Match Thread: Ireland v Wales [2.30pm 29/08/15 Aviva Stadium] Guinness Series

Cosmo Kramer

Looks like the tough decisions in the backs might be made easier now. Personally, if Fitz isn't 100% I'd leave him in Dublin, with just 14 backs travelling I don't know if we can carry someone with his ongoing injury problems. Of course, if Earls us out we need him to travel, if they're both out Cave must come into contention.

I thought Jordi Murphy had a poor game today, it won't happen but with Ryan and Henderson able to cover 6, Henry to cover 7 and SOB and POM both able to switch to 8 there's an argument to be made for just taking four out and out back rows and bringing an extra prop to allow both Healy and Moore time to get back to match fitness. I don't know if Murphy adds a whole lot to the squad.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Even if Fitzgerald is fit I'm not sure he's done anything to deserve selection over any of the others there. We'll see.

.ak

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

Looks like the tough decisions in the backs might be made easier now. Personally, if Fitz isn't 100% I'd leave him in Dublin, with just 14 backs travelling I don't know if we can carry someone with his ongoing injury problems. Of course, if Earls us out we need him to travel, if they're both out Cave must come into contention.

I thought Jordi Murphy had a poor game today, it won't happen but with Ryan and Henderson able to cover 6, Henry to cover 7 and SOB and POM both able to switch to 8 there's an argument to be made for just taking four out and out back rows and bringing an extra prop to allow both Healy and Moore time to get back to match fitness. I don't know if Murphy adds a whole lot to the squad.

Murphy is easily our best option at 20, and he wasn't the only person to have a poor game today. He was quiet, but he's been one of our best backrows this year, easily. I'd defo be taking him.

Hopefully fitz is alright.

molloyjh

.ak wrote: »

Feck!

I think he was specifically asked about both though and wasn't asked about Fitz.

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

Looks like the tough decisions in the backs might be made easier now. Personally, if Fitz isn't 100% I'd leave him in Dublin, with just 14 backs travelling I don't know if we can carry someone with his ongoing injury problems. Of course, if Earls us out we need him to travel, if they're both out Cave must come into contention.

I thought Jordi Murphy had a poor game today, it won't happen but with Ryan and Henderson able to cover 6, Henry to cover 7 and SOB and POM both able to switch to 8 there's an argument to be made for just taking four out and out back rows and bringing an extra prop to allow both Healy and Moore time to get back to match fitness. I don't know if Murphy adds a whole lot to the squad.

I wouldn't be too down on Murphy. He struggled today, but he'll be behind the other 4 back rows at this stage I think. He won't be facing opposition like that in the RWC barring a few injuries.

irishbucsfan

.ak wrote: »

Yeah, when JC is saying tipuric or Jenkins are legal when they effected turn overs dispute resting their bodies on the ruck or their feet not being in contact with the ground... Well that's not interpretation that's just being wrong.

Well for example everyone was yelling about Tipuric's turnover where Murray had him on the ground. Anyone who says he was illegal is just flat out wrong. He came through on his feet and was only taken off his feet AFTER he had the ball. People see what they want at the breakdown though.

Or another example, Luke Pearce called POC and everyone calls "bullsh*t" when POC very clearly threw the Welsh player over his body and the Welsh player (Tipuric?) landed on his neck, which is being specifically watched now. I suppose people thought the call was for POC actually hitting the player high, and they're thinking that it's a wrong call based on that... and then people just add that to their internal mental marking of the officials... and it builds and builds despite being based on fallacies...

The Jenkins one was incorrect imo, should have been called. But I'm more concerned about the fact we had multiple forwards there staring at him while he did it and none of them put their shoulder between him and the ball. They were off their feet on a number of occasions, but you think we'd have learned after the first one, or maybe learned after previous games under Joubert.

The only thing I actually had a problem with in the officiation was both teams coming straight through the breakdown and taking out the half backs. It wasn't called until we got a penalty for it right at the end, but we should have had penalties earlier on for it on a number of occasions and the Welsh should have had it more than once. An early call on that would have been preventative imo

.ak

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Even if Fitzgerald is fit I'm not sure he's done anything to deserve selection over any of the others there. We'll see.

