Ireland XV v. Kidney Reject XV

Madworld

Completely hypothetical here but would Kidney's preferred XV beat my best of the rest by that much?

1. Healy
2. Best
3. Ross
4. O'Connell
5. O'Callaghan
6. Ferris
7. O'Brien
8. Heaslip
9. Murray
10. O'Gara
11. Earls
12. Darcy
13. O'Driscoll
14. Bowe
15. Kearney

My best of the rest team. Mainly picked on people who were left for possibly inferior players. Playing Devil's Advocate a small bit here though. I.E. BOD V. McFadden

1. Hagan
2. Cronin
3. Wilkonson

Part of a Connaught front row who destroyed teams in the ML. Know each other well.

4. Cullen
5. Casey

Maybe not as good all round players, but IMO a better lineout pair than POC and DOC

6. Muldoon
7. Jennings
8. Wilson

Although Kidney clearly doesn't rate him, Jennings is one of the best scavengers in the Northern Hemisphere. Wilson and Muldoon add plenty of bulk in terms of ball carrying and nous in terms of the dark arts of the breakdown.

9. Stringer
10 Sexton

A combo I would of loved to seen tried for Ireland. Stringer still is Ireland's quickest and best passer IMO. Sexton's playmaking ability is second to none. These two could of been devastating if they had of been given a chance.

12. Downey
13. Fitzgerald

Downey pure explosiveness and ability to break the gaineline would cause ROG and Darcy much of the same difficulties as Roberts. Fitzgeralds pace and rugby brain could also unleash the a very potent back three.

11. Carr
14. Trimble
15. Murphy

Carr has played some top quality games for Leinster. Trimble was probably player of the Warm-ups and Murphy is a multiple Heineken Cup winning player.


So if the Ireland team played the Declan Kidney rejects (exc. Sexton) what do people thing the score would be?

20-18 Ireland for me.

NoelJ

bout 20 points difference.

badabing106

So if the Ireland team played the Declan Kidney rejects (exc. Sexton) what do people thing the score would be?

20-18 Ireland for me.

A first string Ireland team would beat a second string Ireland team comfortably .We are not New zealand

irishbucsfan

Front row would be absolutely slaughtered. Second row would be thrashed in the lineout and Casey would keep up with about 25% of the play. Muldoon and Jennings are great, Wilson is alright, but they're playing one of the best back rows in the world and would be slaughtered as well. Stringer isn't NEARLY good enough. Sexton is not a reject... not even close and so I'll imagine they'd have Humphreys or Keatley, neither of whom are up to scratch. Fitzgerald has not played 13 at any decent level, and Downey is about the most one dimensional person since pacman. They'd be all at sea defensively (although Ireland wouldn't be able to take advantage of that!). Carr would be embarrassed in defense against Tommy Bowe. Murphy and Trimble are both great.


The score would be about 35-3 and only because Ireland couldn't score tries regularly with their uncreative back play.

The team I'd pick by the way would be Wilkinson, Cronin, Hagan, Tuohy, Cullen, Ruddock, Ryan, Muldoon; Boss, Keatley, Trimble, Fitzgerald, Spence, Gilroy, Murphy and they wouldn't do much better. Still slaughtered in the set piece and pack.

GerM

The Irish pack would absolutely blow that second string pack out of the water in every facet of forward play. Ireland first choice by 20-30 points.

matthew8

Scrum- 1st pack destroys second
lineout- neither side with significant advantage
backrow- Jennings would be a better 7 than O'Brien, though Muldoon would be dominated. Wilson wouldn't fare too well if Heaslip has any sort of a decent game.
Halfbacks- As always, Sexton outperforms O'Gara while playing against him while Stringer mathes Murray
centres- with darce and bod off form and fitz on form I don't see the first xv having to big an advantage
back 3- Murphy shows how much better he is than Kearney, as does Carr with Earls, though Bowe outperforms Trimble

I think first xv by 3. What'd be more interesting is Leinster (using only Irish players) vs. rest of Ireland (again only Irish players).

Fishooks12

Ireland first choice would put 30 or 40 on that team, it's not even well picked (Fitz and Downey in the centre?!)

Richard Wilson would probably be my 5th or 6th choice Irish 8 too

matthew8

Here's my 2nd team:
1. Hagan
2. Cronin
3. Court
4. Cullen
5. Casey
6. Dominic Ryan
7. Jennings
8. Rhys Ruddock

I'd have great confidence in the second and back rows and I think that in those positions the second team would do better due to having the best lineout jumper eligible for Ireland as well as a top class 7.

