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

irishbucsfan

.ak wrote: »

Dan Carter wouldn't have made a difference.

If he stood up and took responsibility for where and how the game was going to be played he would have.

Fishooks12

.ak wrote: »

Dan Carter wouldn't have made a difference.

Exactly, the problem is how we're set up as an attacking unit

Although one thing I'd say is that I though Sexton could have played for territory in the second half

danthefan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If he stood up and took responsibility for where and how the game was going to be played he would have.

What does that even mean? Did he shirk responsibility or something?

In the 2nd half our pack was getting absolutely minced. Is that his fault too? There's little or nothing a backline can do in those circumstances. I would extend the same argument to Murray, who imo didn't play particularly well but when your pack is being dominated like that it's a huge struggle for a SH.

liammur

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If he stood up and took responsibility for where and how the game was going to be played he would have.

I would agree here. Had we 1 leader on the field yesterday ?

Sexton going for that difficult kick in 2nd half was madness. Carter would have put that in the corner.

.ak

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If he stood up and took responsibility for where and how the game was going to be played he would have.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. No fly-half can 'take responsibility' or 'grab a game by the scruff of it's neck' when the team's tactics are poison in the first place.

He's down the pecking order in the Irish camp, regardless of how we view him.

Almaviva

liammur wrote: »

Basically to put us out of our misery.

And his international carrer out of its.

irishbucsfan

.ak wrote: »

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. No fly-half can 'take responsibility' or 'grab a game by the scruff of it's neck' when the team's tactics are poison in the first place.

Eh? They can and do very regularly. One of the guys in our squad was an absolute master of it. Look at Munster-Northampton in April 2010. Look at Montpellier in 2011. Look at Scotland-Ireland March 2010. Plenty of examples of it.

danthefan

liammur wrote: »

Sexton going for that difficult kick in 2nd half was madness. Carter would have put that in the corner.

What a completely ridiculous comment. In a tight game Dan Carter will kick anything he feels is in his range. Sexton obviously felt he had the range and ended up what, a metre short, if even? There's no more guarantee of getting the ball "into the corner" from 50m than there is kicking a goal either. And our attack was absolutely pants all game.

irishbucsfan

danthefan wrote: »

What does that even mean? Did he shirk responsibility or something?

In the 2nd half our pack was getting absolutely minced. Is that his fault too? There's little or nothing a backline can do in those circumstances. I would extend the same argument to Murray, who imo didn't play particularly well but when your pack is being dominated like that it's a huge struggle for a SH.

Absolutely Murray takes some responsibility for it as well, but you'd expect more from Sexton. Why on earth was he continually shovelling the ball across the backline on 7th or 8th phase when our pack were completely overstretched?

Things clearly weren't working for us, what did Sexton (or Murray) do about it? They kept putting pressure on the forwards instead of playing the game that was working for us. The game crept away from them and they didn't reel it back in. You can't just give it to him as a freebie.

shuffol

One aspect of Sextons game that was undisputably poor IMO was his touchfinders from penalties, he usually does it excellently for Leinster, when you consider the difficulty he had making yardage from open play it makes a big difference.

danthefan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Eh? They can and do very regularly. One of the guys in our squad was an absolute master of it. Look at Munster-Northampton in April 2010. Look at Montpellier in 2011. Look at Scotland-Ireland March 2010. Plenty of examples of it.

What are you on about? He kicked a penalty in the last minute against Montpellier, you know the team has to go win a penalty in a kickable position for him to do that, right? Same with Parks kicking a goal against us in 2010. What a load of nonsense.

liammur

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Absolutely Murray takes some responsibility for it as well, but you'd expect more from Sexton. Why on earth was he continually shovelling the ball across the backline on 7th or 8th phase when our pack were completely overstretched?

Things clearly weren't working for us, what did Sexton (or Murray) do about it? They kept putting pressure on the forwards instead of playing the game that was working for us. The game crept away from them and they didn't reel it back in. You can't just give it to him as a freebie.

Well said.

irishbucsfan

danthefan wrote: »

What are you on about? He kicked a penalty in the last minute against Montpellier, you know the team has to go win a penalty in a kickable position for him to do that, right? Same with Parks kicking a goal against us in 2010. What a load of nonsense.

I'm not talking about Leinster against Montpellier in October, I'm talking about the way Galthie had them playing domestically the season before.

