RWC 2019 Ireland v Japan Match Thread: Group A - Sat 28th Sep 08:15 Shizuoka

Cork Boy 53

simongurnick wrote: »

I disagree. It shows what throwing caution to the wind does. The fact we lost the match proves my point. We had to take a risk. Hanging on to a losing bonus point against japan is an embarrassment

And a greater embarrassment would have been throwing away that bonus point. Imagine the comments that would have been made if that had happened. If it had been a knockout match then it would have been worth the risk but not in a pool match. From early in the second half it was more and more obvious there was always only going to be one winning team and they were not wearing green.

FrancieBrady

simongurnick wrote: »

Proof will be in the pudding i suppose. I just thought it summed up the mentality of the day...play it safe.

It was the last play of the game. The most we could achieve was a draw. It's a tournament, not the knockout stage.

Play the percentages, take the guaranteed point, and disregard the 'heroes on the sofa' back home.

prawnsambo

simongurnick wrote: »

I'd agree with the first half assessment. The heat shouldn't be an issue though. It's no surprise japan is humid. That's poor preparation.

It takes weeks to prepare properly for that. And you have to have that weather consistently which isn't always the case. Even the Japanese lock could barely walk off the pitch when subbed. And I've never seen Cian Healy subbed off at 45 minutes and pouring bottles of water over his head. It was the one thing I was concerned about before the match. There was a reason the Japanese were playing us there, they knew it would be an advantage.

simongurnick

Portsalon wrote: »

Probability of going the length of the pitch and scoring a try = tiny.

Benefit of going the length of the pitch, scoring a try and not converting it = zilch.

Probability of going the length of the pitch and scoring a try and converting it = smaller than tiny.

Benefit of going the length of the pitch, scoring a try and converting it = drawn game, so one additional point on the table.

Risk of being intercepted or giving away a penalty to the Japs in our attempt to score an unlikely converted try = tiny but possible.

Risk of someone being injured in a fruitless attempt to score an unlikely try = not insignificant.

Sensible option - kick the ball out.


Remember how England fukced up in the last RWC when they went for the win instead of settling for a draw against Wales?

Fair points mate for sure. But the sensible option doesnt always win the day. Our two tries came from high risk plays because we had the benefit of an advantage which allowed carty to take the risk. I'd prefer to see the team die on their swords than meekly limp away. Difference of opinion i suppose.

prawnsambo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It was the last play of the game. The most we could achieve was a draw. It's a tournament, not the knockout stage.

Play the percentages, take the guaranteed point, and disregard the 'heroes on the sofa' back home.

Yeah. How many times have we seen teams take the suggested approach and shoot themselves in the foot? England at the last RWC comes to mind

FrancieBrady

simongurnick wrote: »

Fair points mate for sure. But the sensible option doesnt always win the day. Our two tries came from high risk plays because we had the benefit of an advantage which allowed carty to take the risk. I'd prefer to see the team die on their swords than meekly limp away. Difference of opinion i suppose.

We couldn't 'win the day'. At best we could draw, at worst we could have given away a penalty or coughed the ball back to them.

He did the smart thing not the rash thing.

Portsalon

simongurnick wrote: »

Fair points mate for sure. But the sensible option doesnt always win the day. Our two tries came from high risk plays because we had the benefit of an advantage which allowed carty to take the risk. I'd prefer to see the team die on their swords than meekly limp away. Difference of opinion i suppose.

But surely "advantage" means zero risk plays?

simongurnick

prawnsambo wrote: »

It takes weeks to prepare properly for that. And you have to have that weather consistently which isn't always the case. Even the Japanese lock could barely walk off the pitch when subbed. And I've never seen Cian Healy subbed off at 45 minutes and pouring bottles of water over his head. It was the one thing I was concerned about before the match. There was a reason the Japanese were playing us there, they knew it would be an advantage.

Not sure the japanese got to pick where their games were played, did they?

prawnsambo

simongurnick wrote: »

Not sure the japanese got to pick where their games were played, did they?

