QF3: Ireland v Argentina, 18 October

First topic message reminder :

   
IRELAND v ARGENTINA

18 October 2015
KO: 13:00 BST (UTC+01)
Millennium Stadium, Cardiff

Live on [tbc]

Ref: Jerome Garcès (France)
ARs: Romain Poite (France)and Chris Pollock (NZ)
TMO: George Ayoub (Australia)

A. Head to Head

15 Played 15
10 Won 5
0 Drawn 0
5 Lost 15
331 Points 283

B. Recent Form

14 June 2014
Estadio Monumental José Fierro, Tucumán
17 – 23 to Ireland

7 June 2014
Estadio Centenario, Resistencia
17 – 29 to Ireland

24 November 2012
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
46 – 24 to Ireland

28 November 2010
Aviva Stadium, Dublin
29 – 9 to Ireland

22 November 2008
Croke Park, Dublin
17 – 3 to Ireland

30 September 2007
Parc des Princes, Paris, France
30 – 15 to Argentina

2 June 2007
Estadio José Amalfitani, Buenos Aires
16 – 0 to Argentina

C. TEAMS:

IRELAND


15. Rob Kearney (UCD/Leinster)
14. Tommy Bowe (Belfast Harlequins/Ulster)
13. Keith Earls (Young Munster/Munster)
12. Robbie Henshaw (Buccaneers/Connacht)
11. Dave Kearney (Lansdowne/Leinster)
10. Johnny Sexton (St Mary's College/Leinster)
9. Conor Murray (Garryowen/Munster)
1. Cian Healy (Clontarf/Leinster)
2. Rory Best (Banbridge/Ulster)
3. Mike Ross (Clontarf/Leinster)
4. Devin Toner (Lansdowne/Leinster)
5. Iain Henderson (Ballynahinch/Ulster)
6. Jordi Murphy (Lansdowne/Leinster)
7. Chris Henry (Malone/Ulster)
8. Jamie Heaslip (Dublin University/Leinster) captain

Replacements;
16. Richardt Strauss (Old Wesley/Leinster)
17. Jack McGrath (St Mary's College/Leinster)
18. Nathan White (Connacht)
19. Donnacha Ryan (Shannon/Munster)
20. Rhys Ruddock (St Mary's College/Leinster)
21. Eoin Reddan (Old Crescent/Leinster)
22. Ian Madigan (Blackrock/Leinster)
23. Luke Fitzgerald (Blackrock/Leinster)

ARGENTINA


15. Joaquin Tuculet
14. Santiago Cordero
13. Matías Moroni
12. Juan Martín Hernández
11. Juan Imhoff
10. Nicolás Sánchez
9. Martín Landajo
1. Marcos Ayerza
2. Agustín Creevy (c)
3. Ramiro Herrera
4. Guido Petti
5. Tomás Lavanini
6. Pablo Matera
7. Juan Martín Fernández Lobbe
8. Leonardo Senatore

Replacements:
16. Julián Montoya
17. Lucas Noguera
18. Juan Pablo Orlandi
19. Matías Alemanno
20. Facundo Isa
21. Tomás Cubelli
22. Jerónimo De La Fuente
23. Lucas González Amorosino

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Marshes wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Madigan is impulsive and just might set up too fast a game that might have the potential of running away from us against a very slick Argentina.

We've always said Madigan can do his thing.  And he can.  And the more he's trusted, the more his confidence will grow.  
But I do think if Sexton is fit to play (and Joe is not the man to throw a guy in there who isn't) he'll be a better chaperone to take us through the first 60 or so minutes of the next game.

Considering (if lucky) that we might have an encounter next up with the glory boys of Oz, I think this game should be a much more a containing kind of game.  Containing the Argentine's most ambitious gameplans - frustrating them.

There are only three more games AT MOST.  It's becoming too late to be trying to save players when the very act of saving them might lose you a game.  Lose a game and it's over anyway.

I think you are right that Sexton should start over Madigan if he is fit, but I do hope the lads are sitting down to re-watch the game thinking "Jeez Louise maybe we can play a bit more of an open plan!!". Or maybe that was Joe's crafty plan all along

Against France Ireland actually looked like playing their own game, rather than containment or stifling. It was brilliant to see, and the odd fumble aside, everyone looked like they were up to the challenge of playing that type of rugby. I don't know how much of that was down to Madigan coming on, but if I'm honest I don't think it would have been the same if Sexton stayed on.