Do you remember what happened in the Ireland - Scotland game in 2010? How they won that game (I'm not talking about whoever was playing 10 for us, just the way Parks played the game for them).

I honestly don't know what you think a 10 is supposed to do behind a beaten pack. Probably just throw the ball around and blame everyone else when they lose.

danthefan

liammur wrote: »

Well said.

It's not well said. It's just a load of bland generalities. "He should have reeled the game back in", right so, I hope someone lets him know before the Argie game.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm not talking about Leinster against Montpellier in October, I'm talking about the way Galthie had them playing domestically the season before.

Do you remember what happened in the Ireland - Scotland game in 2010? How they won that game (I'm not talking about whoever was playing 10 for us, just the way Parks played the game for them).

I honestly don't know what you think a 10 is supposed to do behind a beaten pack. Probably just throw the ball around and blame everyone else when they lose.

Scotland didn't have a beaten pack that day though. They had us on toast in both the scrum and lineout. I think we lost 7 lineouts on our own throw or something, and our scrum just got minced. I was at that game, was the day I really knew Kidney was going to run the side into the ground

Fishooks12

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Absolutely Murray takes some responsibility for it as well, but you'd expect more from Sexton. Why on earth was he continually shovelling the ball across the backline on 7th or 8th phase when our pack were completely overstretched?

Things clearly weren't working for us, what did Sexton (or Murray) do about it? They kept putting pressure on the forwards instead of playing the game that was working for us. The game crept away from them and they didn't reel it back in. You can't just give it to him as a freebie.

You've made a good point

But I'd extend the fact that Sexton shouldn't be in a position where he was to do that in the first place. Our attack play should be set up to his and the other backs strengths from the start

liammur

danthefan wrote: »

What a completely ridiculous comment. In a tight game Dan Carter will kick anything he feels is in his range. Sexton obviously felt he had the range and ended up what, a metre short, if even? There's no more guarantee of getting the ball "into the corner" from 50m than there is kicking a goal either. And our attack was absolutely pants all game.

Dan Carter will kick whether the game is tight or not, I've often seen him tap them over when the ABs are 40 points up. I haven't seen him go for too many Holy Marys though. Now, I'm not putting all the blame on Sexton, we simply had no leader on the field yesterday. I hope that was Heaslip's first and last time being captain.

.ak

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Eh? They can and do very regularly. One of the guys in our squad was an absolute master of it. Look at Munster-Northampton in April 2010. Look at Montpellier in 2011. Look at Scotland-Ireland March 2010. Plenty of examples of it.

Hang on, you're totally misrepresenting what you mean. Those games revolved around tactics that utilized the OH, the OH in those games doesn't just turn around and go 'Hang on lads, lets forget what the coaches have planned out and play this way'.

Even the Leinster-Northampton final in 2011 was down to a draft of tactical changes that came from Joe and Jono in the changing room.

Sexton is playing with one hand tied behind his back at Ireland with the tactics we're employing.

matthew8

liammur wrote: »

Dan Carter will kick whether the game is tight or not, I've often seen him tap them over when the ABs are 40 points up. I haven't seen him go for too many Holy Marys though. Now, I'm not putting all the blame on Sexton, we simply had no leader on the field yesterday. I hope that was Heaslip's first and last time being captain.

What about the kick he went for against us in the second test?

irishbucsfan

danthefan wrote: »

It's not well said. It's just a load of bland generalities. "He should have reeled the game back in", right so, I hope someone lets him know before the Argie game.

Right then sorry for insulting a Leinster player. Sexton was brilliant, you're right. South Africa got lucky to survive against a player putting on such a masterclass, if only the rest of the team were not rubbish and able to take advantage of all the opportunities he created and all the territory he won we would have won by a few thousand points.

Fishooks12

tbh lads I think, as ever, the truth might lie somewhere in the middle. I do think Sexton is hugely hampered by our tactics with ball in hand, but on the other hand he should have played a lot more territory especially in the second half.

liammur

matthew8 wrote: »

What about the kick he went for against us in the second test?

Well recalled, however the ABs were rudderless that day, and full of mistakes which is unusual.

danthefan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Right then sorry for insulting a Leinster player. Sexton was brilliant, you're right. South Africa got lucky to survive against a player putting on such a masterclass, if only the rest of the team were not rubbish and able to take advantage of all the opportunities he created and all the territory he won we would have won by a few thousand points.

