AI: Ireland v South Africa; Aviva Stadium, Sat 10 Nov [MOD WARNING POST #1160]

MrDerp

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That plan was an 80 minute plan. We only executed it for 40 minutes.

Nail on the head. No allowance for international class coaches and analysts telling the saffers what was going on at half time.

I'm all for having an 80 minute plan - it should start with 40 mins of rugby and then involve turning the screw when you're up, and a rewrite if you're down, in the second half

Fireball07

Emperor1989 wrote: »

Maybe I just don't rate him, I just don't see him as a International 13. I can't forget when he was cleaned out by Hosea Gear last only a few months ago. I don't know there is something wrong with that combo in center and maybe I am blaming Earls too much. He can't be shown in the best light when Darcy is being battered by Jean De Villers and then expected to tackle the big men coming around the corner.

The backline just doesn't work, Madigan sitting at home and is maybe the spark we need. I love to see a 9. Marshall 10. Sexton 11. Zebo 12. McFadden 13. Cave 14. Bowe 15. Madigan Plenty of spark there, enough with the likes of Trimble and Darcy and Murray. Time to move on!

Earls had a good 6N last year and has looked impressive for Munster at 13 since the turn of the year. I think he has what it takes to be a good international 13...Cave deserves a bit of a chance to show what he can do but I reckon Earls probably has slightly more in his armoury. Although Earls is an excellent winger too. You have to remember this was his first game in a good few weeks too, he's been injured.

I don't think Madigan at 15 is the answer... didn't show enough when he played there to say he's the answer. I'd still rather see Earls at 15, Cave at 13 and Zebo at 11... but Zebo at 15 did seem to work. 12 is a big issue... Luke Marshall should be given a shot, I think.

Marshall at 9 is worth looking at though.

Baker87

tolosenc wrote: »

Yeah, he's always falling over.

For anyone who doubts his pace, I direct your attention to 7:05 in the following video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsYcFuzE8_0

He is quick no doubt, just IMO not as quick as Earls.

Also in that clip, yes he skint the opposite winger, but he was coming on to the pass full tilt, while the other fella was just after being turned....and he still nearly caught him, not overly impressive!

.ak

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If the penalty is on you always keep the ball in the scrum. Even if they had made ground with the set play it never would have been as valuable as the penalty we should have won. Heaslip made the right call there and got unlucky that the penalty wasn't given.

In fairness there aren't many 8s in the world with the instincts that Heaslip has at the base of the scrum. He's very very strong in that area of the game.

Exactly. We were all screaming at the tv when Auva'a was doing the exact opposite last week. Heaslip kept the ball in on a dominant scrum... right call imo.

irishbucsfan

MrDerp wrote: »

Nail on the head. No allowance for international class coaches and analysts telling the saffers what was going on at half time.

I'm all for having an 80 minute plan - it should start with 40 mins of rugby and then involve turning the screw when you're up, and a rewrite if you're down, in the second half

Whatever the Saffers did at half time is irrelevant to the fact that our halfbacks completely failed to deliver in the second half and completely lost control of the game. That was completely their own fault.

Now obiviously the buck stops with the coaches and ultimately Kidney, but they had the game plan right. There was very little variation available to us (honestly, what else did people want us to do?)

.ak

Baker87 wrote: »

He is quick no doubt, just IMO not as quick as Earls.

Also in that clip, yes he skint the opposite winger, but he was coming on to the pass full tilt, while the other fella was just after being turned....and he still nearly caught him, not overly impressive!

Ah he's defo quicker full tilt. I'm sure Earls would be the first to acknowledge that. He's had quicker runs than that.

Fishooks12

Baker87 wrote: »

He is quick no doubt, just IMO not as quick as Earls.

Also in that clip, yes he skint the opposite winger, but he was coming on to the pass full tilt, while the other fella was just after being turned....and he still nearly caught him, not overly impressive!

Your man didn't get near him. McFadden just blistered him

Scioch

irishbucsfan wrote: »

He was up to international standard today. He played very well. I was screaming for Reddan in February but I'm not naive enough to not be able to realise that different games call for different selections, and today the selection was correct.

Seems to me the criteria is different for both. Murray passing the ball and kicking well (doing the basics) is enough to say he had a good game. While Reddan is expected to turn the game around and pull a win out of his arse.