I'm not saying we have to go all-singing, all-dancing, just that the aerial bombardment and containment be aspects of the plan rather than the focal points. To my mind a containment game at this stage cedes the initiative and momentum to the attacking team, which is a dangerous thing against a team with their tails already up.

I think we played to the same gameplan we used v Wales in the 6N.It was a possession based gameplan but our accuracy was just several levels up from where it has been in ages.

The thing that really excites me now is that we didn't actually play brilliantly last week,we played well but there is a lot to work on.We gave away far too many penalties,14 I think.We wasted one gilt edged chance and at half time it felt like the game was still on  a knife edge.That game will stand to us and we'll be a lot sharper now having played a real top level Test match.Healy is the only player I think can improve hugely on his performance but I'd like to see the Kearney brothers a little more involved.

I actually disagree slightly here. I thought our accuracy was poor in the match, far too many poor passes, dropped balls and little knock ons. There is so much room for improvement which is both infuriating and exciting. Where we did improve was in the decision making. Murray and Madigan generally made the right choices in their distribution. Murray had a pretty poor match against Italy in that regard. It happens, it's not a big deal. He was excellent last week but with room to do even better. If you think of at least two dreadful grubbers in decent field positions from Henshaw and eliminate them, show patience and go through the phases then that too would be an improvement. Let's not talk about Earls' dropped pass. But, though he was very sound in defence (great covering tackle on Spedding) he offered very little in attack. I've watched a lot of Argentina this season. If our pack are as good at the breakdown and create quick, clean ball and space for Earls he could tear their defence apart with his pace.

Argentina are a good team, no doubt. But their defence is mechanical and they rely on their pack closing ball down to get themselves set up correctly. If you win quick, clean ball and show patience and go through phase after phase you can really expose them. Easier said than done though. They have a serious backrow and their back three is unsung but almost certainly better than ours (bar Kearney perhaps). Make no mistake, they are a step above France. But if we execute a gameplan I think we will win, but it will be within a score. If the Argentinian pack get on top (and watch out for Garces as ref) then we will struggle. This isn't the Pumas of old with a big physical pack who can go for 60 minutes and then collapse. They have a cracking backline.  

However it must be said, at what point, when a majority of people are saying a team is underrated, does a team actually become highly rated?

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:

Marshes wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Madigan is impulsive and just might set up too fast a game that might have the potential of running away from us against a very slick Argentina.

We've always said Madigan can do his thing.  And he can.  And the more he's trusted, the more his confidence will grow.  
But I do think if Sexton is fit to play (and Joe is not the man to throw a guy in there who isn't) he'll be a better chaperone to take us through the first 60 or so minutes of the next game.

Considering (if lucky) that we might have an encounter next up with the glory boys of Oz, I think this game should be a much more a containing kind of game.  Containing the Argentine's most ambitious gameplans - frustrating them.

There are only three more games AT MOST.  It's becoming too late to be trying to save players when the very act of saving them might lose you a game.  Lose a game and it's over anyway.

I think you are right that Sexton should start over Madigan if he is fit, but I do hope the lads are sitting down to re-watch the game thinking "Jeez Louise maybe we can play a bit more of an open plan!!". Or maybe that was Joe's crafty plan all along

Against France Ireland actually looked like playing their own game, rather than containment or stifling. It was brilliant to see, and the odd fumble aside, everyone looked like they were up to the challenge of playing that type of rugby. I don't know how much of that was down to Madigan coming on, but if I'm honest I don't think it would have been the same if Sexton stayed on.

I'm not saying we have to go all-singing, all-dancing, just that the aerial bombardment and containment be aspects of the plan rather than the focal points. To my mind a containment game at this stage cedes the initiative and momentum to the attacking team, which is a dangerous thing against a team with their tails already up.