He wasn't brilliant by any means, I never suggested he was. I'm saying he had nothing to work with. Our pack was destroyed and there's a complete failure of ideas in the squad of what to do when we have the ball - this goes back to coaching.

irishbucsfan

.ak wrote: »

Hang on, you're totally misrepresenting what you mean. Those games revolved around tactics that utilized the OH, the OH in those games doesn't just turn around and go 'Hang on lads, lets forget what the coaches have planned out and play this way'.

Even the Leinster-Northampton final in 2011 was down to a draft of tactical changes that came from Joe and Jono in the changing room.

Sexton is playing with one hand tied behind his back at Ireland with the tactics we're employing.

Our gameplan yesterday completely revolved around Murray and Sexton and the use of the boot. I don't know what you thought we were doing in the first half, but it was very similar to what all those teams did. Hence Zebo, hence Trimble. Hence 40 minutes of well executed fairly dominant rugby. It got away from us in the first 10 minutes of the second half and we panicked and stopped executing that game plan (could well have been coaches orders, I don't personally see why they'd change things though).

jamiedav2011

liammur wrote: »

I would agree here. Had we 1 leader on the field yesterday ?

Sexton going for that difficult kick in 2nd half was madness. Carter would have put that in the corner.

This is the type of utterly ridiculous comment that the general Irish rugby watching public trots out every now and again, and we hear from eejits like Hook. I knew someone would bring this up as soon as the kick fell short.

He went for the kick, had the direction and just missed on distance. Madness my arse.

liammur

Fishooks12 wrote: »

tbh lads I think, as ever, the truth might lie somewhere in the middle. I do think Sexton is hugely hampered by our tactics with ball in hand, but on the other hand he should have played a lot more territory especially in the second half.

Few would disagree with this.

He had a bad day, but you are always more likely to have a bad day when nearly everyone is being bossed about as well. I rate Sexton as a top OH.

jm08

Fishooks12 wrote: »

You've made a good point

But I'd extend the fact that Sexton shouldn't be in a position where he was to do that in the first place. Our attack play should be set up to his and the other backs strengths from the start

Sexton needed to vary the attack a bit more with kicks in over the defence, the odd crossfield kick (even if they didn't work out), it would have kept the opposition defence guessing. After the first 40 minutes they knew what he was going to do (shovel it across the pitch).

He could also have attempted to break himself a bit more (though I sympathise with him in that the Boks seemed to hit him extra hard).

irishbucsfan

Fishooks12 wrote: »

tbh lads I think, as ever, the truth might lie somewhere in the middle. I do think Sexton is hugely hampered by our tactics with ball in hand, but on the other hand he should have played a lot more territory especially in the second half.

He's definitely hampered by our tactics with ball in hand. There are clear issues with our attacking play. The main issue being its absolutely dire. Although you have to be realistic and look at the fact we have had big changes to the coaching staff (Kidney's fault) and we are missing 6 or 7 players from the first XV so there was always going to be a lack of cohesion.

So you look at a very clear failing in our attacking play and you ask why on earth we kept persisting with it? The half backs have to make that call on the field. Complete lack of control and adaptability. Certainly you can blame the coaches for not being sure they know when or how to react, but I would have liked to think Sexton could be trusted to do a lot more on his own.

phog

jamiedav2011 wrote: »

This is the type of utterly ridiculous comment that the general Irish rugby watching public trots out every now and again, and we hear from eejits like Hook. I knew someone would bring this up as soon as the kick fell short.

He went for the kick, had the direction and just missed on distance. Madness my arse.

He did something very similar (in NZ, I think), maybe going down the line would have been a better option when it's that far out, certainly, that's what I thought.

In saying that I always back a kicker of Sextons standard to get it once he opts for it.

danthefan

Again you're just saying he should have done more, and changed it up, without actually saying, in tangible terms, what he could or should have done.

shuffol

According to the stats Sexton kicked 4 times, passed 25 times and ran twice, certainly could've varied things more. Personally I dont think he takes on as much responsibility for Ireland as he does for Leinster.

jamiedav2011

phog wrote: »

He did something very similar (in NZ, I think), maybe going down the line would have been a better option when it's that far out, certainly, that's what I thought.

I think if he thinks he has the distance, which he obviously did, then he goes for it tbh, particularly in that type of game.

