Eos

Chucky the tree

Can someone tell him that your allowed make more then 2 subs during a Rugby match? His use of the bench was shocking yet again. Whats his problem? Waiting 60 minutes into the game to make his first substitution was a joke. Waiting untill we went 10 points up to make the second one was an even bigger joke.

We have probaly the strongest bench we have ever had, yet he doesnt use it. The chap is an absolute clown.

davyjose

Who would you have brought on, and why? I thought Wales began to lose momentum when they began to tinker. We have the best bench, sure, but we also had a pretty good starting XV. He made the only tactical change I would have made - Flannery for Best. I'd have been tempted to replace Dempsey with Murphy, but that would have, in hindsight, been a mistake given BOD's injury.

is_that_so

Murphy to me was the only thing he got wrong although I thought Flannery did well enough. With such a short gap between games and your team winning why risk it?

Chucky the tree

POC off, MOD on, Boss on Stringr off. It doent matter how good the starting XV is, they wont be the same after 60 minutes of rugby.

I would of taken an backrow off and put on Best, again just to for some fresh legs to make it to the breakdown quick and stronger. Paddy Wallace could of come on for BOD, so i would put murphy on earlier.

Chucky the tree

is_that_so wrote:

Murphy to me was the only thing he got wrong although I thought Flannery did well enough. With such a short gap between games and your team winning why risk it?

Because there is such a short gap between games. Does he expect the same 15 to play every minute of the 6 nations.

is_that_so

No but from where I was sitting it was a case of who was playing least badly. You could've replaced over half the team today and I think in that situation you go for the one that can make the most impact which i thought he did. Flannery for his ball-carrying and Murphy - although that was enforced and not a choice. But he will always be a cautious coach, that's his trademark.

Chucky the tree

Even at 10 points up, wasnt it just the BOD sub he made? A bit of caution is grand, but he just takes the biscuit.

davyjose

I do see where you're coming from Chucky, but we were putting the Welsh under sustained pressure for most of the last quarter of the match, and to have made substitutions might have caused problems. Bringing of O'Connell would have given the wrong message to his teammates I think. It would have dropped some heads to see such a leader come off, although he wasn't great. I was happy enough with Stringer.
Maybe in the backrow we could have made some changes. I would have been happy to see Best or Gleeso (was he on the bench?) come on. But in General I think the team that was on the pitch were more likely to win the game, than replacements. The jury is still out on Paddy Wallace, for me, I'm afraid.

zAbbo

I think he got it right, no need to make changes just for the hell of it, the changes made to Wales didn't help them in terms of momentum.

The possible sub was Murphy on for Trimble, considering that 12 & 13 were carrying knocks, that would have been silly as well.

Why put Boss in, when O'Gara was having trouble from the boot, give him what he's used to.

Eddie played the percentages, and got it right.

thirdmantackle

great for my fantasy rugby team though, cause they all finished the match!!!

thebaz

zabbo wrote:

I think he got it right, no need to make changes just for the hell of it, the changes made to Wales didn't help them in terms of momentum.

The possible sub was Murphy on for Trimble, considering that 12 & 13 were carrying knocks, that would have been silly as well.

Why put Boss in, when O'Gara was having trouble from the boot, give him what he's used to.

Eddie played the percentages, and got it right.

I think Eddie got it all wrong , yes we won , but against real quality we wouldn't , his starting 15 was the problem . Murphy should have been in for Dempsey, Flannery in for Best , Boss for Stringer (Stringers passing was poor, and put o'gara under unnecessary pressure !) . Trimble has a lot to learn as a winger, in fact hes a centre ! And we had impact subs , that wernt used again , i worry if this team can fulfill its potential, i think Eddie is a good coach, but his selections and use of subs worry me !

zAbbo

Do you think he'll change it for next week ?

Murphy at FB looks to be the change, it might depend on the centres being fit.

I don't think he'll switch Boss for Stringer, I'd like to see it though.

Flannery for Best should happen as well.

thebaz

Flannery and Murphy must come in , although Stringer will probably stay -- Boss provides more options, and i feal he could help O'Gara in the long term , Stringer has great heart but is too small for top international rugby, and this hampers him posing a threat on the break, like Boss can -- i know others disagree , including Ed.

The big problem next week, will be if D'arcy and O'Driscoll are unfit , as long as they are fit for the world cup !