Yep this last point is what scares me too. But I agree with SF that it's hard to see how we can keep up the type of bodies-on-the-line breakdown intensity required for us to dominate possession. D'arcy just wrote a column somewhat motivated by this issue I think. He seems to think that the solution lies with a "neither and both" approach to the Argentina game. When the Argies back off for the kicking game, Murray/Madigan/Sexton need to have their heads up and be looking to break the gainline. When the Argies realise that we are running it (like last week) and then reinforce their line, then we have to spot the gaps and bring out our best territorial game to make them turn and cover. All going well then they won't know which way to turn.

No worries there then... that sounds like a piece of

Really liking D'Arcy's (two apostrophes in his name there?) writing, he takes a great angle on topics. I think Murray and Sexton can execute that type of plan (sounds to me a bit vs France in the 6N 2013). You and fly are right about the required levels of intensity not being sustainable, but I don't think Argentina will be shy in hitting us hard at the breakdown and wherever else they can contest possession knowing we are off the back of a more intense and recent game!

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Argentina are the new All Blacks. Can't be denied. Just look at their recent record.....


We should tremble with fear.

Either this comment is tongue in cheek banter or is level of arrogance mostly associated with Will Carling era England. Staggering.

LondonTiger wrote:Argentina are a half decent side, but reading most o fthis thread I get the feeling Irish fans view them about as good as Uruguay.

I get the same impression Tiger. Ireland are a strong side but I would say Argentina are just as strong.

Arrogant because I don't buy the hype? Fair enough Radge. Ireland have just won two 6N's, have beaten Australia and South Africa in the AI's, have just destroyed France, but according to you I'm arrogant for not buying the Argentina hype, and it is hype, and believing my side can beat them.....

You numpty

Interesting choice of words. If you destroyed France I'm curious to see how you rate your team's performances against Canada.

I wouldn't say you destroyed France. You beat them well enough despite losing some key players, although you should have lost your best player due to GBH but that's another matter.

Indeed you are correct, you have won the last couple of six nations tournaments, bagging grand slams along the way no doubt... And yes beating South Africa hasn't exactly been a benchmark for an invincible team this year since Argentina and Japan can also count themselves among teams to have taken that particular scalp.

As for Australia beating them in the Autumn hasn't been all that hard, now however is a different matter.

The level of contempt you are showing the Argentina side is pretty disrespectful. That's not my opinion thats a fact. I would like to see Ireland win, the whole NH/SH or 6N/RC thing, but your posts don't exactly endear your side to me.

Basically I think you are a bit of a gimp.

This is the second post this week where you seem to be seriously muddled about what is an opinion and what is fact.

Anyway, I have no idea why the likes of yourself and London Tiger are criticising the Irish posters here for feeling confident about their own team. I haven't seen anyone write off or disrespect Argentina (seriously? ) but at the same time Irish fans should feel confident that we can win this game. However it will be an extremely close game and it could go either way.

I will still be very nervous watching this game, as every other Irish fan will be. Argentina will be our toughest opponent yet, but do not write us off either. Nor should you (or anyone else) be discouraging others from having confidence and belief in their own team and for being excited about what could possibly be the best World Cup in our history.

Marshes wrote:

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:

Marshes wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Madigan is impulsive and just might set up too fast a game that might have the potential of running away from us against a very slick Argentina.

We've always said Madigan can do his thing.  And he can.  And the more he's trusted, the more his confidence will grow.  
But I do think if Sexton is fit to play (and Joe is not the man to throw a guy in there who isn't) he'll be a better chaperone to take us through the first 60 or so minutes of the next game.

Considering (if lucky) that we might have an encounter next up with the glory boys of Oz, I think this game should be a much more a containing kind of game.  Containing the Argentine's most ambitious gameplans - frustrating them.

There are only three more games AT MOST.  It's becoming too late to be trying to save players when the very act of saving them might lose you a game.  Lose a game and it's over anyway.

I think you are right that Sexton should start over Madigan if he is fit, but I do hope the lads are sitting down to re-watch the game thinking "Jeez Louise maybe we can play a bit more of an open plan!!". Or maybe that was Joe's crafty plan all along

Against France Ireland actually looked like playing their own game, rather than containment or stifling. It was brilliant to see, and the odd fumble aside, everyone looked like they were up to the challenge of playing that type of rugby. I don't know how much of that was down to Madigan coming on, but if I'm honest I don't think it would have been the same if Sexton stayed on.

