England v Ireland Autumn Nations Cup | 21.11.20 KO 15:00 | RTE 1 Read Post #5

JohnniDrama

eclipsechaser wrote: »

We're a small population where rugby is the 4th sport. Still, we've managed multiple club European championships, multiple 6 Nations titles, grandslams, a summer tour and wins over NZ.

I'd say it's been a remarkably successful time in the IRFU's history. Sure the WC results haven't been great and we don't look as good right now but really we've been spoilt compared to how Ireland traditionally fared.

Of course you are completely right....amazing times....

But what about right now? And going forward?

We can’t keep going on about Saint Joe and Chicago forever.

bilston

JohnniDrama wrote: »

Of course you are completely right....amazing times....

But what about right now? And going forward?

We can’t keep going on about Saint Joe and Chicago forever.

We're in between cycles...it happens all the time.

We're still probably No.3 in Europe and in top 6 or 7 in the world...the other thing is that we've had some.outstanding U20s sides in the last 4 years, some of those players are starting to come through and there are more to come. I'm pretty confident we will come good in the 12-24 months. Leinster, Ulster and Munster are hammering everyone in the Pro 14 at the moment and they are doing largely with young players who have come out of these U20s sides.

That said England and France are going to be strong for the next few years so repeating the successes of the 2010s will be difficult.

ionadnapokot

awec wrote: »

Byrne standing deep, with Aki and Farrell outside him receiving the ball standing still, neither an elusive runner, neither one going to unlock any defence with their passing ability.

Passing deep with two bosh merchants in the centre, I genuinely hope that this was not the tactics dictated by the coaches.

It wasn’t helping with Byrne standing deep that’s for sure.
If the plan was to stand deep to allow space to kick through or over the top that would have been sensible.

Unfortunately I think it’s the secondary point you made because there is an overwhelming body of evidence that that is exactly how we tried to play the last two times v England.
Deeply concerning that this appeared to be the plan under Farrell to beat them.
And if it’s not plan what was it?

Because there was oceans of space in behind England all game and the coaches either failed to identify this (again v England) and or the players didn’t exploit it.
In fairness to Burns he clearly saw this and executed the chip well.
Game was up at that stage. Although It felt over after the 1st try.

If we were judging the Farrell coaching ticket on this game there would be questions asked.
The fact is this is almost an exact replica of what we have seen from Ireland v England.
With the addition of the chaotic defensive performance v France this is deeply concerning because of the three key things you expect from in any good side.
1. Selection - Grade D
2. Game plan - Grade D
3. Execution - Grade D

JohnniDrama

Solutionking wrote: »

I do love to see the crazy over reaction after every loss.



You do realize that England and France keep changing the Henieken Cup format because they struggle to compete with the Irish provinces. Yet you are asking to throw it out.

We are a small island and rugby would struggle to be our 3rd sport yet people expect us to be the number 1 in the World
In comparison England have 14 top teams all with academies. They are the richest union and the national team has a superstar team of coachs picked from all around the World. SA destory them in the scrum, well then hire the SA scrum coach.
Unless we change every pitch in Ireland and every secondary school to rugby we will never be at that level.

Also the team is in a massive transition, Sexton, Kearney, SOB and Murray having to be replaced. New coaching team which still have question marks.

Plus this is a makey up competition with no real prize, no WC seeding. The whole point of it is to bring in new players, something which everyone complains we are not good at doing, they try to bring in new players, lose a nothing game and you have people posting the above. Bit of cop on needed to be honest. If we start the same old team filled with players from the WC I can imagine the reaction. With soem people you can never win
The big mistake yesterday was not starting Burns which could have been down to head injury assessment which I understand, but he should have been brought on earlier. Also I would have whipped off Lowe, moved Keenan to wing and put Stockdale into 15 earlier. But I know that could hit Lowe confidence and he is a confidence player. We know what Earls can do, we know we couldn't win so why not move Keenan onto Earls wing and put Stockdale into 15. Try it out

Maybe I should have posted my thoughts in the Ireland thread...For me, it is a medium term view held over the last few years. Not an extreme reaction to just one game.

