South Africa v Ireland, Second Test. Match Thread

awec

former total wrote: »

Jackson has been good but both performances have been littered with individual errors. We accept them because he is still feeling his way into the role and you make allowances for guys making the step up to test intensity but he is not there yet. It's been a very positive tour for him but there is still a considerable gap to Sexton.

Payne has been very good but in the same way he is very good at 13; as a fulcrum of the team's structure, as a link player for those around him. Some lovely feet in traffic, some lovely offloads but searing linebreaks, a genuine threat from deep? Not really.

This really isn't true at all. There has been a stark contrast between him at 13 and at 15.

I don't think we've missed Sexton at all to be honest. He'd have made no difference yesterday.

LorMal

First Up wrote: »

He is also a brilliant defender. He overdoes the box kick for sure but I guess he is playing to orders. It became a bad tactic when fatigue created far more room for the Boks to run at but at that stage we were there for the taking anyway.

I'm not sure 'we were there for the taking anyway'. We might have held on. Giving the ball to the Bocs to keep running at us made sure we were finished!

As Pat Lam said at the end of the Pro 12 Final 'I was screaming at my players not to kick away possession'....

CMOTDibbler

phog wrote: »

What gametime have the reserve scrumhalfs got in this tour, that in itself tell it's own story.

We really don't know how well or badly some of the players adapted to the altitude. It seems to be dismissed as a factor but different people react differently and need a lot more time to acclimatise.

Look at how we played the first test and how 14 men were able to defend accurately against the boks and then compare with the second test and how quickly some of them were gone. Some of the options may not have been options at all based on their ability to handle the oxygen deficit.

It's a massive advantage for the springboks, one that people don't seem to grasp.

MJohnston

Altitude on its own might not have been a reason, but its attitude combined with playing out of their skins with a man down last weekend that had most of them gassed, I would imagine. Backs especially. Telling that the greatest threats were SA players who both hadn't played last week for long and that regularly play at that attitude. Problem is next week some of those lads might still be wrecked.

blackdog1

haiyna wrote:

I feel like Furlong handled the scrum much better than Ross did.

Furlong did excellent but I'd like to see him come off the bench. He's better for impact. Also worth noting he had roux and Henderson pushing him. Ross had Toner and Trimble.... bit of a difference.

irishbucsfan

haiyna wrote: »

I feel like Furlong handled the scrum much better than Ross did.

No I just automatically write Sexton and Murray's names! I'll edit it!

former total

awec wrote: »

This really isn't true at all. There has been a stark contrast between him at 13 and at 15.

I don't think we've missed Sexton at all to be honest. He'd have made no difference yesterday.

You're taking the piss now.

I make perfectly reasonable comments on the games, all you can say is "I can't fathom how anyone would think that". No effort to actually discuss.

So I back it up with more detail and specifics. And all you have in response is "that's not true"?

Here's a sketch that sums it up perfectly, starring John Cleese in the awec role.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnTmBjk-M0c

Good luck.

awec

former total wrote: »

You're taking the piss now.

I make perfectly reasonable comments on the games, all you can say is "I can't fathom how anyone would think that". No effort to actually discuss.

So I back it up with more detail and specifics. And all you have in response is "that's not true"?

Here's a sketch that sums it up perfectly, starring John Cleese in the awec role.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnTmBjk-M0c

Good luck.

Well I can't fathom it.

What specifically in the past two games has Payne done that you think points to him being a better 13?

I think he has shown us everything we have been missing at full back when we've been playing Kearney, and I doubt I am alone in that. In fact I know I'm not, the general consensus does appear to be (IMO quite rightly) that Kearney is going to struggle to get his spot back.

mfceiling

Bigbok wrote: »

It's spelt "IRELAND"

Ah god you're back. There wasn't a squeak out if you last week when SA were beaten by 14 men, at home, and even with 13 players at one stage.

Good to see you back.

irishbucsfan

Payne has been a much better 15 for us.

