Ireland v Waltzing Matilda, test 1 build up thread.

Buer

awec wrote: »

One thing I notice about us is if we don't score in the first few phases we aren't going to score. There was a prolonged period in the second half when we had possession but looked clueless as to how to unlock Australia. We revert to one out forwards, but Australia just ate it up. You felt a turnover was inevitable.

Keeping possession and opening teams up over multiple phases is how we play. The difference is we normally have Sexton directing things.

Tigerandahalf

A strange call for the try at the end. Surely the ref has to have the final call on awarding/disallowing a try based on help from the TMO.

Some very poor refereeing in the NZ France game too where 2 NZ players escaped sanction - yellow and red card offences.
The officiating needs to be tightened up.

Ireland once again shown up for having no attacking flair. We can't seem to hurt teams on the turnover like NZ, Oz and even France. Argentina can even do it.

I'd be worried that we will get knocked out early again in a world cup. Hard ground in Japan won't favour us and the attacking/flair teams will have the benefit of dry ground and probably a dry ball.

Schimdt gets a lot of praise but our backplay is terribly pedestrian. Perhaps it is down to a lack of talent/pace in our backline and not having the hand skills but there is no doubt that we could do with coaching input there - perhaps Lancaster should be brought in, given he is the system already.

ScissorPaperRock

Didn't see the final possession stats, but we certainly didn't have the hallmark possession levels today.

Buer

Lancaster is a former forward. He isn't a backs coach and there's no hope he'll be taking any backs coaching ahead of Joe Schmidt.

Tigerandahalf

Buer wrote: »

Lancaster is a former forward. He isn't a backs coach and there's no hope he'll be taking any backs coaching ahead of Joe Schmidt.

Isn't he the backs coach at Leinster no?

Buer

Whilst the run is over, I thought James Ryan was superb again. The bloke just keeps on delivering. 6'8" and breaks/offloads like an openside.

Only Hooper had more tackles than him today. He has really come on in the maul too. Himself and Henderson should be our engine room for the next 6 years.

Buer

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

Buer wrote: »

Lancaster is a former forward. He isn't a backs coach and there's no hope he'll be taking any backs coaching ahead of Joe Schmidt.

Isn't he the backs coach at Leinster no?

Nope. Dempsey. He is overall head coach so obviously has a heavy input into the overall approach and plan but he has never been a backs coach.

irishbucsfan

Buer wrote: »

Nope. Dempsey. He is overall head coach so obviously has a heavy input into the overall approach and plan but he has never been a backs coach.

"Senior coach"

Tigerandahalf

The fact that Dempsey headed off I get the feeling he was demoted.

kuang1

Maybe it's the sunshine, but that's the most acceptable defeat I've ever experienced.

Richard Hillman

Penalty right under the posts and we kick for goal. That's the difference between a team that backs itself and a team that just wants to stay in a game. The Irish players and coaches can big themselves up all they want but the reality is, when it comes down to it, they believe in themselves as a dominant force in world rugby

Buer

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Buer wrote: »

Nope. Dempsey. He is overall head coach so obviously has a heavy input into the overall approach and plan but he has never been a backs coach.

"Senior coach"

Shut up.

Deusexmachina

errlloyd wrote: »

This is ridiculously reactionary and ott.

They did not destroy us in the scrum, they destroyed us in one scrum. Otherwise there were no scrum penalties at all and hardly any resets. They didn't destroy us at the breakdown, we had 95 percent ruck success and they had 97, they beat us there. But that's fine.

We had more offloads, clean breaks, defenders beaten, we destroyed them in the lineout.

They best us today, sure. But the margins were very fine. Murray puts a kick the wrong side the corner flag barely. Stockcube slices a Chip, Folou freak saves Earls from one. Henshaw puts a grubber into touch that he wanted to stay. Larmour spills a pick up, and an intercept. CJ rolls when he didn't need to. Someone knocks the ball on before marmion.

They won today, but our seconds created probably 6 or 7 try scoring chances in that game. Against England we crested we three chances and scored them all.

That's rugby.

It is not 'reactionary' (look it up).
The margins were not very fine. Australia were better than Ireland in almost every facet of the game today.
Your reasoning boils down to 'we might have won the match but for the fact that they scored more points than us'.

joseywhales

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Penalty right under the posts and we kick for goal. That's the difference between a team that backs itself and a team that just wants to stay in a game. The  Irish players and coaches can big themselves up all they want but the reality is, when it comes down to it, they believe in themselves as a dominant force in world rugby

So their confidence is justified because they kicked for goal? I am confused. We had plenty of chances to win the game.

