A Good Result??

harryp · Post by **harryp** » February 26th, 2006, 11:54 pm

I think it was a poor game today, particularly after the loss of Stephen Jones. He had controlled the game, when Henson replaced him Wales went to the dogs. They just weren't an international class side.

From an Irish side, I think the front 5 did pretty well, big Mal had a great game, and the backline looked pretty lively off indifferent ball. Great to see GM show some of his class. Problem area again was the breakdown and 6 to 10. Lost too much ball on the ground, and the ball we retained was either ridiculously slow or often very poorly used by ROG. The backs best work came from broken play rather than set pieces.

We won by 26 points, but the Welsh side that finished today is the weakest side in the 6N, and we probably could have won by 56. There are still some serious problems to be sorted. If the scots play like they did on Saturday and we don't solve our problems at the breakdown, then some serious questions may get asked.

On a positive note, fantastic to see Gav live upto all the hype and prove to us for once and for all that he is a World Class player.

jezzer · Post by **jezzer** » February 27th, 2006, 9:26 am

Wales were a bit of a shambles, but all in all we should be pretty happy with how things went. Sure... we could have scored more, but - assuming England can beat France -we have as good a chance of winning the champs as anyone.

Agree the breakdown was a mess - we need a 7 badly. Kaplan was brutal though - Welsh hands on the deck at every ruck. Didn't ruck over the ball very convincingly, so this back row is falling between 2 stools. On the other hand, the scrum was as good as we've seen it, Flan and jumpers were much better coordinated, maul OK.

Much better use of the boot when options weren't on.

Hoped EOS would bring humphs on after 60 mins when the game went flat but looks like he was protecting our fragile little 10 from further dents to his wafer-thin confidence.

TrueBlue · Post by **TrueBlue** » February 27th, 2006, 9:37 am

Agreed that ROG was poor. It was similar to Italy in that he passed to the inside runners too often, leaving both D'arcy and BOD on occasion with little room to move, resulting in further slow ball. As well as this his tackling is USELESS, he was run through on more than three occasions.

While the back row played OK individually but we need a GLEESON!! Leamy isn't an 8. The pick and drive worked well for us and was refreshing to see. Im not Stringer's biggest fan by any stretch of the imagination but I was impressed with him yesterday, he broke when it was right to break unlike last year when he broke too often.

The problems still lie from 6-10. Bring in Foley or Heaslip, and bring in GLEESON.....we can only dream

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 27th, 2006, 10:19 am

Don't really know what to make of that. Wales were absolutely terrible, but you can only beat what's out in front of you. Some standout performances from players I didn't expect - Stringer had his best game for a long time. Hopefully the pressure of having Reddan in the wings is galvinising his performance. Mal had a great game too, good to see him respond. Flannery was good all round the park and the backline worked reasonably well despite several errors. I thought our backrow did well to neutralise the Welsh BR, but they didn't create a lot.....and Rog......don't know what to say, i think he's getting worse. Two horrendous place kicking misses, missed kicks to touch and more missed tackles. Looks like his confidence is really shot.....

thecoolfreak · Post by **thecoolfreak** » February 27th, 2006, 10:32 am

As ye have said it was a pretty poor game yesterday. However, we are starting to move in the right direction and at least we have something to play for in the rest of the championship.

I think it is time for EOS to bring in Gleeson or Jennings and move Wallace to 8. Leamy is becoming a bit of a liability as he loses the head too easily

ribs · Post by **ribs** » February 27th, 2006, 10:54 am

agree that we saw a different Stringer yesterday - perhaps it was because his opposite number was the best player on the pitch. Good to see all the same.
Someone mentioned that the scrums were solid - I didn't think so, my impression was that our front row was demolished with the front row popping up under the Welsh pressure. It will be fine against the scots but need lots of practise before england. Did I see that we won a ball against the head though?
Oh, and the scrum was much better when Best came on - what does that say?

