Difference between Wales and Ireland.

From looking at the first half, Wales have made some excellent breaks and have really carved up the all blacks.

Now, it would seem that Ireland have a better defence, but the breaks made by Wales would, imo, put Ireland to shame.

Why is this? What are they different, we have better players, we just don't seem to have the same spirit.

Royale with Cheese

zaraba wrote: »

we have better players

What makes you think that?

Inquitus

You could argue the merits of each player individually, but broadly speaking I would say there's little difference between them overall.

themont85

Wales have vastly superior scrum halfs and out half depth. They also have a quality finisher in Williams. Apart from that i would say we have the better players. Wales play with intent at all times, it has been difficult to decipher a game plan in Ireland for two years.

Stev_o

They have better half backs and a better back 3 then us thats what separates us for them

corny

Wales play very simply. No wrap around after wrap around, you run this angle i run that angle crap. They set it up with their ball carriers and then spin it wide where they have good finishers. I'd argue they're slightly better than us man for man especially in positions where it matters most.

toomevara

Better 3/4 line, higher skill level among the backs, but on the evidence of the 2nd half they're just as tactically dim and prone to blow-up when the pressure comes on as we are.

remus808

corny wrote: »

Wales play very simply. No wrap around after wrap around, you run this angle i run that angle crap. They set it up with their ball carriers and then spin it wide where they have good finishers. I'd argue they're slightly better than us man for man especially in positions where it matters most.

What?? From 1-15:

Loosehead: I'l give you that one hands down. (1-0)
Hooker: Hmm actually.. adv. Wales. (2-0)
Tighthead: Hayes is twice the player Jones is. (2-1)
Second Rows: Normally this would be a straight, obvious victory for us but TBH Wyn Jones is playing better stuff than DOC these days. (3-2)
Flankers: hmm.. Draw aswell.. (4-3)
Eight: Powell seems to be an awesome force.. (5-3)
Half-Backs: (7-3)
Centres: (7-5)
Back 3: (9-6)

Hmm. Wasn't expecting that. Guess your right...

louthandproud

Stev_o wrote: »

They have better half backs and a better back 3 then us thats what separates us for them

That's about the most simplistic(and finger pointing) explanation I have ever heard for anything in my entire life.

davyjose

louthandproud wrote: »

That's about the most simplistic(and finger pointing) explanation I have ever heard for anything in my entire life.

It's true though

Reesy

davyjose wrote: »

It's true though

+1

And the results support the conclusion.

ironingbored

What I can't stomach is the difference in how Wales approached the game compared to Ireland's lame and defeatest demeanour. The build up yesterday was incredible. Facing down the AB's after the Haka was a brilliant move.

We then had 40 minutes of running, exciting rugby. Wales threatened time and again to break the gain line; something Ireland couldn't do against Argentina nevermind the AB's.

I think we will beat Italy (just), struggle to beat Scotland and be well beaten by the other three at next year's 6Nations.

toomevara

ironingbored wrote: »

I think we will beat Italy (just), struggle to beat Scotland and be well beaten by the other three at next year's 6Nations.

With all due respect, thats tosh, did you watch the England game? Nigh on 80% possession, huge error rate, school boy decision making. SA's tackle rate three times higher,they skittled an england team which trades on its physicality all over the park..

Despite the huge disparity in possession and territory, England scored precisely 6 points and squandered at least 4 clear try scoring opportunities(I gave up counting). We'll lamp an increasingly one-dimensional Italy, Scotland simply cannot score tries and Leinster or Munster alone would beat the current England squad handsomely...

While the game yesterday was poor, lets keep a sense of proportion re: the 6N (fast becoming the bargain basement of International rugby giving the beatings being handed out by Tri-Nations squads at the end of a long season away from their own patches.). The only team we'll struggle against is France , as for the rest we'll hold our own.

Stev_o

louthandproud wrote: »

That's about the most simplistic(and finger pointing) explanation I have ever heard for anything in my entire life.

Its just the facts, for a start their back three have speed something which he fecking lack around the park let alone the one place where your supoosed to have it in abundance.

Cooper, Peel and Philips would get into the irish starting XV no bother much better SH then we have available.

And lets face it Wales can use Jones and Hook and probably very soon Biggar. Regardless of club form which some of them are dire they'v been able to step up to international form and least play well unlike a certain OH for Ireland.

The fact is they make much better use out of their resources, we dont, they have backup players in the key areas of 9/10 and from 11/14/15 who can come in and play at this level while we can only dream of having this.

merlynthewizard

Wales over all would be the better side of the 2 teams

Sangre

Backs aside they've all got Martyn Williams who is probably the 2nd best 7 in the world.