Would thinking that simply doing the basics right is enough to be classed as international standard be naive ?

Fishooks12

Anyway, final thoughts for my 5,000th post!


Really think there are far more positives than negatives to take out of today. A few years ago injuries to so many starting players would have meant a comfortable victory for SA. But the pool of genuine international talent in Ireland is widening by the year, as was exhibited tonight.

We didn't win. But our defense was very good and our pack were solid throughout despite many of them being left on the field for far too long (Healy, Strauss and Ross were wrecked). We even showed some flashes in the backs to suggest that a better game plan with ball in attack would yield serious returns given the pace we have out wide.

In summation: Same old Kidney, but the players really stood up today.

donfers

RuggieBear wrote: »

great moment alright and no better man to hit, trust south africa to come out with crap like having "an enforcer" - what lets them down constantly is they are obsessed with physicality, size, posturing, machismo and forget about stupid little things like playing rugby

Tigerandahalf

tolosenc wrote: »

Yeah, he's always falling over.

For anyone who doubts his pace, I direct your attention to 7:05 in the following video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsYcFuzE8_0

I cant ever view those clips on youtube on boards. Have a GS2. Any ideas what is wrong?

Swiwi

OK. I haven't read any of the preceding posts, and I've just got in from pints with the lads, but I was at the game (which gives you a better overview than the TV, even if you can't always see the finer details) and I will say 3 things:

1) Aside one box-kick which went too far, Conor Murray had a decent game. I can freely make that comment as I'm neither from Munster nor Leinster.

2) The Irish backs were too deep, and played too much behind the gainline. Sexton needs to be flatter on attack, have a go sometimes, and this should help the whole backline. Zebo looked promising, but got caught behind the advantage line more than once.

3) Thank God my countryman (and now yours) did OK in the scrums, even winning a penalty. I can rest easy, it looks as if he might be a keeper.

Fishooks12

Scioch wrote: »

Seems to me the criteria is different for both. Murray passing the ball and kicking well (doing the basics) is enough to say he had a good game. While Reddan is expected to turn the game around and pull a win out of his arse.

Would thinking that simply doing the basics right is enough to be classed as international standard be naive ?

Who expects Reddan to do that? Reddan was expected to come on and up the tempo which he usually does, but not today. He was very indecisive.

Doing the basics right at international level is not easy. Murray did that and then some today (a fantastic try saving tackle and a nice break for example). The only area he fell down in was three or four imperfect passes.

accidentprone1

Haven't watched the match back again, but as far I recall it seemed that we pulled the same back line move out of the hat two or three times in the game. Each time it seemed to rely on Zebo getting outside his man but he couldn't quite manage it or the offload.

Not blaming Zebo here (thought he played quite well actually) but surely we have more than the one move? It seemed like the limited opportunities our backs had to perform a set piece became predictable and easily countered.

Ardillaun

I didn't manage to catch much of it in the end in my struggle with the Internet. We were are the races today, at least, which was a big improvement. Our performance against one of the top scrums in the world was impressive and we'll need to do the same against the Argies. McCarthy and Bent were excellent picks.
BOD seems to keep all the back moves up his jersey and when he's away we are clueless. Darce and Earls battled bravely in the middle but were clearly bested by the nearly always excellent de Viliers (excellent for RSA anyway).

leakyboots

McFadden is very quick, I wouldn't say there's much between him and Earls (Earls might have slightly more acceleration off the mark maybe) but I think McF would shade it in a foot race. Both speedsters though.

Zebo is also lightning but over a distance, his running style kind of fools you, tends to glide along and look like he's not trying that hard. Denis Hurley has a similar style of running (but isin't as fast... although not as slow as many Munster fans would think, he's got good pace once he gets going, woeful acceleration though). Luke O'Dea is another fella who has a great burst of pace off the mark like Earls. There's a Leinster young fella who had my jaw wide open one day when I saw him run, Conway maybe? Bags of pace.

Funny to think for quite a while we hadn't a lot of speedsters in Irish rugby on the wing/fullback... think the mid-late 90s to a few years ago... Tyrone Howe, Shane Horgan, Dempsey, John Kelly... Denis Hickie was the exception really.

