Ireland Team Talk X: The Long Hard Road to a Semi. MOD WARNING POSTS #1, #1474, #5707

sydthebeat

salmocab wrote: »

In fairness the two jumpers and one of the props don’t play regularly, it was as close to a scratch line out as you’d get at this level. It doesn’t mean any of them were terrible but they aren’t used to each other.

mike ruddock on RTE radio 1 after the game was making the point that, in his opinion, the first few lineout calls were wrong... in that they were "movement" calls with lots of moving parts, rather than "quick jump" calls where the goal is to get the catcher in the air in front of the defense..... mainly to get the timing right between the jumper and thrower, and to see what the defense is doing to counter.

But a lot of the blame would have to fall on Cronins shoulders as there were some complete overthrows... and as buer has said, being hooked on 47 mins... just before an attacking line out... was a sign the coaches though so too.

jm08

is_that_so wrote: »

I don't think you can use that excuse for a top level hooker. They should be able to adapt. What didn't help was others not playing well either.

I think you can as it takes a bit of time to get timing etc. right. Ireland's best ever linout was POC, DOC, Flannery and John Hayes lifting POC. Training together for years had an awful lot to do with why they were so good.

thebaz

I thought the back row was very poor , Murphy nowhere near the level for international rugby for an 8 - but question - I find the incosistency of POM form hard to comprehend - he can brilliant world class one game , and then very average for a run of games , anyone think this - in fairness he usually gets himself up for the big games ,

is_that_so

jm08 wrote: »

I think you can as it takes a bit of time to get timing etc. right. Ireland's best ever linout was POC, DOC, Flannery and John Hayes lifting POC. Training together for years had an awful lot to do with why they were so good.

Sure but if Cronin was so good why was yesterday his first ever 6N start? Don't agree with the time thing though, he's been around the squad for the best part of a decade. He wasn't fully to blame but he's the man throwing the ball.

stephen_n

thebaz wrote: »

I thought the back row was very poor , Murphy nowhere near the level for international rugby for an 8 - but question - I find the incosistency of POM form hard to comprehend - he can brilliant world class one game , and then very average for a run of games , anyone think this - in fairness he usually gets himself up for the big games ,

Since he played well yesterday and got the MOTM award yesterday, not sure what your point is? He was the best performer of our starting backrow yesterday.

Buer

sydthebeat wrote: »

mike ruddock on RTE radio 1 after the game was making the point that, in his opinion, the first few lineout calls were wrong... in that they were "movement" calls with lots of moving parts, rather than "quick jump" calls where the goal is to get the catcher in the air in front of the defense..... mainly to get the timing right between the jumper and thrower, and to see what the defense is doing to counter.

I'd strongly agree with that being the case on the first screw up which was massively influential when the pod was in the air and on the way down when the ball reached them. Although, having watched it a few times, I'm not sure if POM would have been able to take it even if he was at the top of his jump.

A few factors here. Jordi Murphy and Furlong were the lifters. Neither are big guys. That's taking a few inches off the lift straight away. Roux bales out of the line at the last moment to allow Furlong make it back. Furlong makes it there just in time. He got his man up in the air but I'm not sure how well gripped he was to be able to hold him up for that extra half second that we normally see. POM was straight up and down with no hang time at all. Even if Murphy was the main lifter, Furlong at the front adds that hold which allows a little bit of air time.

Lastly, were we just trying to be too bloody clever? Farrell and Aki were in that line out albeit at the tail. It appeared the last thing on our mind there was to keep it simple and straightforward.

When Scannell came on, the ball was straight to POM at 2 and secured. Unfortunately, Italy copped onto that pretty quickly. But if we had done that with our very first line out on the 5m line and had scored, the entire game changes very quickly.

salmocab

is_that_so wrote: »

Sure but if Cronin was so good why was yesterday his first ever 6N start? Don't agree with the time thing though, he's been around the squad for the best part of a decade. He wasn't fully to blame but he's the man throwing the ball.

But the other people in the line out aren’t around that long, the timing is with all 8. Cronin didn’t play great or anything but the whole thing didn’t function

thebaz

stephen_n wrote: »

Since he played well yesterday and got the MOTM award yesterday, not sure what your point is? He was the best performer of our starting backrow yesterday.

so you think the back row played well ?? - do not know how he got MOTM , the Italian 9 should have got that, I thought POM was very average for what he can do - thats my point

jm08

is_that_so wrote: »

Sure but if Cronin was so good why was yesterday his first ever 6N start? Don't agree with the time thing though, he's been around the squad for the best part of a decade. He wasn't fully to blame but he's the man throwing the ball.