But even more importantly we have a ton of young midfield talent and I really think it's time we stuck with that. Payne is the same age as Kearney and both will be slowing down before we even go on another proper summer tour! I wouldn't be surprised if we take the summer tour next year (Japan) to find an alternative (Zebo or O'Halloran) and they are in situ by the 2018 6 Nations. Until then Payne is my man.

And I would also say Jackson has been great at 10, better than any alternative would have been in all areas except for Sexton's defensive contribution. And that's not a qualified statement. I think he puts far more pressure on Sexton's position now than Madigan ever could have done, and he should be a genuine contender for the starting spot after this tour. I love what he's been doing when he have the ball, both when he's in possesssion and when he isn't, I just love 10s who are constantly moving and looking for space to make their carriers relevant (it's the one skill I think Marsh possesses that gives me some hope he can be a real option for Leinster) and Jackson displayed that ability. If I was going to qualify that statement at all it would be to say it's possible that the Boks are probably not as good as Wales, France or England right now, I'd love to see Jackson start against one of them.

awec

Jackson was solid in defence until he started to run out of gas. It's unfortunate he had to stay on for so long.

Going to be a big ask for him to put in another 80 next weekend.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

Jackson was solid in defence until he started to run out of gas. It's unfortunate he had to stay on for so long.

Going to be a big ask for him to put in another 80 next weekend.

No problem with Jackson's defense really, but Sexton is probably the best defensive 10 in the world at the moment.

awec

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No problem with Jackson's defense really, but Sexton is probably the best defensive 10 in the world at the moment.

You're probably right, but my point is if PJ can put in performances like the past 2 games then I have no issue with him starting for Ireland and it would probably be good if we could rotate Sexton slightly more than we have been able to do to date. Or at least bring him off earlier in games.

He's not quite as refined as Sexton but that'll come with time and experience. Easy to forget that he's only 24 given he's been around for about 4 years now.

CMOTDibbler

awec wrote: »

Well I can't fathom it.

What specifically in the past two games has Payne done that you think points to him being a better 13?

I think he has shown us everything we have been missing at full back when we've been playing Kearney, and I doubt I am alone in that. In fact I know I'm not, the general consensus does appear to be (IMO quite rightly) that Kearney is going to struggle to get his spot back.

Payne isn't a great kicker of the ball; something that he has to do more of at 15 than at 13.

A lot of his play in the last couple of weeks involved him coming into the line much more and as a consequence playing as much in midfield as he would have had he started at 13.

If anything, I'd have preferred to have seen TOH have a go at 15 and Payne back in the 13 slot. Olding didn't seem to do a whole hell of a lot in the 12 shirt, certainly not as effective as Marshall, so if Henshaw is gone then for me it's Marshall and Payne with TOH as full back.

awec

I agreed with the decision not to bring McCloskey on tour but what I would have done to have him sitting on the bench yesterday ready to come on at the 65 minute mark. And if Henshaw is really gone I'd have gone with McCloskey Marshall next week. Shame but those are the breaks.

Payne has to stay at 15 for me. Marshall and Olding in midfield (probably Olding at 13 to allow the bigger Marshall to take the heat at 12). Maybe even Marshall Earls (would be a very Schmidt selection). I'd be surprised if he started TOH at full back.

irishbucsfan

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Payne isn't a great kicker of the ball; something that he has to do more of at 15 than at 13.

A lot of his play in the last couple of weeks involved him coming into the line much more and as a consequence playing as much in midfield as he would have had he started at 13.

If anything, I'd have preferred to have seen TOH have a go at 15 and Payne back in the 13 slot. Olding didn't seem to do a whole hell of a lot in the 12 shirt, certainly not as effective as Marshall, so if Henshaw is gone then for me it's Marshall and Payne with TOH as full back.