Spudmonkey

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Penalty right under the posts and we kick for goal. That's the difference between a team that backs itself and a team that just wants to stay in a game. The Irish players and coaches can big themselves up all they want but the reality is, when it comes down to it, they believe in themselves as a dominant force in world rugby

That penalty was to get them into the lead and was the correct decision all day long.
If I recall Australia did the exact same several minutes later but I presume that was the right thing to do seen as they won?!

mfceiling

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Penalty right under the posts and we kick for goal. That's the difference between a team that backs itself and a team that just wants to stay in a game. The Irish players and coaches can big themselves up all they want but the reality is, when it comes down to it, they believe in themselves as a dominant force in world rugby

I always enjoy your negativity after an Ireland loss or a poor performance.

joseywhales

It sometimes feels like people are willing wait 12 games for a loss to criticize the team.

Buer

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Penalty right under the posts and we kick for goal. That's the difference between a team that backs itself and a team that just wants to stay in a game. The Irish players and coaches can big themselves up all they want but the reality is, when it comes down to it, they believe in themselves as a dominant force in world rugby

Australia, the most cocksure sporting nation on the planet, did exactly the same thing with 10 minutes left. It wasn't even a question of having to make a choice. One score game, well into the second half, chance to go in front, you go for the posts.

Henry Ford III

Kearney was awful at times.

Minderbinder

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Penalty right under the posts and we kick for goal. That's the difference between a team that backs itself and a team that just wants to stay in a game. The  Irish players and coaches can big themselves up all they want but the reality is, when it comes down to it, they believe in themselves as a dominant force in world rugby

Two penalties under the posts today in the first half. One at 0-3 and one at 3-3. Don't think there's a team in world rugby who would have done differently in the same situation away in Australia.

Christy42

Deusexmachina wrote: »

errlloyd wrote: »

This is ridiculously reactionary and ott.

They did not destroy us in the scrum, they destroyed us in one scrum. Otherwise there were no scrum penalties at all and hardly any resets. They didn't destroy us at the breakdown, we had 95 percent ruck success and they had 97, they beat us there. But that's fine.

We had more offloads, clean breaks, defenders beaten, we destroyed them in the lineout.

They best us today, sure. But the margins were very fine. Murray puts a kick the wrong side the corner flag barely. Stockcube slices a Chip, Folou freak saves Earls from one. Henshaw puts a grubber into touch that he wanted to stay. Larmour spills a pick up, and an intercept. CJ rolls when he didn't need to. Someone knocks the ball on before marmion.

They won today, but our seconds created probably 6 or 7 try scoring chances in that game. Against England we crested we three chances and scored them all.

That's rugby.

It is not 'reactionary' (look it up).
The margins were not very fine. Australia were better than Ireland in almost every facet of the game today.
Your reasoning boils down to 'we might have won the match but for the fact that they scored more points than us'.

How do you figure. We had plenty of half chances. Stander was a big one. Carbery's missed kick. We dominated possession and territory.

Certainly we were not as good in attack and we missed Best and Leavy on the deck. There were also several big refereeing decisions that went against us. Certainly we were lacking in certain facets and off the pace a bit but it was absolutely a close game.

The maul and scrum were big worries for me today as I expected them to go better.

Buer

Why would the scrum be a worry? It wsd almost completely even. We lost one scrum in the match which was a dubious call.

Australia have two monsters locking out their scrum. They don't get a nudge on generally but teams struggle to shove them about.

Clegg

joseywhales wrote: »

It sometimes feels like people are willing wait 12 games for a loss to criticize the team.

It's been like this for years.

There's a minority that love sticking the boot in. They've been very quiet for the last year.

Richard Hillman

joseywhales wrote: »

So their confidence is justified because they kicked for goal? I am confused. We had plenty of chances to win the game.

My apologies, a typo. Was meant to say that they don't believe in themselves as a dominant force

martingriff

joseywhales wrote: »

It sometimes feels like people are willing wait 12 games for a loss to criticize the team.

There is nothing wrong with been critical after a loss regardless if you have won 1, 12 or 20. Now been OTT and predicting doom and gloom I agree with you it silly but if they were mistakes it's right to point it out. I was not sure we would win today as I thought the team would be tired and have less energy due to how long they were in Australua

joseywhales

martingriff wrote: »

joseywhales wrote: »

It sometimes feels like people are willing wait 12 games for a loss to criticize the team.

There is nothing wrong with been critical after a loss regardless if you have won 1, 12 or 20. Now been OTT and predicting doom and gloom I agree with you it silly but if they were mistakes it's right to point it out. I was not sure we would win today as I thought the team would be tired and have less energy due to how long they were in Australua

So generally I was dissapointment that we couldn't grind it out playing poorly because there is no doubt we will have to beat a team playing better than us at some point in a wc. Like our basics should be 100% , even under intense pressure and fatigued. That's in our control.

