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

totallegend

How to win at modern rugby, lesson 1:

DeDoc wrote: »

The first receivers role is crucial - he has to run at the inside shoulders of the defenders to fix the line before releasing.

If you don't do that, you haven't a hope. Ireland need to have this drilled into them in the next ten days.

jm08

goreyguy wrote: »

its difficult, was Heaslip punished for his own personal infraction or for continuous team infractions in trying to stop them scoring?

According to Anthony Foley it was for pulling down the maul:

“At that time South Africa were (mauling) over our line and somebody needed to do something about it and Jamie decided to do something about it and unfortunately he got a yellow card for his actions. You deal with the consequences there for the next 10 minutes.”


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/1113/1224326524656.html

jm08

jm08 wrote: »

According to Anthony Foley it was for pulling down the maul:

“At that time South Africa were (mauling) over our line and somebody needed to do something about it and Jamie decided to do something about it and unfortunately he got a yellow card for his actions. You deal with the consequences there for the next 10 minutes.”


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/1113/1224326524656.html

according to Wayne Barnes, the match referee, who administered the yellow card, it was for team infringements.
" 3 offences, number 8 was the last one"

He also didn't pull down the maul.

(watch from the 56th minute in the youtube video I just posted!)

DeDoc

JustinDee wrote: »

Sounds simple doesn't it? lol
It actually is. The difficulty is matching it physically out there on the field.

I'm not disputing that NZ, like great practictioners of anything, make it look very straightforward. But you have to, IMO, at least try to do the right thing. Compare footage of O'Gara in the 2006 autumn internationals - he was taking the ball flat and using his passing ability to hit runners. Now fair enough, we had a lot more options (partly due to current injuries) then, but a probably significant fact was that O'Gara was 29 and not 35 - I just don't he has the confidence or interest to take the ball on aggressively any more. He was never blessed with great acceleration or the strength to be a gain-line threat himself, but the 2012 (and probably since about 2008) version of himself doesn't really offer anything else by way of compensation in his attacking game.

CatFromHue

Miller Steep Loudspeaker wrote: »

With regards rogs kick at the end it seems stupid because it didn't work but bod did the same against England when we won our first triple crown a couple of years ago and it ended up leading to Shane horgans famous try sometimes a team won't be expacting it and it works well sa delt with it but the level of abuse he's getting for its a bit ott

It's a high risk play and if it comes off you're great.....if it doesn't though you look silly and wasteful.

DeDoc wrote: »

Another team playing in black less than 24 hours after our boys managed many instances of putting away 5 on 4s etc

Just as pertinent in that picture is that O'Gara is taking the ball almost 10 metres behind the gainline and appears to be shipping the ball sideways. Watch the All-blacks anytime they have an overlap. The first receivers role is crucial - he has to run at the inside shoulders of the defenders to fix the line before releasing. If he does that and the next receiver does likewise, then the above picture transforms from a 6 on 4 into a 4 on 2 (plus a few cover defenders, all forwards coming across from the ruck). Put it this way, were that the ABs you'd be fancying them to score a try more often than not from that situation

I think the AB's are almost the exception to the rule to be honest. Even then I think they wouldn't have created the overlap in this situation, they would have done better though. If Stephen Donald had kicked the ball away like ROG had in the same situation he would prob have had to go into hiding.

JustinDee

Deleted User wrote: »

according to Wayne Barnes, the match referee, who administered the yellow card, it was for team infringements.
" 3 offences, number 8 was the last one"

Jamie admitted it himself yesterday. He was pinged following last warning. Mike McCarthy said that the players involved in the previous infringements had their part to play in that as well.

JustinDee

DeDoc wrote: »

I'm not disputing that NZ, like great practictioners of anything, make it look very straightforward . . .

No worries.
Was just having a yap about NZ gameplan.

irishbucsfan

We don't play like NZ because if we did the penalty count would be about 5-1 in the opposition's favour!

totallegend

CatFromHue wrote: »

I think the AB's are almost the exception to the rule to be honest. Even then I think they wouldn't have created the overlap in this situation, they would have done better though. If Stephen Donald had kicked the ball away like ROG had in the same situation he would prob have had to go into hiding.

OK, Ireland probably wouldn't have created the overlap and scorched down the wing for a 50-metre try, but at the very least they had plenty of men out there to retain possession and recycle for another attempt. Kicking it away (and such a tame kick as well) robbed us of the option of doing any of that.