He plays far narrower at 13 while all of the damage he's been doing on this tour has been when coming into the 3rd channel outside the opposition midfield. I actually think Henshaw suits our game at 13 much more, because we have 2 mobile 10s who have either the passing ability to bring the 13 onto the ball directly or the range to move with the ball past the first recieiver and put the 13 through a gap. Also Henshaw is much better playing more direct rugby when the line is shorter and our 13 is coming in as 2nd reciever. I think for sure our midfield going forward should be Henshaw and Marshall unless we find someone else who offers more than either of those two.

awec

One of Payne's biggest assets at 15 is how he can attack the line at second receiver. Of course he pops up in the midfield from time to time, that doesn't mean he should play there. Having him at 15 gives him a bit more freedom of movement than he would otherwise get.

thebaz

awec wrote: »

I agreed with the decision not to bring McCloskey on tour but what I would have done to have him sitting on the bench yesterday ready to come on at the 65 minute mark. And if Henshaw is really gone I'd have gone with McCloskey Marshall next week. Shame but those are the breaks.
.

Why was McCloskey not brought on tour ? injured or dropped ?

Agree Payne at 15 has been a real find as his real international position

CMOTDibbler

irishbucsfan wrote: »

He plays far narrower at 13 while all of the damage he's been doing on this tour has been when coming into the 3rd channel outside the opposition midfield. I actually think Henshaw suits our game at 13 much more, because we have 2 mobile 10s who have either the passing ability to bring the 13 onto the ball directly or the range to move with the ball past the first recieiver and put the 13 through a gap. Also Henshaw is much better playing more direct rugby when the line is shorter and our 13 is coming in as 2nd reciever. I think for sure our midfield going forward should be Henshaw and Marshall unless we find someone else who offers more than either of those two.

I know he's playing one spot out from the centres but with his ability to fix defenders and offload, I think he's as good at 13 as 15 and having quicker guys outside him would do as much if not more damage.

I assume the someone else could be the likes of Ringrose or perhaps McCloskey, but at the moment with the likelihood of Henshaw being injured, I just can't see beyond Payne and Marshall.

mfceiling

The difference between Payne at 15 and RK is that Payne looks for space or for a mismatch where a gap will more readily appear. RK looks for an area where we have 3 or 4 forwards and he's happy to get stopped and look for a ruck to be formed.

It's effective in that we hold on to possession but as an attacking strategy it offers nothing more than a new ruck forming and we're starting from scratch again with the opposition having their defensive line set again.

Buer

The problem is that Payne is our best fullback and 13. It was plain as day how badly he was missed from midfield in the second half yesterday. The Boks moved it far too easily across the pitch with no pressure. It was Argentina all over again.

I would invest in the future and keep him at full back but I can see him being moved to 13 if Henshaw is out. It makes sense.

Marshall needs to come back in. Olding didn't really hit the heights even in the first half where he was solid more than anything which is a very good start but not what's needed next week.

CMOTDibbler

mfceiling wrote: »

The difference between Payne at 15 and RK is that Payne looks for space or for a mismatch where a gap will more readily appear. RK looks for an area where we have 3 or 4 forwards and he's happy to get stopped and look for a ruck to be formed.

It's effective in that we hold on to possession but as an attacking strategy it offers nothing more than a new ruck forming and we're starting from scratch again with the opposition having their defensive line set again.

The argument isn't really one between Payne at full back and Rk at full back, just Payne15 and Payne13

imo, he offers us more at 13 defensively and as an attacking threat it's marginal.

sydthebeat

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

The argument isn't really one between Payne at full back and Rk at full back, just Payne15 and Payne13

imo, he offers us more at 13 defensively and as an attacking threat it's marginal.

I don't think its marginal at all

A henshaw 13, Payne 15 combo is a significantly better attacking threat than a Payne 13 Kearney 15 at this moment in time.

I can't see how is arguable at all really.

.ak

Buer wrote: »

The problem is that Payne is our best fullback and 13. It was plain as day how badly he was missed from midfield in the second half yesterday. The Boks moved it far too easily across the pitch with no pressure. It was Argentina all over again.

I would invest in the future and keep him at full back but I can see him being moved to 13 if Henshaw is out. It makes sense.