Toner would have first of all settled the lineout by calling uncomplicated lineouts (on himself first of all) and let Cronin grow into the game (like what Ruddock suggested should have happened).

Cronin's confidence was probably shot and had to be taken off.

is_that_so

salmocab wrote: »

But the other people in the line out aren’t around that long, the timing is with all 8. Cronin didn’t play great or anything but the whole thing didn’t function

I think it was a collective mess but if you can't have faith in the number 2 it's a mess anyway.

is_that_so

jm08 wrote: »

Toner would have first of all settled the lineout by calling uncomplicated lineouts (on himself first of all) and let Cronin grow into the game (like what Ruddock suggested should have happened).


Cronin's nerves were probably shot and had to be taken off.

Yeah, the lineouts were a bit like a three cup scam and I don't think anyone knew where the ball was going at times.

stephen_n

thebaz wrote: »

so you think the back row played well ?? - do not know how he got MOTM , the Italian 9 should have got that, I thought POM was very average for what he can do - thats my point

Where did I say the backrow played well? I said he was the best performer, which he was. What was wrong with his game yesterday that makes you think he played so badly? What was average about his performance?

salmocab

is_that_so wrote: »

I think it was a collective mess but if you can't have faith in the number 2 it's a mess anyway.

Same can be said of your lifters and jumpers or indeed the guy making the call.

MarinersBlues

stephen_n wrote: »

From reading the Connacht thread, more so than watching them play, so very open to correction. Isn’t the Connacht lineout a constant sore point with the fans? Especially in the opposition 22?

Apparantly Connacht have the most successful lineout in the league.

There may be a bit of an unjustified narrative built up around one or two key moments, or there may be a bit of whiteline fever at key moments.

For my part I have been disappointed with McCartney's throwing.
The biggest issue is that Heff and Delahunt are both playing great stuff and as a result neither has asserted as first choice.

thebaz

stephen_n wrote: »

Where did I say the backrow played well? I said he was the best performer, which he was. What was wrong with his game yesterday that makes you think he played so badly? What was average about his performance?

his allround game was average , compared to the levels he can play at , I just think he lacks consistency of high level performances , to say last year against All Blacks and England where he was truly world class , and he was not that yesterday , just curious.

is_that_so

salmocab wrote: »

Same can be said of your lifters and jumpers or indeed the guy making the call.

It can be but number 2 is the guy with the ball in his hand. If he's not doing his part right the rest are irrelevant.

Buer

thebaz wrote: »

his allround game was average , compared to the levels he can play at , I just think he lacks consistency of high level performances , to say last year against All Blacks and England where he was truly world class , and he was not that yesterday , just curious.

His all round game was good yesterday. Himself, Dillane and Kilcoyne were the only ones approaching good performances up front.

He turned over a couple of balls, stole a line out and had very good linespeed in defence. He's never going to be the most prominent in the loose but he turned in a solid showing in the areas where he's expected to. I'm not sure what you wanted him to do when he's turning over ball on the deck and in the air as well as defending well?

stephen_n

thebaz wrote: »

his allround game was average , compared to the levels he can play at , I just think he lacks consistency of high level performances , to say last year against All Blacks and England where he was truly world class , and he was not that yesterday , just curious.

He was a total pest at the Italian breakdown yesterday, stole ball off one of their line outs and was busy in defense all day. I thought he was very good yesterday. I’d agree the Italian SH should have got MOTM though.

sydthebeat

sydthebeat wrote: »

mike ruddock on RTE radio 1 after the game was making the point that, in his opinion, the first few lineout calls were wrong... in that they were "movement" calls with lots of moving parts, rather than "quick jump" calls where the goal is to get the catcher in the air in front of the defense..... mainly to get the timing right between the jumper and thrower, and to see what the defense is doing to counter.

But a lot of the blame would have to fall on Cronins shoulders as there were some complete overthrows... and as buer has said, being hooked on 47 mins... just before an attacking line out... was a sign the coaches though so too.