Crash

If O'Driscolls unfit, I figure he'll switch trimble into the centre from the start and murphy on the wing. (when BOD went off today I said this is what'd happen, and got scoffed at in my local - the fools) - if D'arc is unfit - trimble and wallace in centre?

Diamondmaker

ONe centre out=Trimble to centre and urphy to wing.

2 out, a bit unlikely, but aside from going outside the selected panel its Wllace in their too.

There is nothing else to do ap[art from going outside the selected panel.

Sangre

Boss, Flannery and N Best should have all charged onto the pitch at 60 minutes. Boss and Flannery alone because their on field counterparts were having howlers. People need to get it out of there head that people are subbed because they're having bad games. You have to play 22 man game in the modern era.

Tbh, I was devastated he didn't unleash the Beast.

Diamondmaker

Chucky the tree wrote:

Can someone tell him that your allowed make more then 2 subs during a Rugby match? His use of the bench was shocking yet again. Whats his problem? QUOTE]


Eddie knew at half time that Darcy was carrying a niggle and to bring on Murphy for Girv could have proved very costly if darcy twinged after this sub was made. BOD may have also indicated a worry at half time with his hammer... EOS cautious foresight I think , got it right here.

On the others:

Easterby played well and was no need to throw the fierry Best into what could have been a knife edge drop goal finale situation.

We were ahead by 3 scores and there was no need for the attacking talents posed by Boss when Defence away from home was order of the day. Rush of blood to the rookies head, break, swallow , turnover.....Another good call EOS

The only other possible sub was made, in Flannery so, what are people moaning about.

People want subs for subs sake. We knoe for a fact that the game was won, we dont know for a fact would we have still won it if those subs were made.
So it was the right call.

GreenHell

I would be off the opinion that rugby is now a 22 man game, subbing in the likes of Best, MOD, Flannery and Murphy and maybe Boss at certain points in the game would stand to us better over the course of the championship.

By the by even if Murhpy came on for Dempsey, there would be no reason in why Dempsey couldn't be brought back on to regig the backline after the BOS injury.

Anyway, what does it matter, EOS is a conservatitive coach and won't change a winning formula, so there is little or no point talking about it.

thebaz

GreenHell wrote:

I would be off the opinion that rugby is now a 22 man game, subbing in the likes of Best, MOD, Flannery and Murphy and maybe Boss at certain points in the game would stand to us better over the course of the championship.

Anyway, what does it matter, EOS is a conservatitive coach and won't change a winning formula, so there is little or no point talking about it.

I wish Eddie realised rugby is a 22 man game , i hate his stubborness (e.g. Casey and other English based players ) -- he has done well as an Irish coach, but if he wasn't so stubborn , he could be a great coach -- anyone hear his interview on BBC , he sounded like the cliched Premiership MOTD interview "game of two halfs " etc .. i thought it halarious -- waiting to be stitched up by Apre Match (where they already do a good skit on him !) .

Eoin

GreenHell wrote:

I would be off the opinion that rugby is now a 22 man game, subbing in the likes of Best, MOD, Flannery and Murphy and maybe Boss at certain points in the game would stand to us better over the course of the championship.

By the by even if Murhpy came on for Dempsey, there would be no reason in why Dempsey couldn't be brought back on to regig the backline after the BOS injury.

Anyway, what does it matter, EOS is a conservatitive coach and won't change a winning formula, so there is little or no point talking about it.

Dempsey wouldn't be allowed come back on. As far as I know, the only players who can come back on (blood subs excluded obviously) are front row players; in the event that a sub replaces them, and then gets injured.

O'Sullivan knew that both centres were carrying a knock from early on. using up one of your few backline subs to take off another player who was having an OK game would be madness.

GreenHell

You are correct, about the subbing. I suppose Paddie Wallace could have come on at 12/15.

Eoin

GreenHell wrote:

You are correct, about the subbing. I suppose Paddie Wallace could have come on at 12/15.

That could seriously upset what was a pretty solid backline, and Ireland were winning the game at that stage. If we had been 4 or 5 points down, chasing the game and maybe just one of our centres was in doubt, then Murphy would have been a good addition.

I do agree with the sentiment that EOS doesn't use his bench nearly enough, but this was one of the few occasions where he was justified.

terry mac

I don't think you can defend Eddie's reluctance to use the bench by referring to injury worries.