MJohnston

Richard Hillman wrote: »

joseywhales wrote: »

So their confidence is justified because they kicked for goal? I am confused. We had plenty of chances to win the game.

My apologies, a typo. Was meant to say that they don't believe in themselves as a dominant force

Remarkably stupid comment - dominance is about winning. You don't win if you're arrogantly going for tries when you're 2 points behind. Any team would take the 3, anyone who says otherwise is a giant spoofer.

errlloyd

Deusexmachina wrote: »

It is not 'reactionary' (look it up).
The margins were not very fine. Australia were better than Ireland in almost every facet of the game today.
Your reasoning boils down to 'we might have won the match but for the fact that they scored more points than us'.

We had more possession, more territory, more clean breaks, more defenders beaten, we ran more yards, we won way way more lineouts. We lost one scrum, and gave away one penalty more than they did.

Yes we lost on the scoreboard, yes we made horrific errors, but if that match was replayed tomorrow I'd bet on us to win it 7 times out of 10.

Weepsie

MJohnston wrote: »

Remarkably stupid comment - dominance is about winning. You don't win if you're arrogantly going for tries when you're 2 points behind. Any team would take the 3, anyone who says otherwise is a giant spoofer.

Or marginally infront - See England RWC 15

clsmooth

Thoughts on Henshaw’s beard? I quite like it, I mean it’s nothing on D’Arcys 2014 version, but none the less quite impressive

LuckyLloyd

kuang1 wrote: »

Maybe it's the sunshine, but that's the most acceptable defeat I've ever experienced.

It’s not acceptable. Either we’re intent on being a team capable of challenging for a World Cup or we’re not. Games like today are why Southern Hemisphere teams *know* they can beat us when it matters in a World Cup.

LuckyLloyd

Clegg wrote: »

It's been like this for years.

There's a minority that love sticking the boot in. They've been very quiet for the last year.

Meh

Some of us realise this is the greatest abundance of talent we’ve ever had in Irish Rugby and arguably the cleanest World Cup draw we’ve received. Our expectations are high, and it is perfectly normal to question the approach, performance and result today.

ScrubsfanChris

Think it's a good thing I had to head out straight after the game. Had a bit of time to come to terms with that performance insted of just rushing in here.

Dam that was frustrating. Even when we were down 11-9 I still felt confident he were going to win it.
Looking on the bright side, yes we lost but it was a bad team performance. We all know Ireland can play much better than this and will next week.

Ryan again was superb and I think CJ had his best game in green in a long while. Herring too with the spot on lineouts. Carbery was okay but he did look lost in attack and that missed 3 pointer was very poor. If Ringrose can start next week I think Henshaw will be dropped from the 22.

P.Walnuts

Some random thoughts

Scrum and maul concerning anyone else?

Also think we should have kicked more for territory, their hooker was struggling with his darts.

Ringrose needs to come back in outside Henshaw, who should really not play 13 again at international bar an absolute emergency.

Herring looked reliable and busy, a good showing imo.

Clegg

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Meh

Some of us realise this is the greatest abundance of talent we’ve ever had in Irish Rugby and arguably the cleanest World Cup draw we’ve received. Our expectations are high, and it is perfectly normal to question the approach, performance and result today.

That's not what I'm talking about. I thought the result and performance was poor and so have most.

But there's a number of posters who only come here to criticise the team when they lose. Never seen from any other time.

First Up

ScrubsfanChris wrote: »

Think it's a good thing I had to head out straight after the game. Had a bit of time to come to terms with that performance insted of just rushing in here.

Dam that was frustrating. Even when we were down 11-9 I still felt confident he were going to win it.
Looking on the bright side, yes we lost but it was a bad team performance. We all know Ireland can play much better than this and will next week.

Ryan again was superb and I think CJ had his best game in green in a long while. Herring too with the spot on lineouts. Carbery was okay but he did look lost in attack and that missed 3 pointer was very poor. If Ringrose can start next week I think Henshaw will be dropped from the 22.

If anyone is being dropped in midfield it should be Aki.

twinytwo

awec wrote: »

One thing I notice about us is if we don't score in the first few phases we aren't going to score. There was a prolonged period in the second half when we had possession but looked clueless as to how to unlock Australia. We revert to one out forwards, but Australia just ate it up. You felt a turnover was inevitable.

Its days like today you remember how good Drico was at destroying defences.

mangobob

kuang1 wrote: »

Maybe it's the sunshine, but that's the most acceptable defeat I've ever experienced.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It’s not acceptable. Either we’re intent on being a team capable of challenging for a World Cup or we’re not. Games like today are why Southern Hemisphere teams *know* they can beat us when it matters in a World Cup.

