Ireland u20 2016 6Nations/Junior World Cup

Adbrowne

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I might be slight encumbreed by liquidic catalysm at a stone roses gig, but I don't see an Ireland score. Any help?

35-7

OldRio

Adbrowne wrote: »

was he the no17 today?

Indeed he was. Scored the final try.

Korat

Heroic chaps.

phog

Poor enough game but job done with the extras from a BP win.

Brian017

England are a point ahead with 12 mins to go, so as it stands it's

Eng vs RSA
Ire vs Arg

The Lost Sheep

Less than 20 to go in last of the pool games.
As things stand we play South Africa and other semi is Argentina England.
Lot will change and every score counts. We'll be waiting until final whistle to know exactly who we'll face in semi

sydthebeat

if england get 1 more point they make the semis

edit: maybe picking that up wrong....

Brian017

So the SF are confirmed:

England vs South Africa

Ireland vs Argentina

Korat

sydthebeat wrote: »

if england get 1 more point they make the semis

edit: maybe picking that up wrong....

I'm missing something.

I'll miss you more with Br4x7t

Luv Ireland with kisses. D

The Lost Sheep

Next round of games is
1-4: Ireland v Argentina, England v SA
5-8: Scotland v Australia, NZ v Wales
9-12: Georgia v Italy, France v Japan

errlloyd

Are this Argentina u20s good (in comparison to England and South Africa)

croket

errlloyd wrote: »

Are this Argentina u20s good (in comparison to England and South Africa)

They beat South Africa 19-13

The Lost Sheep

errlloyd wrote: »

Are this Argentina u20s good (in comparison to England and South Africa)

Well the Argentinians beat the South Africans in the pool... but too hard to say when we've so little to base them on considering its not like they have 6Ns that we can compare to or too many results at u18/19 level...

mfceiling

errlloyd wrote: »

Are this Argentina u20s good (in comparison to England and South Africa)

I watched them against France and they are similar to their senior team. Good hands and not afraid to throw it about. Their forwards have decent ball handling skills and link up well with the backs. No pushovers for sure.

kingofthekong

I hope to god that Cillian Gallagher isnt injured , theres a huge drop off between him and O'Connor/Mintern

Podge_irl

Absoluvely wrote: »

When I was reading the laws a few years ago, it said a forward throw was defined as a throw towards the opponents' dead ball line. But the then-IRB told referees to allow forward throws if they weren't forward relative to the thrower, but they neglected to reflect this in the laws.

"Towards the opponents' dead ball line" also means these two tries (from rugby league) would inadvertently be illegal.

That appears not to be the definition now.

DEFINITION: THROW FORWARD
A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward, i.e, if
the arms of the player passing the ball move towards the opposing team’s dead
ball line.

I would also contest that thrown towards the opponents dead ball line is not the same as travelled towards the opponents dead ball line.

Adbrowne

James ryan withdrawn from the u20 squad with an injury according to joe.ie

The Parish King

Adbrowne wrote: »

James ryan withdrawn from the u20 squad with an injury according to joe.ie

I think that's in reference to today's matchday squad rather than the overall squad. The article was published before KO earlier (so you'd imagine Carolan would have discussed it in any interviews) and there's a line about hoping it's not too serious with the semi finals looming next week

ClanofLams

Adbrowne wrote: »

James ryan withdrawn from the u20 squad with an injury according to joe.ie

Jesus providing that's correct this is feeling eerily similar to RWC QF. O'Donnell/Kenny, Ryan, Claffey, Connors, Johnston. Gallagher was getting treatment today too. Big ask without the likes of those.

molloyjh

The Parish King wrote: »

I think that's in reference to today's matchday squad rather than the overall squad. The article was published before KO earlier (so you'd imagine Carolan would have discussed it in any interviews) and there's a line about hoping it's not too serious with the semi finals looming next week

I'd assume the match day squad. It was a dead leg so can't see that ruling him out of the tournament.

godzillaie

If it is actually a dead leg and not something else.

godzillaie

Shame that the other provinces can't produce quality looseheads, Bollard isn't really upto much as seen yesterday.

Would have liked to have seen Vakh and Porter against the Georgian scrum although I doubt it would have been much different.

Gallagher looked like he was injured when he went off, that would be a big blow.
Saunders has a nice pass, but I think he had an average game.

Tarf1234

godzillaie wrote: »

Shame that the other provinces can't produce quality looseheads, Bollard isn't really upto much as seen yesterday.

Would have liked to have seen Vakh and Porter against the Georgian scrum although I doubt it would have been much different.

Gallagher looked like he was injured when he went off, that would be a big blow.
Saunders has a nice pass, but I think he had an average game.