MrDerp

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Whatever the Saffers did at half time is irrelevant to the fact that our halfbacks completely failed to deliver in the second half and completely lost control of the game. That was completely their own fault.

Now obiviously the buck stops with the coaches and ultimately Kidney, but they had the game plan right. There was very little variation available to us (honestly, what else did people want us to do?)

What do you think the halftime talk for Ireland involved? I'm asking with neither sneer nor insincerity. Please take the question at face value.

I believe Ireland were given tweaks, concentrating on perfecting the continuation of plan A, while SA were read the riot act, shown our weaknesses, and Meyer explained how to hold the gain line.

I believe we were found out, and we flailed and ran into 3 v 5 contact left and right for the second half. Even when we had front foot posession we spread it. I don't believe in (maybe I'm naive) HC class halfbacks throwing front foot ball to backs who've shown no penetration all day, without dictat.

I agree that the half backs needed to show better instincts, I just don't believe they were given an effective framework of directionfor the second half

Scioch

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Who expects Reddan to do that? Reddan was expected to come on and up the tempo which he usually does, but not today. He was very indecisive.

Doing the basics right at international level is not easy. Murray did that and then some today (a fantastic try saving tackle and a nice break for example). The only area he fell down in was three or four imperfect passes.

And how does Reddan up the tempo ? He has to take charge of the game. He wasnt indecisive he was lacking options due to everyone being out on their feet and the Boks being well organised and forcing us to throw more men into rucks and slowing ball. He has to take risks like going forward before offloading (where he was caught by Pinear) to inject pace into the attack. He cant do what Murray does which is simply turn up and pass the ball.

Reddans task when he came on involved a hell of a lot more than what Murray is asked to do so I dont think it at all fair to claim Murray was better simply because there was less expectation.

Teferi

Fishooks12 wrote: »

In summation: Same old Kidney, but the players really stood up today.

I agree with this.

It actually highlights a further weakness of Kidney - what could we have done the past couple of years if that joker had actually had created a squad? We'll never know.

This game was ours to lose and if Kidney had of used the bench as a weapon like any modern coach would have we could have won this match. Disappointing.

Zebo was fine. If he wants to add another string to his bow as a utility fullback I'd like to see him do so at Munster. I feel he would have performed better if he had of had some FB experience under his belt.

Sexton moving to 12 will never really work. Stop attempting it.

ROG's last touch of the ball sums up the mans recent contribution to Irish rugby.

Strauss and Bent had good games. Now that they are capped do we start calling them Risteárd and Micheál? Particularly impressed by Micheál's scrummaging.

Swiwi

MrDerp wrote: »

What do you think the halftime talk for Ireland involved? I'm asking with neither sneer nor insincerity. Please take the question at face value.

I believe Ireland were given tweaks, concentrating on perfecting the continuation of plan A, while SA were read the riot act, shown our weaknesses, and Meyer explained how to hold the gain line.

I believe we were found out, and we flailed and ran into 3 v 5 contact left and right for the second half. Even when we had front foot posession we spread it. I don't believe in (maybe I'm naive) HC class halfbacks throwing front foot ball to backs who've shown no penetration all day, without dictat.

I agree that the half backs needed to show better instincts, I just don't believe they were given an effective framework of directionfor the second half

SA had a terrible first half. Once they stopped giving away silly penalties, and making unforced errors they were able to use their physicality to grind out the win, as only SA can.

For me, the Irish bench should have been used differently. From memory, one of the first replacements was McFadden for Trimble, when it was the forwards that seemed to be tiring, and would have benefitted from a fresh pair of legs.

Fishooks12

Scioch wrote: »

And how does Reddan up the tempo ? He has to take charge of the game. He wasnt indecisive he was lacking options due to everyone being out on their feet and the Boks being well organised and forcing us to throw more men into rucks and slowing ball. He has to take risks like going forward before offloading (where he was caught by Pinear) to inject pace into the attack. He cant do what Murray does which is simply turn up and pass the ball.

Reddans task when he came on involved a hell of a lot more than what Murray is asked to do so I dont think it at all fair to claim Murray was better simply because there was less expectation.