I'm not saying we have to go all-singing, all-dancing, just that the aerial bombardment and containment be aspects of the plan rather than the focal points. To my mind a containment game at this stage cedes the initiative and momentum to the attacking team, which is a dangerous thing against a team with their tails already up.

Yep this last point is what scares me too. But I agree with SF that it's hard to see how we can keep up the type of bodies-on-the-line breakdown intensity required for us to dominate possession. D'arcy just wrote a column somewhat motivated by this issue I think. He seems to think that the solution lies with a "neither and both" approach to the Argentina game. When the Argies back off for the kicking game, Murray/Madigan/Sexton need to have their heads up and be looking to break the gainline. When the Argies realise that we are running it (like last week) and then reinforce their line, then we have to spot the gaps and bring out our best territorial game to make them turn and cover. All going well then they won't know which way to turn.

No worries there then... that sounds like a piece of

Really liking D'Arcy's (two apostrophes in his name there?) writing, he takes a great angle on topics. I think Murray and Sexton can execute that type of plan (sounds to me a bit vs France in the 6N 2013). You and fly are right about the required levels of intensity not being sustainable, but I don't think Argentina will be shy in hitting us hard at the breakdown and wherever else they can contest possession knowing we are off the back of a more intense and recent game!

Yep. So far as I can see (and I think this is what D'Arcy is trying to get at), the only answer to the big Argentinian physical threat is for our backline to have the kind of game that the forwards had last weekend. If we can keep moving the point of contact, keep their big lads constantly running for the first 10-20 mins of each half and put a good bit of emphasis on our backs dominating their backs at breakdowns... if we can do those things and then also sporadically get in behind them with some well-chosen kicks... well that might allow for a game that takes less toll on the forwards. But it sounds like a very difficult gameplan to actually get right. As I said, the backs would really have to have a stormer with no knock-ons and making the right choices all through the first half especially.

If we fall back into the more regular forwards possession game, slower ball, 10-15 more or less static rucks 5 and 10 metres beside each other... well then we'll be sitting ducks for their physical game and that could really take it's toll by the second half.

Why all this talk of Sexton. If he has a groin strain he can't kick the ball. If he plays he will last to his first kick.

Of course seems to be a normal thing nowadays. Sexrom plays til injured. Although this one looked muscular which you can't hide from

Fitzgerald or Earls. Much more interesting.

Hope Argentinian players don't read the Irish Times then But of course old Contepomi probably does know his old pal writes for the rag and drops in over the world cup to see what he's saying.....

...keep a lid on it D'arce ...unless it's a treble bluff and you're in on it with misinformation

wolfball wrote:France were under hyped before Ireland but are always a cliche so are correctly hyped (neither under nor over hyped) for NZ.

Think France were severely over-hyped before the Ireland game, by both neutrals and Irish fans, and that has resulted in our achievement in outplaying them being given slightly more credence than it deserves. Expect New Zealand to tear through them with clinical brutality.

Blanko wrote:Fitzgerald or Earls. Much more interesting.

I think it should just about be Fitzgerald, although Earls was impressive in his defensive duties. The Earls mistake in dropping the ball was a bad one but Fitzgerald is equally prone to making errors like that. So a close call.

Fitz will only start if Earls is out injured...Paynes replacement not going to be announced until after the weekend McFadden the likeliest...

Henderson possibly looking more likely to start at 6 given he trained there so one out of two is not bad Notch.

Agreed. Much of muchness between the two. I wouldn't be annoyed if Cave came in either, don''t think either of the three would let themselves down. For the sake of versatility it would probably be Earls (if he is fit) with Fitz on the bench.

Earls should keep his place as long as he's fit.He was very solid bar that one glaring fup up.However that's not the type of mistake I think he'll repeat,he's normally clinical in those situations.

The thing is, if Earls is fit and we still pick Fitzgerald at centre- we can then pick Earls on the wing instead of Kearney where he is a lot more dangerous.

Not going to happen. DK's role is to do nothing and he does it very well. Earls is a better centre for us...time to get over it..

Poor Dave is just not wanted.

Any excuse to offload him. He must have long phonecalls with Payne...

His role is to not bring attention to his side of the field. Did you see Nakatacai last week, did he do anything...no, nada, rien. Brilliant play by Dave.

