England v Ireland, 5 September

First topic message reminder :

  
ENGLAND v IRELAND
5 September 2015
14:30 BST
Twickenham, London

Live on Sky Sports 1

Referee: Nigel Owens (Wales)
Touch judges: Romain Poite (France) Leighton Hodges (Wales)
Television match official: Shaun Veldsman (South Africa)

A. Head to Head

129 Played 129
74 Won 47
8 Drawn 8
47 Lost 74
1,484 Points 1,056

B. Recent Form

1 March 2015
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
19 – 9 to Ireland

22 February 2014
Twickenham, London
13 – 10 to England

10 February 2013
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
6 – 12 to England

17 March 2012
Twickenham, London
30 – 9 to England

27 August 2011
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
9 – 20 to England

19 March 2011
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
24 – 8 to Ireland

27 February 2010
Twickenham, London
16 – 20 to Ireland

C. Teams

ENGLAND

15. Mike Brown (Harlequins, 38 caps)
14. Anthony Watson (Bath Rugby, 10 caps)
13. Jonathan Joseph (Bath Rugby, 12 caps)
12. Brad Barritt (Saracens, 22 caps)
11. Jonny May (Gloucester Rugby, 15 caps)
10. George Ford (Bath Rugby, 12 caps)
09. Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 48 caps)

01. Joe Marler (Harlequins, 32 caps)
02. Tom Youngs (Leicester Tigers, 23 caps)
03. Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers, 51 caps)
04. Geoff Parling (Exeter Chiefs, 24 caps)
05. Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints, 39 caps)
06. Tom Wood (Northampton Saints, 37 caps)
07. Chris Robshaw (captain, Harlequins, 38 caps)
08. Ben Morgan (Gloucester Rugby, 28 caps)

16. Jamie George (Saracens, 1 cap)
17. Mako Vunipola (Saracens, 22 caps)
18. Kieran Brookes (Northampton Saints, 11 caps)
19. Joe Launchbury (Wasps, 23 caps)
20. Billy Vunipola (Saracens, 18 caps)
21. Richard Wigglesworth (Saracens, 22 caps)
22. Owen Farrell (Saracens, 30 caps)
23. Sam Burgess (Bath Rugby, 1 cap)


IRELAND

01. Jack McGrath (St. Marys College/Leinster)
02. Rory Best (Banbridge/Ulster)
03. Mike Ross (Clontarf/Leinster)
04. Devin Toner (Lansdowne/Leinster)
05. Paul O'Connell (Young Munster) (capt)
06. Peter O'Mahony (Cork Constitution/Munster)
07. Sean O'Brien (UCD/Leinster)
08. Jamie Heaslip (Dublin University/Leinster)

09. Conor Murray (Garryowen/Munster)
10. Johnny Sexton (St. Mary's College/Leinster)
11. Dave Kearney (Lansdowne/Leinster)
12. Robbie Henshaw (Buccaneers/Connacht)
13. Jared Payne (Ulster)
14. Tommy Bowe (Belfast Harlequins/Ulster)
15. Simon Zebo (Cork Constitution/Munster)

16. Richardt Strauss (Old Wesley/Leinster)
17. Tadhg Furlong (Clontarf/Leinster)
18. Nathan White (Connacht)
19. Donnacha Ryan (Shannon/Munster)
20. Chris Henry (Malone/Ulster)
21. Eoin Reddan (Old Crescent/Leinster)
22. Ian Madigan (Blackrock College/Leinster)
23. Darren Cave (Belfast Harlequins/Ulster)

Saw Kearney (I think) read a move and get a good hit on Ford and the turnover but not sure I saw Ford get isolated? Farrell bar the awful miss pass was good but that did cost us at least 5 points.

I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentence, the wc deserves the best players and gutted for Webb and Halfpenny.

Also have to say that Barritt Joseph worked pretty well together but against the best teams I think we do need Slade on the bench (or even Farrell) who can come on and open the game up a bit is needed.