Think about it...
we hadn't looked remotely like scoring a try up to that stage
Sexton was kicking well
our lineout was misfiring
we hadn't scored for a while iirc and needed something on the board
it would have given the crowd and the team a huge lift
worst case scenario was either it goes long and wide and we get a 22, or we win territory

An absolute no brainer for me. That's not something to have a go at Sexton for yesterday.

irishbucsfan

danthefan wrote: »

Again you're just saying he should have done more, and changed it up, without actually saying, in tangible terms, what he could or should have done.

Sorry, I've said it earlier in the thread in detail so I didn't want to repeat.

When we got into the phases in the South African half Murray or Sexton should have put boot to the ball. Depending on where the back 3 is a kick to the touchline or a kick for one of our players to attack. Make sure the South Africans are starting with the ball from their 22 (they were useless when attacking from deep) or giving us the ball back with a set piece in their half.

But we didn't, we kept playing the ball and giving away penalties, allowing South Africa possession in our half and making it impossible for us to score .

[Jackass]

Wow, interesting discussion.

I thought Sexton was very good. Solid from the place kicking, think he missed one, he did reasonably well with his game management, made some nice wrap around runs for some half breaks, defensively superb - sure it wasn't a classic that'll be shown in the highlights reel at the end of his career, but then it was hardly a memorable day for anyone.

Dragging Sexton into the debate is strange though - the only debate about Sexton is whether he's the best 10 in the northern hemisphere and a nailed on starter for the Lions or not...

I don't know why there is this relentless defence of Murray. He's a mediocre player. Granted Reddan was equally as poor when he came on, but he came in to a game where we were fully wilted, he didn't have the hour of competitive rugby Murray did.

I don't know, maybe people want to believe he's good or something, it doesn't bother me, if I see my team facing him I'm always more than happy, it's when he's on my team I have an issue.

There's a very real debate to be had about whether or not he is the best 9 in the country, which I deffinitely don't think he is. Reddan over the last number of seasons, his last 20 minutes of rugby not withstanding, has been superb and he links up with Sexton superbly, often an argument made for retaining Stringer with O'Gara, and worst of all, when we seemed to be attempting to play Leinster type rugby in the first half, he's not the preffered option. And it's not like it's rotation, no matter what, Murray starts...It doesn't make sense to me, the contrasts are clear to me, and I can't conclude anything other than he's selected to develop him, not because he's the best.

I could rehash all of his poor decisions, which aren't stand out bad play, like when he pops the ball to a prop standing still (Healy) when there is a 3 man overlap way out to the right, and then does it again two phases later, you might think he did nothing wrong there, but in terms of big picture of the game and seeing his options, he is very poor.

Granted he has got his speed of delivery up from glacier to granny, but the quality of his delivery has suffered as a result, hospital passes to beat the band, but my main issue is that Kidney seems to think the national team should be used for a learning process for guys like him, but other guys (not from Munster) must be the finished article to even be considered - and it seems to me that unless there's no young Munster player who needs experience floating around, then a good player can come in and hold tackle bags whilst a young Munster fella starts...

It's not a Munster bashing from me or an anti anybody (such as Murray) thing - and I hope people wont play the Munster card, it's jackass, so he hates Munster - no, judge this on the merits of the things I say, as I genuinely believe them to be true, regardless of what province it favors...I think it's as plain as day - and when you look at the dominant team in all of Europe only drawing par in terms of representation on the national team with a very under preformed team in Europe and another team who knocked them out and seems to have surpassed them not even being able to draw parity in representation, you have to wonder...

Why focus on developing Zebo for example and not Gilroy - the man who skinned him and scored a fine individual try against them in the Heineken Cup - or why not one Leinster player under 25 can make the Irish squad yet 3 or 4 of them are starting for Ireland from Munster...

It could be excused if it was getting results, but this is the worst Irish team - in terms of results - since the early 1990's, or what we refer to as the dark times.

I believe, and with a lot of weight of evidence imo, that Irish performance has been sacrificed for Munster youth development as they have fallen so far behind. Maybe it's a Kidney thing, maybe it's an IRFU thing, maybe it's both, I don't know...

