Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is Joe Schmidt concealing his hand?

Options
1234689

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It could go one of two ways. He's either going to be hailed as a genius or we'll be out early and he'll be criticised for the team not even trying to play.


  • Options
    #153
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It could go one of two ways. He's either going to be hailed as a genius or we'll be out early and he'll be criticised for the team not even trying to play.

    That's not even an 80/20 call. As molloyjh pointed out above, the last two 6N wins didn't come by accident nor did Joe's previous record with Leinster.

    in my mind there is zero chance of the team not trying to play.


  • Options
    #154
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    rrpc wrote: »
    That's not even an 80/20 call. As molloyjh pointed out above, the last two 6N wins didn't come by accident nor did Joe's previous record with Leinster.

    in my mind there is zero chance of the team not trying to play.

    Even just that phrase though is a little disingenuous. Some will tell you that "trying to play" means flinging the ball around and playing "sexy" rugby. The problem is that at international level it pays to be pragmatic far more than it pays to be attractive. There just isn't the space in the game at the top level to be what Leinster were a few years back. And even then Leinster weren't always the expansive Harlem Globetrotters they were touted as being.

    For me (although admittedly not for others) there is beauty in the different elements. A good kick chase, a well worked maul and a game plan that I can follow are all good to watch. I'll cheer on good breakdown work almost as much as a decent line break. Best for Paulies try yesterday was superb for example. But I completely understand that not everyone is a rugby nerd and gets into it at that level.


  • Options
    #155
    LorMal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,372 ✭✭✭LorMal


    molloyjh wrote: »
    I'm sorry but this is just reactionary nonsense. And please let me explain exactly why.

    In all our other competitive games Ireland have shown at least 1 of 2 things. The first is strike moves. Look at Kearneys try against England in Twickenham 18 months ago or SOBs try against Scotland this year. Ireland often have set moves that they go to that are practised to within an inch of their lives. These don't have to be ball in hand moves either. Bowes try against SA is another example of a strike move. Something pre-planned and delivered with accuracy that the lads can pull out of the locker and execute well.

    The second thing we've seen from Ireland regularly is an identification of opposition weaknesses to be exploited. Look at Wales in 2014 where we used a very specific type of kicking game to totally nullify them for 80 minutes. Or the France game this year where we clearly targeted Nacatacis wing because he was (and still is) defensively suspect, particularly in terms of positioning. When watching games you can often clearly see exactly what it is that Joe and the other coaches have spotted and decided to target.

    These have both been regular and critical parts to Irish rugby under Joe Schmidt. We saw neither in the warm ups (2 simple line-out moves aside). The reason we didn't see them wasn't because the coaches suddenly forgot how to or were unable to come up with them. We didn't see them because the coaches didn't want us to see them. The purpose of the warm-ups was not to "shock and awe" people with our wonderful rugby skills, make a statement to the world that we're here to win it and show our hand while doing so. It was to get guys game time and improve their match fitness. And from that perspective (injuries to TOD and Trimble aside) we got pretty much exactly what we wanted from the games.

    We were very one dimensional in the last few weeks because we wanted to be one dimensional. Joe himself prior to kick-off yesterday pretty much said himself that the result didn't really matter and that it was about guys putting in a performance. And as bad as the first half was there were still improvements to be seen over the previous 2 games (Bowe excluded). And the second half saw us step it up again. With 4 weeks to go to the Italy game we're not in a bad place.

    I'd be incredibly worried if we continued on in the second half the same way we did in the first. Or if we were attempting a load of set plays and they just weren't coming off. But neither are the case. If we struggle against Canada and/or Romania then maybe I'll start to worry. Until then we're doing ok. We have a nice few weeks to gradually ramp up to the France game (the way the fixtures have fallen for us are perfect in that regard). I'm in no way discouraged by the last few weeks at all because it seems very clear to me that we have a hell of a lot left in the tank.

    You're seeing what you want to see. The fact that you actually think there were improvements in the first half yesterday confirms that.
    I am not suggesting Ireland are terrible but there are definitely worrying signs of a flatness and a lack of dynamism / creativity in the team at the moment.
    Hope I am proved wrong and you have my permission to tell me so when we beat the French!
    (P.s. Look up the meaning of the word reactionary - you are misusing it)


  • Options
    #156
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,687 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    Is that lineout move from which POC scored his try a new set piece?