He had a pretty good game today. I thought he was probably our best Rucker. I wouldn't be surprised if he hit more rucks than our back rowers. And he was very effective there. Good foot work and good hands, and didn't miss a tackle.

If he's fit I'd be bringing him.

molloyjh

molloyjh wrote: »

I wouldn't be too down on Murphy. He struggled today, but he'll be behind the other 4 back rows at this stage I think. He won't be facing opposition like that in the RWC barring a few injuries.

The whole backrow struggled today. We know Murphy is well able for this level of rugby.




And Ryan doesn't cover 6 at all, that's a nonsense. If he ends up there against a decent side we're fecked.

Buer

.ak wrote: »

Murphy is easily our best option at 20, and he wasn't the only person to have a poor game today. He was quiet, but he's been one of our best backrows this year, easily. I'd defo be taking him.

Henry, surely? Plays 6, 7 and 8, offers leadership and has performed in big games against top class opposition previously like SA and 6N teams.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Or another example, Luke Pearce called POC and everyone calls "bullsh*t" when POC very clearly threw the Welsh player over his body and the Welsh player (Tipuric?) landed on his neck, which is being specifically watched now. I suppose people thought the call was for POC actually hitting the player high, and they're thinking that it's a wrong call based on that... and then people just add that to their internal mental marking of the officials... and it builds and builds despite being based on fallacies...

Er, that was what the call was for. That is what Joubert indicated and spoke to POC about, a high clearout.

There was also a penalty given to Wales when we held up the ball for a maul that CJ failed to spot.

.ak

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well for example everyone was yelling about Tipuric's turnover where Murray had him on the ground. Anyone who says he was illegal is just flat out wrong. He came through on his feet and was only taken off his feet AFTER he had the ball. People see what they want at the breakdown though.

Or another example, Luke Pearce called POC and everyone calls "bullsh*t" when POC very clearly threw the Welsh player over his body and the Welsh player (Tipuric?) landed on his neck, which is being specifically watched now. I suppose people thought the call was for POC actually hitting the player high, and they're thinking that it's a wrong call based on that... and then people just add that to their internal mental marking of the officials... and it builds and builds despite being based on fallacies...

The Jenkins one was incorrect imo, should have been called. But I'm more concerned about the fact we had multiple forwards there staring at him while he did it and none of them put their shoulder between him and the ball. They were off their feet on a number of occasions, but you think we'd have learned after the first one, or maybe learned after previous games under Joubert.

The only thing I actually had a problem with in the officiation was both teams coming straight through the breakdown and taking out the half backs. It wasn't called until we got a penalty for it right at the end, but we should have had penalties earlier on for it on a number of occasions and the Welsh should have had it more than once. An early call on that would have been preventative imo

People didn't think POC was called for going high on the clear out... He WAS called for that. They said it was because he cleared out using the players neck.

Murray was also cleared out and landed on his neck at one stage and nothing was done about it.

Sob tried the lie on rucks thing and got told to leave the ball... It's just the consistency thing that annoys me there.

There was also another incident early on in the game where tipuric had a few players lying on him and he clearly wasn't supporting his weight and got the turn over over...

No, like I said, there's interpretation and there's just being wrong. Joubert was clearly wrong in those calls. No two ways about it.

Didn't effect the game tho because we were ****e really.

.ak

Buer wrote: »

Henry, surely? Plays 6, 7 and 8, offers leadership and has performed in big games against top class opposition previously like SA and 6N teams.

Honestly I'll be surprised if Henry gets the 20 jersey. I think Schmidt sees him as a backup openside.

I think Murphy looks set to be the 20 jersey.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well for example everyone was yelling about Tipuric's turnover where Murray had him on the ground. Anyone who says he was illegal is just flat out wrong. He came through on his feet and was only taken off his feet AFTER he had the ball. People see what they want at the breakdown though.

Yet when the same happened to SOB he was told to let go of the ball because he didn't survive the clean-out....

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Or another example, Luke Pearce called POC and everyone calls "bullsh*t" when POC very clearly threw the Welsh player over his body and the Welsh player (Tipuric?) landed on his neck, which is being specifically watched now.