May has also given a selection headache; Nowell was nailed on a month ago and now looks very much under pressure after a great performance.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Also have to say that Barritt Joseph worked pretty well together but against the best teams I think we do need Slade on the bench (or even Farrell) who can come on and open the game up a bit is needed.

May has also given a selection headache; Nowell was nailed on a month ago and now looks very much under pressure after a great performance.

I agree.

For al it's detractors, the England midfield looked sharp and incisive for most of the time. Joseph is a real handful, Barritt too (but for more bish bosh reasons). May had a good game, but can he replicate the performance? Burgess wasn't the duffer his haters would have you believe, he made ground easily, although his handling could improve.

I must be in a slight minority, but was disappointed with Joseph's display. Ireland seemed terrified of May and Watson and were oftne drifting too much to allow them to double team the wingers - which should have allowed JJ to run riot. Hopefully he will be back to his best come the actual RWC.

LondonTiger wrote:I must be in a slight minority, but was disappointed with Joseph's display. Ireland seemed terrified of May and Watson and were oftne drifting too much to allow them to double team the wingers - which should have allowed JJ to run riot. Hopefully he will be back to his best come the actual RWC.

Maybe I should have said that JJ 'could' be a handful. I should think he'll improve for the WC.

Ireland perhaps didn't go into this match worrying too much about the result, but in reality, it was a full-on test. England came out of the blocks so well that Ireland had to work hard to save face, that was no second string Ireland side. Others may have said it, but they look a bit stupefied when a team takes it to them. France will test them.

That was as close to a full Irish side as there's been in the warmups but there's a few additions/changes that would make it the full 1st choice. Ireland just weren't at all up for the game and as you said only had to go up a gear in order to save face. I don't think anyone expected the intensity England brought but I'm satisfied that Ireland have another 2 or three gears in them for when it matters.

Jonny May did very well, and has been given every chance to make the spot his, looks like he was the favoured choice over Nowell.

If he does continue with this form then he is the best choice with Watson, but Nowell is one hell of an option

Pete330v2 wrote:That was as close to a full Irish side as there's been in the warmups but there's a few additions/changes that would make it the full 1st choice. Ireland just weren't at all up for the game and as you said only had to go up a gear in order to save face. I don't think anyone expected the intensity England brought but I'm satisfied that Ireland have another 2 or three gears in them for when it matters.

They might have one more gear, but not two or three.

Any news on Murray?

id give the irish defence some credit, they didnt allow the midfield to break the line at will, england had more joy out wide with the pace of the may and watson. I thought JJ and barrit complemented each rather well as we hoped they would, Barritt ran great crash and dummy lines and JJ stepped well and released the outside backs.

I thought the difference between the teams mainly was the quality of the englands kicking/chasing game, this allowed england to control the territory for large parts of the game putting the irish defence under lots of pressure, also england defended rather well.

The consensus moving forward for england is very much that the set piece needs to improve and they will need to be more clinical especially when there is a clear overlap. Fiji showed with the demolition of canada that they will be a real test first up, if england can deny them territory in the first half the way they did on saturday, I do think they will stroll home but if Fiji get a sniff of the try line early on it could be a nail biter!

Ireland will clearly improve, I thought they defended well under pressure for the most part and showed good discipline not to give a way more kickable pens. Set piece was good. I did think the back row under performed and tommy bowe was a shadow of his former self and they miss kearney at full back, so probably one or two changes to the starting 15 is in order.

Last point I wanted to make was about the replacements, englands forwards that came on were excellent and i am sure they will all play a role if england are to be successful at the world cup.

HQ matt wrote:id give the irish defence some credit, they didnt allow the midfield to break the line at will, england had more joy out wide with the pace of the may and watson. I thought JJ and barrit complemented each rather well as we hoped they would, Barritt ran great crash and dummy lines and JJ stepped well and released the outside backs.

I thought the difference between the teams mainly was the quality of the englands kicking/chasing game, this allowed england to control the territory for large parts of the game putting the irish defence under lots of pressure, also england defended rather well.