    I'd have expected it normally to go to Toner then mail towards the line

    Did anyone notice that very few of the lineout throws were to Toner yesterday as well?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    LorMal wrote: »
    You're seeing what you want to see. The fact that you actually think there were improvements in the first half yesterday confirms that.
    He didn't say that. He said there were improvements in the first half from the previous match.

    I'd agree with that. For one, the penalty count was much lower.


  • Options
    #158
    mfceiling
    Registered Users Posts: 12,774 ✭✭✭✭mfceiling


    Of course there is an element of concealment to our play at present. How easy would it be for all our pool opponents to read us if we pulled out 5 or 6 big plays in the past few games.

    It's the small things we do that make the difference. Best's clear out yesterday wasn't a stroke of genius, rather a practised move that left a huge gap for Paul to sail through.


  • Options
    #159
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Stheno wrote: »
    Is that lineout move from which POC scored his try a new set piece?

    I'd have expected it normally to go to Toner then mail towards the line

    Did anyone notice that very few of the lineout throws were to Toner yesterday as well?

    We've played a few variations on the 'dummy maul' before. The one yesterday was a double dummy which caught the English defence flat-footed.

    It's nice to see new variations but it's not nice to see them in meaningless warm-up games.


  • Options
    #160
    LorMal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,372 ✭✭✭LorMal


    rrpc wrote: »
    He didn't say that. He said there were improvements in the first half from the previous match.

    I'd agree with that. For one, the penalty count was much lower.



    That's because we didn't have the ball


  • Options
    #161
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,687 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    LorMal wrote: »
    That's because we didn't have the ball

    Our scrums were better than last week?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    LorMal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,372 ✭✭✭LorMal


    Stheno wrote: »
    Our scrums were better than last week?

    Yes definitely. And we improved considerably in the second half.
    We are one dimensional and our kicking game is uninspiring and predictable. Henshaw and Payne aren't the most dynamic and we are not off loading in the tackle so I don't know where we are going to create go forward momentum other than kick chase.
    Hope we will bring more to the table.


  • Options
    #163
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    LorMal wrote: »
    You're seeing what you want to see. The fact that you actually think there were improvements in the first half yesterday confirms that.
    I am not suggesting Ireland are terrible but there are definitely worrying signs of a flatness and a lack of dynamism / creativity in the team at the moment.
    Hope I am proved wrong and you have my permission to tell me so when we beat the French!
    (P.s. Look up the meaning of the word reactionary - you are misusing it)

    If anyone is seeing what they want to see it's you. You want to reduce the whole RWC preparation and campaign down to "hoof ball" and Ireland not being 100% weeks out from the start of the tournament. It's overly simplistic and utterly lacking in context. I'm seeing what is there in front of me. Our penalty count was lower, we weren't falling off tackles as badly across the board, our scrum was better, our breakdown work while still poor was improved. POC for example was far more effective in that first half than he had been against the Welsh. It's was far from the finished article, but it was better. Compare it again to the Scotland game and there were further improvements there too.

    You may think you're wise to how Ireland are playing, but you've shown a distinct lack of understanding on how we've been approaching games for the last year or so. And we have players and coaches who know how to win trophies and have been doing so consistently now for years. I'm not really sure what more these guys can do to earn a bit of trust. You don't win the RWC before the RWC starts. The teams that peak at the right time stand the best chance. Now is not the right time. And if you think you saw all there is to Ireland in the last few weeks you haven't been paying attention for the last 2 years.


  • Options
    #164
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    LorMal wrote: »
    Yes definitely. And we improved considerably in the second half.
    We are one dimensional and our kicking game is uninspiring and predictable. Henshaw and Payne aren't the most dynamic and we are not off loading in the tackle so I don't know where we are going to create go forward momentum other than kick chase.
    Hope we will bring more to the table.

    New Zealand offloaded the ball 4 times in the entire 2011 world cup final. They only offloaded the ball 4 times against Australia as well in the semi final before that.

    We definitely played poorly yesterday but I really don't think the style of rugby you're looking for is going to appear, nor has it been the style of rugby of any of the previous winners.