But the call there was that the clear out was by the neck when he was tackled around the shoulder.

Sean Kinsella

awec wrote: »

Players getting penalties when blatantly not supporting their weight is nothing to do with playing the ref or adapting to his style.

It's just a completely wrong call.

In some areas we definitely didn't adjust to Joubert, in other areas Joubert was just getting it wrong and his interpretation was inconsistent with the laws.

Edit to add: I don't think it had a bearing on the result though.

Well in fairness, he missed one outrageously forward pass in the build up to the Welsh try, but we were still rubbish and lacking in ideas and that's worrying.

Not worried at all by that. We didn't get into top gear and we're very one dimensional which I'd say is a matter of us showing nothing before the tournament.

We badly missed Toner to disrupt their mauls / lineout.

McGrath worked very hard, strauss was solid, White pretty anonymous. POC was poor, though no doubt has more to show. Henderson was excellent, his best game in green.

POM had moments and worked hard, Murphy did nothing flash and struggled to deal with Tipuric and the total free for all at the breakdown. Heaslip had a good game cleaning things up, tackling everything and was probably our best forward. SOB was headless when he came on but got into it.

9 and 10 both poor for them, but will get better. Earls was poor in the first half, didn't come in off his wing and had no real impact. Was improving in the second half before injury.

Henshaw was a rock, tackled hard and carried well. Good 12 performance. Very impressed with Fitz at 13. Tackled well, worked hard at the breakdown and linked things up well - hope his injury is ok as I'd say he's done enough to travel.

Dave Kearney with wing performance of series for us so far. Hype is real - he'll travel. Rob "can't tackle or pass" Kearney was excellent. Destroyed North in to touch with a tackle, was unbeatable in the air, assured performance, no one is close to him at 15.

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

Yet when the same happened to SOB he was told to let go of the ball because he didn't survive the clean-out....

But he didn't survive the clean-out and he didn't have the ball in his possession?

aimee1

Sean Kinsella wrote: »

but we were still rubbish and lacking in ideas and that's worrying.

or we are just not showing our hand too much. A lot of what we saw was stuff we have done for a few years.

irishbucsfan

.ak wrote: »

People didn't think POC was called for going high on the clear out... He WAS called for that. They said it was because he cleared out using the players neck. .

I'll wait to see it again. He wasn't high but Tipuric did land on his neck, either way it was a penalty and there was a recent article about officials watching for the latter.

maddness

I'd have been very surprised if we showed anything much today. It's 6 weeks until we meet France in the WC, that's when we need to peak and not today against a limited but effective Wales.

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

Not worried at all by that. We didn't get into top gear and we're very one dimensional which I'd say is a matter of us showing nothing before the tournament.

We badly missed Toner to disrupt their mauls / lineout.

McGrath worked very hard, strauss was solid, White pretty anonymous. POC was poor, though no doubt has more to show. Henderson was excellent, his best game in green.

POM had moments and worked hard, Murphy did nothing flash and struggled to deal with Tipuric and the total free for all at the breakdown. Heaslip had a good game cleaning things up, tackling everything and was probably our best forward. SOB was headless when he came on but got into it.

9 and 10 both poor for them, but will get better. Earls was poor in the first half, didn't come in off his wing and had no real impact. Was improving in the second half before injury.

Henshaw was a rock, tackled hard and carried well. Good 12 performance. Very impressed with Fitz at 13. Tackled well, worked hard at the breakdown and linked things up well - hope his injury is ok as I'd say he's done enough to travel.

Dave Kearney with wing performance of series for us so far. Hype is real - he'll travel. Rob "can't tackle or pass" Kearney was excellent. Destroyed North in to touch with a tackle, was unbeatable in the air, assured performance, no one is close to him at 15.

Agree with some of this and disagree with some of it.

Strauss - did nothing.
White - did nothing.
Heaslip - decent, but Henderson was our best forward by a mile

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'll wait to see it again. He wasn't high but Tipuric did land on his neck, either way it was a penalty and there was a recent article about officials watching for the latter.

