Indo piece today on the France game

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 13th, 2006, 1:22 pm

Exellent piece in the Indo today. Well worth a read in my view!

Independent:

Farce leaves Eddie

Player power likely catalyst in crazy Parisian volte-face

France 43

Ireland 31

AMONGST the bowels of the Stade de France, the densely plotted Feydeau farce we had just witnessed seemed still quite impossible to digest.

Alas, as we trooped towards the media centre, hoping that the truth would unravel before us, we were confounded still more.

"God that first half was gas, wasn't it? Sure you wouldn't make that many mistakes in a year! And we made them all in one half? And then, sure isn't it sod's law, the ball was glued to us in the second half?"

Delusional

This was, to cut to the chase, the risible raimeis which was churned out by the Irish players in an attempt to explain themselves to their public on Saturday evening. And that's before you encounter the stunning delusional drivel which emanated from their coach.

To claim that France scored four lucky tries and that Ireland didn't alter their perspective after half-time is an asinine attempt in spin which might even give Alistair Campbell a headache.

Are we seriously supposed to buy into this half-baked theory? Is the Irish public gullible enough to be lulled by such a simplistic notion? Saturday's zany, sprawling epic can't be dismissed with a typically Gallic shrug of the shoulders by name-dropping Lady Luck and her regular, unscheduled cameos.

As much as France were a changed outfit after they went 43-3 up, Ireland too were transformed. Their approach was markedly different, in many ways. The alignment of the backs. Shane Horgan moving infield. Forwards interlinking with backs. Shorter, more accurate passing. Less predictable midfield play.

While we are sold a pup in some quarters as to this being the best comeback ever - some claim, given the result - the elephant in the corner is being ignored. Why did this Irish team alter so dramatically in such a short period of time?

As the Irish players slumped to their stations at half-time, are we really to believe that O'Sullivan simply told his players that they were playing all the best rugby and not to change a thing?

Or was the calm reflection a chance for the players to allow the voice in the middle of the room to soar over their heads before they decided that, for once, they might do things their own way?

We will never know what occurred within the sanctity of the dressing-room at half-time but it's obvious that an interesting precedent may have been set during the course of the interval or when Ronan O'Gara coughed up his second seven-pointer of the day.

For the dramatic nature of what subsequently transcribed can't all be linked to the fact that France drifted into a coma.

However, in an astonishing revelation which potentially revealed a chasm in the real relationship between the coach and his players, O'Sullivan dismissed any discussion of the dramatic change in Ireland's fortunes.

Criticised

"I can't explain it," he said. If ever a statement reflected the coach's inability to motivate his players, this was it. Worryingly, he once again criticised a player in public, this time Tommy Bowe for his part in the first try.

Yesterday morning, he boldly challenged a reasonable assertion that Ireland's second-half comeback was as a result of catch-up rugby. Quite simply, he bullied the questioner into submission and refused to address the topic.

"I don't know what you're getting at," he said. "What's catch-up rugby? I don't know what the term is."

Catch-up rugby, for the ignorant amongst us who to deign to question the direction of this Irish rugby team, occurs when players begin to claw themselves back from the brink of a potential drubbing.

Read the following quotation carefully. This would be an honest appraisal of what happened in the Stade de France on Saturday afternoon, were O'Sullivan dignified enough not to insult the intelligence of those outside Irish rugby's comfort zone.

"We started pretty well but then made a number of mistakes and they capitalised on that. Suddenly we were behind by two or three scores. We had to start the second half well but they took the initiative again and we had to play catch-up rugby after that. We scored a couple of tries but I don't think we got close enough to threaten them."

The Irish coach spoke those words following Ireland's defeat to Wales in Cardiff less than 12 months ago. And yet he has the gall to claim that he doesn't know what catch-up rugby is, maintaining that Ireland did in the second half what they wanted to do in the first.

Far more worrying than a coach who produces a game-plan which palpably doesn't work, to then ignore the fact that the players shredded his instructions is deeply disquieting. If ever there was a sign that a coach is losing his grip on his playing staff, then this was most certainly a case in point.

