2020 6 Nations - Ireland vs Scotland match thread

Shefwedfan

Heres Johnny wrote: »

We dominated for 20 mins. I thought Japan were further ahead of us on the day than the scoreline suggested. But they're genuinely a good team and beat us comfortably.

No they didn't.....


Anyway it was the WC and makes no difference now

Shefwedfan

reg114 wrote: »

Correction, I didn't agree with Farrell getting the job in the first place.

Wasn't 100% happy with it myself but its a small bit silly making a statement about his ability after 1 game and a win

JRant

sydthebeat wrote: »

At least one pen was for healy stepping out and not pushing straight.
Another was for not holding it up, but he was a tad unlucky as his elbow hit the ground milliseconds before fagerson.

That’s right, just after he complained about the head to head as well, if I remember correctly.
Second one should have been a reset, looked like they both lost their bind at the same time.

Podge_irl

Heres Johnny wrote: »

We dominated for 20 mins. I thought Japan were further ahead of us on the day than the scoreline suggested. But they're genuinely a good team and beat us comfortably.

They took the lead for the first time in the 59th minute and never got more than a score ahead. They neither “waltzed” past us not even “won comfortably”.

Anyway. Let’s see what happens next week - that will give us a better idea of where we stand. Losing Doris 3 minutes in will not have done much for the gameplan.

Granny15

I think Farrell has to change up selection next week. If he does he’ll have the support of the public and a get out of jail card. If he sticks with the old heads and we get beaten there’ll be calls that he wasn’t the right man to appoint. I personally like him the way he talks and motivates players. He got a few players playing above themselves on the weekend. But he needs to move things forward in order to get support.

lawrencesummers

Granny15 wrote: »

I think Farrell has to change up selection next week. If he does he’ll have the support of the public and a get out of jail card. If he sticks with the old heads and we get beaten there’ll be calls that he wasn’t the right man to appoint. I personally like him the way he talks and motivates players. He got a few players playing above themselves on the weekend. But he needs to move things forward in order to get support.

There will be changes, Henshaw and bungee will start because ringrose is out, and killer should start if he is fit. Outside of that it’s probably that same 6/7/8.

mfceiling

reg114 wrote: »

We rode our luck yesterday and were fortuitous to get past a poor Scottish team. A reminder that Japan waltzed past both these teams in the world cup, and on yesterday's showing Japan would do it again with ease.

If Japan can beat Ireland at their leisure then the reigning champions Wales will have no fear next weekend. I see no evidence whatsoever that Ireland will beat England who have trounced them the last twice. France away will be a very tough task for Ireland at the best of times nevermind now.

Sadly I'm predicting Ireland will finish 4th this year. My gut feeling is Farrell is out of his depth. Yes it's early to call it but evidence already exists. Replacing Murray on the hour was recognition that he was wrong to have started with the munster man. Generally this was a poor display from a man who knows these players inside out. Simply not good enough.

Using your "logic" that means we waltzed past Scotland yesterday?

Not bad for our 1st game under a new coach and the shuffling we had to do because of injuries.

Hotblack Desiato

Christy42 wrote: »

I should point out I feel they need to examine how to get more help to refs. The world cup was a disgrace all over the place. This is not helping. 30 players all trying to fool the ref and they have reached the point where the refs can't handle it.

Some, like playing it on the ground were mistakes and they will happen, but we at least need to see if we can give refs more help.

There was plenty of help available to this ref, he just refused to take it.

IIRC he consulted with his assistants twice during the game.

Didn't consult with the TMO once as far as I could make out.

Gross incompetence for a ref at this level and the Scots took full advantage.

Sportsmad5

bennyl10 wrote: »

And yet our back row was our best functioning unit all game.
Get rid of the provincial BS for a minute and look at the game today

Eddie Jones does not pick on club basis, if he did would he have picked 4 starting backs from the side that has won the least games in the premiership. One who scored 2 tries and a very important impact sub Ellis Genge

Granny15

Granny15 wrote: »

I think Farrell has to change up selection next week. If he does he’ll have the support of the public and a get out of jail card. If he sticks with the old heads and we get beaten there’ll be calls that he wasn’t the right man to appoint. I personally like him the way he talks and motivates players. He got a few players playing above themselves on the weekend. But he needs to move things forward in order to get support.