In fairness LL, you would be amazed at how benevolent you can feel even after a loss when the sky is blue, the sun is shining and you are half way down a bottle of wine.

I have gone from frustration, disappointment and pessimism to feeling it was a great learning experience, we'll be grand next week, I'm proud of the squad, I love this forum and the aussies are a great bunch of lads altogether...

BBDBB

mangobob wrote: »

In fairness LL, you would be amazed at how benevolent you can feel even after a loss when the sky is blue, the sun is shining and you are half way down a bottle of wine.

I have gone from frustration, disappointment and pessimism to feeling it was a great learning experience, we'll be grand next week, I'm proud of the squad, I love this forum and the aussies are a great bunch of lads altogether...

Speaking as a man 3/4 the way down a very acceptable bottle of old vine garnacha I agree, given the opposition and the selection I think this was genuinely a game to learn from, rather than the usual cliche. Oz were bloody good today, it was a tough game and there’s lots to be positive about from the performance.

razorblunt

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

In fairness if your knowledge doesn't even extend to knowing the lads name you're not exactly best placed to criticise.

Your knickers, untwist them.

irishbucsfan

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Meh

Some of us realise this is the greatest abundance of talent we’ve ever had in Irish Rugby and arguably the cleanest World Cup draw we’ve received. Our expectations are high, and it is perfectly normal to question the approach, performance and result today.

Funny that you only ever seem to be interested in talking about it when they lose!

Hippo

First Up wrote: »

If anyone is being dropped in midfield it should be Aki.

Absolutely. Henshaw at 12 and Ringrose at 13, you know, the combo that actually works.

irishman86

Hippo wrote: »

Absolutely. Henshaw at 12 and Ringrose at 13, you know, the combo that actually works.

Henshaw plays bad gets a free pass. Hmmmm
Aki has been our best centre since debut but should be dropped hmmm

irishman86

irishman86 wrote: »

Henshaw plays bad gets a free pass. Hmmmm
Aki has been our best centre since debut but should be dropped hmmm

I don't think Aki should be dropped, but Ringrose is our best centre. He'll be the common denominator in the first choice team with Aki and Henshaw rotating.

First Up

irishman86 wrote: »

Hippo wrote: »

Absolutely. Henshaw at 12 and Ringrose at 13, you know, the combo that actually works.

Henshaw plays bad gets a free pass. Hmmmm
Aki has been our best centre since debut but should be dropped hmmm

He was awful today. Looked like he hadn't played with any of those around him before.

Squatter

Christy42 wrote: »

This is a structural error in how the game is reffed. The entire point of the tmo is to have it on tape and make a decision on that. The call might have been right or wrong but I see no reason to not show it to the ref in either case.

Making bad calls happen. Saying I have video evidence I swear but I won't show it to you is asking for people to question the call.

Can you post a link to where the TMO said that?

Because I heard him tell the TV director to put up the view from "camera 7" which the director failed to do.

The TMO then assured the ref that he has an angle that clearly shows a knock-on, but once again the TV Director failed to put it up on screen.

Trying to blame the officials for the incompetence of the TV director is as immature as blaming Met Eireann when rain spoils your birthday bbq.

Squatter

Clegg wrote: »

there's a number of posters who only come here to criticise the team when they lose. Never seen from any other time.

But why would anyone bother to come on here and criticise the team after it has won? They'd only be be accused of being begrudgers and would get short shrift from other posters.

Clegg

Squatter wrote: »

But why would anyone bother to come on here and criticise the team after it has won? They'd only be be accused of being begrudgers and would get short shrift from other posters.

You're being obtuse.

There are posters who only post here when the team loses so they can slag them off. It's crazy to me.

Deusexmachina

Clegg wrote: »

You're being obtuse.

There are posters who only post here when the team loses so they can slag them off. It's crazy to me.

Time to grow up. You don’t have to defend the team. They are professional players.
I don’t see anyone slagging off the team. The team gets huge praise when they play well - no harm in some criticism when they don’t.
Do you think Joe just says ‘well done Lads’ ..

Tigerandahalf

Looking at Le Roux at FB for SA today I really think we are losing out by not having TOH in the day squad. A great stepper and pace but more importantly he is a great passer and would be a good playmaker off 2nd phase play on.

Kearney has another 16 months to the WC and is likely to lose more pace. He is very solid but offers little else.

None of our centres are great passers.
Ringrose still has questions about his defence and Henshaw for me has declined a lot over the last couple of years. He is very solid but offers little else. I think Bundee is better at 13. Truth is we are probably lacking a good pair of hands in there.

Most of the top teams will score off turnover ball but we don't seem to be capable of it. A lot of games we are grinding out a result.

I'd fancy Australia to kick on now. Their scrum was very solid today, which was their big weakness over recent years.