It's a weird one, been a good while since any other province has produced even a decent loosehead.

Never helps anyone in a front row when they're played in a completely new FR. I would imagine Vakh would have preferred to be playing with Porter as well!!

Really didn't think Saunders had a good game at all. He seems to pick the ball up a good bit before he's even thought about what to do with it.

godzillaie

Tarf1234 wrote: »

It's a weird one, been a good while since any other province has produced even a decent loosehead.

Never helps anyone in a front row when they're played in a completely new FR. I would imagine Vakh would have preferred to be playing with Porter as well!!

Really didn't think Saunders had a good game at all. He seems to pick the ball up a good bit before he's even thought about what to do with it.

Liam O'Connor for Munster last year was decent, but still viewed as 3rd choice behind two leinster players.

Yeah he needed to be quicker making a decision, but has the raw tools to be a good scrumhalf IMO.

Tarf1234

godzillaie wrote: »

Liam O'Connor for Munster last year was decent, but still viewed as 3rd choice behind two leinster players.

Yeah he needed to be quicker making a decision, but has the raw tools to be a good scrumhalf IMO.

It's funny how these things come and go. Leinster will always have the advantage of population so less likely to go through 'droughts' in any 1 position. In saying that it seems a long time since any other province produced a genuinely quality LH.

Can see he has potential alright but I hate seeing 9's playing the way he was yesterday. I think against a better team it would have been hugely costly.

godzillaie

Tarf1234 wrote: »

It's funny how these things come and go. Leinster will always have the advantage of population so less likely to go through 'droughts' in any 1 position. In saying that it seems a long time since any other province produced a genuinely quality LH.

Can see he has potential alright but I hate seeing 9's playing the way he was yesterday. I think against a better team it would have been hugely costly.

Maybe it would have, but Ireland don't have many scrumhalves that are upto this level. Leinster are in the middle of a few talent droughts at a few positions irregardless of population advantage.

Saunders is the next best option behind Kerins and very likely to be 1st 9 next year. Hopefully another year of development will help him quicken up his decision making.

Tarf1234

godzillaie wrote: »

Maybe it would have, but Ireland don't have many scrumhalves that are upto this level. Leinster are in the middle of a few talent droughts at a few positions irregardless of population advantage.

Saunders is the next best option behind Kerins and very likely to be 1st 9 next year. Hopefully another year of development will help him quicken up his decision making.

Very true and 9 is actually the best example of that at the moment!

Everyone at this age group should have space to grow anyway, so hopefully he'll go well next year. First start as well so maybe he was just eager to impress. Can't see him getting ahead of Kerins for the rest of the comp who I think has been excellent.

godzillaie

Tarf1234 wrote: »

Very true and 9 is actually the best example of that at the moment!

Everyone at this age group should have space to grow anyway, so hopefully he'll go well next year. First start as well so maybe he was just eager to impress. Can't see him getting ahead of Kerins for the rest of the comp who I think has been excellent.

Yeah there is no way he gets ahead of Kerins.

He is the youngest player at the JWC for any nation.

MunsterMike

Tarf1234 wrote: »

It's a weird one, been a good while since any other province has produced even a decent loosehead.

Never helps anyone in a front row when they're played in a completely new FR. I would imagine Vakh would have preferred to be playing with Porter as well!!

Really didn't think Saunders had a good game at all. He seems to pick the ball up a good bit before he's even thought about what to do with it.

Vakh is still better at LH imo .

godzillaie

MunsterMike wrote: »

Vakh is still better at LH imo .

Has a chance at developing into a good TH, so that should be explored further IMO.

A good LH is easily found in Irish rugby, a good TH is much rarer.

No surprise he struggled yesterday against the Georgians, wasnt helped by Bollard who really struggled. Would have been interested to see Porter/Vakh get a few goes and see if that made things any better.

case885

godzillaie wrote:

No surprise he struggled yesterday against the Georgians, wasnt helped by Bollard who really struggled. Would have been interested to see Porter/Vakh get a few goes and see if that made things any better.

He'll be on the bench in the next game I presume so may have a chance to scrummage with porter.

godzillaie

case885 wrote: »

He'll be on the bench in the next game I presume so may have a chance to scrummage with porter.

he scrummaged with him against NZ.

just wonder how they'd have looked together against the best scrum in the tournament.

ClanofLams

The 42 reporting Gallagher doubtful. Matthew Cosgrove on standby.

wicklowwood

godzillaie wrote: »

Has a chance at developing into a good TH, so that should be explored further IMO.

A good LH is easily found in Irish rugby, a good TH is much rarer.

No surprise he struggled yesterday against the Georgians, wasnt helped by Bollard who really struggled. Would have been interested to see Porter/Vakh get a few goes and see if that made things any better.

