Ireland v France 2021 6n

wittycynic

Awful from Ireland again. A handful of bright moments in a sea of muck. In particular our attack was dire, and we never looked like we were in danger of scoring, or even making ground, off the back of our own creativity.

We are evidently continuing the downward slide that started in the last days of Schmidt and our new management has done nothing to arrest that deterioration, let alone improve us.

With any luck Farrell and co will be shown the door after this Championship. Sadly, I doubt the IRFU will have the courage to make that move and we're going to limp on with the team continuing to worsen.

It's all very reminiscent of the dreadful second half of Kidney's tenure.

crossman47

Sabre0001 wrote: »

GAA is likely taking players away from rugby, but we have to play the cards we're dealt America could be phenomenal at rugby if it weren't for the distractions of their national sports. Playing population is something that tends to only come up when we aren't going so well. And in fact, it is dismissed as a potential contributing factor to success by some when it comes to provincial level.

We were ranked #1 in the world not so long ago, our provincial teams (one in particular) are battering all around them at league level and Leinster could only be unstuck by Sarries in Europe (I don't think anyone else would have stopped them). We're well capable of beating anyone; it's just not going to plan at the moment.

As the cliche goes, it's a game of fine margins. We won a game against France a few years ago that we could have (and maybe should have) lost thanks to a wonder drop goal. We could have beaten Wales last week even with 14, and we could have won today (even though I also think France could have been out of sight) - Lowe perhaps needs to wear smaller boots.

Leinster battering all round them may be a problem. Lowe looks good for Leinster but he never has to defend = so he can't.

UAEguy2020

Sabre0001 wrote: »

GAA is likely taking players away from rugby, but we have to play the cards we're dealt America could be phenomenal at rugby if it weren't for the distractions of their national sports. Playing population is something that tends to only come up when we aren't going so well. And in fact, it is dismissed as a potential contributing factor to success by some when it comes to provincial level.

We were ranked #1 in the world not so long ago, our provincial teams (one in particular) are battering all around them at league level and Leinster could only be unstuck by Sarries in Europe (I don't think anyone else would have stopped them). We're well capable of beating anyone; it's just not going to plan at the moment.

As the cliche goes, it's a game of fine margins. We won a game against France a few years ago that we could have (and maybe should have) lost thanks to a wonder drop goal. We could have beaten Wales last week even with 14, and we could have won today (even though I also think France could have been out of sight) - Lowe perhaps needs to wear smaller boots.

Of course it does, it’s called an excuse. We got to number one in the world and were the best in the world in 2018 so it’s irrelevant obviously.

This is the main reason I dreaded France being good again as it handed the usual suspects the ammo to add to the population excuse which would be used to deflect away from the mediocrity we are being served at the moment.

The fact is we weren’t good enough in either game and that’s the facts of the matter, bringing the nonsense cliches we are being served is just a distraction from the actual problem we have which is clearly a mixture of mentality and coaching in the backs and until that’s fixed nothing will change.

ujjjjjjjjj

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

He was poor by any metric. Fair play to him on the lineout steal and the turnover but for carries and ground made, which is one of the main reasons he was picked, he was very quiet.

I have to say it's quite surprising that there has been a turnaround in relation to how we view backrowers on this forum. I can recall a time in the not to distant past where the above stats were enough to have people calling for players to be dropped from the squad.

Thought Ruddock was excellent. Hugely impressed but then have thought for sometime he is the man for the 6 Jersey. With Doris at 8 and VDF and Connors scrapping over 7 and maybe even Dan Leavy too. Conan and Stander in reserve.

Don't think backrow is an area of concern or a problem.

With Sexton in his twilight years and 9 being constantly chopped and changed I think the half back pairing is our key area of issue. Loosehead a concern as Healy can't continue to carry the load and we have to sort hooker.

For me 9,10 1 and 2 are the big areas right now. 2 looks sortable with Kelleher.

UAEguy2020

crossman47 wrote: »

Leinster battering all round them may be a problem. Lowe looks good for Leinster but he never has to defend = so he can't.

He has to defend against the best teams in Europe.

Leinster show just how important it is to have a culture, we have no culture in our set up at the moment meaning it’s hard to transition players in and out of the team.

Faugheen

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

He was poor by any metric. Fair play to him on the lineout steal and the turnover but for carries and ground made, which is one of the main reasons he was picked, he was very quiet.

I have to say it's quite surprising that there has been a turnaround in relation to how we view backrowers on this forum. I can recall a time in the not to distant past where the above stats were enough to have people calling for players to be dropped from the squad.

He isn’t picked to make barnstorming runs whatsoever. He’s picked to get us go-forward ball in tight situations, which your stats proved he did just that. He consistently broke the gain line and he was a big reason why we got so much quick ball, especially in the first half.

Again I ask what more do you want from him? The fact you are spouting this nonsense suggests you’ve actually never watched him play before today.

Every time after contact he made meters. You going to deny that based on your stats?