Absolutely. Host country privilege.

simongurnick

Portsalon wrote: »

But surely "advantage" means zero risk plays?

Right but if the advantage wasnt there we wouldnt have attempted the higher risk kick in the first place

simongurnick

prawnsambo wrote: »

Absolutely. Host country privilege.

Christ never knew that. Seems a bit much.

simongurnick

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It was the last play of the game. The most we could achieve was a draw. It's a tournament, not the knockout stage.

Play the percentages, take the guaranteed point, and disregard the 'heroes on the sofa' back home.

Sad day when we are clinging on to a losing bonus point against japan

Weepsie

simongurnick wrote: »

Not sure the japanese got to pick where their games were played, did they?

Were they not allowed pick the order of fixtures for this group as host nation? It definitely suited them to play Ireland after Ireland toughest game (on paper) after their easiest fixture and with 2 days extra rest.

Wouldn't be much of a stretch to allow them pick venues too

mfceiling

blinding wrote: »

Fortunately . I am entitled to my opinion .

Yeah but that's all you are giving. An opinion. A ridiculous one at that.

Cork Boy 53

prawnsambo wrote: »

Absolutely. Host country privilege.

I never realized that. That is completely different from the soccer World Cup, Euros etc. where the draw determines where the group matches are played.

alswearengen

New Zealand would never have kicked it out on minute 80 if down by 7, no matter who they were playing.

Ireland did against a tier 2 nation. It was gutless.

FrancieBrady

simongurnick wrote: »

Sad day when we are clinging on to a losing bonus point against japan

And a sadder day if we hadn't gotten that point.

Cork Boy 53

alswearengen wrote: »

New Zealand would never have kicked it out on minute 80 if down by 7, no matter who they were playing.

Ireland did against a tier 2 nation. It was gutless.

In your opinion. Many have called it as the correct tactical decision in the circumstances.

FrancieBrady

alswearengen wrote: »

New Zealand would never have kicked it out on minute 80 if down by 7, no matter who they were playing.

Ireland did against a tier 2 nation. It was gutless.

Even on a bad day, we HAVE to be the All Blacks.

pummice

I know it sound odd but I still think Ireland will top this group. I believe Scotland will beat Japan with their agressive physical brand of rugby, Japan dont have enough guile to beat two tier 1 sides

blinding

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And a sadder day if we hadn't gotten that point.

That Point could be very Important come the final reckoning of the Group .

Can you imagine if One Point was the difference between the possible end places of the Group .

Rockbeast2

I swear to Bod, if I read the word "gutless" used in reference to the Irish players, I will--

Feck it. I won't bother going further. Disgusting word and anyone that knows any of those players knows that the last thing they are is "gutless".

Cork Boy 53

pummice wrote: »

I know it sound odd but I still think Ireland will top this group. I believe Scotland will beat Japan with their agressive physical brand of rugby, Japan dont have enough guile to beat two tier 1 sides

They already have beaten two Tier 1 sides in World Cups. No reason they can`t do so for a third time against a poor Scotland team.

hahashake

Fantastic result for rugby, for this world cup and for pool A. Every point means that much more from now on.

Scotland vs Japan should be a cracker.

FrancieBrady

pummice wrote: »

I know it sound odd but I still think Ireland will top this group. I believe Scotland will beat Japan with their agressive physical brand of rugby, Japan dont have enough guile to beat two tier 1 sides

Quite possible. The Japanese have opened up the group, no doubt about that.

ErnestBorgnine

It was gutless alright, a draw was still acheivable.

Settling for a 7 point loss against Japan ffs

Ash.J.Williams

Where?

awec

Don't think Ireland made a decent line break the entire second half, and people think we'd go the length of the field and score a try? With absolutely no handling errors, unable to kick the ball and having to resource every single ruck to ensure possession and not give away penalties?

Delusional.

More Japanese points were more likely than more Irish points at that stage.

Ash.J.Williams

ErnestBorgnine wrote: »

It was gutless alright, a draw was still acheivable.

Settling for a 7 point loss against Japan ffs

Welcome to boards ...

ErnestBorgnine

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Welcome to boards ...