  • Options
    #165
    aimee1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,290 ✭✭✭aimee1


    molloyjh wrote: »
    If anyone is seeing what they want to see it's you. You want to reduce the whole RWC preparation and campaign down to "hoof ball" and Ireland not being 100% weeks out from the start of the tournament. It's overly simplistic and utterly lacking in context. I'm seeing what is there in front of me. Our penalty count was lower, we weren't falling off tackles as badly across the board, our scrum was better, our breakdown work while still poor was improved. POC for example was far more effective in that first half than he had been against the Welsh. It's was far from the finished article, but it was better. Compare it again to the Scotland game and there were further improvements there too.

    You may think you're wise to how Ireland are playing, but you've shown a distinct lack of understanding on how we've been approaching games for the last year or so. And we have players and coaches who know how to win trophies and have been doing so consistently now for years. I'm not really sure what more these guys can do to earn a bit of trust. You don't win the RWC before the RWC starts. The teams that peak at the right time stand the best chance. Now is not the right time. And if you think you saw all there is to Ireland in the last few weeks you haven't been paying attention for the last 2 years.

    spot on. We probably need yesterdays team, or close enough, to start against canada. And we need a more clinical performance, We will know a lot more about the level they are at then.

    The italy game is the key one IMO to get us to the right level for the big one with france. England play fiji in 12 days time. They needed to be at a much higher level yesterday.


  • Options
    #166
    aimee1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,290 ✭✭✭aimee1


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    New Zealand offloaded the ball 4 times in the entire 2011 world cup final. They only offloaded the ball 4 times against Australia as well in the semi final before that.

    We definitely played poorly yesterday but I really don't think the style of rugby you're looking for is going to appear, nor has it been the style of rugby of any of the previous winners.

    1995 - 0
    1999 - 1
    2003 - 2
    2007 - 0
    2011 - 2

    5 tries in last 5 world cup finals says it all.


  • Options
    #167
    Flipper22
    Registered Users Posts: 811 ✭✭✭Flipper22


    LorMal wrote: »
    That's because we didn't have the ball

    The penalty count was lower because we didn't have the ball?

    That's not the way it works.


  • Options
    #168
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,687 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    LorMal wrote: »
    Yes definitely. And we improved considerably in the second half.
    We are one dimensional and our kicking game is uninspiring and predictable. Henshaw and Payne aren't the most dynamic and we are not off loading in the tackle so I don't know where we are going to create go forward momentum other than kick chase.
    Hope we will bring more to the table.

    There was a period in the second half yesterday that I seem to remember Henshaw and Payne working well together


  • Options
    #169
    LorMal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,372 ✭✭✭LorMal


    molloyjh wrote: »
    If anyone is seeing what they want to see it's you. You want to reduce the whole RWC preparation and campaign down to "hoof ball" and Ireland not being 100% weeks out from the start of the tournament. It's overly simplistic and utterly lacking in context. I'm seeing what is there in front of me. Our penalty count was lower, we weren't falling off tackles as badly across the board, our scrum was better, our breakdown work while still poor was improved. POC for example was far more effective in that first half than he had been against the Welsh. It's was far from the finished article, but it was better. Compare it again to the Scotland game and there were further improvements there too.

    You may think you're wise to how Ireland are playing, but you've shown a distinct lack of understanding on how we've been approaching games for the last year or so. And we have players and coaches who know how to win trophies and have been doing so consistently now for years. I'm not really sure what more these guys can do to earn a bit of trust. You don't win the RWC before the RWC starts. The teams that peak at the right time stand the best chance. Now is not the right time. And if you think you saw all there is to Ireland in the last few weeks you haven't been paying attention for the last 2 years.

    Jaysus, you're very tetchy. You don't know any more about this than I do. Please - no more lectures - it's only my opinion - you're welcome to yours.

    The louder you protest, the more I know you are secretly worried.
    Here's what the English Independent newspaper thought - After a spectacularly flat display – a brief third-quarter rally apart – including little open-field threat from Johnny Sexton at fly-half, and his half-back mate Conor Murray removed early by a head knock, the Canadians and Romanians might fancy an upset.


  • Options
    #170
    LorMal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,372 ✭✭✭LorMal


    Flipper22 wrote: »
    The penalty count was lower because we didn't have the ball?