In the first half, the Irish players performed as if they had a metaphorical gun to their heads, forcing the issue in entirely unsuitable occasions.

The whole point of expansive rugby is that one implements such a game-plan in certain areas and with certain key components in place. Flinging wild passes into touch or two feet above your captain on the half-way line does not construe expansive rugby.

Disingenuous

Apart from the astonishingly disingenuous interpretation that it was just a plethora of errors which wounded Ireland, France's imposing defence and thundering impact in contact are factors which can't be ignored.

When France stood off in the second-half, Ireland found it much easier to break the gain-line because the French were either unwilling or physically unable to replicate the intensity of their first-half defence.

A skewed analysis of the first half has conveniently ignored the fact that Ireland spurned several opportunities to score themselves, a fact at least admitted by O'Sullivan yesterday. That they did not do so when they were on top and only breached the French when they had sealed their victory is very worrying and these are cracks which can't be papered over.

Deeper concerns - the failure to groom a replacement out-half, the reluctance to address the appalling skills deficit within the squad - will linger on. But for how long?

If the players chose Saturday's second half as an opportunity to make their point, then one hopes that the coach will listen. Because the players don't seem to be listening to him.

thecoolfreak · Post by **thecoolfreak** » February 13th, 2006, 2:58 pm

That is terrible journalism. The biggest load of cr@p i've ever had the displeasure of reading.

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 13th, 2006, 3:00 pm

thecoofreak wrote:That is terrible journalism. The biggest load of cr@p i've ever had the displeasure of reading.

Nice analysis

Which particular dimensions are you disagreeing with?

thecoolfreak · Post by **thecoolfreak** » February 13th, 2006, 3:03 pm

the players don't seem to be listening to him.

Where is there any proof of this? Both Trimble and Murphy have come out and said that the coaches words at half time were listened to, it was to continue on and play in the same style as the first half and cut out the mistakes. And that is exactly what happened.

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 13th, 2006, 3:07 pm

thecoofreak wrote:
the players don't seem to be listening to him.
Where is there any proof of this? Both Trimble and Murphy have come out and said that the coaches words at half time were listened to, it was to continue on and play in the same style as the first half and cut out the mistakes. And that is exactly what happened.

There are one or two players who have said something to the coach, not in public, but they have suffered the consequences.....dissent is not tolerated on the good ship Eddie....

As for the half time talk, its just a joke in my view. If the talk was so inspirational and helpful, why did we come straight out and conceed two tries in the first 10 minutes? I was watching from high up - the game plan CLEARLY went out the window - the backs dropped deeper, it was so obvious!

thecoolfreak · Post by **thecoolfreak** » February 13th, 2006, 3:10 pm

It is up to the backs to decide how deep they align and nothing to do with the coach, i would have thought.

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 13th, 2006, 3:11 pm

thecoofreak wrote:It is up to the backs to decide how deep they align and nothing to do with the coach, i would have thought.

Nope. Backline plays are called on team ireland.

thecoolfreak · Post by **thecoolfreak** » February 13th, 2006, 3:13 pm

But backline moves are only used of setpieces usually, so after that it would be to the backs to decide their running lines, alignment, etc.

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 13th, 2006, 3:38 pm

thecoofreak wrote:But backline moves are only used of setpieces usually, so after that it would be to the backs to decide their running lines, alignment, etc.

True, though moves off rucks and Mauls will be worked in advance. I would have thought depth positioning would have been worked up pre-match. i was watching the backline because i knew france play close to the offside line and it was so obviously after the 50th minute that we dropped.

deco · Post by **deco** » February 13th, 2006, 8:55 pm

Got to say that i agree with almost all in that article......unusual for me as I think the paper is a rag. To (mis)quote Mary O Rourke "it's time to call a spade a spade"!

harryp · Post by **harryp** » February 13th, 2006, 9:33 pm

That article is bang on. Eddy never made that call.