With Trimble out Earls is the most dangerous winger Ireland have. Dave tends to come in field a lot and does make hard yards, but Earls is actually a much bigger finishing threat from deep, when it is worked wide he can really hurt teams with his pace. Having Fitzgerald or Cave central frees him up to be that threat. But I think Joe won't want anymore shake up in the starting XV unless forced, so Earls stays put i imagine.

Thus Kearney does Earl's centre work as Earls rushes outside to do his whizz work.

I would say its more that Joe will play who he sees as his best OC...the current best OC in the squad is Earls....

Three more prospective games to find out against class, class and probably ultimate CLASS....

Easy stuff... where's the Cup? Can we hold onto it before winning it?.

We are going to win..simples...

Ireland ranked higher playing closer to home. Ireland's to lose.

nganboy wrote:Ireland ranked higher playing closer to home. Ireland's to lose.

We're planning desperately not to.

nganboy wrote:Ireland ranked higher playing closer to home. Ireland's to lose.

Hope the French stuff ye

ME-109 wrote:I would say its more that Joe will play who he sees as his best OC...the current best OC in the squad is Earls....

Agreed. He had a superb game against France in defense and Fitz will only start if he's injured.

DK was also excellent so don't think Joe will make any unforced changes. In Joe's mind he's the first choice winger he's so good defensively and does more than the others off the ball - basically he's a better version of McFadden.

I think they are bluffing about Sexton to keep the Pumas guessing - best case he will go on the bench and Madigan will start.

rodders wrote:

ME-109 wrote:I would say its more that Joe will play who he sees as his best OC...the current best OC in the squad is Earls....

Agreed. He had a superb game against France in defense and Fitz will only start if he's injured.

DK was also excellent so don't think Joe will make any unforced changes. In Joe's mind he's the first choice winger he's so good defensively and does more than the others off the ball - basically he's a better version of McFadden.

I think they are bluffing about Sexton to keep the Pumas guessing - best case he will go on the bench and Madigan will start.

If Sexton ain't fit to start the worst thing g wod be to have him on the bench. If he comes on and breaks down what then? To big a risk

We may be bluffing around Sexton, but for the life of me I'm not sure what we'd be gaining.
Argentina have all the cards.  I don't know how many bluffs we can throw at this game.  We have a 'gifted' flyhalf who has been playing well below/within himself even before the injury.  We have lost a big load of guaranteed grunt and Leadership qualities in the middle with POC and POM gone.
Argentina will think we're ripe for the taking, as it's okay to do what we did against France when the emotional blood was up - harder to replicate that from a cold start when the big man ain't there to hold any nerves in check.

The guys remaining now know they have to play out of their skins to dampen Argentina's confidence levels.  They have to prove in the first few minutes that we're still there to impose our game regardless of which players we use.

Reading some of the other threads apparently we arent very good or rather we are ok but other teams arent very good. I hope we play as badly as last weekend against Argentina....at this rate we will be like France in the last WC and if we continue to be sh1te we should walk the whole tournament.

ME-109 wrote:Reading some of the other threads apparently we arent very good or rather we are ok but other teams arent very good. I hope we play as badly as last weekend against Argentina....at this rate we will be like France in the last WC and if we continue to be sh1te we should walk the whole tournament.

Yeah. I think we obviously see this Irish team and their victory over the French with very different eyes to the Scots, English, etc. They haven't been watching this Irish team for two decades and wondering why they couldn't be consistent or raise their game to a whole new level. They weren't in Paris every two years and watching us (even in our best years) struggling through French games and always worrying that we could ship 3-4 tries in 10 minutes if they lost concentration. And neither do they know nor care about the underlying psychological fragility that always dogged Irish teams in World Cups. They're just looking at a supposedly better Irish team beating a lesser French team and doing it well enough - but not with a hatful of tries, etc.

Anyone who has a long-term close investment in this Irish team knows that there's definitely something different. Doesn't mean anything on Sunday... but no Irish team ever looked so ready to suffocate and physically dominate France or any other "big team" at a WC. Not even Argentina or Wales. I can barely remember if France even got into our 22 - let alone created a clear-cut try chance. Our new level doesn't result in a NZ-style absolute crushing... just a feeling that for once this Irish team know actually what they want to do and how to unify their powers to make it all come together on the day.