But I understand your sentiment.

I am just trying to challenge if the IRFU are set up for success going forward...They have shown in the past to be very good to adapt at times, but also to be very slow at other times.

I feel they are behind the curve recently. That’s all.

LuckyLloyd

eclipsechaser wrote: »

We're a small population where rugby is the 4th sport. Still, we've managed multiple club European championships, multiple 6 Nations titles, grandslams, a summer tour and wins over NZ.

I'd say it's been a remarkably successful time in the IRFU's history. Sure the WC results haven't been great and we don't look as good right now but really we've been spoilt compared to how Ireland traditionally fared.

It's two years now being every inch the "softies" Rassie assessed us as. Joe's brief period where it fell right for him is in the past and the ebb and flow of provincial outcomes is decoupled from the national team. The Vodafone Greens have been disappointing for two years now and we don't appear as if we're moving towards anything good. It's been an incredibly grim period since we beat New Zealand and it should be okay to label it for what it is.

TomsOnTheRoof

Kingston Wailing Numskull wrote: »

I didn't actually see the game, and probably won't rewatch now but really surprised reading these comments on Stander. Even in games where he isn't hugely effective you can normally count on 10-15 carries and 10-15 tackles from him, but saw stats on Twitter earlier suggesting he wasn't even very busy. Wonder if the coaches were trying to use him in a different way or something, but then you'd wonder why they'd do that.

Stander was stuck to the wing. Looked like he was playing the 1 role in the attacking system. Would make sense considering we had Farrell at 13 who's more likely to carry than pass.

Just noticed clsmooth's comment with regard to our blindside. It does seem to be too much of a coincidence that they consistently fall out of games.

shootermacg

I think the guys here saying Farrell is a bosh merchant are way wide of the mark. He had little option when faced with a 14 man rush defense, what choice did he have? Shovel the ball out to his winger to get bundled into touch?

Farrell has a very good passing game, which he's showed many times. He also did very well to truck up static ball. Unfortunately the halfback performance didn't really leave him with any real options.

Solutionking

JohnniDrama wrote: »

Maybe I should have posted my thoughts in the Ireland thread...For me, it is a medium term view held over the last few years. Not an extreme reaction to just one game.

But I understand your sentiment.

I am just trying to challenge if the IRFU are set up for success going forward...They have shown in the past to be very good to adapt at times, but also to be very slow at other times.

I feel they are behind the curve recently. That’s all.

How? Ireland is in the top 5 in World, potentially top 4. We have three provinces which would hope to be in knockout each season with two having ambitions to win it. One province who is rolling over the majority of teams across Europe and unbeaten in I dont know how long in their league.

Yes you could say England/NZ/SA/France are ahead of us in terms of national team but on our day we could still beat any of those teams, if we had France at home in last game I think we can all say we would have won.

We have a academy system with one main province but two others starting to produce players

So what exactly are the IRFU behind the curve on?

As I said, unless we swap everyone from GAA to Rugby it's not going to change massively. England at the moment are ahead of Ireland, I could have told you that before the game
On Amazon they had the welsh talking, flicked back over and POC was doing the main presenter, comment was said the Welsh said England by 15 to get a reaction, POC said that was about right. How is anyone surprised we lost the game? a win would have been a massive massive shock.

Solutionking

shootermacg wrote: »

I think the guys here saying Farrell is a bosh merchant are way wide of the mark. He had little option when faced with a 14 man rush defense, what choice did he have? Shovel the ball out to his winger to get bundled into touch?

Farrell has a very good passing game, which he's showed many times. He also did very well to truck up static ball. Unfortunately the halfback performance didn't really leave him with any real options.