TrueBlue · Post by **TrueBlue** » February 27th, 2006, 11:03 am

Agreed about Best...He's a lot more solid than Hayes IMO, and better in the loose. Hayes will get killed by Sheridan, and Horan wont get anywhere with Julian White. Leamy has to go-he loses the head to much, and as we know Dallaglio, Moody, Corry etc. will get to him...

...Wallace/Foley/Heaslip at 8 for me, but Steady Eddie will stick by Leamy...

Geordan Murphy

He made it look so easy yesterday...lets hope he can keep that form up..

We will beat Scotland by 10+ points, but I fear we will get beaten well in London...

My team for Twickenham:Horan, Flannery, S Best, POC, DOC/MOK, Easterbunny, Gleeson, Wallace, Stringer, O' Gara

, Trimble, Flash, BOD, Horgan, Murphy

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 27th, 2006, 11:10 am

In fairness guys, Leamy's card was with seconds to go and the game won. Think its a bit harsh to say he should be dropped because he's hot headed.....the backrow is wrong, but EOS won't change a thing for the Pants game.

jezzer · Post by **jezzer** » February 27th, 2006, 11:39 am

Leamy contributes too much to go, but I'd like to see him at 6. He's not heads-up enough for 8. Easterby is not irreplaceable for lineouts and graft in the tight, but EOS won't drop him. That puts the pressure on Wallace, who - as usual - had flashes of brilliance mixed with ordinary. Gleeson would make such a difference, it's bananas.

I'd rather see Best start for Hayes, but I don't agree the scrum was bad at all - remember we won one against the head.

We've got 4 centres on the pitch now and a lot of our play goes up the middle. hope that works against a Scotland side that loves dominating the middle of the park and forcing you to go around them. It's starting to click -we'll really start punching holes if the second receiver offloads sooner. Shaggy tends to mentally get caught between an offload and going to ground, so he flings it up in the air as he hits the deck and D'Arce burrows his way through cover tacklers for one or 2 extra yards - tying up the ball.

TrueBlue · Post by **TrueBlue** » February 27th, 2006, 11:56 am

Maybe I was atad harsh on Leamy, but im frustrated because he's not an 8. He's very dynamic, but I feel he can be just as dynamic at 6, and allow for a better 8 to come in i.e. Foley or Heaslip.

Stringer got Tony Ward's MOTM in the indo. Everybody 7 and above. Mal got 8, DOC 7....bit of an issue there I reckon.....duh!!!

Team will stay the same for the Scots with POC coming back for DOC.

Victory will ensue, but Twickenham will be a different kettle of fish..

harryp · Post by **harryp** » February 27th, 2006, 12:13 pm

I think we are all pretty much in agreement on wta we want to see in the Backrow, Leamy or Easterbunny has to go for Gleeson. We need a 7.

Big worry is ROG. For 1st 20 mins we couldn't get our hands on the ball, because Jones ha run of the game. ROG couldn't impose himself on the game. Henson came on and was useless. Even then though ROG didn't control the game. It was all broken play. His confidence is shot and EOS shouldn't be carrying him. In days of old the OH was always replaced after 60 mins, just to mix the game. I think EOS is afraid of bringing inn Humph because he thinks it'll start the whole ROG v Humph argument again.

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 27th, 2006, 12:16 pm

harryp wrote:I think we are all pretty much in agreement on wta we want to see in the Backrow, Leamy or Easterbunny has to go for Gleeson. We need a 7.