CatFromHue

totallegend wrote: »

OK, Ireland probably wouldn't have created the overlap and scorched down the wing for a 50-metre try, but at the very least they had plenty of men out there to retain possession and recycle for another attempt. Kicking it away (and such a tame kick as well) robbed us of the option of doing any of that.

Definitely, yeah.

I think the kick was the wrong option to take. There was only one chaser who was up against JP Williams who's pretty quick. The other thing that annoys me is that there isn't anyone looking to do anything outside ROG, not a single dummy run or anything.

.ak

Infraction issued & post deleted - read the thread title people.

molloyjh

DeDoc wrote: »

Compare footage of O'Gara in the 2006 autumn internationals - he was taking the ball flat and using his passing ability to hit runners. Now fair enough, we had a lot more options (partly due to current injuries) then, but a probably significant fact was that O'Gara was 29 and not 35 - I just don't he has the confidence or interest to take the ball on aggressively any more. He was never blessed with great acceleration or the strength to be a gain-line threat himself, but the 2012 (and probably since about 2008) version of himself doesn't really offer anything else by way of compensation in his attacking game.

In fairness Sexton wasn't exactly taking the ball flat either. It was a feature of the game they went out there to play more-so that ROG himself. Of course kicking the ball away when the clock had gone red and there were other options was monumentally daft for someone of his experience.

goreyguy

Heaslip didn't have his best game, but he wasn't terrible.
Disappointing though, along with a lot of other players.

19543261

goreyguy wrote: »

Heaslip didn't have his best game, but he wasn't terrible.
Disappointing though, along with a lot of other players.

Are you kidding me...?

goreyguy

19543261 wrote: »

Are you kidding me...?

No, I don't see how you could I say he played terribly.
It was an average performance, also we don't really have a replacement for him right now.

19543261

goreyguy wrote: »

No, I don't see how you could I say he played terribly.
It was an average performance, also we don't really have a replacement for him right now.

Oh, apologies; I'd agree with you, I completely read that wrong.

maddragon

Tox56 wrote: »

Kidney has clearly been told/has realised how poor his use of the bench was in the past, and he is getting better, but bringing on ROG at 75 mins was a bit pointless.

FYP.

eoferrall

pickarooney wrote: »

Was anyone else frustrated by the complete lack of momentum of the receivers? I don't recall one single time when the ball was passed off the back of the ruck to a moving forward. Surely this is basic stuff? It's hard to see how they were ever going to make significant inroads into the defensive line when running with ball in hand from a standing start.

This seems to have been brushed over, i found it incredibly frustrating. not sure whether it was murray moving them about and that caused them to not know when to time run or if it was a tactic to set up pods etc. But EVERY time we rucked ball and passed to a forward it was stationary ball. It's been a feature of the last few matches so either Kidney hasn't addressed it, or won't address it. and if the players can't do it, change them.

.ak

It's brushed over because it's become the norm in recent times for Ireland. I refuse to believe the players 'can't' do it because they do it regularly at H-Cup level against the same international quality.

eoferrall

.ak wrote: »

It's brushed over because it's become the norm in recent times for Ireland. I refuse to believe the players 'can't' do it because they do it regularly at H-Cup level against the same international quality.

But i feel it is a bigger issue than RoG's kick at the end, which technically lost us the game. but in reality was lost long before due to the inability to generate consistent go forward ball.

No one seems to discuss it anywhere (media or here) which baffles me, so much nit picking goes on here and arguments back and forth about earls etc, but nothing on this.

ah well, new coach new ideas soon hopefully.

who_me

DeDoc wrote: »

I'm not disputing that NZ, like great practictioners of anything, make it look very straightforward. But you have to, IMO, at least try to do the right thing. Compare footage of O'Gara in the 2006 autumn internationals - he was taking the ball flat and using his passing ability to hit runners. Now fair enough, we had a lot more options (partly due to current injuries) then, but a probably significant fact was that O'Gara was 29 and not 35 - I just don't he has the confidence or interest to take the ball on aggressively any more. He was never blessed with great acceleration or the strength to be a gain-line threat himself, but the 2012 (and probably since about 2008) version of himself doesn't really offer anything else by way of compensation in his attacking game.

I don't think it's age - as a non-running, distributor he could play on for a few seasons. I think it's down to a few factors.