I don't think it was a conscious decision, certainly not by either Drico or ROG. I think it probably followed on from either Shaggy or GM running through ROG's space, upped the pace and the players went back to playing their natural games.

Got to remember EOS is backline coach, and his playmaker on the pitch is ROG. No move in the 2nd half came from either ones Play Book. Christ Strings made a conscious decision to stop giving ROG ball. Every pass was either short for a Crash Ball, or he ran across ROG and gave the ball directly to deeper runners.

Unfortunately EOS has taken claim to all the credit.

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 14th, 2006, 12:55 pm

harryp wrote:That article is bang on. Eddy never made that call.

I don't think it was a conscious decision, certainly not by either Drico or ROG. I think it probably followed on from either Shaggy or GM running through ROG's space, upped the pace and the players went back to playing their natural games.

Got to remember EOS is backline coach, and his playmaker on the pitch is ROG. No move in the 2nd half came from either ones Play Book. Christ Strings made a conscious decision to stop giving ROG ball. Every pass was either short for a Crash Ball, or he ran across ROG and gave the ball directly to deeper runners.

Unfortunately EOS has taken claim to all the credit.

Fortunately nobody believes him......

jezzer · Post by **jezzer** » February 14th, 2006, 2:20 pm

[quote="harryp"]Strings made a conscious decision to stop giving ROG ball. Every pass was either short for a Crash Ball, or he ran across ROG and gave the ball directly to deeper runners.[quote]

Totally agree Harry. Difference in 2nd half was not so much "go-for-broke" "catch-up rugby" as Stringer taking control for once and leaving ROG out of the game as much as possible.

if there was one positive out there, it's that Stringer can do more than pass at intnl level. Just need a coach who'll let him...

thecoolfreak · Post by **thecoolfreak** » February 14th, 2006, 2:24 pm

Tony Ward

WHILE clearly wrong in suggesting that Ireland played "all the rugby" despite losing at the Stade de France, Eddie O'Sullivan still had much to take away from Saturday's 'curate's egg' of a performance.

In pure statistical terms, O'Sullivan's side dominated position and possession. The French held the ball a mere 27 minutes in total to Ireland's 42. The game was played for 29 minutes in Ireland's half with over an hour spent deep inside French territory.

Little surprise, therefore, that it was the home side doing the bulk of the tackling and at a ratio of four to one. These are extraordinary statistics by any test standard but particularly so given this was Ireland dictating the terms on French soil. Bernard Laporte, however, had the last laugh. A 43-31 win and a 12-point winning margin was the most telling number of all.

Two years ago, I well remember leaving the same stadium having lost 'respectably' (17-35) but with a hollow feeling because, despite the coach's protestations to the contrary, we had played with little obvious ambition. Though he denies it to this day, it seemed an exercise in damage limitation. Well, whatever else this latest performance was, it most certainly wasn't that.

Here was an Irish side in Paris sticking rigidly to its preordained plan of playing it through the hand. It's always a high-risk strategy and leads to the concession of soft tries but, as a statement of future intent, it blew the Italian display away. Losing is never easy but - sometimes - the manner does help.

On Saturday, we lost again in Paris but this time playing positively in the best modern fashion. Four of the tries were soft, the result of individual errors under aggressive French pressure.

Failure to acknowledge the quality of the French blitz defending is disingenuous. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and, were it Irish pressure responsible for French errors leading to Irish tries, we would be lauding it forever and a day.

Video analyst Mervyn Murphy is going to be busy over the coming days dissecting Ireland's version of the good, the bad and the ugly, and probably in reverse order. That said, with two games gone we are still on course for the overall objective of three home wins taking us to Twickenham and a possible Triple Crown/Championship assault on St Patrick's weekend.

For all the doom and gloom post-November, it's a pretty respectable place to be at the first break in this campaign. O'Sullivan has a week now to refocus and readdress the suicidal aspect to Paris. As things stand, it is England on a roll with the newly-constructed chariot gathering momentum by the match.

