

Nachos Jones wrote:Of course he is not solely to blame for Irelands form. Its just that I held him in such high regard that his form stood out more than any other players.

Maybe I shouldn't praise him on here, as a Munsterman all my words will get twisted

Not twisting your words, Nachos...just pointing out a little logic when you decided to use 2009 as a line in the sand. It very much was a line in the sand year - for a lot of players - and coaches. It was down the dune after that for all of them.

http://balls.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/kear.jpg

Most refs would say thats a penalty verging on a yellow - after being warned it's a yellow. He's not looking at the ball, and unless he thinks he's got superhuman skills, he's not expecting to catch the ball with that arm, but to prevent kearney catching it. Cynical and intentional foul play.

Half of rugby nowdays is knowing the ref you're up against. South Africa were not as good as Ireland at that part of the game. POC has been yellowed for talking to Poitre too much in the past, even though he was captain. Poitre likes to give yellows. Touching someone in the air is THE most severely penalised area in rugby at the moment. Strauss should have known better and walked (or ran rather) right into it.

Biltong wrote:I will say again, Poite is a useless referee.

Let me explain how clueless he is, Ireland does not commit to the maul, so Sa can't drive forward otherwise it will be obstruction, then Ireland sends a players around the back of the "non maul" as technically there is no offside line and he tackles the ball carrier.

He seals the ball off and Poite calls scrum to Ireland.

Now lets look at the law, in a tackle situation the tackler must release the ball and roll away, Ireland does not do that, if Poite was sharp and knew the law he would have penalised Ireland by applying the normal  tackle law.

Surely as soon as Archer tackles the ball carrier it becomes a maul, no?