I was just going to post that people should listen to Ruddocks newstalk pod where he points out it wasn’t Cronins fault. It was whoever called the line outs at the start, as you said the movement ones, that gave the Italians time to get up and disrupt. Yes there were some overthrows but the very first line out where Cronin was on the far side he was looking up and in to the sun, he has likely been blinded slightly or struggled to see the movement timing as a result.

Anyone who lays blame squarely on one players shoulders should reassess themselves. Cronin is a good player, it isn’t entirely his fault that the two boys behind him and one to his side are completely different to what he is used to coming on to play with or start with.

It is unfortunate that he is likely to be the fall guy for the set pieces yet again.

Zzippy

Deleted User wrote: »

I was just going to post that people should listen to Ruddocks newstalk pod where he points out it wasn’t Cronins fault. It was whoever called the line outs at the start, as you said the movement ones, that gave the Italians time to get up and disrupt. Yes there were some overthrows but the very first line out where Cronin was on the far side he was looking up and in to the sun, he has likely been blinded slightly or struggled to see the movement timing as a result.

Anyone who lays blame squarely on one players shoulders should reassess themselves. Cronin is a good player, it isn’t entirely his fault that the two boys behind him and one to his side are completely different to what he is used to coming on to play with or start with.

It is unfortunate that he is likely to be the fall guy for the set pieces yet again.

But no matter whether the Italians got up, our guys were up too but the ball was overthrown. The Italians didn't get their hands on those throws either until it was out the back of the lineout. Yes, possibly we should have called simpler moves, but the hooker has one basic thing to get right - throw it in well, and give your jumpers a chance. He didn't. There's no guarantee the jumper in a simpler lineout call would have got near the ball either.

stephen_n

Zzippy wrote: »

But no matter whether the Italians got up, our guys were up too but the ball was overthrown. The Italians didn't get their hands on those throws either until it was out the back of the lineout. Yes, possibly we should have called simpler moves, but the hooker has one basic thing to get right - throw it in well, and give your jumpers a chance. He didn't. There's no guarantee the jumper in a simpler lineout call would have got near the ball either.

Well considering the jumper was on his way down when the ball was overthrown, the calling is definitely in question on the first lineout.

Buer

stephen_n wrote: »

Well considering the jumper was on his way down when the ball was overthrown, the calling is definitely in question on the first lineout.

It is but I really don't think POM would have caught it even at the top of that jump. If he did, it would have been fingertip stuff.

stephen_n

Buer wrote: »

It is but I really don't think POM would have caught it even at the top of that jump. If he did, it would have been fingertip stuff.

Possibly so, seemed a bit high alright, but there was definitely more wrong with that lineout than just the throw.

Perifect

Cronin didn't have a good game, I think it was a bit of nerves. I think yesterday showed why I was saying that Roux is not what we need at this level. Hopefully, we give Beirne a go next game with Ryan and Henderson to come on. It really looks like hooker is a very weak spot for us now. Cronin is just an impact sub it appears, Best isn't at the level he once was, I'd like to see Scannell get a start v France. Again, our back play wasn't good enough, obviously handling errors don't help but we really need to work on building diversity and inventiveness.

Brewster

Perifect wrote: »

Cronin didn't have a good game, I think it was a bit of nerves. I think yesterday showed why I was saying that Roux is not what we need at this level. Hopefully, we give Beirne a go next game with Ryan and Henderson to come on. It really looks like hooker is a very weak spot for us now. Cronin is just an impact sub it appears, Best isn't at the level he once was, I'd like to see Scannell get a start v France. Again, our back play wasn't good enough, obviously handling errors don't help but we really need to work on building diversity and inventiveness.

Correct, Best isn’t at the level he once was, however, his level is still head and shoulders above the others. If fit, he plays against France and Wales. No question.

Perifect

Brewster wrote: »

Correct, Best isn’t at the level he once was, however, his level is still head and shoulders above the others. If fit, he plays against France and Wales. No question.

Remember that we're building for the world cup, especially since this championship is out of our reach. Best will be 37 then. Cronin got his audition yesterday and sadly he failed. Scannell deserves a go.

troyzer

France is probably our last chance to really get into form. It's a potentially soft fixture at home and Marmion, Ringrose, Henshaw, Beirne etc. should all be available for selection.