Can't complain about Byrne and then make an excuse for Farrell. I think Farrell will want to forget yesterday

But personally picked one player out is the problem. X done this and was great and Y done that and was sh*t. Looked like complete system failures across the pitch yesterday which has to be a concern for the management. Farrell is defense and we look off, taking into consideration the like of Porter left on the wing in the French game and getting burned for first try. Why is this happening? is the system wrong?

shootermacg

shootermacg wrote: »

I think the guys here saying Farrell is a bosh merchant are way wide of the mark. He had little option when faced with a 14 man rush defense, what choice did he have? Shovel the ball out to his winger to get bundled into touch?

Farrell has a very good passing game, which he's showed many times. He also did very well to truck up static ball. Unfortunately the halfback performance didn't really leave him with any real options.

Farrell has a good passing game - he's a quality centre and had some great moments in the second half yesterday.

But we needed to move the ball smarter and use a mix of decoy runners and depth and we didn't seem to have anyone coordinating that. I commented in the thread yesterday that whilst Aki, Farrell and Byrne are all quality players they combined bluntly against a pressing English defence and Byrne wasn't able to bring in guys around him like he can at Leinster. Part of that is the step up to International level but I'm not sure if he was a bit rattled having had a bad previous experience in Twickenham or if it's a failure in our general attacking shape. The Ross Byrne who was part of that come back against Exeter a few seasons ago is a better player than what we saw yesterday.

I honestly think our attacking shape is a product of our coaching and a failure to evolve as Sexton has also looked ordinary on a few occasions the last year for Ireland.

The difference a player like Ringrose might have made is summed up in this try from 2018:



We saw little of that yesterday. Mix of the type of players available but also a poorly drilled side perhaps?

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

Byrne standing deep, with Aki and Farrell outside him receiving the ball standing still, neither an elusive runner, neither one going to unlock any defence with their passing ability.

Passing deep with two bosh merchants in the centre, I genuinely hope that this was not the tactics dictated by the coaches.

I think it was more the default setting for those individuals than the plan. Byrne, for example, is never going to be a 10 that threatens the line, no matter what his coaches want from him.

molloyjh

molloyjh wrote: »

I think it was more the default setting for those individuals than the plan. Byrne, for example, is never going to be a 10 that threatens the line, no matter what his coaches want from him.

Maybe I'm mistaken but I feel Byrne plays a lot flatter for Leinster.

His decision making yesterday (in particular when we didn't kick) constantly cost us territory without ever giving up the ball.

Combine that with our back three rarely getting involved outside of gathering English kicks and there is a problem that is either a Ross Byrne shaped one or a Mike Catt shaped one or both.

Byrne has been in camp long enough - maybe he just had a howler yesterday but I presume he was following the game plan.

We'll know more as selections continue through the tournament.

clsmooth

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Maybe I'm mistaken but I feel Byrne plays a lot flatter for Leinster.

Definitely does but then you have to factor in the lack of go forward ball too. Hard to play anyway flat off slow ball against a rush defence. The issue was that when we did get a bit of go forward ball we seemed too slow to recycle and take advantage. The Earls break in the first half is a good example. Ended up getting turned over though which was very disappointing.

First Up

theVersatile wrote:

Keenan was beaten in the air for the first try

I stand corrected.

So in that case Lowe's defence was OK, and he couldn't do much with the crumbs he had to work with in attack.

Taking him off wouldn't have helped. The problems were inside - at 10 mostly. I have always liked Ross Byrne but he was awful yesterday

Skyfloater

Was there some reason Byrne never tried a chip kick over the onrushing English defense? When your opposite outhalf only ever shovels the ball to his centres, it's easy to bunch together and double tackle Aki or Farrell.

bilston

First Up wrote: »

I stand corrected.

So in that case Lowe's defence was OK, and he couldn't do much with the crumbs he had to work with in attack.

Taking him off wouldn't have helped. The problems were inside - at 10 mostly. I have always liked Ross Byrne but he was awful yesterday

I think to be fair to Byrne you have to look at the half backs as a package. Gibson Park had a tough afternoon which in turn makes it hard for the 10.