The consensus moving forward for england is very much that the set piece needs to improve and they will need to be more clinical especially when there is a clear overlap. Fiji showed with the demolition of canada that they will be a real test first up, if england can deny them territory in the first half the way they did on saturday, I do think they will stroll home but if Fiji get a sniff of the try line early on it could be a nail biter!

Ireland will clearly improve, I thought they defended well under pressure for the most part and showed good discipline not to give a way more kickable pens. Set piece was good. I did think the back row under performed and tommy bowe was a shadow of his former self and they miss kearney at full back, so probably one or two changes to the starting 15 is in order.

Last point I wanted to make was about the replacements, englands forwards that came on were excellent and i am sure they will all play a role if england are to be successful at the world cup.  

If you ignore the sympathy sh*g that Ireland have got in the WC draw, then you have to expect both teams to improve as the tournament progresses. I think if the groups go to plan (or as most expect), England will meet Ireland again in the knockout stages. If that were the case, I'd expect it to be very much wash, rinse, repeat of Saturday's performance.

finally watching the game...

26 mins in, tom youngs looks man of the first 26 minutes until he threw that forward pass...qn for the tigers fans...when he played centre were his arms and back that big? cause it doesnt look like he can get both his arms moving in a backwards or flat direction they are so big! LOL.

Jimpy wrote:

Pete330v2 wrote:That was as close to a full Irish side as there's been in the warmups but there's a few additions/changes that would make it the full 1st choice. Ireland just weren't at all up for the game and as you said only had to go up a gear in order to save face. I don't think anyone expected the intensity England brought but I'm satisfied that Ireland have another 2 or three gears in them for when it matters.

They might have one more gear, but not two or three.

That's your opinion but I reckon they have much more in them and are about 2 - 3 weeks behind England in preparation due to the game schedule.

The side on top always looks like they've brought more desire to the game.

Now Ireland may well be behind in their fitness plan, trying to peak later than england. It might well leave them leggy and a little off the pace. All England fans are/were hoping that was the case for us against france. They could well have been working on specific attributes and on a particular plans during the game as well. Ultimately, though, they want game time for their best team and they will have gone to twickenham looking to win, wanting to put down a marker and will be pi**ed that they didn't. Now, they may not be too concerned by it... in the grander scheme of things the result isn't important, other than a potential knock to confidence, but to say they weren't up for it is wrong in my opinion. An ireland team not up for playing england? Not up to it, on this particular occasion, is probably more appropriate.

milkyboy wrote:The side on top always looks like they've brought more desire to the game.

Now Ireland may well be behind in their fitness plan, trying to peak later than england. It might well leave them leggy and a little off the pace. All England fans are/were hoping that was the case for us against france. They could well have been working on specific attributes and on a particular plans during the game as well. Ultimately, though, they want game time for their best team and they will have gone to twickenham looking to win, wanting to put down a marker and will be pi**ed that they didn't. Now, they may not be too concerned by it... in the grander scheme of things the result isn't important, other than a potential knock to confidence, but to say they weren't up for it is wrong in my opinion. An ireland team not up for playing england? Not up to it, on this particular occasion, is probably more appropriate.

Funny old thing, if I'd have said that, there's be indignation all round...

just got to burgess's near try-scoring tackle...enjoyed that one.

good game. scoreline flattered ireland, but they didnt really look that up for it so i dont imagine they be too upset. two amazing calls by the tmo against english near tries. hope they arent that accurate during RWC against us...

Jimpy wrote:

milkyboy wrote:The side on top always looks like they've brought more desire to the game.

Now Ireland may well be behind in their fitness plan, trying to peak later than england. It might well leave them leggy and a little off the pace. All England fans are/were hoping that was the case for us against france. They could well have been working on specific attributes and on a particular plans during the game as well. Ultimately, though, they want game time for their best team and they will have gone to twickenham looking to win, wanting to put down a marker and will be pi**ed that they didn't. Now, they may not be too concerned by it... in the grander scheme of things the result isn't important, other than a potential knock to confidence, but to say they weren't up for it is wrong in my opinion. An ireland team not up for playing england? Not up to it, on this particular occasion, is probably more appropriate.