What exactly do you mean by "take charge of the forwards"., I want you to elaborate on that because I'm curious as to how Murray didn't do that and Reddan did

I actually think you're just making up ways to try and somehow argue that Murray was poor

Swiwi

Teferi wrote: »

I agree with this.

It actually highlights a further weakness of Kidney - what could we have done the past couple of years if that joker had actually had created a squad? We'll never know.

This game was ours to lose and if Kidney had of used the bench as a weapon like any modern coach would have we could have won this match. Disappointing.

Zebo was fine. If he wants to add another string to his bow as a utility fullback I'd like to see him do so at Munster. I feel he would have performed better if he had of had some FB experience under his belt.

Sexton moving to 12 will never really work. Stop attempting it.

ROG's last touch of the ball sums up the mans contribution to Irish rugby.

Strauss and Bent had good games. Now that they are capped do we start calling them Risteárd and Micheál? Particularly impressed by Micheál's scrummaging.

O'Gara was actually taking the ball flatter than Sexton, it was noticeable at the ground. But I agree kicking away possession when Ireland needed to hold on to it and force a try was not smart.

Fishooks12

Teferi wrote: »

ROG's last touch of the ball sums up the mans contribution to Irish rugby.

Very unfair tbh. ROG has been a fantastic servant. Not his fault he's picked when he shouldn't be. Doesn't take away from the fantastic things he's done for Munster and Ireland in the past

Swiwi

Teferi wrote: »

I agree with this.

It actually highlights a further weakness of Kidney - what could we have done the past couple of years if that joker had actually had created a squad? We'll never know.

This game was ours to lose and if Kidney had of used the bench as a weapon like any modern coach would have we could have won this match. Disappointing.

Zebo was fine. If he wants to add another string to his bow as a utility fullback I'd like to see him do so at Munster. I feel he would have performed better if he had of had some FB experience under his belt.

Sexton moving to 12 will never really work. Stop attempting it.

ROG's last touch of the ball sums up the mans contribution to Irish rugby.

Strauss and Bent had good games. Now that they are capped do we start calling them Risteárd and Micheál? Particularly impressed by Micheál's scrummaging.

You can call him Michéal, but he'll have absolutely no idea what you're saying, and no clue as to how to pronounce it when he sees it on paper. Trust me, I know.

irishbucsfan

MrDerp wrote: »

What do you think the halftime talk for Ireland involved? I'm asking with neither sneer nor insincerity. Please take the question at face value.

I believe Ireland were given tweaks, concentrating on perfecting the continuation of plan A, while SA were read the riot act, shown our weaknesses, and Meyer explained how to hold the gain line.

I believe we were found out, and we flailed and ran into 3 v 5 contact left and right for the second half. Even when we had front foot posession we spread it. I don't believe in (maybe I'm naive) HC class halfbacks throwing front foot ball to backs who've shown no penetration all day, without dictat.

I agree that the half backs needed to show better instincts, I just don't believe they were given an effective framework of directionfor the second half

So when you say "we flailed and ran into 3v5 contacts" are you saying that was part of the game plan?

Or are you saying that our halfbacks lost control and didn't executed the same plan which was succesful in the first half? Which is basically what I'm saying.

South Africa did nothing special in the 2nd half at all. Even their try was extremely straightforward.

Stheno

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Anyway, final thoughts for my 5,000th post!


Really think there are far more positives than negatives to take out of today. A few years ago injuries to so many starting players would have meant a comfortable victory for SA. But the pool of genuine international talent in Ireland is widening by the year, as was exhibited tonight.

We didn't win. But our defense was very good and our pack were solid throughout despite many of them being left on the field for far too long (Healy, Strauss and Ross were wrecked). We even showed some flashes in the backs to suggest that a better game plan with ball in attack would yield serious returns given the pace we have out wide.

In summation: Same old Kidney, but the players really stood up today.

Actually I think this is a good summation.

Myself and the OH worked our day around going out and having a meal whilst I watched the man (he's not a fan) and I went out thinking we were going to be hammered without normally starting players.

Instead I enjoyed the match, got to see new players etc.

I wonder how they will do given time etc?

Fishooks12

irishbucsfan wrote: »

So when you say "we flailed and ran into 3v5 contacts" are you saying that was part of the game plan?

Or are you saying that our halfbacks lost control and didn't executed the same plan which was succesful in the first half? Which is basically what I'm saying.