Burns had a decent little 8 minute cameo, or however long it was, but then he had a British and Irish Lion at scrum half serving him the ball.

bilston

Skyfloater wrote: »

Was there some reason Byrne never tried a chip kick over the onrushing English defense? When your opposite outhalf only ever shovels the ball to his centres, it's easy to bunch together and double tackle Aki or Farrell.

My memory of the period prior to England's first try was that we kicked the ball everyone we got it. Then as soon as they scored we cut that tactic almost completely.

First Up

bilston wrote:

I think to be fair to Byrne you have to look at the half backs as a package. Gibson Park had a tough afternoon which in turn makes it hard for the 10.

I thought JBK's service was crisp enough and he also threw good passes to Earl's and Lowe running at pace. Byrne wasn't giving him that option.

bilston wrote:

Burns had a decent little 8 minute cameo, or however long it was, but then he had a British and Irish Lion at scrum half serving him the ball.

Murray and Burns looked sharper for sure, for whatever reason.

Burkie1203

guapos wrote: »

Think it was keenan who was beaten in the air. In hindsight he should have stepped back and waited for him to land

May had a massive advantage of being on the outside and having a run up. Keenan made a split second decision. On another day he might have got a hand in to disrupt the ball etc.

beggars_bush

Burkie1203 wrote: »

May had a massive advantage of being on the outside and having a run up. Keenan made a split second decision. On another day he might have got a hand in to disrupt the ball etc.

Keenan's starting position and jumping start were very poor

Anyway, we need to quickly develop a way to move the ball before the chop tackle that England, Wales and France use

Pudsy33

beggars_bush wrote: »

Keenan's starting position and jumping start were very poor

Anyway, we need to quickly develop a way to move the ball before the chop tackle that England, Wales and France use

Is this tackle strictly legal? I was wondering this myself and noticed a few comments about it on the match thread. Seems to be very little arms involved.

lawrencesummers

As much as Byrnes ability if attack is being slated we should acknowledge the solid defensive work he did. His tackling was excellent and he answered very well the questions that were asked of him in this regard.

As far as Keenan I think he should be absolutely hammered in the video review for taking the carry that lead to the turnover after Earls made a Break. Keenan shouldn’t have been anywhere near looking for a carry at that instance. He killed our best attacking opportunity in that half.

TomsOnTheRoof

Pudsy33 wrote: »

Is this tackle strictly legal? I was wondering this myself and noticed a few comments about it on the match thread. Seems to be very little arms involved.

Dependent on whether an attempt is made to wrap the arms. Quite a few yesterday were just shoulder barges on shins and knees. Of course even if they are illegal you still need the officiating team to call it. Neither Gauzere or Owens were interested in calling anything yesterday unless they were certain it was completely immaterial..

lawred2

Pudsy33 wrote: »

Is this tackle strictly legal? I was wondering this myself and noticed a few comments about it on the match thread. Seems to be very little arms involved.

it's a full body trip at momentum with no hands whatsoever...

Dubinusa

Johnny May is world class and very experienced. Keenan will hopefully learn from that mistake.
One problem I see is that for years we get into the attacking 1/3 of the field and we have no idea how to open up the top defenses.
Wales a few years back, we spent enormous energy and possession in the 22 and went nowhere. France in Paris. We dominated the 1st half, had possession in the 22 and failed to convert. We lost 10-9.
It is an ongoing issue. Farrell and Catt have to revise our attacking strategy in the red zone. If not, we'll come up short against the better sides.

ionadnapokot

lawrencesummers wrote: »

As much as Byrnes ability if attack is being slated we should acknowledge the solid defensive work he did. His tackling was excellent and he answered very well the questions that were asked of him in this regard.

As far as Keenan I think he should be absolutely hammered in the video review for taking the carry that lead to the turnover after Earls made a Break. Keenan shouldn’t have been anywhere near looking for a carry at that instance. He killed our best attacking opportunity in that half.

God point on Byrne. He made some cracking tackles

Yes It should be pointed out to Keenan.
Hammered...not sure. System failure?
I need to watch it back again to see why he ended up there.

Eddie O’Sullivan made a great point after Heaslip was finished with his generic babble and talk of the Ffffflippin Monday morning review.