Funny old thing, if I'd have said that, there's be indignation all round...

... there's time

When I meet an irish sportsman (or welsh or scottish or french or australian etc) who understands the word friendly when it comes to playing england, I promise to post details.

OK - lots of chat going on, I havent read a lot of the comments above.
Ive just come back from a weekend away and seen a recording of the game.
My thoughts on the England performance are as follows.
I am still dissapointed with the pack - lineout had improved (possibly because of the pairing up of Parling and T.Youngs). But the scrum still looks a little fragile when comparing to 6N.
Cole looks to be underperforming in my opinion!
T.Youngs had a good game. Marler had a solid performance with a few good carries.
A bit of a gripe about T.Wood getting MoM - I am not sure what that was for, yes he carried more than usual or previous games (I think thats what Barnes was saying) but, thats his job! There were a dissapointing number of turnovers on both sides - does that show a lack of breakdown competativeness? Hooper and Pocock will run riot if not checked somehow.

I thought B.Youngs was OK, but that weird lazy pass thing was inexplicable! Ford improved on his last outing correcting a lot of wrongs but also seemed to be a lot less agressive in attack - perhaps it was more a game for settling the nerves and doing the basics right.

Barritt was pretty absent for a lot, however - it was his first outing for a long time. Joseph was pretty much man marked by the Irish and that made space for May and Watson who were both exceptional again. Brown showed again that he is first pick over Goode.

Burgerss brough a lot of energy when he came on, he is the only sub to really show it. The first dropped ball at full tilt, running those inside lines that Manu used to take was a naff pass, but you could tell that he had the Irish worried in defence ( I thought). The Vaunipolas added additional carriers.
My other concern is that with Burgess on the bench and Barritt/Joseph starting is that if Joseph is injured we could end up with Barritt and Burgess together! That would feel a bit too much like Farrell and Noone!
Do most agree or am I courting controversy?

PropDavid - IMO all you've illustrated with your post is that you have your feet firmly on the ground and you are aware of certain concerns and are not getting carried away with the hype. The scrums on occasion did look uncertain and were there 2 against the head in that game which is v strange. I actually like Wood as I think he offers more consistency and brings a better balance to England's back row. None of the 8's are on fire at the moment and whilst Parling adds something in the lineout you lose something with the work Launchbury gets through. Out wide you are looking very good with a solid enough midfield. To win this thing or even get out of the group however everyone is going to have to be on their A game and that is the challenge. After dominating for so long it must have raised some alarm bells to see the score at 15-13 with the men in green in the ascendency. The same problems go for Wales as well of course as IMO I see Aus being well ahead at the moment with their power, pace and nouse at the break down. Good luck for the RWC

Pete330v2 wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

Pete330v2 wrote:That was as close to a full Irish side as there's been in the warmups but there's a few additions/changes that would make it the full 1st choice. Ireland just weren't at all up for the game and as you said only had to go up a gear in order to save face. I don't think anyone expected the intensity England brought but I'm satisfied that Ireland have another 2 or three gears in them for when it matters.

They might have one more gear, but not two or three.

That's your opinion but I reckon they have much more in them and are about 2 - 3 weeks behind England in preparation due to the game schedule.

If they are 3 weeks behind they will be in a heap of trouble come their opening fixture.

Ireland didn't do any altitude training that I know of..... Now maybe they've been in chambers to mimic altitude but going to those places - well, teams go there for a reason - and I think I'm right in saying England and Wales have - perhaps more than once?

So I don't think it too strange to see Irish guys that have spent their Summer camps in sea level winter conditions Ireland!!! would be off the boil in terms of stamina levels in comparison to Wales and England.  They were finding it difficult to live with the pace.  

Ireland truly seem to have decided to slow, slow burn their way to match fitness (and maybe that's an alternative scientific belief that has champions in sports medical journals somewhere - I don't know)
But it seems strange again that so meticulous a coach as Schmidt didn't avail himself of a trip or two to high altitude training grounds.  So you always ask "Why?"  If you want your players on a level playing field fitness-wise, do you not mimic the best fitness procedures and practices of your nearest rivals?