South Africa did nothing special in the 2nd half at all. Even their try was extremely straightforward.

This. If we had been a little more subtle in stopping their maul we would have won. They really disappointed me overall.

Fireball07

I don't think that ROG was actually that bad today...okay kicking the ball away was stupid, but he didn't do anything else worth criticising. He didn't do anything particularly good either, he just got the ball and passed it really...they were okay passes.

He shouldn't be in the squad at all but he didn't do much wrong today.

Sexton shouldn't be moved to 12 but he wasn't playing particularly well either.

Teferi

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Very unfair tbh. ROG has been a fantastic servant. Not his fault he's picked when he shouldn't be. Doesn't take away from the fantastic things he's done for Munster and Ireland in the past

I will qualify my statement by adding "recent".

I would have assumed people would understand.

Fishooks12

It's a mark of just how good Sexton is thought that when he isn't playing that well he's still the best 10 in the British Isles

Fishooks12

Teferi wrote: »

I will qualify my statement by adding "recent".

I would have assumed people would understand.

I do now, and agree.

Fireball07

Fishooks12 wrote: »

It's a mark of just how good Sexton is thought that when he isn't playing that well he's still the best 10 in the British Isles

Well...Sexton is very good... but I'll couple that with some fairly lacklustre competition.

irishbucsfan

Fireball07 wrote: »

I don't think that ROG was actually that bad today...okay kicking the ball away was stupid, but he didn't do anything else worth criticising. He didn't do anything particularly good either, he just got the ball and passed it really...they were okay passes.

He shouldn't be in the squad at all but he didn't do much wrong today.

Sexton shouldn't be moved to 12 but he wasn't playing particularly well either.

In fairness I think ROG was on for 4 minutes or something and he made the biggest error of the match!

I don't disagree with bringing him on though I must say. We weren't doing anything anyway, it was right after a particularly bad passage of play from Sexton and Reddan.

Fishooks12

Fireball07 wrote: »

Well...Sexton is very good... but I'll couple that with some fairly lacklustre competition.

That's a given infairness!

leonard7

i hate this whole o'gara debate thing and its not for me usually but would love if someone could point out something he did today that Jackson, Madigan or Keatley couldn't do...?

Swiwi

Fishooks12 wrote: »

It's a mark of just how good Sexton is thought that when he isn't playing that well he's still the best 10 in the British Isles

He'll need to play better than that though if he gets 10 with the Lions. If he doesn't keep the defence guessing, and they know they can drift off him, it will be problematic. Michalak was probably the pick of the NH 10s tonight, although I didn't torture myself by watching Italy v Tonga (or England crucify Fiji).

Fireball07

irishbucsfan wrote: »

In fairness I think ROG was on for 4 minutes or something and he made the biggest error of the match!

I don't disagree with bringing him on though I must say. We weren't doing anything anyway, it was right after a particularly bad passage of play from Sexton and Reddan.

Would you call it the biggest error of the match?

I really don't think we were going to score a try anyway... it was a bad decision, one that he's made before but you can kinda see his point of view, we were very lateral, if the chip came off we'd have got a bit of momentum.

leonard7

leonard7 wrote: »

i hate this whole o'gara debate thing and its not for me usually but would love if someone could point out something he did today that Jackson, Madigan or Keatley couldn't do...?

actually ill go ahead an answer that one question...there was some roar when he came on that i dont think the others wouldve got...im sure that did the team some good

Fishooks12

leonard7 wrote: »

i hate this whole o'gara debate thing and its not for me usually but would love if someone could point out something he did today that Jackson, Madigan or Keatley couldn't do...?

Essentially every right minded rugby fan knows that O Gara is just gone past it. And that's no shame, the man is 37 after all!

It's just frustrating that his inclusion in the national squad is holding back talented young tens like Keatley, Jackson and Madigan. All of whom offer more in virtually every asset of their games now.

I love ROG. I'll never forget the day he kicked that drop goal against Wales. He really was world class in his prime. But by continually selecting him like this, Kidney is doing nothing but diminishing his legacy as an Ireland great

MrDerp

irishbucsfan wrote: »

So when you say "we flailed and ran into 3v5 contacts" are you saying that was part of the game plan?