    That's not the way it works.

    It would be zero if we didn't turn up at all.


  • Options
    #171
    aimee1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,290 ✭✭✭aimee1


    LorMal wrote: »
    Here's what the English Independent newspaper thought - After a spectacularly flat display – a brief third-quarter rally apart – including little open-field threat from Johnny Sexton at fly-half, and his half-back mate Conor Murray removed early by a head knock, the Canadians and Romanians might fancy an upset.

    we could play sadie and billy o'driscoll at half back and still expect to beat canada and romania

    our second string dispatched georgia quite comfortably last november who are a better side then canada/romania.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,687 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    LorMal wrote: »
    Jaysus, you're very tetchy. You don't know any more about this than I do. Please - no more lectures - it's only my opinion - you're welcome to yours.

    The louder you protest, the more I know you are secretly worried.
    Here's what the English Independent newspaper thought - After a spectacularly flat display – a brief third-quarter rally apart – including little open-field threat from Johnny Sexton at fly-half, and his half-back mate Conor Murray removed early by a head knock, the Canadians and Romanians might fancy an upset.

    Ah Jesus now did you miss that strip of sextons from the English six in our 22 and Joe saying Murray is fine?

    Talk about being a naysayer of doom


  • Options
    #173
    total former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    LorMal wrote: »
    Jaysus, you're very tetchy. You don't know any more about this than I do. Please - no more lectures - it's only my opinion - you're welcome to yours.

    The louder you protest, the more I know you are secretly worried.
    Here's what the English Independent newspaper thought - After a spectacularly flat display – a brief third-quarter rally apart – including little open-field threat from Johnny Sexton at fly-half, and his half-back mate Conor Murray removed early by a head knock, the Canadians and Romanians might fancy an upset.

    Ah come on. An upset? No.


  • Options
    #174
    matthew8
    Registered Users Posts: 9,599 ✭✭✭matthew8


    It's amazing how France can barely put in a decent performance for 4 years and get talked up on here but a couple of preseason losses and suddenly we're doomed.


  • Options
    #175
    BoardsMember
    Registered Users Posts: 4,439 ✭✭✭BoardsMember


    Watching that I was pleasantly surprised we turned a bad first half into some half decent rugby second half. I think we are moving nicely in the right direction and can and will play much better in the coming weeks, whereas I'm not sure England can or will. Time will tell, I'm hopeful though.


  • Options
    #176
    LorMal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,372 ✭✭✭LorMal


    total former wrote: »
    Ah come on. An upset? No.

    I know - it's ridiculous. It's just interesting to see how much respect we are getting!


  • Options
    #177
    aimee1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,290 ✭✭✭aimee1


    LorMal wrote: »
    I know - it's ridiculous. It's just interesting to see how much respect we are getting!

    id say JS doesnt mind that tbh. He wasnt too pleased with BOD's slam talk in february


  • Options
    #178
    LorMal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,372 ✭✭✭LorMal


    matthew8 wrote: »
    It's amazing how France can barely put in a decent performance for 4 years and get talked up on here but a couple of preseason losses and suddenly we're doomed.

    No-one said we were doomed. However, I am happy to counter the 'six nations champions, 2nd in the world' hype.
    We are a good team. We have some very good players and some okay players. We have an excellent coach.
    We will need to find something extra to unlock defenses though. We are predictable ad we kick away too much possession. Hope we have something else in the arsenal because we look pedestrian at the moment.


  • Options
    #179
    LorMal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,372 ✭✭✭LorMal


    aimee1 wrote: »
    id say JS doesnt mind that tbh. He wasnt too pleased with BOD's slam talk in february

    Very true. I much prefer this to the hype that was building before the most recent losses.
    We have a lot to do. if anyone can drive this team on, it's Joe


  • Options
    #180
    total former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    LorMal wrote: »
    I know - it's ridiculous. It's just interesting to see how much respect we are getting!

    I don't know who wrote that but it's not remotely representative of how we're perceived, not even close.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    LorMal wrote: »
    The louder you protest, the more I know you are secretly worried.

    How marvellously perceptive of you. The reality is I actually can't sleep at night from the sheer terror that Ireland have forgotten how to play rugby.

    The horror!


Advertisement