As Reggie Corrigan said in the paper yesterday - training in international camp and playing against international opposition will improve young players on a massive scale and quickly - yet any young Munster player who plays a couple of games gets capped and in all the training camps (Kilcoyne - 6 professional starts in his career, Irish international, Archer - has been like a folding deck chair with Munster - Irish squad - Murray, about 15 Munster caps - becomes first choice for Ireland ahead of 3 time Heineken Winning scrum half - O'Mahony - Less than 15 Munster caps, Irish international - Felix Jones, under 20 caps, only for injury was to be selected ahead of the future European player of the year - Zebo, one season, first team starter for Ireland - look at who doesn't make it - Gilroy, Madigan, Dom Ryan, Jack McGrath (double Kilcoynes provincial caps and has looked very strong - when not playing tighthead), Fitpatrick (stand out back up imo), Jamie Hagan, a poor option, but not as poor as Archer - O'Halloran, Dave Kearney, Cave, Paul Marshall (contrast his performances this season vs Murray - an argument made for Jackson ahead of Madigan - well then same logic Marshall should be miles ahead of Murray) - or the amount guys like Henry, McCarthy, Tuhoy, Healy, McFadden, Sexton had to prove themselves before getting near the national team - if it's not a bias, then why all Munster players with under 20 professional games in their life becoming internationals (and they are numerous and every single one of them Munster) - why not any of these guys, some of whom have shown great performances consistently for a few seasons?

Basically I believe the Irish team is being used as a Munster academy training camp. When we are competitive on the pitch, then people can tell me these players are good enough. (By the way, I don't think we will ever play a poorer South African team than that - we should hammer a team like that). Just as a fact, not bias, Munster of late have been the 3rd province in Ireland, yet top representation and massive focus on their youth in the international team ahead of anyone else...that makes no sense to me, and we're losing and playing poorly - but they're learning and improving...

danthefan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Sorry, I've said it earlier in the thread in detail so I didn't want to repeat.

When we got into the phases in the South African half Murray or Sexton should have put boot to the ball. Depending on where the back 3 is a kick to the touchline or a kick for one of our players to attack. Make sure the South Africans are starting with the ball from their 22 (they were useless when attacking from deep) or giving us the ball back with a set piece in their half.

But we didn't, we kept playing the ball and giving away penalties, allowing South Africa possession in our half and making it impossible for us to score .

So, kick more. They'd have kicked back, we're back to square one. Munster got so much change out of pinging the corners because their pack could bully just about anyone they met. Ireland can't.

phog

jamiedav2011 wrote: »

I think if he thinks he has the distance, which he obviously did, then he goes for it tbh, particularly in that type of game.

Think about it...
we hadn't looked remotely like scoring a try up to that stage
Sexton was kicking well
our lineout was misfiring
we hadn't scored for a while iirc and needed something on the board
it would have given the crowd and the team a huge lift
worst case scenario was either it goes long and wide and we get a 22, or we win territory

An absolute no brainer for me. That's not something to have a go at Sexton for yesterday.

I'm not having a go but still think he should have gone the line. I think we had sorted our lineout by then too.

irishbucsfan

jamiedav2011 wrote: »

I think if he thinks he has the distance, which he obviously did, then he goes for it tbh, particularly in that type of game.

Think about it...
we hadn't looked remotely like scoring a try up to that stage
Sexton was kicking well
our lineout was misfiring
we hadn't scored for a while iirc and needed something on the board
it would have given the crowd and the team a huge lift
worst case scenario was either it goes long and wide and we get a 22, or we win territory

An absolute no brainer for me. That's not something to have a go at Sexton for yesterday.

Yep, I'm not sure what happened afterwards, but if they kicked it out of their 22 we were at least still getting a lineout in their half. Maybe not as much territory as we would have won with kicking the ball out, but a small price to play for the chance to score points.

The right decision imo

Fishooks12

[Jackass] wrote: »

Wow, interesting discussion.

I thought Sexton was very good. Solid from the place kicking, think he missed one, he did reasonably well with his game management, made some nice wrap around runs for some half breaks, defensively superb - sure it wasn't a classic that'll be shown in the highlights reel at the end of his career, but then it was hardly a memorable day for anyone.

Dragging Sexton into the debate is strange though - the only debate about Sexton is whether he's the best 10 in the northern hemisphere and a nailed on starter for the Lions or not...

I don't know why there is this relentless defence of Murray. He's a mediocre player. Granted Reddan was equally as poor when he came on, but he came in to a game where we were fully wilted, he didn't have the hour of competitive rugby Murray did.

I don't know, maybe people want to believe he's good or something, it doesn't bother me, if I see my team facing him I'm always more than happy, it's when he's on my team I have an issue.