They very clearly said the clear out was around the neck. And it wasn't. I've no issue with that really. It was an honest mistake, but you can't use it as a reason people are being unreasonable in how they see the game.

aimee1

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'll wait to see it again. He wasn't high but Tipuric did land on his neck, either way it was a penalty and there was a recent article about officials watching for the latter.

murray [i think] was taken out very similar fashion and it didnt get penalised

its not necessarily the decisions but the lack of consistancy

.ak

awec wrote: »

Agree with some of this and disagree with some of it.

Strauss - did nothing.
White - did nothing.
Heaslip - decent, but Henderson was our best forward by a mile

Strauss was very good. Probably our cleanest carrier along with henshaw?

awec

The inconsistencies of refs at breakdowns annoys me in general. I'm not referring specifically to Joubert today, but speaking generally.

Sometimes a ref will blow up if a player has his hands on the ball for a second. Sometimes they'll wait until the player has their hands on it for 5 or more seconds. Sometimes they'll give a defensive penalty if a player gets his hands on the ball and is then knocked over, other times they'll give an attacking penalty.

awec

awec wrote: »

Agree with some of this and disagree with some of it.

Strauss - did nothing.
White - did nothing.
Heaslip - decent, but Henderson was our best forward by a mile

Strauss went well today, threw well and was busy. Had some lovely tackles but actually looked very tired later on.

Henderson had one or two big shows and otherwise was very good, but watch Heaslips performance, probably the single biggest reason Wales didn't get one or two more scores. Nothing between them mind, just my 2c.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Not that it should have effected our performance but important to remember that Wales are (or should be) a few weeks ahead of us in terms of where they need to be. We have the luxury, if you want to call it that, of having a few matches to ease us into the World Cup, they need to hit the ground running and as such you'd assume they're in a different place to us at the moment.

English Lurker

awec wrote: »

What do people think of the Henderson POC partnership?

While Henderson had a great game, there were times when I could see him ambling around almost as if he didn't know where he was meant to be, a constant half-phase behind play. When he's there, he's awesome, and he was more there than in any other start in an Irish jersey, but I can understand Schmidt's reluctance to overtrust him at times.

Still had a really good game. I'd like to see him and POC given this, the more gametime he's given the less he'll look like an ambling lad, but can fully understand why Schmidt would go with Toner and keep Henderson for impact. Just think Henderson would grow and become a vitally important weapon over the whole 80.

Buer

For the record, Earls was due to play the 80 and Fitz to come off. Felix Jones was announced as replacing Fitz but Earls went down so Fitz had to stay on.

.ak

Buer wrote: »

For the record, Earls was due to play the 80 and Fitz to come off. Felix Jones was announced as replacing Fitz but Earls went down so Fitz had to stay on.

That sounds like fitz was due to go on the plane. If he misses it due to injury he'll be in a dark place....

Tox56

molloyjh wrote: »

They very clearly said the clear out was around the neck. And it wasn't. I've no issue with that really. It was an honest mistake, but you can't use it as a reason people are being unreasonable in how they see the game.

Joubert didn't call it and I dont think he had any intention to until the TJ intervened

Buer

.ak wrote: »

That sounds like fitz was due to go on the plane. If he misses it due to injury he'll be in a dark place....

That's generally how I would see it. You only give someone the 80 if the need the game time or the coach needs to see more of you.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

The inconsistencies of refs at breakdowns annoys me in general. I'm not referring specifically to Joubert today, but speaking generally.

Sometimes a ref will blow up if a player has his hands on the ball for a second. Sometimes they'll wait until the player has their hands on it for 5 or more seconds. Sometimes they'll give a defensive penalty if a player gets his hands on the ball and is then knocked over, other times they'll give an attacking penalty.

Aha, this is another massive bugbear of mine.

It doesn't matter how long the player has his hands on the ball. The penalty has nothing to do with the defending player or where his hands are. It's completely irrelevant. The penalty is for the attacking player not releasing the ball. What's more important is how long since the tackle was completed and is the attacking player really still holding onto the ball or has he released.