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:Yeah. I think we obviously see this Irish team and their victory over the French with very different eyes to the Scots, English, etc.

You guys have spent so long moaning about whether you can create anything, talking the team down and discussing who is the worst "Daverage", Earls, Fitz, Cave, Payne etc is it any wonder the rest of us start to believe you?

LondonTiger wrote:

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:Yeah. I think we obviously see this Irish team and their victory over the French with very different eyes to the Scots, English, etc.

You guys have spent so long moaning about whether you can create anything, talking the team down and discussing who is the worst "Daverage", Earls, Fitz, Cave, Payne etc is it any wonder the rest of us start to believe you?

Fair enough.

My guess is that we're all quite happy with Argentina being the insider's tip for the 1/4s. It ensured there's no complacency or exaggerated expectation this time round. And all that just feeds into things feeling a good bit different to even 4 years ago (let alone 8 years ago). That Wales game was particularly painful.

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:Yeah. I think we obviously see this Irish team and their victory over the French with very different eyes to the Scots, English, etc.

You guys have spent so long moaning about whether you can create anything, talking the team down and discussing who is the worst "Daverage", Earls, Fitz, Cave, Payne etc is it any wonder the rest of us start to believe you?

Fair enough.

My guess is that we're all quite happy with Argentina being the insider's tip for the 1/4s. It ensured there's no complacency or exaggerated expectation this time round. And all that just feeds into things feeling a good bit different to even 4 years ago (let alone 8 years ago). That Wales game was particularly painful.

Arguably you were unlucky to run into Wales only decent performance in that WC. Of course Aussies will claim that they lost to your only decent performance.

Meanwhile England's best performance came in a bar in queenstown.

LondonTiger wrote:

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:Yeah. I think we obviously see this Irish team and their victory over the French with very different eyes to the Scots, English, etc.

You guys have spent so long moaning about whether you can create anything, talking the team down and discussing who is the worst "Daverage", Earls, Fitz, Cave, Payne etc is it any wonder the rest of us start to believe you?

Fair enough.

My guess is that we're all quite happy with Argentina being the insider's tip for the 1/4s. It ensured there's no complacency or exaggerated expectation this time round. And all that just feeds into things feeling a good bit different to even 4 years ago (let alone 8 years ago). That Wales game was particularly painful.

Arguably you were unlucky to run into Wales only decent performance in that WC. Of course Aussies will claim that they lost to your only decent performance.

Meanwhile England's best performance came in a bar in queenstown.

I keep seeing flashbacks of that Wales game. Just hoping we don't stick henderson in at 6 and start shipping standing ball after standing ball to him round the fringes.

Can't remember any team playing particularly well in that last WC. Remember NZ struggling through and falling over the line. Remember SA dumped out to Aus in a workmanlike game. Cooper having a mare against NZ. England doing nothing at all. Wales' 14 holding France to a miserable 1 score win. Twas all pretty low-key stuff. This time around has been the opposite.

carpet baboon wrote:

rodders wrote:

ME-109 wrote:I would say its more that Joe will play who he sees as his best OC...the current best OC in the squad is Earls....

Agreed. He had a superb game against France in defense and Fitz will only start if he's injured.

DK was also excellent so don't think Joe will make any unforced changes. In Joe's mind he's the first choice winger he's so good defensively and does more than the others off the ball - basically he's a better version of McFadden.

I think they are bluffing about Sexton to keep the Pumas guessing - best case he will go on the bench and Madigan will start.

If Sexton ain't fit to start the worst thing g wod be to have him on the bench. If he comes on and breaks down what then? To big a risk

I might be inclined to take a gamble and not pick Sexton- trust Madigan to get the job done, make sure Sexton is fully fit for the semi-final when he does. Not saying we will win easily against Argentina or we can afford to rest players or anything like that. Even with a fully fit Sexton Argentina are definitely good enough to beat us and this is a game against a very good team that could go either way. But if we play Sexton, win and he breaks down then I'm not sure we can beat Australia in the next match without him. That would make it a phyrric victory.

Of course this would be a huge gamble and if we lose we will have egg on our face in a massive way. Is the main goal to win this game and get further than any Irish team has before? Or is the goal a bigger one, to win the World Cup outright? If we have serious designs on the trophy we might gamble by giving Sexton some recovery time to help us should we make it past Argentina. Sometimes when you're aiming at the stars you need to take a gamble like that.