9. Reddan
10. Sexton

These halfbacks are far better than ROG and Murray.

12. Fitzgerald
13. McFadden

These 2 guys clearly have the class to be great players and Fitz is on form
11. Carr, who has for some reason been totally ignored by Kidney, he must think Connact is some amateur team.
14. Trimble
15. Murphy

I woul give that team a great chance vs. Ireland.

Fishooks12

matthew8 wrote: »

Here's my 2nd team:
1. Hagan
2. Cronin
3. Court
4. Cullen
5. Casey
6. Dominic Ryan
7. Jennings
8. Rhys Ruddock

I'd have great confidence in the second and back rows and I think that in those positions the second team would do better due to having the best lineout jumper eligible for Ireland as well as a top class 7.

9. Reddan
10. Sexton

These halfbacks are far better than ROG and Murray.

12. Fitzgerald
13. McFadden

These 2 guys clearly have the class to be great players and Fitz is on form
11. Carr, who has for some reason been totally ignored by Kidney, he must think Connact is some amateur team.
14. Trimble
15. Murphy

I woul give that team a great chance vs. Ireland.

Kidneys given plenty of Connacht players game time, McCarhty, Cronin, Tuohy.

Who would Carr replace in the Irish squad? Although I admit he should probably have been included in the provisional Irish WC training squad

If he nails down a place in Leinster I'm sure he'll get a chance

.ak

Carr had an impressive start with Leinster at the beginning of the season, but has since become a little quiet and relies too much on one-on-one situations. He needs to be a little bit more clever with ball in hand imo. Hudson put on a better performance to be fair in the previous game.

GerM

Hagan is a tighthead. People keep putting him at loose. He'd be hammered there. Carr isn't good enough in reality. He has improved and is lethal in space with the ball in hand but his all round game isn't up to scratch. I would reckon that he'll be the first Leinster winger to drop down the pecking order when others come back from injury/international duty. His aim for the season will be to get some significant game time and convince Leinster to give him something beyond a one year deal. I'd be surprised if he ever gets a cap with the winger options coming through in the provinces.

Fishooks12

Anyone else mystified by the supposed outrage surrounding James Downeys exclusion from past Irish squads

He's very one dimensional, granted D'arcy struggles to get go-forward ball these days we still have much better options in McFadden, Fitzgerald, and Spence

We saw with Pat McCabe (who's a better ball carrier than Downey) what can happen to one dimensional 12s in test rugby.

GerM

Flavour of the month, I suppose, given his season with Northampton. He's a good player but not international class. He could have done a good job for Munster at 12 in the past few years and would have allowed them to use a NIQ elsewhere. Downey at 12 with a NIQ flanker would be far preferable for me to Mafi at 12 and Leamy/Ryan at flanker. He's very limited but does a job. It's a pity that his spell in Munster clashed with Halstead who was a better version of himself.

Podge_irl

The only place the "reject" teams are even remotely close is at half back (where they're generally better actually) and possibly the back 3. They'd be annihilated.

Fishooks12

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Kidneys given plenty of Connacht players game time, McCarhty, Cronin, Tuohy.

chupacabra

Deleted User wrote: »

Got Brian and Dan mixed up probably.

Anyway, that Ireland first XV would make mince meat of the second string. Stringer might have a quick pass but it is by no means a good pass anymore. Its all over the place. Downey at 12 would be detrimental to the midfield play.. the ball would just end with him running into contact and while that front row was good for connacht it would be no match for the front row that demolished Australia and beat Italy in the WC.

Ireland first XV by 10 - 20

Madworld

chupacabra wrote: »

Got Brian and Dan mixed up probably.

Anyway, that Ireland first XV would make mince meat of the second string. Stringer might have a quick pass but it is by no means a good pass anymore. Its all over the place. Downey at 12 would be detrimental to the midfield play.. the ball would just end with him running into contact and while that front row was good for connacht it would be no match for the front row that demolished Australia and beat Italy in the WC.

Ireland first XV by 10 - 20

That Ireland front row is the Leinster one plus Rory Best whom Strauss would equal in terms of in scrummaging. In last yrs ML games Leinster held no discernible advantage against Connacht. They also benefit from having a bigger second row behind them.