Confidence, and the pressure from Sexton and in the media. The Irish pack '12 isn't generating the kind of quick, clean ball we had at times in the noughties. The 'banana' defence defence is very effective against a non-running 10 who doesn't have a Plan B (look at how Penney/Mannix use the sweep back pass to the FB to get wide around the rush defence). And his tactical kicking is nowhere near what it was - I wonder how much of that is a lack of form, and how much is the opposition dropping their wingers back deep to cut off the kicks to touch, thus leaving a punt down the middle as the only option.

It's a pity, because people will forget we played some outstanding rugby with O'Gara at 10, and he may be remembered based on the last few seasons.

.ak

eoferrall wrote: »

But i feel it is a bigger issue than RoG's kick at the end, which technically lost us the game. but in reality was lost long before due to the inability to generate consistent go forward ball.

No one seems to discuss it anywhere (media or here) which baffles me, so much nit picking goes on here and arguments back and forth about earls etc, but nothing on this.

ah well, new coach new ideas soon hopefully.

You're 100% correct, I just think it's because we've come to live with it.

People often say why can't Ireland play like Leinster or Ulster - and they're quickly shot down because people assume the likes of Leinster just play an expansive game and go wide for fun. Leinster, and particularly Ulster and Munster, do well because of strike runners. We've all seen how much Leinster have suffered these season without the likes of SOB or Kearney coming from deep at speed as first recievers from a ruck, punching holes and causing the gain line to become dog legged.

Like wise we've seen it work well for Ulster and Munster with runners like Downey, Dougal, Henderson, Henry, Williams, or Cave. As the saying goes you need to earn the right to go wide, Ireland don't even try to barter for that right.

dtpc191991

.ak wrote: »

You're 100% correct, I just think it's because we've come to live with it.

People often say why can't Ireland play like Leinster or Ulster - and they're quickly shot down because people assume the likes of Leinster just play an expansive game and go wide for fun. Leinster, and particularly Ulster and Munster, do well because of strike runners. We've all seen how much Leinster have suffered these season without the likes of SOB or Kearney coming from deep at speed as first recievers from a ruck, punching holes and causing the gain line to become dog legged.

Like wise we've seen it work well for Ulster and Munster with runners like Downey, Dougal, Henderson, Henry, Williams, or Cave. As the saying goes you need to earn the right to go wide, Ireland don't even try to barter for that right.

This is where Ireland's poor play is down to the coaching team. They are not coaching players in our backline to act as strike runners. If you look at last Saturday's team the likes of Bowe, Earls, Zebo, D'Arcy, Henry and Sexton when not acting as first receiver can do that. We've seen them do it in the past for Province and country. BOD's complaint about "not knowing where the point of attack was supposed to be" clearly highlights that the coaching team are not highlighting who should be where in an attacking phase in training.

JustinDee

.ak wrote: »

It's brushed over because it's become the norm in recent times for Ireland. I refuse to believe the players 'can't' do it because they do it regularly at H-Cup level against the same international quality.

There is a notable difference between international level and ERC level.
Jamie Heaslip explained as such last night the difference at the Patrons Club Q&A in the Aviva.

Aside from being with a provincial side longer over the year than with the international squad and basically 'working from home', the margins for error in international are massively narrower, and speed and intensity higher than in the RaboDirect Pro12 or the Heineken Cup.

This is what any player I've ever asked or seen asked has said also.

JustinDee

JustinDee wrote: »

There is a notable difference between international level and ERC level.
Jamie Heaslip explained as such last night the difference at the Patrons Club Q&A in the Aviva.

Aside from being with a provincial side longer over the year than with the international squad and basically 'working from home', the margins for error in international are massively narrower, and speed and intensity higher than in the RaboDirect Pro12 or the Heineken Cup.

This is what any player I've ever asked or seen asked has said also.

but these changes only effect the Irish national team?

desertcircus

JustinDee wrote: »

There is a notable difference between international level and ERC level.
Jamie Heaslip explained as such last night the difference at the Patrons Club Q&A in the Aviva.

Aside from being with a provincial side longer over the year than with the international squad and basically 'working from home', the margins for error in international are massively narrower, and speed and intensity higher than in the RaboDirect Pro12 or the Heineken Cup.

This is what any player I've ever asked or seen asked has said also.