There's a very real debate to be had about whether or not he is the best 9 in the country, which I deffinitely don't think he is. Reddan over the last number of seasons, his last 20 minutes of rugby not withstanding, has been superb and he links up with Sexton superbly, often an argument made for retaining Stringer with O'Gara, and worst of all, when we seemed to be attempting to play Leinster type rugby in the first half, he's not the preffered option. And it's not like it's rotation, no matter what, Murray starts...It doesn't make sense to me, the contrasts are clear to me, and I can't conclude anything other than he's selected to develop him, not because he's the best.

I could rehash all of his poor decisions, which aren't stand out bad play, like when he pops the ball to a prop standing still (Healy) when there is a 3 man overlap way out to the right, and then does it again two phases later, you might think he did nothing wrong there, but in terms of big picture of the game and seeing his options, he is very poor.

Granted he has got his speed of delivery up from glacier to granny, but the quality of his delivery has suffered as a result, hospital passes to beat the band, but my main issue is that Kidney seems to think the national team should be used for a learning process for guys like him, but other guys (not from Munster) must be the finished article to even be considered - and it seems to me that unless there's no young Munster player who needs experience floating around, then a good player can come in and hold tackle bags whilst a young Munster fella starts...

It's not a Munster bashing from me or an anti anybody (such as Murray) thing - and I hope people wont play the Munster card, it's jackass, so he hates Munster - no, judge this on the merits of the things I say, as I genuinely believe them to be true, regardless of what province it favors...I think it's as plain as day - and when you look at the dominant team in all of Europe only drawing par in terms of representation on the national team with a very under preformed team in Europe and another team who knocked them out and seems to have surpassed them not even being able to draw parity in representation, you have to wonder...

Why focus on developing Zebo for example and not Gilroy - the man who skinned him and scored a fine individual try against them in the Heineken Cup - or why not one Leinster player under 25 can make the Irish squad yet 3 or 4 of them are starting for Ireland from Munster...

It could be excused if it was getting results, but this is the worst Irish team - in terms of results - since the early 1990's, or what we refer to as the dark times.

I believe, and with a lot of weight of evidence imo, that Irish performance has been sacrificed for Munster youth development as they have fallen so far behind. Maybe it's a Kidney thing, maybe it's an IRFU thing, maybe it's both, I don't know...

As Reggie Corrigan said in the paper yesterday - training in international camp and playing against international opposition will improve young players on a massive scale and quickly - yet any young Munster player who plays a couple of games gets capped and in all the training camps (Kilcoyne - 6 professional starts in his career, Irish international, Archer - has been like a folding deck chair with Munster - Irish squad - Murray, about 15 Munster caps - becomes first choice for Ireland ahead of 3 time Heineken Winning scrum half - O'Mahony - Less than 15 Munster caps, Irish international - Felix Jones, under 20 caps, only for injury was to be selected ahead of the future European player of the year - Zebo, one season, first team starter for Ireland - look at who doesn't make it - Gilroy, Madigan, Dom Ryan, Jack McGrath (double Kilcoynes provincial caps and has looked very strong - when not playing tighthead), Fitpatrick (stand out back up imo), Jamie Hagan, a poor option, but not as poor as Archer - O'Halloran, Dave Kearney, Cave, Paul Marshall (contrast his performances this season vs Murray - an argument made for Jackson ahead of Madigan - well then same logic Marshall should be miles ahead of Murray) - or the amount guys like Henry, McCarthy, Tuhoy, Healy, McFadden, Sexton had to prove themselves before getting near the national team - if it's not a bias, then why all Munster players with under 20 professional games in their life becoming internationals (and they are numerous and every single one of them Munster) - why not any of these guys, some of whom have shown great performances consistently for a few seasons?

Basically I believe the Irish team is being used as a Munster academy training camp. When we are competitive on the pitch, then people can tell me these players are good enough. (By the way, I don't think we will ever play a poorer South African team than that - we should hammer a team like that). Just as a fact, not bias, Munster of late have been the 3rd province in Ireland, yet top representation and massive focus on their youth in the international team ahead of anyone else...that makes no sense to me, and we're losing and playing poorly - but they're learning and improving...

Good god, I need a break from this forum. The provincial bull**** is just pathetic a this stage

So many non truths and complete hyperbole in that post that even Neil Francis circa 2005 would call it far fetched

Adios

liammur

phog wrote: »

He did something very similar (in NZ, I think), maybe going down the line would have been a better option when it's that far out, certainly, that's what I thought.