If we struggle against France then we're going to get battered in Cardiff and there are no meaningful fixtures after that.

Eod100

Just looking there, there's only 12 players with a better try record than Stockdale. Not even 23 yet, mad.

https://www.irishrugby.ie/ireland/statistics/

joseywhales

I'm suffering despair, not because of yesterdays away bonus point winning performance but because of the insane reactions and expectation of supporters.

It's like we never imagined there could possibly be a slump after an unprecedented run of consecutive victories.

There's no patience, they are still hanging in there and working through games, getting results despite the performance.

The form will return slowly and a couple of players are returning from injury (Henderson) that will help a lot.

To compare to '07 is laughable, we almost lost to georgia! We have just won two away games and we are in meltdown, lol

troyzer

joseywhales wrote: »

I'm suffering despair, not because of yesterdays away bonus point winning performance but because of the insane reactions and expectation of supporters.

It's like we never imagined there could possibly be a slump after an unprecedented run of consecutive victories.

There's no patience, they are still hanging in there and working through games, getting results despite the performance.

The form will return slowly and a couple of players are returning from injury (Henderson) that will help a lot.

To compare to '07 is laughable, we almost lost to georgia! We have just won two away games and we are in meltdown, lol

07 comparisons aside (which a former Ireland international wsa the first to make), Ireland's collapse in form has been shocking. Whatever about a dip in form and being off for the Six Nations but they look like a completely different team. Their strengths like the maul and outhalves have become weaknesses.

Eod100

troyzer wrote: »

07 comparisons aside (which a former Ireland international wsa the first to make), Ireland's collapse in form has been shocking. Whatever about a dip in form and being off for the Six Nations but they look like a completely different team. Their strengths like the maul and outhalves have become weaknesses.

Form can change pretty quickly. Agree it's worrying but just need to look at example of England finishing 5th last season and could win Championship this season. Hopefully we can turn it around for the RWC.

is_that_so

joseywhales wrote: »

I'm suffering despair, not because of yesterdays away bonus point winning performance but because of the insane reactions and expectation of supporters.

It's like we never imagined there could possibly be a slump after an unprecedented run of consecutive victories.

There's no patience, they are still hanging in there and working through games, getting results despite the performance.

The form will return slowly and a couple of players are returning from injury (Henderson) that will help a lot.

To compare to '07 is laughable, we almost lost to georgia! We have just won two away games and we are in meltdown, lol

It may do ,but there are concerns. Murray doesn't look right and Sexton is still in a post-injury phase. We can also expect other returning players to take time to get back into things. There's nothing wrong with questioning whether this form will be there for the RWC. Even if it does will player confidence?

It's not just about yesterday's game either although we learnt that there are some players who will not be making the final squad. From where we were this is quite the collapse and winning the last two games don't hide how poor we've been.

is_that_so

Eod100 wrote: »

Form can change pretty quickly. Agree it's worrying but just need to look at example of England finishing 5th last season and could win Championship this season. Hopefully we can turn it around for the RWC.

For individual players it can but much harder for a whole team. How many players can we say have played well for us in the 6N so far?

troyzer

Eod100 wrote: »

Form can change pretty quickly. Agree it's worrying but just need to look at example of England finishing 5th last season and could win Championship this season. Hopefully we can turn it around for the RWC.

It took a year for them to turn it around and there were a LOT of low lying fruit such as not being idiots thinking they could play one man rucks. Plus injuries had a big role to play for them.

We have a tougher mountain to climb and half the time.

Shefwedfan

Perifect wrote: »

Remember that we're building for the world cup, especially since this championship is out of our reach. Best will be 37 then. Cronin got his audition yesterday and sadly he failed. Scannell deserves a go.

Scannell didn't cover himself in glory either....


I think Roux was calling wrong. Did we lose a lineout with Henderson and Cronin on the pitch?

jacothelad

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Scannell didn't cover himself in glory either....


I think Roux was calling wrong. Did we lose a lineout with Henderson and Cronin on the pitch?

Surely irrespective of any individual call, if it fails, it is because of the way it was carried out, not the original call being at fault. A call is either in the play book or it isn't. There may be criticism of any call being the wrong choice at any time but it is up to the team to do it right.

It's a bit like saying, " If you want to get to there, you shouldn't start from here."