Thanks Ash, pleasure to be here.

simongurnick

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And a sadder day if we hadn't gotten that point.

Crazy talk. There is not an ounce of my being that is thinking "well, at least we grabbed a bonus point". We played terrible and were outdone by a team we should have stuffed by 20 pts and insult to injury we kick away the last possession.

Hugh_C

Wheety wrote: »

It was horrible timing but I don't think it's RTE's fault. Be a bit silly for every country to have their own cameras broadcasting live.

Correct. No fault of Rte’s

awec

simongurnick wrote: »

Crazy talk. There is not an ounce of my being that is thinking "well, at least we grabbed a bonus point". We played terrible and were outdone by a team we should have stuffed by 20 pts and insult to injury we kick away the last possession.

You'd prefer to come away with no bonus point?

Because that was a far more likely outcome than Ireland scoring a try. I mean, how can you have watched the previous 80 minutes and thought Ireland would score a try from 100 metres out is beyond comprehension.

I suspect all those moaning about us kicking it out would be the same ones moaning if we'd played on and ended up with nil points.

simongurnick

awec wrote: »

Don't think Ireland made a decent line break the entire second half, and people think we'd go the length of the field and score a try? With absolutely no handling errors, unable to kick the ball and having to resource every single ruck to ensure possession and not give away penalties?

Delusional.

More Japanese points were more likely than more Irish points at that stage.

I think i am right in saying that with the new rules if we got a penalty after 80 minutes we would be allowed to take the lineout?
If so it's not that delusional to think we could have got up to our 22, reward a penalty and then work off a line out in their half. Stranger things have happened. Like japan beating ireland for starters

Rockbeast2

There was only one team going to score more points in that game and SPOILER ALERT it was not Ireland.

If that game had gone on ten more minutes, we's have shipped another two tries to them.

Securing the bonus point was absolutely the correct thing to do.

Heres Johnny

The players are not gutless. I played all my life from good underage teams to AIL rugby for 12 years and then another 6 at leinster junior. I could count on one hand the number of gutless players I played with and they didn't last long on any of my teams, never mind become professional and make the Irish team. It's a tough sport and we were beaten by a better team today. I'm not happy about it but can't say the players didn't try. They were poor, yes, but not gutless.

awec

simongurnick wrote: »

I think i am right in saying that with the new rules if we got a penalty after 80 minutes we would be allowed to take the lineout?
If so it's not that delusional to think we could have got up to our 22, reward a penalty and then work off a line out in their half. Stranger things have happened. Like japan beating ireland for starters

It really is delusional.

A penalty on our 22, if we even got there in the first place, would not be that big a deal. We're past 80 minutes, so Carbery would have to absolutely guarantee the ball goes into touch, which means no risk can be taken with distance. If we're really, really lucky we end up with a lineout on their 22, but far more likely we end up with one nearer the 10m line, and we still have an absolute mile to go. And now Japan are in their own half, so they don't commit to rucks any more, they don't go for the turnover, and they just fan out and let Ireland hit brick walls all day until someone drops the ball.

I can understand this mentality if we'd been punching holes all day, making yards with our carries, but we hadn't been. We were grunting away with no return, Japan were controlling the gain line. I could also understand it if we were just 2 points behind, and a penalty wins it for us. But we were 7 behind, and gaining a point was not worth the risk of losing one.

Right decision was made. We were well beaten, just take your medicine, put it out and be grateful we get something for a very bad day at the office.

Brian017

Hugh_C wrote: »

Correct. No fault of Rte’s

I don't think it happened on eir.. I've seen a clip of it and you could see the interception. There was no RWC swoosh

FrancieBrady

simongurnick wrote: »

I think i am right in saying that with the new rules if we got a penalty after 80 minutes we would be allowed to take the lineout?
If so it's not that delusional to think we could have got up to our 22, reward a penalty and then work off a line out in their half. Stranger things have happened. Like japan beating ireland for starters

Other than assuaging the sense of 'shame' that we aren't the AB's and are 'gutless' what would it have achieved?