Porter and Coyle looked very solid when they teamed up. I thought that VB was under pressure in the scrum.

MunsterMike

wicklowwood wrote: »

Porter and Coyle looked very solid when they teamed up. I thought that VB was under pressure in the scrum.

Have to agree they scrums changed when they came on very solid pairing

godzillaie

All the tightheads look better with Porter, hence why I'd like to have seen Vakh paired with him against the Georgians.

Coyle is a good scrummager, but doubt he makes it further than this level.

RobbieRuns

godzillaie wrote: »

All the tightheads look better with Porter, hence why I'd like to have seen Vakh paired with him against the Georgians.

Coyle is a good scrummager, but doubt he makes it further than this level.

Lots of these young lads might not make it further than this level, but as the first national men's team to beat the All Blacks, they have secured their own little piece of history !!!! Something to tell the kids and Grandkids about as they grow old.

I am not sure, but I think Munster might have beaten the All Blacks in 1978, its not like they ever mention it or write plays about it........

MunsterMike

godzillaie wrote: »

All the tightheads look better with Porter, hence why I'd like to have seen Vakh paired with him against the Georgians.

Coyle is a good scrummager, but doubt he makes it further than this level.

One man is not an island !

MunsterMike

RobbieRuns wrote: »

Lots of these young lads might not make it further than this level, but as the first national men's team to beat the All Blacks, they have secured their own little piece of history !!!! Something to tell the kids and Grandkids about as they grow old.

I am not sure, but I think Munster might have beaten the All Blacks in 1978, its not like they ever mention it or write plays about it........

Nicely said fair play to this squad they are making history .

godzillaie

RobbieRuns wrote: »

Lots of these young lads might not make it further than this level, but as the first national men's team to beat the All Blacks, they have secured their own little piece of history !!!! Something to tell the kids and Grandkids about as they grow old.

I am not sure, but I think Munster might have beaten the All Blacks in 1978, its not like they ever mention it or write plays about it........

I never said it was something not to be proud etc.

godzillaie

MunsterMike wrote: »

One man is not an island !

not sure what that has to do with what I said.

wicklowwood

MunsterMike wrote: »

Nicely said fair play to this squad they are making history .

Absolutely correct. I would hope that they all continue to cause headaches for the people selecting their teams going forward.

bazvanchaz

I was over at the game vs the Blacks last Saturday and for effort alone it was unreal, we gave them soft trys and made it hard for ourselves but to keep coming back like we did was epic and will stay with me forever.

The game yesterday was tough as it gets and I was glad we changed the props when we did as the scrum just before the changes buckled badly and was very dangerous and someone could of been badly hurt, the introduction of coyle and porter helped us control all aspects of the game and made the remainder of the game a whole lot easier. Beasts!

godzillaie

The introduction of Porter/Deegan/Gallagher was the difference, plus the red card of course.

bazvanchaz

godzillaie wrote: »

The introduction of Porter/Deegan/Gallagher was the difference, plus the red card of course.

Quite sad that you feel the need to correct my opinion... I won't bother picking your post apart because your entitled to your opinion as am I.

godzillaie

I didn't correct your opinion, I posted mine.

By all means try to pick my opinion apart, i'd like to see you try.

bazvanchaz

godzillaie wrote: »

I didn't correct your opinion, I posted mine.

By all means try to pick my opinion apart, i'd like to see you try.

Lol

The red card and Deegan comin on happened within the first 20 minutes and we still struggled with the scrums and the breakdown. Georgia still posed us loads of problems. Like I said Porter and Coyle coming on helped us control those aspects of the game a hell of a lot better and was the main factor in why we controlled the game so well for the last half an hour. I'd like to hear why you don't think that was the case?

Tarf1234

bazvanchaz wrote: »

godzillaie wrote: »

I didn't correct your opinion, I posted mine.

By all means try to pick my opinion apart, i'd like to see you try.

Lol

The red card and Deegan comin on happened within the first 20 minutes and we still struggled with the scrums and the breakdown. Georgia still posed us loads of problems. Like I said Porter and Coyle coming on helped us control those aspects of the game a hell of a lot better and was the main factor in why we controlled the game so well for the last half an hour. I'd like to hear why you don't think that was the case?

How can you possibly say the red card was not the turning point of the game? It's literally one of the biggest impacting things which can happen in a game.

godzillaie

Tarf1234 wrote: »

How can you possibly say the red card was not the turning point of the game? It's literally one of the biggest impacting things which can happen in a game.

No no, it was Coyle coming on. He was the changing of the result.

MunsterMike

godzillaie wrote: »

No no, it was Coyle coming on. He was the changing of the result.

I would have though it was the change in the front row