Big worry is ROG. For 1st 20 mins we couldn't get our hands on the ball, because Jones ha run of the game. ROG couldn't impose himself on the game. Henson came on and was useless. Even then though ROG didn't control the game. It was all broken play. His confidence is shot and EOS shouldn't be carrying him. In days of old the OH was always replaced after 60 mins, just to mix the game. I think EOS is afraid of bringing inn Humph because he thinks it'll start the whole ROG v Humph argument again.

there's an element of that. I remember the France game in the RWC. The contrast when Humph came on was massive and questions were asked in the media.....I'm sure with the media in their current mood, EOS is keen to avoid a repeat performance.

harryp · Post by **harryp** » February 27th, 2006, 12:26 pm

I've noticed since the AB match that EOS will now only bring on subs late on when the game is won, and the player being replaced has performed. Look at JO'C yesterday. He couldn't have had an impact on the game, whereas if he had come in against Italy, he could have made a significant difference, and upset the Leamy / Wallace / Easterbunny justification process.

jezzer · Post by **jezzer** » February 27th, 2006, 12:29 pm

Can't believe I'm saying this, but I understand EOS's logic here. The game was crying out for Humphs to come on for the last 30, but Eddie knows he only has one OH to get him through to the WC and if he does anything to worsen his already dented confidence, we can only suffer as a team.

Eddie just has to hope Ginge will play his way out of his bad form.

Harsh on Humphs, a guy who almost certainly would have spurred us to another 15 points we could have done with.

Grumpy Old Man · Post by **Grumpy Old Man** » February 27th, 2006, 12:35 pm

"Hayes will get killed by Sheridan"

Didn't happen in Thomond Park. I think Hayes is one of those people who it is fashionable to give out about but who does a whole lot of unspectacular work. Someone will have to prove that they can bring more to the side then he can and I don't see anybody who can do that yet.

Duff Paddy · Post by **Duff Paddy** » February 27th, 2006, 12:41 pm

TrueBlue wrote:Geordan Murphy He made it look so easy yesterday...lets hope he can keep that form up..

He didn't have to make any tackles!

I accept that he's good going forward, but it's his positional play and inability to tackle that let him down. He always plays well against poor opposition.

CM · Post by CM » February 27th, 2006, 12:51 pm

He couldn't have had an impact on the game,

Except he kinda did. Thought he brought a bit of dynamism to our play to push us into getting the 3rd try. Should have been brought on earlier though - nothing against Wallace but with the game won we needed to score tries and O'Connor provides better continuity than Wallace.

Only thing Murphy did better than in recent outings was kick. He'd little to do in defence so the jury is still very much out as it is on the whole side. Thought we've actually regressed a bit yesterday into the shell of more boring but also more effective rugby. Perhaps we're just not capable of playing the game we attempted in Paris.

Anyway, upwards and onwards. We still have a good chance of winning this championship.

Duff Paddy · Post by **Duff Paddy** » February 27th, 2006, 1:00 pm

CM wrote: Perhaps we're just not capable of playing the game we attempted in Paris.

Anyway, upwards and onwards. We still have a good chance of winning this championship.

That's my take on the situation as well. I think we selected the wrong players if we wanted to play it "Wales style".

epaddy · Post by **epaddy** » February 27th, 2006, 1:01 pm

Duff Paddy wrote:
CM wrote: Perhaps we're just not capable of playing the game we attempted in Paris.

Anyway, upwards and onwards. We still have a good chance of winning this championship.
That's my take on the situation as well. I think we selected the wrong players if we wanted to play it "Wales style".

i dont think anyone is, Leinster dont even play that way, it was completely senseless.

jezzer · Post by **jezzer** » February 27th, 2006, 1:41 pm

CM wrote:Thought we've actually regressed a bit yesterday into the shell of more boring but also more effective rugby. Perhaps we're just not capable of playing the game we attempted in Paris.

Anyway, upwards and onwards. We still have a good chance of winning this championship.

Think we got it about right - put it behind them when a line break wasn't on. No point in running everything, as we have discovered in Leinster occassionally to our cost. Paris 40 mins was an unreal one-off. We might see flashes of that in coming games, but we only played like that out of desperation and shame - pretty high risk stuff it was too.

Downside of out new conservatism is more set-piece (which at least we won our share of) and that's where O'Gara is at his worst going forward. Back to the topic of a better linking backrow...