In Rome, they eventually pulled clear against an Italian side which I repeat is on the verge of making that long-term breakthrough. In the end, Andy Robinson's side was flattered by the 15-point winning margin, yet there is a structure and sense of purpose to England's modus operandi that looks ominous for their opponents to come.

Before that, of course, it's Wales and then Scotland. At Cardiff on Sunday there was enough structure - irrespective of Scott Murray's dismissal - to suggest two tough and physically challenging Triple Crown hurdles lie ahead for Ireland.

Mike Ruddock's squad may be riddled with injury but the offloading game to which O'Sullivan's Ireland now aspire is clearly still in evidence. More to the point, in Dwayne Peel the Welsh possess the all-singing, all-dancing scrum-half for which O'Sullivan yearns. Peel was at the heart of everything constructive against the eager Scots and was rightly named Man of the Match.

Ireland can beat Wales but, although the expansive strategy will continue in its broadest sense, the need will be for a tailored and much more prudent version for the simple reason that when it comes to 'offloading, fingertip rugby in the tackle' the Welsh do it better. That is the dilemma facing O'Sullivan ahead of announcing the starting lineup for that game.

While his track record suggests little change, where improvement can be made O'Sullivan is a realist. For that reason the case for Marcus Horan and Donncha O'Callaghan on form ahead of Reggie Corrigan and Malcolm O'Kelly is significant.

On the basis of flagging confidence, either Andrew Trimble or Denis Hickie should return on the left wing for Tommy Bowe. Beyond that there will be little tinkering, although the structure to the back-row still leaves me perplexed.

Geordan Murphy's form too is of concern but such is his moral fibre that even when things are going anywhere but his way, he never ever hides. On the contrary, as he showed in the final quarter in Paris, he is continually looking to make things happen.

Girvan Dempsey has been in the best attacking form of his career for Leinster this season so the option of a change in personnel incorporating one positional switch in the back three (Murphy for Bowe) also exists.

That said, Trimble's rich potential versus Hickie's out-and-out pace seems the more likely option should Bowe bite the dust.

As things stand, it's England in pole position and only one of the six still in line for a Grand Slam. Four fill the second slot but with Ireland alone of the Celtic nations still in with a chance of the Triple Crown.

Could the final showdown at Cardiff a year ago repeat itself at Twickenham now? Then it was Wales in search of a Grand Slam and Ireland a 'mere' Triple Crown.

Rest assured, if we arrive in London in a similar position this time round it will be in a much more positive and far more appreciative frame of mind.

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 14th, 2006, 3:53 pm

Wardy is obviously unaware that the IRFU objective is a CHAMPIONSHIP by 2007....as opposed to 3 home wins.....

Dave Cahill · Post by **Dave Cahill** » February 14th, 2006, 4:03 pm

Flash Gordon wrote:Wardy is obviously unaware that the IRFU objective is a CHAMPIONSHIP by 2007....as opposed to 3 home wins.....

I'd say if you compiled a list of things that Wardy is unaware of it would...it would... it would....well it'd be a pretty long list

harryp · Post by **harryp** » February 14th, 2006, 4:05 pm

Dave Cahill wrote:I'd say if you compiled a list of things that Wardy is unaware of it would...it would... it would....well it'd be a pretty long list

He lost me when he declared how ROG was controlling the game and the Backline in the Italian game.

Flash Gordon · Post by **Flash Gordon** » February 14th, 2006, 4:15 pm

harryp wrote:
Dave Cahill wrote:I'd say if you compiled a list of things that Wardy is unaware of it would...it would... it would....well it'd be a pretty long list
He lost me when he declared how ROG was controlling the game and the Backline in the Italian game.

Totally. WTF?

epaddy · Post by **epaddy** » February 14th, 2006, 4:27 pm

Your man Kelly is a plank, the abount of abuse he sent Leinsters way this season wsa ridiculas. He was also a mess on Setanta last nigh sucking up to Neil feckin Francis