In saying that I always back a kicker of Sextons standard to get it once he opts for it.

Of course you are spot on.

The real problem was they were afraid to down the corner, so let's just give it a lash.

irishbucsfan

danthefan wrote: »

So, kick more. They'd have kicked back, we're back to square one. Munster got so much change out of pinging the corners because their pack could bully just about anyone they met. Ireland can't.

We wouldn't be back to square one. Lambie and Kirchener were both kicking poorly (as we knew they would). We were winning kicking battles in the first half. We'd have possession from a fresh set piece, and able to reorganise ourselves and crucially not concede a penalty (which is conceding both possession and territory).

That game plan is not reliant on the pack bullying anyone. It would only be reliant on that if you wanted to stay in their 22 for 15 phases attempting to push them over the line, something we shouldn't have done either. It's reliant on a strong kick chase and good kicking (both things we had). It worked well in the first half. It stood more chance of working than relying on our attack anyway.

liammur

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Good god, I need a break from this forum. The provincial bull**** is just pathetic a this stage


Adios

Once again I'm agreeing with you.
But what you need to do is use the Ignore option. It will benefit you.

Banbridgeman2

The more the think about the game the more I can't help but blame earls. Mistake after mistake and butchered 2 potential tries. Just no penetration in midfield with him and Darcy. Zebo as well just refused to pass it seems the only player capable was bowe yesterday. Trimble completely underused

jamiedav2011

phog wrote: »

I'm not having a go but still think he should have gone the line. I think we had sorted our lineout by then too.

But for what reasons?

This is a non discussion as far as I'm concerned, for the reasons highlighted above.

Your whole argument is based on 'I think we had sorted our lineout by then too'?!

irishbucsfan

Banbridgeman2 wrote: »

The more the think about the game the more I can't help but blame earls. Mistake after mistake and butchered 2 potential tries. Just no penetration in midfield with him and Darcy. Zebo as well just refused to pass it seems the only player capable was bowe yesterday. Trimble completely underused

We had 2 potential tries?

liammur

irishbucsfan wrote: »

We had 2 potential tries?

That's the first I've heard of them!

Fishooks12

irishbucsfan wrote: »

We had 2 potential tries?

A potential try is now a crash ball that as mistimed? And Bowe still had two defenders to beat and 40 meters to go for his "potential try"

and apparently Zebo "refused to pass".Pathetic the lengths people are going to flame Munster players at this stage by some posters who wouldn't breath a word if it was a player from their own province putting in the same shift

danthefan

Fishooks12 wrote: »

A potential try is now a crash ball that as mistimed? And Bowe still had two defenders to beat and 40 meters to go for his "potential try"

and apparently Zebo "refused to pass".Pathetic the lengths people are going to flame Munster players at this stage by some posters who wouldn't breath a word if it was a player from their own province putting in the same shift

I personally thought Zebo was back to hogging the ball. It didn't cost us the game or anything but he's shown good awareness for Munster this season, he didn't show it yesterday.

On Earls, the best thing he did all game was stand up one of the Saffers and just burn him on the outside - get him back on the wing imo.

liammur

Fishooks12 wrote: »

and apparently Zebo "refused to pass".Pathetic the lengths people are going to flame Munster players at this stage by some posters who wouldn't breath a word if it was a player from their own province

Now I'm a Munster fan but I must say Earls simply has to improve for both province and country, anyone else think he is living on past reputation?

.ak

[Jackass] banned for two weeks, ignoring mod instruction.

Any more provincial bias or accusation of provincial bias (no matter how innocent you think it is) will also result in bans.

19543261

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Good god, I need a break from this forum. The provincial bull**** is just pathetic a this stage

So many non truths and complete hyperbole in that post that even Neil Francis circa 2005 would call it far fetched

Adios

Which are the "non-truths" there, exactly? Care to point them out, for everyone's benefit?

jm08

shuffol wrote: »

According to the stats Sexton kicked 4 times, passed 25 times and ran twice, certainly could've varied things more. Personally I dont think he takes on as much responsibility for Ireland as he does for Leinster.

According to the stats, Dan Carter kicked 7 times, passed 11 times, and ran 6 times the last time he played the Boks in SA.

Less passing maybe and a bit more variety in the kicking.