Zzippy

stephen_n wrote: »

Well considering the jumper was on his way down when the ball was overthrown, the calling is definitely in question on the first lineout.

stephen_n wrote: »

Possibly so, seemed a bit high alright, but there was definitely more wrong with that lineout than just the throw.

I think the ball was too high to be caught anyway. Also, it's the hooker who needs to read the move and know when to throw to reach the jumper at their peak. If Cronin threw too late that's on him. The lads can't stay up in the air for ever.
I'm sure there will be collective responsibility for the lineout malfunction, and maybe when the hooker was not throwing well we should have adjusted and simplified, so I'm sure Roux will shoulder some of the blame in the video review.

Buer

troyzer wrote: »

France is probably our last chance to really get into form. It's a potentially soft fixture at home and Marmion, Ringrose, Henshaw, Beirne etc. should all be available for selection.

If we struggle against France then we're going to get battered in Cardiff and there are no meaningful fixtures after that.

France will never be a soft fixture for us in the same manner that Wales will never be a soft fixture for England. They could be playing like drains and still spend 60 minutes absolutely battering us up and down the park, physically.

There will be no rotation or experimentation. If there is, it will be a panicky reaction and that would be very unlike Schmidt. Nor should there be a panicky reaction to a bonus point win away from home regardless of how many issues there were.

troyzer

Buer wrote: »

France will never be a soft fixture for us in the same manner that Wales will never be a soft fixture for England. They could be playing like drains and still spend 60 minutes absolutely battering us up and down the park, physically.

There will be no rotation or experimentation. If there is, it will be a panicky reaction and that would be very unlike Schmidt. Nor should there be a panicky reaction to a bonus point win away from home regardless of how many issues there were.

I'd get as many of our front liners in as possible but also yank Murray. Leave him on the bench maybe.

Buer

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Scannell didn't cover himself in glory either....


I think Roux was calling wrong. Did we lose a lineout with Henderson and Cronin on the pitch?

Henderson was the jumper who was overthrown for the first try.

Also, the final line out with Cronin on wasn't lost but Italy disrupted it and it bounced back down to Cronin.

thomond2006

There's only one man that can fix the lineout. You know it and I know it.

Squidgy Black

thomond2006 wrote: »

There's only one man that can fix the lineout. You know it and I know it.

Paul O'Connell?

Eod100

troyzer wrote: »

It took a year for them to turn it around and there were a LOT of low lying fruit such as not being idiots thinking they could play one man rucks. Plus injuries had a big role to play for them.

We have a tougher mountain to climb and half the time.

Yeah the short turn-around is a concern. Don't want to be using the RWC warm-up games to find form.

The one positive is that bar England game we have got results. Not pretty by any means and not sure those performances would cut it against France, nevermind Wales but hopefully with the 2 week break, we will be able to reassess and gel better.

Clegg

Leinster's injury update suggests that Ringrose might be back for the France game, but that Leavy won't take any part in the Six Nations. We're dying for creativity in midfield so having Ringrose back will benefit us hugely. Could we used Leavy's exemplary work at the breakdown buy it wasn't to be

Buer

thomond2006 wrote: »

There's only one man that can fix the lineout. You know it and I know it.

Do you really want to secure the line out just to concede a penalty at every scrum though?

Faugheen

stephen_n wrote: »

I think that Cronin’s running game is not as suited to starting. He exploits gaps in defenses that simply don’t exist at international level in the first 50 mins. He looked far more dangerous when he came back on towards the end.

Think we saw yesterday exactly how difficult and important lineout calling is. Our timing on jumps was suspicious all day, even with POM who is normally safe as houses to throw to. This could also be down to the new lifters. There’s many moving parts to a lineout but the hookers always cop the blame.

This. For one of our losses early on it was an absolutely terrible lift. I couldn't see if it was a mis-time on the jump or the lift but they didn't get him (I think it was POM or Jordi) up there.

jm08

thomond2006 wrote: »

There's only one man that can fix the lineout. You know it and I know it.

John Hayes?

thomond2006

Buer wrote: »

Do you really want to secure the line out just to concede a penalty at every scrum though?

2/10

troyzer

thomond2006 wrote: »

There's only one man that can fix the lineout. You know it and I know it.

The Stay Puft Marshmallow Man in Paris?

Buer

thomond2006 wrote: »

2/10

You're lashing out. That's ok.