This begs the question; should a head coach care about the support of the public? He should be playing to win regardless

prawnsambo

Deleted User wrote: »

This begs the question; should a head coach care about the support of the public? He should be playing to win regardless

It's election season. Everyone's looking for votes.


Apparently.

pummice

Did anyone else think that the nutmeg pass to Hogg for his non-try was forward?

antietam1

Bundi trying to play beach volleyball while trying to receive one kick was comical.
It was two tries to one for us v Japan and a litany of errors such as Furlong staring at a ruck and us getting in front of our own maul when it looked promising.
Still making the same unforced errors Larmour stepping into touch etc.
Scots pals saying if they hadn't made those errors they would have won, I replied if we had made less mistakes would not have been close.

Riskymove

Podge_irl wrote: »

They took the lead for the first time in the 59th minute and never got more than a score ahead. They neither “waltzed” past us not even “won comfortably”.

10 of Japan's points came from 2 silly Irish mistakes

Best overthrowing led to 3pts

Stander and Hendo running into each other led to the try

that's all - 2 split second errors

Riskymove

antietam1 wrote: »

Scots pals saying if they hadn't made those errors they would have won, I replied if we had made less mistakes would not have been close.

we definitely made them look better than they are....the truth will out when they play teams in better form

antietam1

Riskymove wrote: »

10 of Japan's points came from 2 silly Irish mistakes

Best overthrowing led to 3pts

Stander and Hendo running into each other led to the try

that's all - 2 split second errors

Farrell?

jacothelad

ionadnapokot wrote: »

Lack of intensity and aggression was the most alarming thing.

Apart from CJ there was no hard edge about the pack.
Also should have sorted out Scotland at the rucks and made a point of it to Raynal.

Henderson needs a rocket and should be dropped.
I think he’s ideal for the bench. Toner starts.

http://https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1224251174779609089?s=19
Just highlights the inaccuracy of your post in regard to Henderson's performance.

ionadnapokot

Have you heard the joke about statistics, the drunken man and the lamp?

Some people use statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts—for support rather than illumination!

Please take this joke in spirit it is meant.

I direct you to my other post which specifically highlighted his ruck “involvements” around the 16 minute mark. Completely ineffectual.
I stand by my criticism of his performance yesterday particularly because we all know he had real physical ability - Explosiveness. I appreciate he can’t be running over people all of the time but he can sure as sh1t put more effort in than that passage of play. 16 minutes in?

I was in awe at Henderson’s performance in Paris in the 2018 6N. He is not putting in the same effort and work rate and I think it’s fair to ask for more from him. Allot more and I believe it’s fair and due criticism.

For the record:
This is not “lazy confirmation bias of provincial one eyes”

Btw The link still isn’t working

prawnsambo

This is the link.

Bridge93

He also had more lineout steals than anyone in any game this weekend apparently with 2

Buer

The number that jumps out there is Caelen Doris making the first three of opposition rucks 10 times in 4 minutes!

aloooof

Buer wrote: »

The number that jumps out there is Caelen Doris making the first three of opposition rucks 10 times in 4 minutes!

https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1224369597517828098

Buer

Not gonna lie, you had me in the first half.

I don't really believe any of the official 6N stats this year tbh, they seem off the wall.

prawnsambo

For those saying Cian Healy wasn't up to scratch at the weekend, the French apparently disagree.

Squidgy Black

prawnsambo wrote: »

For those saying Cian Healy wasn't up to scratch at the weekend, the French apparently disagree.

They also have George North in the team as a centre though, his debut at the position wasn't great......

errlloyd

Squidgy Black wrote: »

They also have George North in the team as a centre though, his debut at the position wasn't great......

I think GN has a rake of caps at 13?

Squidgy Black

errlloyd wrote: »

I think GN has a rake of caps at 13?

For Wales? Wasn't aware, but you learn something new every day!

prawnsambo

This is an interesting little snippet on Ireland's attacking shape against Scotland. Very low-tech video work though.