Marshall needs to come back in. Olding didn't really hit the heights even in the first half where he was solid more than anything which is a very good start but not what's needed next week.

Yeah we're in a tricky position now. I'd also go with a Marshall/Payne midfield. The guys are used to each other. Who plays 15 though? Is Earls back fit? Might be worth looking at Olding there? I thought he was too poor at the breakdown yesterday and against SA we need guys who can bullet the ruck in midfield, at 15 that isn't as much of an issue... I wouldn't mind seeing him with a bit of space to play with.

Zzippy

Buer wrote: »

The problem is that Payne is our best fullback and 13. It was plain as day how badly he was missed from midfield in the second half yesterday. The Boks moved it far too easily across the pitch with no pressure. It was Argentina all over again.

I would invest in the future and keep him at full back but I can see him being moved to 13 if Henshaw is out. It makes sense.

Marshall needs to come back in. Olding didn't really hit the heights even in the first half where he was solid more than anything which is a very good start but not what's needed next week.

There was very little line speed in defence as our guys tired, I don't think that's down to who was playing 13. It's all well and good to want your centres to push up and put pressure on, but if the rest of your players are f*cked, that just creates doglegs and mismatches for attackers to exploit.

.ak

Zzippy wrote: »

There was very little line speed in defence as our guys tired, I don't think that's down to who was playing 13. It's all well and good to want your centres to push up and put pressure on, but if the rest of your players are f*cked, that just creates doglegs and mismatches for attackers to exploit.

It can, but SA were looking for that inside ball all day, which would've suited us if we could put a bit of pressure on the outside channel. You don't have to break your bollox to do that, you just need a bit of composure to do it with opposition running lines at you. That's why guys like Payne are so valuable in midfield, they just see things and keep calm under pressure.

Not blaming anyone for it, Olding did better than I thought he would in his first cap and he was hardly going to be a stalwart in defence, and Henshaw looked like he was having a hard time with knocks and bangs, but they left our outside defence with too much work to do for the 23's try. Payne got absolutely flattened because we allowed an absolute unit an acre of space to run at.

Buer

Zzippy wrote:

There was very little line speed in defence as our guys tired, I don't think that's down to who was playing 13. It's all well and good to want your centres to push up and put pressure on, but if the rest of your players are f*cked, that just creates doglegs and mismatches for attackers to exploit.

They were doing it from the moment the second half started though, not just the final stages when our legs went. They scored a try directly from moving it wide with 55 minutes on the clock and should have done before that if it wasn't for poor passing.

irishbucsfan

Buer wrote: »

They were doing it from the moment the second half started though, not just the final stages when our legs went. They scored a try directly from moving it wide with 55 minutes on the clock and should have done before that if it wasn't for poor passing.

But our defensive midfield looked really strong in the first test, and I'd much rather Henshaw worked now to become more consistent there as a long-term option in the position given how important it is.

EDIT: Of course not an option this weekend by the sounds of it. But this weekend I'd like to see Marshall there given how well he's done there for Ulster this season

Neil3030

If Henshaw is gone we'll almost definitely see

15 O'Halloran
13 Payne
12 Marshall

23 Olding

CMOTDibbler

sydthebeat wrote: »

I don't think its marginal at all

A henshaw 13, Payne 15 combo is a significantly better attacking threat than a Payne 13 Kearney 15 at this moment in time.

I can't see how is arguable at all really.

That's not the point I was making. Just looking at Payne in isolation, the difference is marginal excluding who else plays at 15. For all we know, the answer to that question could be TOH.

Paddy Jackson had to do a hell of a lot of defending yesterday. He had the joint second most number of tackles (10) and also the joint most tackles missed (2). In contrast, Payne only had to make 4 tackles whereas Jackson, Olding and Henshaw had to make 30 between them and missed 5.

Payne is a very good defender and seeing as the majority of the defensive work was being done in midfield, that's where we need him.

All of this is for the third test by the way. Future matches are a completely different story, but Payne is not a long term option anyway.