In terms of second row Casey and Cullen would have lineout superiority imo. The Ireland second row would be better in open play but in terms of lineout and scrummaging I think the advantage would be in the alternative second row.

The backrow provides a more balanced alternative to the Ireland one.

In terms of backplay, due to the fact of Jennings' presence at the breakdown they would be guaranteed quick ball with the likes of Downey, who despite his limitations would regularly draw in two or three players to take him down, thus freeing up the outside backs for the next phase of play.

In terms of leadership there is no way that a team with four club captains would be beaten by 30 points as others have suggested.

Fishooks12

Madworld wrote: »

That Ireland front row is the Leinster one plus Rory Best whom Strauss would equal in terms of in scrummaging. In last yrs ML games Leinster held no discernible advantage against Connacht. They also benefit from having a bigger second row behind them.

In terms of second row Casey and Cullen would have lineout superiority imo. The Ireland second row would be better in open play but in terms of lineout and scrummaging I think the advantage would be in the alternative second row.

The backrow provides a more balanced alternative to the Ireland one.

In terms of backplay, due to the fact of Jennings' presence at the breakdown they would be guaranteed quick ball with the likes of Downey, who despite his limitations would regularly draw in two or three players to take him down, thus freeing up the outside backs for the next phase of play.

In terms of leadership there is no way that a team with four club captains would be beaten by 30 points as others have suggested.

There's a lot of speculation and what ifs in that post but in no way are Casey and Cullen better line-out operators than DOC and POC, the latter of which is still probably the best line-out operator in world rugby

Casey is too big to lift in the lineout

CatFromHue

The Casey conundrum is an argument from a few years ago, it's not current anymore as he is at the end of his career. I personally believe POC, DOC, and MOK were better players than him throughout his whole career. I have alot of respect for him for making the jump to London Irish and making a career for himself over there though. He could have stayed behind in Leinster but I couldn't see him being picked ahead of Cullen or MOK once they were fit and so would have had limited gametime here.

Mick O'Driscoll is far better than Casey currently, and in previous seasons too.

desertcircus

Madworld wrote: »

That Ireland front row is the Leinster one plus Rory Best whom Strauss would equal in terms of in scrummaging. In last yrs ML games Leinster held no discernible advantage against Connacht. They also benefit from having a bigger second row behind them.

In terms of second row Casey and Cullen would have lineout superiority imo. The Ireland second row would be better in open play but in terms of lineout and scrummaging I think the advantage would be in the alternative second row.

The backrow provides a more balanced alternative to the Ireland one.

In terms of backplay, due to the fact of Jennings' presence at the breakdown they would be guaranteed quick ball with the likes of Downey, who despite his limitations would regularly draw in two or three players to take him down, thus freeing up the outside backs for the next phase of play.

In terms of leadership there is no way that a team with four club captains would be beaten by 30 points as others have suggested.

Leinster's front row in the RDS last year against Connacht was Heinke van der Merwe, Richardt Strauss and Clint Newland, not a single one of whom is currently in the Irish front row. While the two did line up against each other in Galway, that was eight games into the season when Leinster had won four and lost three. And Connacht lost 18-6. I wouldn't set too much store by it.

As for Cullen/Casey - Casey has been unable to play more than twenty minutes a game for over a year now. That's not a harsh call: that's from his own column in the Irish Times. He'd be annihilated, completely and utterly. A man who can manage twenty minutes in the Premiership will not manage fifteen against an Irish international pack.

It doesn't matter how many club captains are in a lineup: the pack would be eaten alive. Jennings is good, but he's a step down from Warburton, Pocock and McCaw as a seven, and wouldn't cause O'Brien, Ferris and Heaslip enough problems. And Downey could be useful against other teams, but not one with as hard a tackler as Brian O'Driscoll in the midfield.

matthew8

Fishooks12 wrote: »

There's a lot of speculation and what ifs in that post but in no way are Casey and Cullen better line-out operators than DOC and POC, the latter of which is still probably the best line-out operator in world rugby

Are you joking on O'Connell being the best lineout operator? I'd rather have Thorn, Rossouw, Horwill, Matfield, Botha, Kellock, Charteris, Jones or Gray.

freyners

in fairness that front row of wilko cronin and hagan have come up against alot of experienced/strong front row combos and held their own. Connachts scrum was one of their main strengths last year.

twinytwo

matthew8 wrote: »