Ardillaun

The first scrum penalty surprised me. I thought it was going to be given our way. Has something happened to our front row or is this a one-off? Healy came in for attention from the ref. Does Best’s absence make any difference? In the second row, is Toner a better scrummager than Henderson? The scrum is not something I thought we’d have to worry about.

There was a telling moment from Raynal when he was challenged on a decision and replied in a rather off-hand way that he thought he was correct. Fortunately, he was.

prawnsambo

Probably should also be in the General Rugby thread, but as it arose from this match, it's likely more useful here. Jonathan Kaplan wrote an article for The Telegraph on the idea of a captain's challenge. Basically a team captain should have the right to question an on-field decision by the ref, once per half. A bit like the cricket challenge system. I think we're all aware of the incident in question and fair play to Kaplan for bringing it up. Obviously blows a lot of smoke up Reynal's ass to sweeten the pill, but we can put that aside for the minute. Do people think a captain's challenge is a good idea?

Mathieu Raynal had a decent game in Dublin but there was an incident in the first half that left Ireland a little upset – and also showcased why I believe rugby union should consider introducing a ‘captain’s challenge’ to appeal poor decisions.

It came in the 17th minute when Scottish No 8 Nick Haining carried the ball into contact. As he did so, Josh van der Flier ripped the ball from his grasp, with the ball landing on Haining’s back as he hit the turf. The Scot turned and placed the ball back on his side, which is illegal as he is not allowed to play the ball on the ground after a tackle.

Raynal did not see him do so and instead penalised Ireland for an infringement, awarding Scotland the penalty. If Ireland had been awarded the penalty then they would have had a kick at goal, but as it was Stuart Hogg kicked long to within 10 metres of the Irish line.

In the end it came to nothing but it could have been a huge moment in the game – potentially a 10-point swing if Scotland had scored a converted try from great field position – and one which was obviously an incorrect call after a single replay.

That is why I would like each captain to be given one challenge per half to contest on-field decisions made by the referee. It would work similarly to cricket’s challenge system, which I feel has worked well for a long time.

stephen_n

prawnsambo wrote: »

Probably should also be in the General Rugby thread, but as it arose from this match, it's likely more useful here. Jonathan Kaplan wrote an article for The Telegraph on the idea of a captain's challenge. Basically a team captain should have the right to question an on-field decision by the ref, once per half. A bit like the cricket challenge system. I think we're all aware of the incident in question and fair play to Kaplan for bringing it up. Obviously blows a lot of smoke up Reynal's ass to sweeten the pill, but we can put that aside for the minute. Do people think a captain's challenge is a good idea?

In that case Sexton challenged, Raynal wouldn’t listen waved him away and then apologized after seeing the replay. Still didn’t encourage him to use his TMO or AR’s for the rest of the game. Decent game my ass.

prawnsambo

stephen_n wrote: »

In that case Sexton challenged, Raynal wouldn’t listen waved him away and then apologized after seeing the replay. Still didn’t encourage him to use his TMO or AR’s for the rest of the game. Decent game my ass.

Yeah. The point being that if he had an official challenge, Raynal couldn't wave him away and would have had to go to the TMO. I think it would be a good idea personally. As Kaplan pointed out, that decision could have swung the game Scotland's way.

stephen_n

prawnsambo wrote: »

Yeah. The point being that if he had an official challenge, Raynal couldn't wave him away and would have had to go to the TMO. I think it would be a good idea personally. As Kaplan pointed out, that decision could have swung the game Scotland's way.

To me it’s side stepping the responsibility of the refereeing team. What if we used it there and then 5 minutes later there’s a more glaring and serious scenario? It’s just a way of covering up for poor officiating.

aloooof

stephen_n wrote: »

To me it’s side stepping the responsibility of the refereeing team. What if we used it there and then 5 minutes later there’s a more glaring and serious scenario? It’s just a way of covering up for poor officiating.

Totally agree with this; it was so obvious from one replay. It's a difficult game to referee at the best of times, but the refereeing team shouldn't be missing something that obvious.