One point if it went well and the risk of it going horribly wrong on a day when all hell was going wrong.

Take the SMART option every time.

prawnsambo

awec wrote: »

Don't think Ireland made a decent line break the entire second half, and people think we'd go the length of the field and score a try? With absolutely no handling errors, unable to kick the ball and having to resource every single ruck to ensure possession and not give away penalties?

Delusional.

More Japanese points were more likely than more Irish points at that stage.

It's probably human nature, but it annoys me when people go after decisions at the end of the game as if they were the making or breaking of the result. As far as I'm concerned, the game was lost in the first half and stupid decisions like kicking away a penalty are what really boil my p1ss. And to a lesser extent the stupid penalties given away.

simongurnick

awec wrote: »

You'd prefer to come away with no bonus point?

Because that was a far more likely outcome than Ireland scoring a try. I mean, how can you have watched the previous 80 minutes and thought Ireland would score a try from 100 metres out is beyond comprehension.

I suspect all those moaning about us kicking it out would be the same ones moaning if we'd played on and ended up with nil points.

If we can't put it up to japan it doesnt matter who we face in the quarter s. So yeah, i couldnt give a toss about the bonus point. It was just the final example of an absolute piss poor display

ErnestBorgnine

Rockbeast2 wrote: »

There was only one team going to score more points in that game and SPOILER ALERT it was not Ireland.

If that game had gone on ten more minutes, we's have shipped another two tries to them.

Securing the bonus point was absolutely the correct thing to do.

What's an acceptable defeat to NZ in the Quarters? Should we aim for between 21-28 points??

Meakly surrendering to the likes of Japan, Jesus wept.

Brian017

Going for the draw would've given us an extra point and denied Japan 2 points. That's a 3 point swing, is there a scenario where that might have being beneficial to us?

simongurnick

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Other than assuaging the sense of 'shame' that we aren't the AB's and are 'gutless' what would it have achieved?

One point if it went well and the risk of it going horribly wrong on a day when all hell was going wrong.

Take the SMART option every time.

How do you know it wouldnt have helped the teams mentality? To come off the pitch thinking, hey, bad day at the office, we lost, but 5 minutes longer and we would have won. Instead the mentality is we played crap and quit at the end.

Rockbeast2

* Meekly

Is that you, Spewin'?

I know your game.

Didn't make the Junior Cup team again?

simongurnick

awec wrote: »

It really is delusional.

A penalty on our 22, if we even got there in the first place, would not be that big a deal. We're past 80 minutes, so Carbery would have to absolutely guarantee the ball goes into touch, which means no risk can be taken with distance. If we're really, really lucky we end up with a lineout on their 22, but far more likely we end up with one nearer the 10m line, and we still have an absolute mile to go. And now Japan are in their own half, so they don't commit to rucks any more, they don't go for the turnover, and they just fan out and let Ireland hit brick walls all day until someone drops the ball.

I can understand this mentality if we'd been punching holes all day, making yards with our carries, but we hadn't been. We were grunting away with no return, Japan were controlling the gain line. I could also understand it if we were just 2 points behind, and a penalty wins it for us. But we were 7 behind, and gaining a point was not worth the risk of losing one.

Right decision was made. We were well beaten, just take your medicine, put it out and be grateful we get something for a very bad day at the office.

So we were right to quit? Great mindset

Hugh_C

Happy4all wrote: »

All part of the plan to face the kiwis and not the saffas in the Q/F

😂😂

PTH2009

Hard to see us getting a bonus point against Samoa

ErnestBorgnine

Brian017 wrote: »

Going for the draw would've given us an extra point and denied Japan 2 points. That's a 3 point swing, is there a scenario where that might have being beneficial to us?

Depends on the result of the Japan-Scotland game but it may have been the difference between a QF with South Africa rather than New Zealand.

And once again failing to get beyond the last 8 on the world stage

ebbsy

Some random thoughts :

I couldn't believe Japan's tackling.

We were toast at half time. Subs needed to be made right then.

The rolling away foul...need to tidy that up.

Zebo anyone ???😂😂😂😂😂