Ireland vs Namibia

kevpants

Why did they fake the shoulder injury so? I'm not 100% sure of the workings. I was just aware of the rule. I'd imagine the situation would have gotten rather sticky for Munster if O'Gara took a smack on the head and didn't come round in the next match.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

SpAcEd OuT

People are talking as if its a fact that Hickie even had a concussion to be honest its all speculation and if Hickie didnt have one like I suspect then thats 2 games in a row where he has played poorly whereas Murphy has been playing very well as of late. Winning teams play their most in form players and right now that isn't Hickie.

if Murphy plays exceptionally well against Georgia then I would certainly be in favour of him taking Hickies place against France and as i've said earlier I wouldnt just throw Shaggy into a game with France having played no warm up games.

yogidc26

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

People are talking as if its a fact that Hickie even had a concussion to be honest its all speculation and if Hickie didnt have one like I suspect then thats 2 games in a row where he has played poorly whereas Murphy has been playing very well as of late. Winning teams play their most in form players and right now that isn't Hickie.

if Murphy plays exceptionally well against Georgia then I would certainly be in favour of him taking Hickies place against France and as i've said earlier I wouldnt just throw Shaggy into a game with France having played no warm up games.

Shaggy will get staght back in to the team cause EOS will not change his best team, he may make 1 or 2 changes in the back row and at 2 but thats it we all know that he like to keep the same guys playing. What the point of bring players at 79 min. NONE

GreeBo

anyone else feel that Stringer & O'Gara spend too much time moaning a the ref when they cant get quick ball rather than just getting on with it?
If our forwards hit the rucks hard and cleared them out like NZ (or Namibia!) then we would have more quality ball.

The back line were too flat, took the ball standing still most of the time and couldnt break the line. Namibia had the try of the match with their line break.

Its all well and good scoring chip ahead and a cross field trys but we shoudnt need to rely on tricks against a team like namibia.

Kick to the corners to get inside their 22 (or at least half) and then run some moves off a lineout/scrum.

EdgarAllenPoo

With this close result do you think the smaller rugby playing nations will now get a boost after seeing Namibia's performance. Based on how they played I think thye could beat teams like Italy,Canada and Japan.

GreeBo

GDM wrote:

Based on how they played I think thye could beat teams like Italy,Canada and Japan.

Italy are better than that.

Sabre0001

I think it makes a case for having the smaller nations still there...

Namibia, Japan, Canada, USA have all scared nations in the openers and shown huge spirit. Samoa put up a good fight but handling errors cost them and Portugal fought hard, put up a good showing and really (visibly) enjoyed it even though they weren't going to win. I will miss this if the WC is reduced in size.

So what if there are cricket scores - the NZ v Italy game was amazing to watch! (and Italy are supposed to be top 10 yet were lucky that NZ took their foot off). The only way these smaller teams will get better (and noticed) is if they get to play at a high level.


And the smaller nations have already had the belief and have tried everything! Even Argentina weren't given a chance against France pre-game but they backed themselves and look what happened!

zAbbo

Namiba's bosses (NRU + executives) have been sent home due to ticket irregularities, they made some decent scratch from touting.

The review, carried out by Canadian advocate Graeme Mew on behalf of Rugby World Cup Limited, shows how several cash deposits totalling E250,500 ($345,000) were made into a trust account of the law firm Conradie & Damaseb, owned by Conradie.

http://www.rugby365.com/story/0,18881,3891_2719649,00.html

AlphaMale 3OO

Sabre0001 wrote:

I think it makes a case for having the smaller nations still there...

Namibia, Japan, Canada, USA have all scared nations in the openers and shown huge spirit. Samoa put up a good fight but handling errors cost them and Portugal fought hard, put up a good showing and really (visibly) enjoyed it even though they weren't going to win. I will miss this if the WC is reduced in size.

So what if there are cricket scores - the NZ v Italy game was amazing to watch! (and Italy are supposed to be top 10 yet were lucky that NZ took their foot off). The only way these smaller teams will get better (and noticed) is if they get to play at a high level.


And the smaller nations have already had the belief and have tried everything! Even Argentina weren't given a chance against France pre-game but they backed themselves and look what happened!

Japan scared the Aussies in a 90 point loss? I'd agree with all the others though. great performances.

LuckyLloyd

Sabre0001 wrote:

I think it makes a case for having the smaller nations still there...

Namibia, Japan, Canada, USA have all scared nations in the openers and shown huge spirit. Samoa put up a good fight but handling errors cost them and Portugal fought hard, put up a good showing and really (visibly) enjoyed it even though they weren't going to win. I will miss this if the WC is reduced in size.

So what if there are cricket scores - the NZ v Italy game was amazing to watch! (and Italy are supposed to be top 10 yet were lucky that NZ took their foot off). The only way these smaller teams will get better (and noticed) is if they get to play at a high level.


And the smaller nations have already had the belief and have tried everything! Even Argentina weren't given a chance against France pre-game but they backed themselves and look what happened!

The only way these nations will improve is if the IRB dictates that they get more test matches against six and tri nations sides in their own back yard.

As for Argentina - it is a disgrace that they do not compete in either the six nations or tri - nations on a yearly basis.

prospect

LuckyLloyd wrote:

As for Argentina - it is a disgrace that they do not compete in either the six nations or tri - nations on a yearly basis.

AFAIK they are currently being considered for the Tri-Nations.

LuckyLloyd

prospect wrote:

AFAIK they are currently being considered for the Tri-Nations.

Ok. Though, IMO of course, it should be a case whereby the IRB says: "they're in". And the other three are forced to make it happen.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Sabre0001

Would make more sense for them to be included in 6 nations as most of them play in France anyway - less hassle for all concerned (except the fans). Also, would be good for Ireland because we often come up against them in crunch games.

nacho libre

thebaz wrote:

what worries me the most is the staleness and lack of energy of the pack -- where is the munster fire -- leamy , easterby , o'connell , o'callaghan are worringly letheragic -- and playing a wounded france in france , is going to be difficult for any team , all blacks included -- worrying times

Brent Pope had an interesting article on the RTE website about this. Anyone read it?

Sabre0001

Just read it there - a good read and some valid points...Don't understand why he says that it's understandable that BO'D who was injured was rusty but that David Wallace should have been fresh - he was also injured!

I agree with the attitude thing - never live up to favourites tag, always seem to be too nice to little teams (in every sport) and don't push hard enough to set out a marker sometimes...