Scrum- 1st pack destroys second
lineout- neither side with significant advantage
backrow- Jennings would be a better 7 than O'Brien, though Muldoon would be dominated. Wilson wouldn't fare too well if Heaslip has any sort of a decent game.
Halfbacks- As always, Sexton outperforms O'Gara while playing against him while Stringer mathes Murray
centres- with darce and bod off form and fitz on form I don't see the first xv having to big an advantage
back 3- Murphy shows how much better he is than Kearney, as does Carr with Earls, though Bowe outperforms Trimble

I think first xv by 3. What'd be more interesting is Leinster (using only Irish players) vs. rest of Ireland (again only Irish players).

i dont even know what to say to most of the above... do you even watch rugby??

twinytwo

matthew8 wrote: »

Are you joking on O'Connell being the best lineout operator? I'd rather have Thorn, Rossouw, Horwill, Matfield, Botha, Kellock, Charteris, Jones or Gray.

Again... do you even watch rugby?.. Matfield even said himself POC was one of the best lineout operators he has ever come up against... but sure what does he know.

porterbelly

freyners wrote: »

in fairness that front row of wilko cronin and hagan have come up against alot of experienced/strong front row combos and held their own. Connachts scrum was one of their main strengths last year.

Sent alot of good scrums backwards last year

Grimebox

The only debatable positions are O'Gara/Sexton, Murphy/Kearney and Trimble/Bowe. The rest win hands down any day of the week, no contest

matthew8

twinytwo wrote: »

i dont even know what to say to most of the above... do you even watch rugby??

Go on, say what you have a problem with.

twinytwo wrote: »

Again... do you even watch rugby?.. Matfield even said himself POC was one of the best lineout operators he has ever come up against... but sure what does he know.

POC is great and perhaps his finest hour was against Matfield in Croker, but to say he's the best lineout operator right now is incorrect.

matthew8

Grimebox wrote: »

The only debatable positions are O'Gara/Sexton, Murphy/Kearney and Trimble/Bowe. The rest win hands down any day of the week, no contest

So you're of the opinion that we should play 2 blindside flankers (Ferris, O'Brien) rather than 1 blindside flanker and 1 openside, unlike the rest of the world?

Podge_irl

I imagine he's of the opinion we should play two outstanding blindside flankers as opposed to one blindside and one openside who appears to be completely ineffectual at international level. I'd tend to agree until better options present themselves.

Grimebox

matthew8 wrote: »

So you're of the opinion that we should play 2 blindside flankers (Ferris, O'Brien) rather than 1 blindside flanker and 1 openside, unlike the rest of the world?

I don't understand the intricacies of the back row at all to be honest, but I don't rate Muldoon whatsoever. How different could it be to play blindside rather than openside? It's the most interchangeable position in my limited opinion (other than wingers)

matthew8

Podge_irl wrote: »

I imagine he's of the opinion we should play two outstanding blindside flankers as opposed to one blindside and one openside who appears to be completely ineffectual at international level. I'd tend to agree until better options present themselves.

What are you basing Jennings being "completely ineffectual at international level" on? He gets hardly any gametime.

Fishooks12

matthew8 wrote: »

What are you basing Jennings being "completely ineffectual at international level" on? He gets hardly any gametime.

He got a full game against the US and was destroyed by Tom Cleaver, a 7 who plays his rugby in Japan

twinytwo

matthew8 wrote: »

Go on, say what you have a problem with.


POC is great and perhaps his finest hour was against Matfield in Croker, but to say he's the best lineout operator right now is incorrect.

Ok lets see, you said...

Scrum- 1st pack destroys second
lineout- neither side with significant advantage
backrow- Jennings would be a better 7 than O'Brien, though Muldoon would be dominated. Wilson wouldn't fare too well if Heaslip has any sort of a decent game.
Halfbacks- As always, Sexton outperforms O'Gara while playing against him while Stringer mathes Murray
centres- with darce and bod off form and fitz on form I don't see the first xv having to big an advantage
back 3- Murphy shows how much better he is than Kearney, as does Carr with Earls, though Bowe outperforms Trimble

I think first xv by 3. What'd be more interesting is Leinster (using only Irish players) vs. rest of Ireland (again only Irish players).

lets see...

1st point.. yes you are correct our current scrum would destroy the second.

2nd point... Not have an advantage? we had the best lineout at the WC with up until the SF;s we had stolen more lineout than anyother team including SA.