Webbs

With Wales probably shading it in terms of quality overall, it has more to do with playing a relatively simple game plan that identifies and optimises the strengths/skills available and then showing a passion and apparent willing to die for the jersey. Having read that it really states a case for the coaching staff being the biggest difference!

Having said that Wales still didnt have enough belief in their ability to play for 80mins against NZ, in the six nations Wales played a possession game, waiting for the openings they created, they seemed to not have the belief in this system and played a game plan to try and nullify NZ rather than beat them.

NZ were fantastic in that second half coupled with Wales worst half of rugby in a long time, it could have been a cracker of a game if the pressure had been maintained on NZ. Again a real case of what if.

Hugh_C

Sangre wrote: »

Martyn Williams who is probably the 2nd best 7 in the world.

but the world's best shiner



Williams is a brilliant 7, we could do with him ...

il gatto

Wales would've thrown the likes of Keatley, Earls, Cave or Pollock into the mix by now. They believe their own hype and sometimes that's an advantage. They're confident when they have no right to be and it pays off.
They play a simple game of running rugby. It's loose and the scrappier a game gets, the more it suits them. Ireland look like a team drilled to death with staid, pre-arranged backline moves.
The Welsh still have some passion and respect for the shirt. Ireland look like their going through the motions. The "contolled instensity" and "profeesional approach" bull that was trotted out in press conferences for the last few years looks like it's not what's required to test matches.
Ironically I think Ireland has had the better backs for the last 5-6 years. It's just that Wales can use theirs. It's all about attitude and confidence, neither of which Ireland has.

Tarakiwa

The difference is simply that Wales have a willingness to loose.

That might be overly simplistic but it certainly has a huge element of truth!

They throw the ball around a lot ....... when it works it works ....... .when it does not they loose!

They have a culture of running the ball and giving it a go.

Some years (like last year) they will have their day! Other times they will be blown away by a well organised team.

Ponster

Tarakiwa wrote: »

Some years (like last year) they will have their day! Other times they will be blown away by a well organised team.

I still wouldn't bet against them to not win the 6 Nations next year. After the SH tour they've come out the strongest and look set to hold on to the cup for another year.

Webbs

Tarakiwa wrote: »

The difference is simply that Wales have a willingness to loose.

Some years (like last year) they will have their day! Other times they will be blown away by a well organised team.

That was probably true in 2005 though I think the last 6N and these Autumn internationals have added an organisation and steel to their natural willingness to run.
None of the SH teams (2nd half against NZ excepted) blew them away, the organisation was what was most impressive, in the past Wales as you rightly said could be hammered if things went wrong. Now they are able to grind through the bad periods and wait for their opportunities.
I would say the Welsh still have a good bit of improving left to do as a the recent games showed they lack that final composure which will be drilled into them next year, if they get the full package to work someone could be in for a fair hiding

twinytwo

ironingbored wrote: »

What I can't stomach is the difference in how Wales approached the game compared to Ireland's lame and defeatest demeanour. The build up yesterday was incredible. Facing down the AB's after the Haka was a brilliant move.

We then had 40 minutes of running, exciting rugby. Wales threatened time and again to break the gain line; something Ireland couldn't do against Argentina nevermind the AB's.

I think we will beat Italy (just), struggle to beat Scotland and be well beaten by the other three at next year's 6Nations.

And where did it get them??.. they still got their asses handed to them worse than we did... as for the 6N we will have to wait and see.. hopefully the lads will pull their socks up

twinytwo

Ponster wrote: »

I still wouldn't bet against them to not win the 6 Nations next year. After the SH tour they've come out the strongest and look set to hold on to the cup for another year.

Not if france actually put at a proper team this year and actually play to win

twinytwo

Sangre wrote: »

Backs aside they've all got Martyn Williams who is probably the 2nd best 7 in the world.

Hardly when Richie Burger Wallace etc are better players

Ponster

twinytwo wrote: »

Not if france actually put at a proper team this year and actually play to win

It's been a while since they did that and the mood of the public and players over here suggest that 2009 isn't going to be their year.

ALH-06

il gatto wrote: »

Wales would've thrown the likes of Keatley, Earls, Cave or Pollock into the mix by now. They believe their own hype and sometimes that's an advantage. They're confident when they have no right to be and it pays off.
They play a simple game of running rugby. It's loose and the scrappier a game gets, the more it suits them. Ireland look like a team drilled to death with staid, pre-arranged backline moves.
The Welsh still have some passion and respect for the shirt. Ireland look like their going through the motions. The "contolled instensity" and "profeesional approach" bull that was trotted out in press conferences for the last few years looks like it's not what's required to test matches.
Ironically I think Ireland has had the better backs for the last 5-6 years. It's just that Wales can use theirs. It's all about attitude and confidence, neither of which Ireland has.