Often the crowd will assume their team should get a penalty if any defensive player comes in as a jackal and is there for a decent amount of time. Sometimes the attacking player has released the ball and so the ref plays on. The crowd always goes nuts! People have reduced the penalty down to just being "if the defensive player is there and on his feet and doesn't get cleared out in time then it should be a penalty." It's understandable this has been done from a spectators perspective because in the stands you can't really tell if the attacking player has released, which is why the referee isn't in the stands.

Much worse than this though is when referees apply the same reductive reasoning, which happens at all levels! Joubert is guilty of this actually although I can't say I saw it today.

phog

Rusty, poor discipline and poor execution and we could still have win the game.

Thought the officials were poor too but they didn't cause us to be so poor.

While DK had a good game has he really out performed any of the contenders, I'm not so sure he did. I think people are looking at the most recent game and think he's good he travels or he's poor he's off the plane.

Sexton, Murray and POC were well below par today but are shoe ins and will be much better next time around.

I think we could see Henderson getting the No4 jersey in a few games yet. He was outstanding, best Irish player out there.

Hope the guys who picked up injuries will be okay.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Schmidt not too happy with some of the decisions either, it seems. The one against PoC in particular, made a comment about the call being made by a man standing 50m away. I noticed Joubert twice go to his line judge and then the TMO for quite clear decisions that he was standing right in front of.

Gatland has said "I don't think Ireland play a lot of rugby."

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Aha, this is another massive bugbear of mine.

It doesn't matter how long the player has his hands on the ball. The penalty has nothing to do with the defending player or where his hands are. It's completely irrelevant. The penalty is for the attacking player not releasing the ball. What's more important is how long since the tackle was completed and is the attacking player really still holding onto the ball or has he released.

Often the crowd will assume their team should get a penalty if any defensive player comes in as a jackal and is there for a decent amount of time. Sometimes the attacking player has released the ball and so the ref plays on. The crowd always goes nuts! People have reduced the penalty down to just being "if the defensive player is there and on his feet and doesn't get cleared out in time then it should be a penalty." It's understandable this has been done from a spectators perspective because in the stands you can't really tell if the attacking player has released, which is why the referee isn't in the stands.

Much worse than this though is when referees apply the same reductive reasoning, which happens at all levels! Joubert is guilty of this actually although I can't say I saw it today.

If a player has his hands on the ball and the tackled player doesn't release sometimes a ref blows straight away. Sometimes if the player doesn't release the ref will wait a while.

This is inconsistency. There is no other way to fluff it up.

aimee1

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Gatland has said "I don't think Ireland play a lot of rugby."

and wales played so much rugby that their only try came from a 13 man maul

Buer

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Schmidt not too happy with some of the decisions either, it seems. The one against PoC in particular, made a comment about the call being made by a man standing 50m away. I noticed Joubert twice go to his line judge and then the TMO for quite clear decisions that he was standing right in front of.

He can have no complaints about that one. Don't know why he'd comment on it.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Buer wrote: »

He can have no complaints about that one. Don't know why he'd comment on it.

Well, as some people have pointed out, it's questionable whether it was a penalty in the first place, Joubert didn't call it himself and only went back to look at it after the lines judge flagged it.

awec

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Well, as some people have pointed out, it's questionable whether it was a penalty in the first place, Joubert didn't call it himself and only went back to look at it after the lines judge flagged it.

It was probably a penalty, just not for the reason that Joubert or his touch judge gave it for.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

If a player has his hands on the ball and the tackled player doesn't release sometimes a ref blows straight away. Sometimes if the player doesn't release the ref will wait a while.

Yes well it's never going to be the exact same amount of time.

awec wrote: »

This is inconsistency. There is no other way to fluff it up. To say the time the player has his hands on the ball to pull it away is irrelevant is nonsense.

Ah it's nonsense? I suppose you'll have to point me to the law for that because you're fabricating that one. The penalty has nothing to do with the defender, the penalty is for a tackled player holding onto the ball, there doesn't even have to be a defender present.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

awec wrote: »

It was probably a penalty, just not for the reason that Joubert or his touch judge gave it for.

Yes, I should have said it was questionable what the penalty was for.