3rd point... jennings may be a better "7" than O'Brien.. O'Brien is a better player than jennings will ever be. ferris o brien and heaslip would walk over any other backrow you could put together in ireland.

4th point... neither have ever consistenly outperformed the other... they have both had excellent and bad games for both club and country. Also how does stringer match murray? murray is superior in every aspect of the game except for maybe pass( its not what it once was) and experience.. but its hard to beat over 200 caps for munster and nearly 100 for ireland.

5th point.. whatever about darcy, drico still ****s over any other center in the country.

6th point.. Again the FB choice comes down to type of game... to say murphy is way better than kearney is daft.. Im sorry but earls would destroy carr.

matthew8

2nd point... Not have an advantage? we had the best lineout at the WC with up until the SF;s we had stolen more lineout than anyother team including SA.

We weren't playing teams with the best lineouts you know. Cullen and Casey are both decent lineout operators, but if Casey can't start Toner is also good in the lineouts.

3rd point... jennings may be a better "7" than O'Brien.. O'Brien is a better player than jennings will ever be. ferris o brien and heaslip would walk over any other backrow you could put together in ireland.

I think I made it pretty clear that the first team would have the advantage in the backrow by pointing out that 2 of the 3 players would be far superior to their counterparts.

4th point... neither have ever consistenly outperformed the other... they have both had excellent and bad games for both club and country. Also how does stringer match murray? murray is superior in every aspect of the game except for maybe pass( its not what it once was) and experience.. but its hard to beat over 200 caps for munster and nearly 100 for ireland.

Let's look at Sexton, when in a match against ROG.
Sexton 25-ROG 6
Sexton 30-ROG 0
Sexton 16-ROG 15
Sexton 16-ROG 6
Sexton 13-ROG 9
ROG 24- Sexton 23
ROG 19- Sexton 9

5-2 to Sexton when they play against eachother.

5th point.. whatever about darcy, drico still ****s over any other center in the country.

Maybe, but McFadden is pretty good.

6th point.. Again the FB choice comes down to type of game... to say murphy is way better than kearney is daft.. Im sorry but earls would destroy carr.

Kearney hasn't been brilliant for a while. Unless all Earls has to do in a match is run in a straight line he would not destory Carr.

CIARAN_BOYLE

matthew8 wrote: »

Kearney hasn't been brilliant for a while. Unless all Earls has to do in a match is run in a straight line he would not destory Carr.

Maybe not but he was pretty damn good in the WC and warm ups and Murphy hasn't been brilliant recently either

danthefan

Kearney was easily our best outside back in the RWC, he didn't put a toe wrong all tournament.

On the issue of opensides - SOB is almost in the exact same style as Wallace, except he's probably a bit better at the breakdown. All this wailing about not having a 7, we haven't had a 7 since about 2004.

On the teams named in the original post - the Ireland XV would win heavily imo.

matthew8

danthefan wrote: »

Kearney was easily our best outside back in the RWC, he didn't put a toe wrong all tournament.

On the issue of opensides - SOB is almost in the exact same style as Wallace, except he's probably a bit better at the breakdown. All this wailing about not having a 7, we haven't had a 7 since about 2004.

On the teams named in the original post - the Ireland XV would win heavily imo.

It's true that we haven't had a 7 since 2004, and it's a damn shame that we never used the great talents of Keith Gleeson, Johnny O'Connor and Shane Jennings.

Fishooks12

matthew8 wrote: »

It's true that we haven't had a 7 since 2004, and it's a damn shame that we never used the great talents of Keith Gleeson, Johnny O'Connor and Shane Jennings.

Those players were never world class 7s though and they got more than ample opportunity to stake their place

Jennings in the opening game of the RWC being a prime example

Quinlan was the closest thing Ireland came to a world class 7 in the last few years

danthefan

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Those players were never world class 7s though and they got more than ample opportunity to stake their place

Jennings in the opening game of the RWC being a prime example

Quinlan was the closest thing Ireland came to a world class 7 in the last few years

Except he wasn't a 7 at all and he definitely wasn't world class.

Fishooks12

danthefan wrote: »

Except he wasn't a 7 at all and he definitely wasn't world class.