That's not an answer; it's a change in the question. What makes Irish players top-class at Pro12 level, top-class at HC level, and then substandard at Test level? The pace of Test rugby isn't an answer, because A. every team has to negotiate that increase in intensity, and most do it better than Ireland, and B. it's simply not true about all games. Leinster v Clermont in the Aviva two year ago, or in France this April, will beat Ireland v Italy in just about any metric you can name. But the Irish team underperforms at that level as well.

"Test rugby is different" is not a serious answer.

JustinDee

desertcircus wrote: »

"Test rugby is different" is not a serious answer.

I'm afraid you or I will never be able to tell, as neither has ever even gotten close to that level of rugby union.
I'd believe a player's view over anyone else's myself.

Foxtrol

JustinDee wrote: »

I'm afraid you or I will never be able to tell, as neither has ever even gotten close to that level of rugby union.
I'd believe a player's view over anyone else's myself.

Have they explained why it doesn't effect other nations as much as poor old Ireland?

desertcircus

JustinDee wrote: »

I'm afraid you or I will never be able to tell, as neither has ever even gotten close to that level of rugby union.
I'd believe a player's view over anyone else's myself.

I'm sure Test rugby is different, but as I pointed out in the rest of the post, that simply shifts the question. Why do Ireland do so much worse than everyone else at negotiating the step up?

JustinDee

Foxtrol wrote: »

Have they explained why it doesn't effect other nations as much as poor old Ireland?

Aside from Wales, which other country? France are basically France, while England are still yet to be proven with any semblance of consistency. How wide is the apparent gap in quality?

With the Welsh in mind, down to a penalty last year in their Grand Slam winning season and the year before, that strange call on the quick throw being allowed which knocked the wind out of Ireland's sails.

I know what you mean but I'm just going by what the protagonists themselves say.

Foxtrol

JustinDee wrote: »

Aside from Wales, which other country? France are basically France, while England are still yet to be proven with any semblance of consistency. How wide is the apparent gap in quality?

Compare the results of how the provinces perform versus English and French clubs during Kidney's reign against how the national side performs against their respective nations. When you take into account they had Johnson and Lievremont at the helm for a large portion of that period you can see how poor we've been. At least their Unions saw the error of their ways an parted ways with those coaches.

With the Welsh in mind, down to a penalty last year in their Grand Slam winning season and the year before, that strange call on the quick throw being allowed which knocked the wind out of Ireland's sails.

Ireland got a hell of a lot of luck in winning our Grand Slam as well. You cant fob off the Welsh improvement and the Irish regression when they move to international level down to luck

I know what you mean but I'm just going by what the protagonists themselves say.

Any chance you can ask them their opinions on why it effects Ireland more? I wish we had an Irish journalist with balls to ask the tough question. BBC were the only ones at the weekend who actually asked a tough question and Kidney's discomfort was noticeable.

JustinDee

Foxtrol wrote: »

Ireland got a hell of a lot of luck in winning our Grand Slam as well. You cant fob off the Welsh improvement and the Irish regression when they move to international level down to luck

I didn't. I said it was close.

jm08

Foxtrol wrote: »

Compare the results of how the provinces perform versus English and French clubs during Kidney's reign against how the national side performs against their respective nations.

The Ospreys have been pretty good when it comes to knock out rugby with the provinces over the last while (and the joke at the time when Wales won their 1st GS was that the Ospreys had won a GS - think there were 12 Ospreys starting for Wales). The Welsh have our number.

I think Wales are starting to hurt now with the mass exodus of players to France. Last year they did well because Gatland had them for so long for the world cup. It will really be interesting to see how it goes over the next couple of months for them.

.ak

I think we're all aware that Test Level is step above H-Cup. However, at certain times H-Cup games will have more Tier 1 internationals in a game than a test game - i.e; Leinster Clermont, Toulon Munster etc. These one off games are, in my opinion, on par with test level - as you say we're not pro players and will never really know - but when the conditions are right and it's the same group of players from respective test teams then why wouldn't it be?

The point is, Irish players never shy away at these games, nor are do they succumb to the accusation of playing without tactics or direction (even if they lose on the day).

Yes, test level rugby may be the highest form of the code, but unfortunately our coaching staff are not.

jm08

.ak - your a bit dismissive of Gert Smal who is a world cup winning forwards coach - surely he is proven to be a world class international coach?

Foxtrol

jm08 wrote: »

.ak - your a bit dismissive of Gert Smal who is a world cup winning forwards coach - surely he is proven to be a world class international coach?