I'm not familiar with how the challenge works in cricket; if the decision goes the way of the captain, is the challenge restored?

ionadnapokot

stephen_n wrote: »

To me it’s side stepping the responsibility of the refereeing team. What if we used it there and then 5 minutes later there’s a more glaring and serious scenario? It’s just a way of covering up for poor officiating.

prawnsambo wrote: »

Probably should also be in the General Rugby thread, but as it arose from this match, it's likely more useful here. Jonathan Kaplan wrote an article for The Telegraph on the idea of a captain's challenge. Basically a team captain should have the right to question an on-field decision by the ref, once per half. A bit like the cricket challenge system. I think we're all aware of the incident in question and fair play to Kaplan for bringing it up. Obviously blows a lot of smoke up Reynal's ass to sweeten the pill, but we can put that aside for the minute. Do people think a captain's challenge is a good idea?

Unfortunately I completely understand the need for something like this.

Refereeing in rugby is now almost an impossible job.
The TMOs are a great idea but ruin the flow of games more often than not.
And the constant talk from players to refs is far too prevalent. He doesn’t need to explain every bloody decision.

In fairness the NFL have something that could be tweaked for rugby.

e.g. the play challenge

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

Probably should also be in the General Rugby thread, but as it arose from this match, it's likely more useful here. Jonathan Kaplan wrote an article for The Telegraph on the idea of a captain's challenge. Basically a team captain should have the right to question an on-field decision by the ref, once per half. A bit like the cricket challenge system. I think we're all aware of the incident in question and fair play to Kaplan for bringing it up. Obviously blows a lot of smoke up Reynal's ass to sweeten the pill, but we can put that aside for the minute. Do people think a captain's challenge is a good idea?

Or use the TMO far, far more. If everyone can blatantly see something obvious and ref misses it, call it back. Everyone watching on TV saw that.

aloooof

Deleted User wrote: »

Or use the TMO far, far more. If everyone can blatantly see something obvious and ref misses it, call it back. Everyone watching on TV saw that.

Am I right in saying it's at the ref's discretion to go to the TMO, tho?

Thinking out loud here, but maybe instead of a "Captain's challenge" you could have a "TMO Challenge", where the ref then has to view something if the TMO brings it to his attention, used for the more obvious / egregious incidents.

Tho you'd hope that the communication between them would be good enough that it wouldn't be required...

Yeah_Right

aloooof wrote: »

Totally agree with this; it was so obvious from one replay. It's a difficult game to referee at the best of times, but the refereeing team shouldn't be missing something that obvious.

I'm not familiar with how the challenge works in cricket; if the decision goes the way of the captain, is the challenge restored?

I think in cricket that if they challenge and it goes against them that's it, no more challenges. But if they get it right, they get another one. It may vary depending on whether it is Twenty20, One Dayer or Test match.

I don't know if its needed in rugby. Maybe the TMO should be allowed to call something the same way a touch judge can. If they see a knock-on, offside etc. they tell the ref. Maybe the TMO could do the same.

jacothelad

Ardillaun wrote: »

The first scrum penalty surprised me. I thought it was going to be given our way. Has something happened to our front row or is this a one-off? Healy came in for attention from the ref. Does Best’s absence make any difference? In the second row, is Toner a better scrummager than Henderson? The scrum is not something I thought we’d have to worry about.

There was a telling moment from Raynal when he was challenged on a decision and replied in a rather off-hand way that he thought he was correct. Fortunately, he was.

In one of the 2 scrums in which Healy was penalised, on a replay you could clearly see that the first person to hit the ground with their knees was the Scottish hooker. This destabilised the whole scrum. Fagerson was scrummaging at right angles at times and at others it was the Scottish loose head. Dreadful officiating from well paid men. They must be related to Blind Dave.

Shefwedfan

jacothelad wrote: »

In one of the 2 scrums in which Healy was penalised, on a replay you could clearly see that the first person to hit the ground with their knees was the Scottish hooker. This destabilised the whole scrum. Fagerson was scrummaging at right angles at times and at others it was the Scottish loose head. Dreadful officiating from well paid men. They must be related to Blind Dave.

I said it straight away after the game we would need to see the scrum this weekend. I have no idea what was going on but it was clear the ref hadn't a clue and Healy was very irate.