He played their plenty of times and I always felt he was underutilised at 6

If he had been switched to 7 more consistently earlier iin his career I feel he could have been world class

If you read my original post I never said he was world class did i

Gleeson and Johnny O'Connor are pretty much the only "#7s" that Ireland have ever played at openside

wixfjord

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Those players were never world class 7s though and they got more than ample opportunity to stake their place

Jennings in the opening game of the RWC being a prime example

Quinlan was the closest thing Ireland came to a world class 7 in the last few years

Jennings was very good in the opening game of the WC, despite what the RTE panel would have you think.

That stuff about Quinlan is so wrong it's unreal! About as far away from a 7 as you could get for a backrow player.

Fishooks12

wixfjord wrote: »

Jennings was very good in the opening game of the WC, despite what the RTE panel would have you think.

I watched it on Setanta and made my own mind up about his performance

He was largely anonymous (fair enough he was just back from injury), he didn't win enough ball on the deck against poor opposition

He wasn't awful but he was far from very good. Cleaver was arguably man of the match that day and got away with war at the break-down

wixfjord

Fishooks12 wrote: »

I watched it on Setanta and made my own mind up about his performance

He was largely anonymous (fair enough he was just back from injury), he didn't win enough ball on the deck against poor opposition

He wasn't awful but he was far from very good. Cleaver was arguably man of the match that day and got away with war at the break-down

Did you notice the slowness of ball when Jennings went off?

danthefan

wixfjord wrote: »

Did you notice the slowness of ball when Jennings went off?

Our fortunes at the rucks changed significantly when Jennings came off. However I don't think there's much of a case for him to be first choice.

wixfjord

danthefan wrote: »

Our fortunes at the rucks changed significantly when Jennings came off. However I don't think there's much of a case for him to be first choice.

Agree completely, no way could you not play one of Ferris, Heaslip or SOB all being fit, and Wallace will still bench when back, but I don't agree with the dismissal of Jennings. A guy who is so good at HEC level should not be behind Leamy in the Irish backrow battle, especially when he's exactly what we need.

Time and time again, people who said we were lacking a seven and that would come back to haunt us were told, ah no we've three guys who can do a 7s work, yet it was as obvious as anything that we had played no 7 of any quality in the WC before Wales.

Then, when we came up against Warburton, he killed our ball and our backrow were toothless.
Had Jennings been on the bench, we could have at least attempted to change it.

Fishooks12

wixfjord wrote: »

Agree completely, no way could you not play one of Ferris, Heaslip or SOB all being fit, and Wallace will still bench when back, but I don't agree with the dismissal of Jennings. A guy who is so good at HEC level should not be behind Leamy in the Irish backrow battle, especially when he's exactly what we need.

Time and time again, people who said we were lacking a seven and that would come back to haunt us were told, ah no we've three guys who can do a 7s work, yet it was as obvious as anything that we had played no 7 of any quality in the WC before Wales.

Then, when we came up against Warburton, he killed our ball and our backrow were toothless.
Had Jennings been on the bench, we could have at least attempted to change it.

I agree

While we differ on how we thought Jennings played in opener it would have been worth having him on the bench against Wales to offer some cover if Warburton (like he did) started to dominate

Jennings can be top class when on form but I think he was fairly rusty in the opener and probably should have been given more game time given he was our only specialized 7

CatFromHue

wixfjord wrote: »

Time and time again, people who said we were lacking a seven and that would come back to haunt us were told, ah no we've three guys who can do a 7s work, yet it was as obvious as anything that we had played no 7 of any quality in the WC before Wales.

Then, when we came up against Warburton, he killed our ball and our backrow were toothless.
Had Jennings been on the bench, we could have at least attempted to change it.

I disagree I don't think we lost out in the rucks or if we did it was minimal. The Welsh defence was excellent, we had possession and position but couldn't break them down. This added with giving away soft trys beat us.

You should have a look at the stats for this game. While ESPN stats may or may not be accurate to a 1% you can see a big pattern emerging from looking at them.

Turnover by Lydiate, Warburton, and Faletau -1.
Turnovers by SOB, Ferris, Heaslip, Ryan, and Leamy - 2 (both by Heaslip)

Tackles made by Lydiate, Warburton, and Faletau - 55.
Tackles made by SOB, Ferris, Heaslip, Ryan, and Leamy - 30.

Tackles missed by Welsh back row - 0
Tackles missed by Irish back row - 3

Total tackles by Welsh team - 150
Total tackles by Irish team - 100

http://www.espnscrum.com/2011-rugby-world-cup/rugby/match/93498.html