Nos na Gaoithe - how are you going to feel when Wales beat Ireland in the third place play-off?

Ok someone has got to say it:

SFinalist - SA, Aus, Ireland and NZ
with Aus and NZ contesting the final

mikey_dragon wrote:Nos na Gaoithe - how are you going to feel when Wales beat Ireland in the third place play-off?

Well I'll be rootin for Wales in the third place play-off...

... I think ye can take those Ozzies the second time round!

Notch wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

rodders wrote:

ME-109 wrote:I would say its more that Joe will play who he sees as his best OC...the current best OC in the squad is Earls....

Agreed. He had a superb game against France in defense and Fitz will only start if he's injured.

DK was also excellent so don't think Joe will make any unforced changes. In Joe's mind he's the first choice winger he's so good defensively and does more than the others off the ball - basically he's a better version of McFadden.

I think they are bluffing about Sexton to keep the Pumas guessing - best case he will go on the bench and Madigan will start.

If Sexton ain't fit to start the worst thing g wod be to have him on the bench. If he comes on and breaks down what then? To big a risk

I might be inclined to take a gamble and not pick Sexton- trust Madigan to get the job done, make sure Sexton is fully fit for the semi-final when he does. Not saying we will win easily against Argentina or we can afford to rest players or anything like that. Even with a fully fit Sexton Argentina are definitely good enough to beat us and this is a game against a very good team that could go either way. But if we play Sexton, win and he breaks down then I'm not sure we can beat Australia in the next match without him. That would make it a phyrric victory.

Of course this would be a huge gamble and if we lose we will have egg on our face in a massive way. Is the main goal to win this game and get further than any Irish team has before? Or is the goal a bigger one, to win the World Cup outright? If we have serious designs on the trophy we might gamble by giving Sexton some recovery time to help us should we make it past Argentina. Sometimes when you're aiming at the stars you need to take a gamble like that.

I think it's got to be a bit of distraction on JS's part. I can't see how they can be seriously thinking about putting Sexton out there again this week when he hobbled off so distraught looking just 5 days ago. No matter how much Sexton would aim to be 100% professional, it's gonna be in the back of his mind that he doesn't want to take another 2-3 big hits so soon afterwards. That's gonna affect his play... and surely that would give the Argentinians a real target to focus their big guns.

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:

Notch wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

rodders wrote:

ME-109 wrote:I would say its more that Joe will play who he sees as his best OC...the current best OC in the squad is Earls....

Agreed. He had a superb game against France in defense and Fitz will only start if he's injured.

DK was also excellent so don't think Joe will make any unforced changes. In Joe's mind he's the first choice winger he's so good defensively and does more than the others off the ball - basically he's a better version of McFadden.

I think they are bluffing about Sexton to keep the Pumas guessing - best case he will go on the bench and Madigan will start.

If Sexton ain't fit to start the worst thing g wod be to have him on the bench. If he comes on and breaks down what then? To big a risk

I might be inclined to take a gamble and not pick Sexton- trust Madigan to get the job done, make sure Sexton is fully fit for the semi-final when he does. Not saying we will win easily against Argentina or we can afford to rest players or anything like that. Even with a fully fit Sexton Argentina are definitely good enough to beat us and this is a game against a very good team that could go either way. But if we play Sexton, win and he breaks down then I'm not sure we can beat Australia in the next match without him. That would make it a phyrric victory.

Of course this would be a huge gamble and if we lose we will have egg on our face in a massive way. Is the main goal to win this game and get further than any Irish team has before? Or is the goal a bigger one, to win the World Cup outright? If we have serious designs on the trophy we might gamble by giving Sexton some recovery time to help us should we make it past Argentina. Sometimes when you're aiming at the stars you need to take a gamble like that.

I think it's got to be a bit of distraction on JS's part. I can't see how they can be seriously thinking about putting Sexton out there again this week when he hobbled off so distraught looking just 5 days ago. No matter how much Sexton would aim to be 100% professional, it's gonna be in the back of his mind that he doesn't want to take another 2-3 big hits so soon afterwards. That's gonna affect his play... and surely that would give the Argentinians a real target to focus their big guns.