“The question here isn’t the review it’s the players asking the coaches can you give us a game plan that might work”

First Up

ionadnapokot wrote: »

God point on Byrne. He made some cracking tackles

Yes It should be pointed out to Keenan.
Hammered...not sure. System failure?
I need to watch it back again to see why he ended up there.

Eddie O’Sullivan made a great point after Heaslip was finished with his generic babble and talk of the Ffffflippin Monday morning review.

“The question here isn’t the review it’s the players asking the coaches can you give us a game plan that might work”

Byrne tackled well but we had twice as much possession as England, so two thirds of his job was supposed to be attacking, not defending.

Both Heaslip and O'Sullivan had a point. I'd be interested to hear Farrell's rationale for not changing his tactics after we had hit the first twenty or so brick walls.

Paul Weller

First Up wrote: »

Both Heaslip and O'Sullivan had a point. I'd be interested to hear Farrell's rationale for not changing his tactics after we had hit the first twenty or so brick walls.

If at first you don't succeed.....

ionadnapokot

First Up wrote: »

Byrne tackled well but we had twice as much possession as England, so two thirds of his job was supposed to be attacking, not defending.

Both Heaslip and O'Sullivan had a point. I'd be interested to hear Farrell's rationale for not changing his tactics after we had hit the first twenty or so brick walls.

Yes completely re:Byrne tackling requirement. It’s something good worth been pointed out considering he stopped some powerful carriers.

What I wouldn’t give to be a fly on the wall of Farrell’s video reviews.
The amount of shi1te talked about those reviews during Schmidt’s tenure and after under Farrell was/is just ludicrous.

Whatever about not changing the tactics I’d love to hear what were the actual tactics.
That’s the biggest indictment.
England did nothing that wasn’t expected. Nothing!

heard a comment on newstalk that almost an insulting approach to the second half by England. Just kick a couple of penos, put it out to 3 scores required for Ireland - just tackle them until the clock is against them - England didn't even need to push for more scores or worry about possession as they don't need to against Ireland.

Ireland's success in the last 10 to 15 years has always been based around having a solid 10 and a fairly rigid game plan - until that player is found, anointed and THEN developed with enough experience not looking good for being competitive in the 6N, never mind the WC.

Paul Weller

glasso wrote: »

heard a comment on newstalk that almost an insulting approach to the second half by England. Just kick a couple of penos, put it out to 3 scores required for Ireland - just tackle them until the clock is against them - England didn't even need to push for more scores or worry about possession as they don't need to against Ireland.

Ireland's success in the last 10 to 15 years has always been based around having a solid 10 and a fairly rigid game plan - until that player is found, anointed and THEN developed with enough experience not looking good for being competitive in the 6N, never mind the WC.

I know it's early days...and I don't want to put pressure on the kid ...but Ben Healy looks like he could be that 10 in the next year or 2

Ardillaun

Dubinusa wrote: »

Johnny May is world class and very experienced. Keenan will hopefully learn from that mistake.
One problem I see is that for years we get into the attacking 1/3 of the field and we have no idea how to open up the top defenses.

It was an excellent kick and he was beaten in the air. That's going to happen, not a massive mistake. The likes of Kearney, Bowe, Horgan would have stood a much better chance against him but that's water under the bridge and Stockdale has some work to do before being reconsidered for the role.

England seemed to encounter more difficulty with Earls's elusive running, on the few occasions he got the ball, than boshing it up the middle. They have scored tries against us in recent years with some lovely kicks. Burns showed yesterday that we can do it too.

We defended quite well against their passing game.

theVersatile

Please can we wait for Heineken Cup or interpros before talking about Healy, Byrne Jr, JOB, Casey, Coombes, or anyone else getting a call up. These Pro14 games are fairly meaningless.