I disagree with just about everything you say here. Whatever about Earls, Keatley, Cave and Pollock aren't ready for international rugby yet. Playing them against anyone other than a minnow would risk another Andy Robinson/Matthew Tait situation. Can't rush them in.

Ireland don't have better backs than Wales. I've never rated Shanklin, but I think Wales currently edge Ireland everywhere else from 9-15. The quality they have in the backs with Peel, Hook, Byrne, S. Williams, G. Henson beats anything we can offer in these positions currently.

And lastly, check this clip out. It's of a staid, pre-arranged Irish backline move cutting Wales to shreds. Look at Darcy's line and angle of running! God I wish we had him back...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1wZjz3n0rSU

Webbs

twinytwo wrote: »

Hardly when Richie Burger Wallace etc are better players

Burger and Wallace are defintately not better 7s esp with the new ELV meaning a better balanced backrow is becoming more and more important.
But then thats my opinion, I prefer a more 'traditional' 7 with linking skills to the 6.5 that wallace and burger are, others will go for the ball carrying ability of those 2 (McCaw is perfect in that he is all these things!)

Webbs

ALH-06 wrote: »

I disagree with just about everything you say here. Whatever about Earls, Keatley, Cave and Pollock aren't ready for international rugby yet. Playing them against anyone other than a minnow would risk another Andy Robinson/Matthew Tait situation. Can't rush them in.

For every Tait situation then you will probably get someone like Halfpenny that Wales unearthed this year and Alun Wyn Jones before that for example. Tait was very badly handled and would be a much better player if he had been allowed to continue rather than destroy his confidence (poor man management not the player at fault!).
The mantra of 'if their good enough their old enough' still holds true. What would have been the harm in bringing on Earls who has the confidence in spades to make it at international level?

Sangre

twinytwo wrote: »

Hardly when Richie Burger Wallace etc are better players

Wallace is nowhere near Williams' class. I'd rate Williams ahead of Burger as well.

RugbyFanatic

ALH-06 wrote: »

And lastly, check this clip out. It's of a staid, pre-arranged Irish backline move cutting Wales to shreds. Look at Darcy's line and angle of running! God I wish we had him back...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1wZjz3n0rSU

But when was the last time you saw firstly our backline so deep and secondly O'Gara give one of those lovely passes?

Our backline is so flat these days and it seems like a simple problem to fix yet it just hasn't been done.

ThomasH

Wales have a slightly better team at the moment. That's due to their players having more experience and they seem to have a bit more passion for winning.

Ireland will improve over next 3 years with the exciting new players of Bowe, Fitzgerald, Kearney, etc. as long as they keep getting experience to play.

twinytwo

Sangre wrote: »

Wallace is nowhere near Williams' class. I'd rate Williams ahead of Burger as well.

Whatever about wallace... Williams hasnt a tap on burger apart from the hot headed moments during some games he can only be described as a human wrecking ball

ThomasH

twinytwo wrote: »

Whatever about wallace... Williams hasnt a tap on burger apart from the hot headed moments during some games he can only be described as a human wrecking ball

+1 Agreed. Williams is not consistent where as I've never seen Burger on an off day.

Doc

Wales keep the ball alive and pass out of the contact very well. They move the ball from the brake down quickly before the opposition has a chance to regroup. There support play and running off the ball is very good. Ireland tends to rely on the set pieces and kicking, or on individuals to make a brake and go all the way themselves.

Webbs

ThomasH wrote: »

Wales have a slightly better team at the moment. That's due to their players having more experience and they seem to have a bit more passion for winning.

Ireland will improve over next 3 years with the exciting new players of Bowe, Fitzgerald, Kearney, etc. as long as they keep getting experience to play.

Ireland have about the same number of caps as their welsh counterparts!

What Wales appear to have in spades is a team ethic and leaders across the park who support each other.

So whatever the reason, the Welsh as a team are streets ahead of where Ireland are at the moment, thats not to say once Kidney has identified how he wants Ireland to play and they all buy into it that major improvements won't happen.
Just pray that Wales dont improve as well and hit their full potential

Serenity Now!

The difference between Wales and Ireland is easy.

The former wouldn't know a decent haircut if it was hit in the mush with one and should have a roof over it while the latter is home to the worst drivers around and is owned by Tony O'Reilly

jam_on_toast

We are too conservative in our rugby, in our play and in our selection. We reek of predictability.

Everything our backline does looks so rehearsed, we need to play a more "off the cuff" style of play, ie, play whats in front of you. Personally, i dont think we can play that style of rugby, as our 10 cannot play that sort of game.