Not in the last few years with Ireland. He's either lost his touch, phoning it in or a yes man.

danthefan

JustinDee wrote: »

There is a notable difference between international level and ERC level.
Jamie Heaslip explained as such last night the difference at the Patrons Club Q&A in the Aviva.

Aside from being with a provincial side longer over the year than with the international squad and basically 'working from home', the margins for error in international are massively narrower, and speed and intensity higher than in the RaboDirect Pro12 or the Heineken Cup.

This is what any player I've ever asked or seen asked has said also.

I'm trying to find the link but after the Leinster v Toulouse HEC SF in 2011 both Nathan Hines and Vincent Clerc said the game was on par with international rugby.

This is the quote anyway which I found in another thread on this board:

'Leinster's match against Toulouse last season was the fastest and hardest game I'd ever played. I walked past Clément Poitrenaud [Toulouse full-back] who was looking shattered. "This game is so fast. I'm gone", he said. I was gone as well, but I wasn't going to tell him. These big Heineken games are do or die. It's international rugby without the jersey.'

Heymans said something about the game being tougher than most 6N games.

.ak

jm08 wrote: »

.ak - your a bit dismissive of Gert Smal who is a world cup winning forwards coach - surely he is proven to be a world class international coach?

In fairness I've never really seen an issue with our forwards - they're just not utilized correctly in attack.

jm08

Foxtrol wrote: »

Not in the last few years with Ireland. He's either lost his touch, phoning it in or a yes man.

Nothing to do with the cattle then? (as Rob Penney would say!)

jm08

danthefan wrote: »

I'm trying to find the link but after the Leinster v Toulouse HEC SF in 2011 both Nathan Hines and Vincent Clerc said the game was on par with international rugby.

This is the quote anyway which I found in another thread on this board:

Heymans said something about the game being tougher than most 6N games.

So Toulouse & Leinster have a higher concentration of Tier 1 nation internationals than most other clubs!

.ak wrote: »

In fairness I've never really seen an issue with our forwards - they're just not utilized correctly in attack.

That doesn't make sense. He is responsible for the forwards and you think they are not being used correctly.

.ak

jm08 wrote: »

So Toulouse & Leinster have a higher concentration of Tier 1 nation internationals than most other clubs!

But that's the point. You can't just say Test level and H-Cup is different. You have to look at it on a game-by-game basis.

That doesn't make sense. He is responsible for the forwards and you think they are not being used correctly.

He's not responsable for how they're utilized in attack. Attack coach doesn't just look after the backs....

Foxtrol

Foxtrol wrote: »

Compare the results of how the provinces perform versus English and French clubs during Kidney's reign against how the national side performs against their respective nations. When you take into account they had Johnson and Lievremont at the helm for a large portion of that period you can see how poor we've been. At least their Unions saw the error of their ways an parted ways with those coaches.

England and France have far far more clubs to pick players from so your argument is mute im not a fan of kidney anymore ( il admit I was for a long time) but that point is thrown around a lot and I feel it's irrelevant

molloyjh

JustinDee wrote: »

I'm afraid you or I will never be able to tell, as neither has ever even gotten close to that level of rugby union.
I'd believe a player's view over anyone else's myself.

How's about this:

Nathan Hines wrote:

Leinster’s match against Toulouse last season was the fastest and hardest game I’d ever played. I walked past Clément Poitrenaud [Toulouse full-back] who was looking shattered. “This game is so fast. I’m gone”, he said. I was gone as well, but I wasn’t going to tell him. These big Heineken games are do or die. It’s international rugby without the jersey.

EDIT: Beaten to it by danthefan

JustinDee wrote: »

France are basically France

Who made the RWC Final last year (despite all the s**t in camp) and the SF in 2007, have won 5 Six Nations Championships in the last 10 years, 4 of which were in the years where Irish teams have been apparently dominating Europe. They are ranked 4th to our 8th. They seem to have made the step up fairly well.

JustinDee wrote: »

England are still yet to be proven with any semblance of consistency.

Yet are still 3 places ahead of us in the rankings, won the 6Ns in 2011 and won twice as many games as us in the last 6 Nations despite a brand new coach still trying to find his feet.

JustinDee wrote: »

With the Welsh in mind, down to a penalty last year in their Grand Slam winning season and the year before, that strange call on the quick throw being allowed which knocked the wind out of Ireland's sails.