Firstly, follow that to the end, and you wouldn't ever bring on tactical subs, they may as well be injury replacements only.

Second, when he did actually have a badly injured player, he left him on the pitch for 10 minutes!! O'Driscoll should have been off once he hit the deck the first time, it was pretty clear it was more than just a minor niggle. So, I don't think you can say he was keeping the subs in reserve to cover injuries!!

Eoin

terry mac wrote:

I don't think you can defend Eddie's reluctance to use the bench by referring to injury worries.

Firstly, follow that to the end, and you wouldn't ever bring on tactical subs, they may as well be injury replacements only.

No, I said that if we were chasing the game, that would be a better time to bring on subs (or maybe if we had the game won). We were just ahead, so I think keeping things constant was a better option - regardless of injury concerns. They just added to the decision.

terry mac wrote:

Second, when he did actually have a badly injured player, he left him on the pitch for 10 minutes!! O'Driscoll should have been off once he hit the deck the first time, it was pretty clear it was more than just a minor niggle. So, I don't think you can say he was keeping the subs in reserve to cover injuries!!

So, if it was clear it was more than a minor niggle, then this adds more to the argument not to use the subs for tactics?

terry mac

eoin_s wrote:

So, if it was clear it was more than a minor niggle, then this adds more to the argument not to use the subs for tactics?

No, it just shows that its against Eddie's religion to bring on subs, he left his injured captain hobbling around on the field, rather than bring on a replacement. Thats stupidity.

GreenHell

Ireland should be at a level where they can introduce sub into the game without a drop in momentum, munster were able to this in last years HEC final, Axle for Quinne and it had a positive effect. My main concern about EOS use of the bench would be that in game where for example our forward are becoming drained EOS wouldn't use impact players be it Best or Esterby. Only when we can use our full 22 man squad will be become world beaters.

As for the game yesterday, I don't have any problems with the subsitutions in the backs but I think our forward unit would have benifited from the introduction of Neil Best for Esterby(who had a fine game) and MOD for POC.

zAbbo

terry mac wrote:

No, it just shows that its against Eddie's religion to bring on subs, he left his injured captain hobbling around on the field, rather than bring on a replacement. Thats stupidity.

You'd have to drag BoD off, he would know how bad the injury was, and it would have been his decision to remain on field until the game was secured.

Eoin

terry mac wrote:

No, it just shows that its against Eddie's religion to bring on subs, he left his injured captain hobbling around on the field, rather than bring on a replacement. Thats stupidity.

Apart from Flannery. I can see where you're coming from, though we don't know what went on. O'Driscoll probably knew better than anyone what his limit was, and for all we know, he told the medical team that he was good to play on for longer. D'Arcy was able to run off his injury, and O'Driscoll probably thought he may be able to as well.

sioda

After every game I feel we are going to have this arguement we all know Eos cant sub properly and until it costs us something big no one is going to complain.

Personally I would have yanked Best ashore at half time for Flannery. Murphy is a better all round player than Dempsey but whats more he is far superior to a very overrated Trimble.

You only have to look at Murphies impact on the game when he blood subbed fot Hickey. Trimble was very bad yesterday his tackling and running was sub standard.

So IMHO it doesn't just come down to the subbing but the selection of the teamin the first place

Rant over

terry mac

I only saw the second half but from what I saw, Trimbles tackling was very much up to and above standard. Had a few great turnover smother tackles when Wales looked to be going places.

Diamondmaker

GreenHell wrote:

Ireland should be at a level where they can introduce sub into the game without a drop in momentum, munster were able to this in last years HEC final, Axle for Quinne and it had a positive effect.QUOTE]

All though I agree with this pount in principal I dont agree with it with regards to this game.
This example you say is terrible though, its like once a substitution worked out well for some team, so therfore EOS should do it more often.

davyjose

eoin_s wrote:

Apart from Flannery. I can see where you're coming from, though we don't know what went on. O'Driscoll probably knew better than anyone what his limit was, and for all we know, he told the medical team that he was good to play on for longer. D'Arcy was able to run off his injury, and O'Driscoll probably thought he may be able to as well.

Bad decision, I think; EOS himself said that he was able to take him off before the injury got too serious, well missing the French game is "too serious". I suspect had he come off earlier in the game the injury would have been quite minor. But the fact is, if we'd performed in the first half, having BOD would have been a luxury in the 2nd half, not a necessity.