His might be the right approach, it might be the totally wrong approach.  But the evidence of it being either isn't far away now.

Gooseberry wrote:

Pete330v2 wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

Pete330v2 wrote:That was as close to a full Irish side as there's been in the warmups but there's a few additions/changes that would make it the full 1st choice. Ireland just weren't at all up for the game and as you said only had to go up a gear in order to save face. I don't think anyone expected the intensity England brought but I'm satisfied that Ireland have another 2 or three gears in them for when it matters.

They might have one more gear, but not two or three.

That's your opinion but I reckon they have much more in them and are about 2 - 3 weeks behind England in preparation due to the game schedule.

If they are 3 weeks behind they will be in a heap of trouble come their opening fixture.

Hardly likely, our first 3 games are being treated as the luxury of 3 extra warm up games before the group decider against France hence being a few weeks behind other sides in preparation due to their big games being earlier in the tournament. Ireland will be fully up to speed by the time we face the French.

I do wonder if Ireland would have performed better against England had we not started so strongly.

Ireland didn't need to do any altitude training SF - They were flying high after the 6 Nations - when you're that high there's only one way to go

lostinwales wrote:I do wonder if Ireland would have performed better against England had we not started so strongly.

Probably, it has been noted a few times that the biggest weakness Ireland seem to have is racking up the points after their opponents have outscored them. If we can gain momentum first, then we are a very difficult team to defeat. If a team starts as strongly as England did last weekend, then we panic and struggle to come back.

We need to find that hidden spark who can light up the game when needed and put some points on the board.

RubyGuby wrote:Ireland didn't need to do any altitude training SF - They were flying high after the 6 Nations - when you're that high there's only one way to go

Plan C.

SecretFly wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Ireland didn't need to do any altitude training SF - They were flying high after the 6 Nations - when you're that high there's only one way to go

Plan C.

You got it

RubyGuby wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Ireland didn't need to do any altitude training SF - They were flying high after the 6 Nations - when you're that high there's only one way to go

Plan C.

You got it

Wait, don't you need a plan B first ?

munkian wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Ireland didn't need to do any altitude training SF - They were flying high after the 6 Nations - when you're that high there's only one way to go

Plan C.

You got it

Wait, don't you need a plan B first ?

Keep up dear munkian, Ireland's plan B is to try plan A harder when plan A fails...

it's forward thinking guerrilla strategy munkian. Modern thinking is not to have a plan B. It confuses the opposition when you go straight to plan C.

However as you might expect, the all blacks are the best team in the world, partly by moving to plan D, if plan A is failing. This catches out the old school teams waiting for plan B, and the lateral thinking students of the game who are expecting plan C. Its bluff and counter bluff at the highest level.

Well Plan A is the garryowen and plan B is the Leinster loop so probably good to have a plan C in case defenses work out the other two.

Milkboy has the serious explanation above, and a rootin' tootin' one it is too.

Plan C though in this case is the result of a strategic chat me and Ruby had a few days ago. It's C for 'curve'.... downwards.

Cheers lads

SecretFly wrote:Milkboy has the serious explanation above, and a rootin' tootin' one it is too.

Plan C though in this case is the result of a strategic chat me and Ruby had a few days ago.  It's C for 'curve'.... downwards.

they all have a code secretfly, for most teams its:

plan A - As usual
plan B - Bugger, plan A isn't working
plan C -  the downward Curve
plan D -  back to the Drawing board


the welsh interpretation is:

plan A - As usual - warrenball
plan B - Better warrenball please lads
plan C - i said play warrenball better you Cnuts
plan D - Damn warrenball isn't working and we've run out of plans

hope that clears it up for everyone

I love the Welsh version of Plan C! Fire and brimstone stubbornness just like we know and love from Gats.

Plan C is Cuthbert - we're Fooked - I'd take Hugh Pugh Barney McGrew, Dibble and Grub before him