Lets see how it goes this weekend before making a huge judgement

Healy was doing media during the week and he seemed a bit miffed at some of the scrum penalties.

connemara man

For the first penalty we gave away at scrum time Healy's elbow was pointing towards the floor making it look like he was dragging it down. That's a part of his technique he changed for later, so he wouldn't look like he was infringing but it's the easiest thing for the Reffing team to spot so called it straight away

lawred2

Could Healy have been penalised at the end? The last scrum of the game I'm sure I remember him standing up before the ball was out. Could have been the other way round...

stephen_n

aloooof wrote: »

Am I right in saying it's at the ref's discretion to go to the TMO, tho?

Thinking out loud here, but maybe instead of a "Captain's challenge" you could have a "TMO Challenge", where the ref then has to view something if the TMO brings it to his attention, used for the more obvious / egregious incidents.

Tho you'd hope that the communication between them would be good enough that it wouldn't be required...

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I think in cricket that if they challenge and it goes against them that's it, no more challenges. But if they get it right, they get another one. It may vary depending on whether it is Twenty20, One Dayer or Test match.

I don't know if its needed in rugby. Maybe the TMO should be allowed to call something the same way a touch judge can. If they see a knock-on, offside etc. they tell the ref. Maybe the TMO could do the same.

We had this a few seasons ago, the TMO was far more involved and it didn’t work so well, it started to ruin the flow of the game. Though sometimes the trade off is needed. The best refs use their AR’s a lot and it makes a big difference.

connemara man

connemara man wrote: »

For the first penalty we gave away at scrum time Healy's elbow was pointing towards the floor making it look like he was dragging it down. That's a part of his technique he changed for later, so he wouldn't look like he was infringing but it's the easiest thing for the Reffing team to spot so called it straight away

Also the Scotish prop's head was on the ground before that

Shefwedfan

stephen_n wrote: »

We had this a few seasons ago, the TMO was far more involved and it didn’t work so well, it started to ruin the flow of the game. Though sometimes the trade off is needed. The best refs use their AR’s a lot and it makes a big difference.

You didn't watch the most recent Leinster v Lyon game.


The ref and assistant ref made the decision on field it was a try, the TMO stopped them and showed loads of replays. The ref still said try and TMO wouldn't let it go. In the end the ref said no try just to shut him up. He was at it all day.



A strong ref should be able to tell the TMO to shut up when he wants to but also to take advice. At the weekend it seemed both the TMO and ref didn't know what was going on so it was a free for all.

antietam1

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I said it straight away after the game we would need to see the scrum this weekend. I have no idea what was going on but it was clear the ref hadn't a clue and Healy was very irate.


Lets see how it goes this weekend before making a huge judgement

There was one near our 22 our put in were we got a nice snap shove on and all 3 of their front row just dropped it, no penalty. Another good Irish scrum on their ball we got pinged and if anything they wheeled it.
All a bit tinfoil hat I know.
Agree with the first scrum penalty as the lh needs to have longer bind and not pointing down.

The Lost Sheep

aloooof wrote: »

Am I right in saying it's at the ref's discretion to go to the TMO, tho?

Thinking out loud here, but maybe instead of a "Captain's challenge" you could have a "TMO Challenge", where the ref then has to view something if the TMO brings it to his attention, used for the more obvious / egregious incidents.

Tho you'd hope that the communication between them would be good enough that it wouldn't be required...

ref will usually nearly always initiate contact with tmo but TMO or the assistants can hint towards it sometimes...

Tmo doesnt need anything in place officially and often TMO or one of other officials can hint towards something so that a TMO check occurs.
Should this be in laws thread?

swiwi_

prawnsambo wrote: »

Probably should also be in the General Rugby thread, but as it arose from this match, it's likely more useful here. Jonathan Kaplan wrote an article for The Telegraph on the idea of a captain's challenge. Basically a team captain should have the right to question an on-field decision by the ref, once per half. A bit like the cricket challenge system. I think we're all aware of the incident in question and fair play to Kaplan for bringing it up. Obviously blows a lot of smoke up Reynal's ass to sweeten the pill, but we can put that aside for the minute. Do people think a captain's challenge is a good idea?

What do people think about a boards.ie challenge? We all know heaps about rugby, even more than the players themselves and the ref, so a live phone in system would be a great idea. Only problem I can think of would be irishbucsfan constantly blocking the line. Maybe tweets directly to the refs smartwatch might work better and we would then all get a say.