Sexton isn't the best at holding back and managing his injuries during a game, he puts himself about as he always does and can over-exert himself in pursuit of his required level. I think it would be too much of a gamble to put him out there, particularly as you say if the Argentines can target him to run at. Madigan is off the back of a very strong performance and I would be confident him and Jackson have the required level and are suited to this game. If we lost Sexton here for the potential semi-final then that would be bridge too far for this team I think.

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Nos na Gaoithe - how are you going to feel when Wales beat Ireland in the third place play-off?

Well I'll be rootin for Wales in the third place play-off...

... I think ye can take those Ozzies the second time round!

Haa.. Yeah I think we'll take 'em down this time too!

http://www.sportsjoe.ie/rugby/iain-henderson-to-start-against-argentina-but-not-where-many-irish-fans-want-him/44453

So apparently its a Toner Henderson second row.....which can only mean Murphy at 6....can't it?

Unless Ruddock is parachuted straight in? Only problem with that is that hes really lacking in game time.

Can't see that happening. Here's the predicted team:

PREDICTED IRELAND XV

R Kearney; T Bowe, K Earls*, R Henshaw, D Kearney; J Sexton*, C Murray; C Healy, R Best, M Ross; D Toner, I Henderson; J Murphy, C Henry, J Heaslip (c).

Replacements: R Strauss, J McGrath, N White, D Ryan, R Ruddock, E Reddan, I Madigan, L Fitzgerald.


* Subject to passing fitness test on Friday.

Good news about Sexton and Earls.

Looks like a capable team.

Apparently BOD was on off the ball last night making some complaints about the welsh match in 2011. Seems the attention to POC is getting to him and he seems to be taking advantage of the fact that DK would never sag anything. Plus Stephen Ferris seemed to make a few comments to negate the bull from BOD. Poor old Brian

Looks good - but we definitely look like we now have a very competent bench rather than an explosive one! Here's hoping Murphy gets the adrenaline flowing and delivers something next level.

Don't get the logic of Strauss over Cronin. If Healy fails to return to form again then surely we could really do with another ball-carrier off the bench.

ME-109 wrote:Apparently BOD was on off the ball last night making some complaints about the welsh match in 2011. Seems the attention to POC is getting to him and he seems to be taking advantage of the fact that DK would never sag anything. Plus Stephen Ferris seemed to make a few comments to negate the bull from BOD. Poor old Brian

Well, he said the shape of the attack and the coaching of the attack just wasn't good enough for that one. I defy you to watch that game back and disagree with him! Once the strategy of having Ferris and O'Brien run over people was thoroughly nullified by the Welsh back row, we were out of ideas.

You have to be a bit in denial about Kidney losing the plot and his reputation with it after 2009 to think that BOD is just saying that because O'Connell is being talked about right now! The tributes to BOD when he retired eclipsed anything any other player I can think of got when they finished up... No, he's saying it because it's true and it's no different at all to what everybody outside the camp said at the time.

ME-109 wrote:Apparently BOD was on off the ball last night making some complaints about the welsh match in 2011. Seems the attention to POC is getting to him and he seems to be taking advantage of the fact that DK would never sag anything. Plus Stephen Ferris seemed to make a few comments to negate the bull from BOD. Poor old Brian

I'd guess they were both partially right.  A tad complacent about the threat levels of Wales - and a tad incapable of changing their game to counteract the Welsh side that did hit them.  I can't see where either one is completely wrong or all right.

We did always traditionally suffer the One Big Game per Competition syndrome.  And I can remember an ex-player (so many of them are chatting and writing during this WC) but he admitted recently  - it might have been even Ferris himself now that I think of it! -  that our good games were all about players just raging and throwing the kitchen sink at the opposition emotionally.  But they had a tough time backing those games up because of the technical shortcomings.

I pray we're not that side now and that we can string two or three French performances together now.... 'cause I think we'll need one or two more if we're to get to where all the others want to get to.

SecretFly wrote:
We did always traditionally suffer the One Big Game per Competition syndrome.

Ehhhh.... we're not quite out of the woods on that one yet there SF.  



EDIT:  Ahhh I see you got back to touch wood before I'd even posted!