Or are you saying that our halfbacks lost control and didn't executed the same plan which was succesful in the first half? Which is basically what I'm saying.

South Africa did nothing special in the 2nd half at all. Even their try was extremely straightforward.

No, I'm saying the same thing (unfortunately) that I've said after all recent Irish performances: When plan A didn't work, or was found out, there was always good old plan A.

It's tough out there when things are working against you, you need leaders watching from the stands, and leaders on the pitch. I feel that this Irish squad are on their own when plan A doesn't work, and it's hard to get an entire team going without a world class leader on the pitch. I accept that we need our [bleurgh] talismans, who'll call the game in front of them, but in their absence we need a plan B, and that only leaves one man wanting.

I don't accept that failure to continue with plan A conceded defeat, I think 'crap! We're rumbled, what now?' continues to be the problem

Teferi

Swiwi wrote: »

O'Gara was actually taking the ball flatter than Sexton, it was noticeable at the ground. But I agree kicking away possession when Ireland needed to hold on to it and force a try was not smart.

Honestly, I've just looked back at the game and ROG got a grand total of 5 touches of the ball. 1 was when the backline was in a bit of chaos and the other 4 it looks like he was standing in a similar position to Sexton.

Stheno

What is the problem that the majority of these players are so good and their clubs so successful at club level, yet when they come together at a national level they cannot perform?

Fitness can't be argued when for the most part they play against their international colleagues regularly in club games and beat them (unless it's the All Blacks)

It has to be the coaching structure nationally surely?

Or a problem between provincial clubs and national level?

Sorry if I'm asking a question long pondered.

Teferi

Fishooks12 wrote: »

But by continually selecting him like this, Kidney is doing nothing but diminishing his legacy as an Ireland great

This is the very thing. I want to have good memories of ROG. I wish Kidney would stop ruining them for me.

Stheno

Teferi wrote: »

This is the very thing. I want to have good memories of ROG. I wish Kidney would stop ruining them for me.

True, sad to see him sitting on the bench, getting his few minutes

Leave him in our memories, not there as some old hack rolled out when the new generation have had their day and need a rest.

JRant

Are best performers today were the players coming into this game with good form, not surprising really.

There doesn't seem to be much point in discussing individual players as it's clearly gone beyond that stage.
Defense was good for large parts of the game.
Attack seems to be like some alien concept to us. We were like headless chickens for large parts with players having no clue as to where to be. We couldn't score a try today even if we still playing till now.

Having just come off a 60-0er and now losing 5 on the bounce, just what exactly does DK have to do to get the chop?

clsmooth

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Who expects Reddan to do that? Reddan was expected to come on and up the tempo which he usually does, but not today. He was very indecisive.

Doing the basics right at international level is not easy. Murray did that and then some today (a fantastic try saving tackle and a nice break for example). The only area he fell down in was three or four imperfect passes.

That's quite a problem for a scrum half.. Anyone else see MOTM McCarthy getting dropped for POC vs Argentina and out of squad completely with the experienced DOC on the bench?

Fireball07

clsmooth wrote: »

That's quite a problem for a scrum half.. Anyone else see MOTM McCarthy getting dropped for POC vs Argentina and out of squad completely with the experienced DOC on the bench?

Well in the team that was leaked beforehand, McCarthy was on the bench ahead of DOC.

I wouldn't have picked McCarthy beforehand, but he was superb today, I'd definitely start him alongside POC for Argentina (if POC is fit).

Tomtom364

The McCarthy Hit in video form.

I havnt seen too much of Connacht this year, but my god if he is doing that week in week out for them! some man.

liammur

All in all, what a poor showing. J Heaslip as captain ? Really shows how poor we are in terms of strength in depth. Depressing V a limited boks team in 2nd gear.

I'd now call for Kidney's head, but it's a bit like Trap in the football. Extremely limited team. Reality bites.

Anatidaephobia

Just thinking back on the match, does anyone else think SA were really stupid at tackling today, particularly in the first half. They had a much stronger pack, but didn't really make use of it. They kept trying to hold up Irish runners with just one man. They'd be successful for a second before a couple more Irish forwards drove them back, making a few easy metres and effectively sealing off the ruck. I noticed this a lot throughout the game.