Paul Weller

Paul Weller wrote: »

I know it's early days...and I don't want to put pressure on the kid ...but Ben Healy looks like he could be that 10 in the next year or 2

the IRFU need to get the finger out, be ruthless and give the REAL TEST PROSPECTS at 10 some development experience at the provinces and then internationally to see if they have it or not and cut their losses on the ones that don't have it.

the poor pro league standard doesn't help in this regard of course.

home exhibition games where the visitors are smashed doesn't develop much of anything - how much more valuable is that than a training session really for a 10?

clsmooth

It’s not completely to do with the 10. If you’re not matching up up front, you’re in big trouble. The Irish forwards put in a huge shift yesterday and had to work very hard to make the gain line. We gave our back line very little front foot quick recycle ball. Compare that to England who made it look easy when they needed to. Their first try was inevitable once they got into our 22. Contrast that to how many times we have been pickpocketed in opposition 22 this year. Same thing happened to Leinster against Sarries losing lineouts in their 22 at key moments. We’re just not as clinical as they are. If we had given Ross Byrne front foot ball he would have done a decent job yesterday. I don’t think Owen Farrell would have managed much better if he was our 10 yesterday. Would Beauden Barrett have made any difference? He would have been nailed behind the gain line too.

clsmooth

clsmooth wrote: »

It’s not completely to do with the 10. If you’re not matching up up front, you’re in big trouble. The Irish forwards put in a huge shift yesterday and had to work very hard to make the gain line. We gave our back line very little front foot quick recycle ball. Compare that to England who made it look easy when they needed to. Their first try was inevitable once they got into our 22. Contrast that to how many times we have been pickpocketed in opposition 22 this year. Same thing happened to Leinster against Sarries losing lineouts in their 22 at key moments. We’re just not as clinical as they are. If we had given Ross Byrne front foot ball he would have done a decent job yesterday. I don’t think Owen Farrell would have managed much better if he was our 10 yesterday. Would Beauden Barrett have made any difference? He would have been nailed behind the gain line too.

of course it's not but Ireland has never been competitive without a decent 10.

also the development track of 10's is different to other positions.

there's more game-running involved and development experience needs to be provided at increasing levels of difficulty to see if a prospect is test level or not.

Ireland have been too conservative and paternalistic in this regard to 10's imo.

bad luck with Carberry and Jackson - so what, spilt milk - have to deal with it at this point and try to sort it out.

UAEguy2020

theVersatile wrote: »

Please can we wait for Heineken Cup or interpros before talking about Healy, Byrne Jr, JOB, Casey, Coombes, or anyone else getting a call up. These Pro14 games are fairly meaningless.

You see enough from the little things these players do to see if they are test level or not. Yes the CC is a higher level but truth be told no level these players play at will prove if they are test level.

UAEguy2020

clsmooth wrote: »

It’s not completely to do with the 10. If you’re not matching up up front, you’re in big trouble. The Irish forwards put in a huge shift yesterday and had to work very hard to make the gain line. We gave our back line very little front foot quick recycle ball. Compare that to England who made it look easy when they needed to. Their first try was inevitable once they got into our 22. Contrast that to how many times we have been pickpocketed in opposition 22 this year. Same thing happened to Leinster against Sarries losing lineouts in their 22 at key moments. We’re just not as clinical as they are. If we had given Ross Byrne front foot ball he would have done a decent job yesterday. I don’t think Owen Farrell would have managed much better if he was our 10 yesterday. Would Beauden Barrett have made any difference? He would have been nailed behind the gain line too.

Well he (Barrett) already was as we saw in 2019!
When England bring that line speed you put it in behind, that’s how SA won the World Cup, they outkicked England and England buckled.

UAEguy2020

I still think that loss in Dublin in 2019 is playing on the Irish players mind. It’s so obvious what England are going to do to Ireland every game and every time Ireland just right into the trap, that along with missing the basics.

The game in Dublin is very important other than just being a potential championship decider but also a chance to clear those demons.

UAEguy2020

UAEguy2020 wrote: »

I still think that loss in Dublin in 2019 is playing on the Irish players mind. It’s so obvious what England are going to do to Ireland every game and every time Ireland just right into the trap, that along with missing the basics.