On the wallace front, he is one of the worlds best backrows, but in no way is he or should ever have been a 7. I would love to have seen wallace at 6 and gleeson at 7 in the WC.

anonymous_joe

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/kidney-must-turn-up-the-heat-using-welsh-recipe-1560002.html

By Tony Ward

Tuesday December 02 2008

As sure as night follows day, New Zealand completed another northern hemisphere Grand Slam at Twickenham on Saturday.

Of course, the much-beleaguered English gave it their best shot. They were game in the first half, could have scored a try early in the second but, in the final analysis, were as far off the pace as the Scots, Irish and even the Welsh in the previous three weeks.

And while, in each of the four games, the Kiwis pulled away in the latter stages, the groundwork was laid in the opening 40 minutes.

Therein lies the biggest single difference between the southern hemisphere's Big Three and the rest -- they have the ability to produce consistently high-tempo, high-pressure, relentlessly intensive rugby over 80 minutes at Test level.

The All Blacks and Springboks have history and tradition on their side -- with due respect to the sports-loving Aussies. For New Zealanders and South Africans, rugby is a way of life. It is, in a sense, a definition of who they are.

Aside from the equally rugby-intoxicated Welsh, can we honestly say that about any other major rugby-playing nation?

So, while it was Argentina who scraped into the top band in fourth place at yesterday's World Cup draw, if the tournament was kicking off tomorrow it would be the Welsh leading the rugby charge outside of the Big Three.

For the third weekend running, it was Warren Gatland's charges who offered us some hope and gave us something to look forward to come the Six Nations as they defeated Australia.

The substance to this winning performance was based on the Tri-Nations principle -- meeting the match tempo for 80 minutes.

Their rugby against the Wallabies was, at times, breathtaking and it's something the Irish set-up must take note of. Wales' ability to offload at pace and to consistently change the point of attack by way of fingertip control has surely provided the blueprint for Declan Kidney.

The bar has already been raised, whether by way of the ELVs or not, and unless Ireland are prepared to follow suit then yesterday's draw has little relevance, short of giving the tournament an early publicity boost.

For anyone who limits Gatland's impact on Wales' game to that of 'new broom' effect, the substance to Saturday's performance told a tale. This was rugby on the edge. The type of competitive game that has punters flocking through the turnstiles, in contrast to the dross we witnessed at Croke Park between Ireland and the Pumas seven days previous.

On an individual level, full-back Lee Byrne, No 8 Andy Powell and IRB World Player of the Year Shane Williams are top-quality players licensed to thrill, while a back row of Ryan Jones, Martyn Williams and Powell was also immense.

There appears to be a post-November school of thought that the current Irish side have an adequate forward unit but inadequate back-line.

It is a view I do not share.

Yes, we are short top-quality pace, with only the recently retired Denis Hickie providing the type of cutting edge comparable with that of the leading nations. But it won't take much convincing to realise that, in Rob Kearney (when eventually installed at full-back), Luke Fitzgerald and Keith Earls, we do possess the kind of free-running, up-and-coming young backs that are comparable with Byrne, Williams et al.

And, with due respect to those commentators currently deriding Ireland behind the scrum, it must be pointed out that any backline -- individually and collectively -- is only as good as the quality of forward ball it gets.

The pace and direction of possession is everything and not a single comparison can be seriously made between the vibrancy of the Welsh up front against the Big Three and that of the Irish pack against the Kiwis or Pumas.

Yes, the Irish team were committed and competitive to a fault and, for sure, we didn't creak physically as at the World Cup, but to suggest our current inadequacies begin at scrum-half and end at full-back is delusional.

The recommencement of the Heineken Cup over the next fortnight, allied to the local derby aspect to the Magners League in the Christmas period, will see a decent level of intensity maintained.

Kidney will not view the Six Nations as a breaking ground for developing talent or indeed for an overly dramatic change in style of play. There's got to be some shift in emphasis.

The autumn objective was to secure a band two seeding and, to that end, it was mission accomplished. However, more of the same come spring and Kidney's honeymoon period will certainly be over.

The aim must be to hit the ground running in the Six Nations when we play France in Croke Park in February.

It is a big ask, but early momentum is everything; win and the Six Nations could be our oyster, lose and it could be a long and lonely series.

The Welsh have shown the way; are we brave enough to follow?

- Tony Ward

Some interesting points. The bit about our pack misfiring is very apt I think.

RuggieBear

tbh the whole bloody team is misfiring.

Sangre

twinytwo wrote: »

Whatever about wallace... Williams hasnt a tap on burger apart from the hot headed moments during some games he can only be described as a human wrecking ball

Different styles. I think Williams style suits wales very well and the same can be said for burger for SA.