That try came with 30 minutes left in the game and only put them 3 points ahead. I can't imagine the lads are so fragile as to let that bother them that much. Wales have made the step up by giving players a shot, showing faith in those players and giving them a system that they can excel in.

Every nation in the 6 Nations do as well or better than their club/regional counterparts with the exception of Ireland. Why?

jm08

.ak wrote: »

But that's the point. You can't just say Test level and H-Cup is different. You have to look at it on a game-by-game basis.

Not all, but the vast majority are. Just like NZ are a cut above most Tier No. 1 nations at the moment.

He's not responsable for how they're utilized in attack. Attack coach doesn't just look after the backs....

The attack coach wouldn't be working in isolation. Smal would have a input on the attack (might suggest that the lineout is a better way to attack than the scrum, or suggest using a maul, or he might suggest going wide quickly because we haven't the forwards to bash a few holes in the opposition defence).

totallegend

.ak wrote: »

But that's the point. You can't just say Test level and H-Cup is different. You have to look at it on a game-by-game basis.

Exactly. You go back and watch the Clermont v Leinster game last season and tell me it was less intense than a test game, or which of the players involved would not stroll into most international sides.

People say "oh, test rugby is a step up from anything at club level" but that's a ridiculously selective argument. Yes; NZ vs SA is more intense than any club game, but Italy v Scotland or USA v Tonga very much is not.

sjwpjw

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/20310010

irishbucsfan

I was just watching the 2nd half up to the South African score there. Just trying to work out exactly what it was that made us change our approach to the game and what moment it happened. I had thought it happened at half time (and was wondering why the coaches would do that).

We came out exactly the same. From the first breakdown Zebo kicked it deep. A good deep kick that stayed in field and after the return we ended up with possession on our 10 meter line (For people who wonder why you would keep a kick in field from your 22, this kick is a perfect example).

In the next phase Sexton launched a pretty perfect garryowen, and for the second time in the game Bowe did great to get under it but knocked it on. If he had been a bit luckier both those times things could have been far different. Pienaar gathered the ball and launched a counter attack.

The problem came next. They had clearly not woken up after half time and from the next breakdown we left a massive gap down the blind side. Earls had made the previous tackle, Bowe had knocked on. In this case you'd expect back rows or at least somebody to fill in but the only person making the effort to get there was Sexton. A Saffer forward picked it up and they made 20 meters (forward drew a man sprinting across and gave it to Taute who drove Sexton back to the edge of the 22). Bowe was rushing back to help out and gave away a penalty for entering at the side/not rolling away.

From that penalty they put the ball into touch and drove us back over our line. Heaslip gave away a really stupid penalty (I don't accept he was preventing a try with the final infringement, the final penalty was just foolish, he just waltzed into the side of the ruck, really disappointing). Then as we all know, dozey play from Ryan lets Pienaar dive across the line too easilly.

The try was clearly just a complete lack of focus after the break. You'd expect they wouldn't have been guilty of that with all their normal leaders present.

Straight away after the try things went to pot. We try an over-elaborate move between Sexton/Murray/Zebo that makes no ground and then Murray box-kicks to noone (and Trimble wasn't chasing at all) giving Pieterson an easy mark. Then Sexton makes a similarly bad kick for an easy mark for Hougaard (who returns off Trimble's fingers to win them great territory down the field). I think these two kicks in a minute rattled the half backs and they made the decision to move away from the kicking game tbh... because it disappeared after that. It was the only part of our game that was working and from then on we were considerably worse.

Shows you how fine the margins can be though. If Bowe had managed to keep hold of that ball in their half we would've had great possession and a lot of momentum behind us, probably would have managed to squeeze another few points out of them. In the end we didn't and we were so rattled by the aftermath we didn't manage to score again for the entire match! I would think having more experienced leaders on the field would have helped us big time, just to encourage them to stick with the game plan and not try to switch to the repetitive possession based game plan that helped them smash our pack to smithereens and leaked penalties like a sieve. A quick word from BOD or POC was what we needed there I reckon.

danthefan

That box kick was one of the most rage-inducing things I've ever seen on a rugby pitch. I lost the plot a little bit I have to say.

danthefan

danthefan wrote: »

That box kick was one of the most rage-inducing things I've ever seen on a rugby pitch. I lost the plot a little bit I have to say.

like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTQWT-B0EBw

thomond2006

Deleted User wrote: »

like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTQWT-B0EBw

Watching Ireland for the last few years summed up in 22 seconds.