The game in Dublin is very important other than just being a potential championship decider but also a chance to clear those demons.

only 6 starters from that day started for Ireland yesterday.

11 of the same English starters.

I think it's more that England have no fear of Ireland at this point and just expect to beat them.

mfceiling

lawrencesummers wrote: »

As much as Byrnes ability if attack is being slated we should acknowledge the solid defensive work he did. His tackling was excellent and he answered very well the questions that were asked of him in this regard.

As far as Keenan I think he should be absolutely hammered in the video review for taking the carry that lead to the turnover after Earls made a Break. Keenan shouldn’t have been anywhere near looking for a carry at that instance. He killed our best attacking opportunity in that half.

Jesus man give it up about keenan. You've been able to find fault with the lad every time he takes the field.
If he shīt a gold bar at your feet you'd hand it back and tell him there was a smell of shīte from it.

ElisaAtWar

mfceiling wrote: »

Jesus man give it up about keenan. You've been able to find fault with the lad every time he takes the field.
If he shīt a gold bar at your feet you'd hand it back and tell him there was a smell of shīte from it.

Not every fan can be positive and I know from myself I can be downright repetitive and downright negative at times. At the same time you got to look at a spade and says it a spade. If you don't start from there then the opinion is irrelevant. I hope Andy Farrell learnt a bit from yesterday.

There were not too many positives from the game but if you look at the team it wasn't terrible either. We played england's game and we were beaten and bloodied by it.

And the players cannot be responsible for only providing battering rams to their opposition. That was a coaching call and that's how it played out.

I do believe certain players should not be on this team, but the reality is, if this is Ireland, it's irrelevant who starts.

Ardillaun

Our lads were up against better players in nearly every position (most obviously in the forwards). The result was not a major shock. However, I think we are entitled to expect functional lineouts and a little more invention from the backs. Regarding the half-backs, there will be a painful transition (first with Sexton) from an outstanding duo to players with less potential but we have to get used to it.

lawrencesummers

mfceiling wrote: »

Jesus man give it up about keenan. You've been able to find fault with the lad every time he takes the field.
If he shīt a gold bar at your feet you'd hand it back and tell him there was a smell of shīte from it.

I’ve praised him at times for what he has done, and the relative lack of experience that he has, he has however made errors and if your delicate sensibility can’t handle some constructive criticism of a player then your probably better off not reading a forum that is choc full of opinions on players performances and actions.

ElisaAtWar

Ardillaun wrote: »

Our lads were up against better players in nearly every position .

Maybe we should use better players then?

molloyjh

ElisaAtWar wrote: »

Maybe we should use better players then?

Ah yeah, cos Farrell is selecting lesser players for the craic. We actually have genetics labs available to engineer better players but again we elect not use them for the sheer giggles.

Jesus Christ.....

ElisaAtWar

While I cannot argue that Farrell is selecting players for continuity, he is selecting a game plan that sucks. And it will always suck against England. You know England are going to bring their aggressive game so you stand back in defence and try and ride it. What a hopeless gameplan

mfceiling

lawrencesummers wrote: »

I’ve praised him at times for what he has done, and the relative lack of experience that he has, he has however made errors and if your delicate sensibility can’t handle some constructive criticism of a player then your probably better off not reading a forum that is choc full of opinions on players performances and actions.

Constructive?

You've hammered the lad at every opportunity. There's no constructive criticism with you towards Keenan. There's an agenda there and it's plain to see.

ElisaAtWar

mfceiling wrote: »

Constructive?

You've hammered the lad at every opportunity. There's no constructive criticism with you towards Keenan. There's an agenda there and it's plain to see.

To be fair Jonny May destroyed him. For the first try May just jumped at the right time and Keenan didn't. It was a childish error in the nature of international rugby

ElisaAtWar

I hadn't checked the team sheet for the day so I only found out that CJ was playing when he came off. And just summed up the negative nature of our play. Or we can also accept that the English are better in all facets of the game and we are just muck. Which seems our excuse these days