I would take Schmidt's comments there as more of a dig at Joubert than the actual decision. As I said there were a number of other calls he didn't seem confident in making even though he was standing right beside them.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yes well it's never going to be the exact same amount of time.



Ah it's nonsense? I suppose you'll have to point me to the law for that because you're fabricating that one. The penalty has nothing to do with the defender, the penalty is for a tackled player holding onto the ball, there doesn't even have to be a defender present.

Not an exact amount of time but it fluctuates wildly.

I think you're just missing my point. You're saying that the penalty is for the defender holding on to the ball and I am not disputing that. That's a red herring here. I am saying that referees have wildly different interpretations, even within the same game, of how long a player can hold on to the ball. You are saying it doesn't matter how long they hold on to it, but it obviously matters seeing as it's stupid to ping someone for holding on to it for a second in one breakdown and then let someone else hold onto it for 5 seconds in the next.

kuang1

awec wrote: »

IMO Jordi Murphy was completely anonymous. The only time he became noticeable was when Wales sauntered down his channel in the first half and he was somewhere else.

Have to say I wasn't that impressed with Jackson when he came on. At least two bad decisions, no idea what he was thinking for the drop goal. Was far enough out and pretty wide, would have had to be a smasher.

The two wingers did alright (DK more so), but IMO Bowe and Trimble are still our best two wingers and would be my 14 and 11 (in that order) for the big games.

I suspect that Joe's first choices are Trimble and Dave K!

Watch this space!

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

Not an exact amount of time but it fluctuates wildly.

I think you're just missing my point. You're saying that the penalty is for the defender holding on to the ball and I am not disputing that. I am saying that referees have wildly different interpretations, even within the same game, of how long a player can hold on to the ball. You are saying it doesn't matter how long they hold on to it, but it obviously matters seeing as it's stupid to ping someone for holding on to it for a second in one breakdown and then let someone else hold onto it for 5 seconds in the next.

There are a ton of other factors at play though. If you just said a player has 5 seconds to release after any tackle then that would be far worse.

There are other factors like has the tackler disrupted the tackled player and should he be allowed more time due to that. Is the holding having an impact on the game. Is he even holding onto the ball or has he released? The jackler is aiming to push the ball back into the tackled players body remember to invite the penalty, maybe the ref is seeing the jackler isn't actually making an attempt to win the ball and he's actually just trying to buy a penalty that way etc.

Some refs will play it slow, others will play it long. That's fine, so long as the refs are communication with the players. Remember the refs talk to players and coaches before the teams even get out onto the field and fans are not privy to those discussions.

I agree with you to some extent. I just find I'm far more cynical about fans interpretations of referees than referees interpretations of breakdowns.

irishbucsfan

kuang1 wrote: »

I suspect that Joe's first choices are Trimble and Dave K!

Watch this space!

Do you think he'd pick Dave Kearney on the left wing?

I think it's certainly possible. I think Zebo could be the starter on the left wing. Or Maybe Trimble and Bowe as they've played for Ulster, with Zebo on the bench. So many possibilities.

awec

Another outstandingly stupid call from the TMO was the Tipuric rip of the ball from the SOB nearly try.

Lost forward my arse.

kuang1

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Do you think he'd pick Dave Kearney on the left wing?

I think it's certainly possible. I think Zebo could be the starter on the left wing. Or Maybe Trimble and Bowe as they've played for Ulster, with Zebo on the bench. So many possibilities.

It's funny but I don't think Zebo rates too highly on Joe's chart.
Bowe's form has been tepid at best for nearly a full season now...his credit in the bank has been used up I fear.

In Joe's ideal world, DK at 14, Trimble at 11!!!
(I should add I'm mainly making this statement based on my gut more than anything else...)

AdamD

How can people say the ref didn't have an effect on the game? 4/5 incorrect penalty decisions in a 1 score game is rpretty damn important. Tipuric was a joke

So Luke Fitz should be fine, was glut not abdomen and primarily just cramp.

Could be back 2 - 3 days but maybe a bit longer.

Earls also fine. No one else mentioned.

total former

Ah lads. Let's have some grace in defeat. The better team won.

.ak

That's better news than expected. Was earls actually knocked out tho?