Buer

All in all, the game went pretty much as I expected. France were never going to come to Dublin and blow us away. We aren't a bad side and, similar to October, we were able to stand toe to toe with France for most of the game. We lacked some incision in the back line and are exceptionally easy to defend against but our pack was excellent again and the better of the two packs.

There were a lot of individual errors which contributed to the loss. Most games will have them but they were massively influential on the scoreboard. JGP and Lowe will both be roasted in the review for their defensive lapses which is unfortunate given they both did some really good work elsewhere. Lowe was very mixed though. A canon of a boot used regularly was undermined by some chasing shadows in defence (and not just the miss for the try).

I thought Keenan was someone who looked like he could spark something but he really needs to work on his back field play. France were getting far too much success through kicks to space in the first half. Almost every kick found grass. Although that's a collective back three situation, Keenan is the full back and should be the main organiser and fielder.

The halfbacks were solid generally. Nothing special but nothing poor. Burns distributed nicely aside from one sloppy pass that got his receiver (Keenan?) in difficulty and ultimately wound up with Stander conceding a penalty for going off his feet. The missed penalty happens. He shook it off and his kicking from hand in open play was a source of territory and us exerting pressure. I'd be more concerned with the ease at which France stripped him of the ball in contact on his own 22. Ross Byrne kicked a great penalty but the back line looked incredibly easy to defend against with him there. Two passages summed up our attack in the second half. The first ended with Lowe putting in a very tidy kick to the corner but that was because we had made no net gain after multiple phases. The second was the closing minutes where we were actively losing ground again and again as we aligned deeper and deeper before being turned over. France never looked troubled for a minute with Byrne directing play, unfortunately.

I'm disappointed Casey didn't get on. It was starting to look like he'd be left out as the game unfolded but a spark was badly needed in those closing stages. We never looked like creating anything and I wonder if a snipe for 10m in that final passage might have been the difference in us being able to look at the drop.

Last word for the pack. They were brilliant as a unit. No single player was outstanding but they were so cohesive and hardworking. They took on a seriously big French pack and got the better of the set piece and the penalty count. There will be some hard decisions to be made when people come back from injury/suspension.

Sabre0001

As for the game itself, great work in the pack. Lineout has really come on and we're disrupting which is great to see. We didn't contest a couple towards the end, which I always think is a shame especially when they've looked iffy throughout the game.

JGP was pretty good aside from the defence on the try. Wasn't as quick as last week, but was more accurate. Those box kicks were hanging for ages too, allowing for players to contest. But that has been our game plan for some time - sometimes the box kick lottery comes off and has produced tries. Aside from that we look stunted in attack. Which is disappointing when you have most of the Leinster backline together and they're cutting teams apart for fun.

Lowe needs a few games to get up to international speed, like Leinster had to work on his defence. Have him trying to hit Ringrose and Larmour rather than tackle bags in training. It's said that there's a step up from Pro14 to Champions Cup and it's another step up to international. Would like to see him allowed to do more in attack / try more himself. Saw a glimpse with the link up with JGP, although the latter had to do well to take the pass. Big boot on him...provided he just needs to get it somewhere down there (*gestures downfield).

Keenan has been a great find. Solid at the back and lively going forward, though again our gameplan needs work there. Could have held defender a touch longer before the pass to Lowe today, but that's easily said from the couch.

Thought France helped us stay in it with some pens and inaccuracy - that header at the line when they had three players ready to score was incredibly fortunate. But at the same time, we could have snuck it.

cantwbr1

Immediately before JGP and Lowe worked their magic on the touchline JGP caught a box kick. My view of it was that he was tackled before he came to ground. He was only 2 feet off the ground but by the letter of the law it was a penalty. If it was called it would have been line out for us probably on their 10m line at a time when we were struggling to make ground. Game of inches and such

Ardillaun

PokeHerKing wrote: »

I chose New Zealand because of the OP reference to Ireland population, inaccurate as it was. Using population as the barometer for sporting success falls flat on its face on many facets but NZ felt like a very apt example to prove my point.

Population counts matter more when the people in those populations are of similar potential for the sport concerned. Take basketball as an example. Why does a tiny country like Croatia do better than its population size would predict? Would height have something to do with that?

Obviously, it’s just one factor. Wales and Scotland are our peers in population size and ability. I suspect Welsh rugby recruits attracts more players from its small pool of elite athletes than does rugby in Scotland or Ireland and has a deeper rugby-playing culture too.

TomsOnTheRoof

Faugheen wrote: »

He isn’t picked to make barnstorming runs whatsoever. He’s picked to get us go-forward ball in tight situations, which your stats proved he did just that. He consistently broke the gain line and he was a big reason why we got so much quick ball, especially in the first half.

Again I ask what more do you want from him? The fact you are spouting this nonsense suggests you’ve actually never watched him play before today.

Every time after contact he made meters. You going to deny that based on your stats?

Where did I say barnstorming? To suggest he isn't picked to make metres is disingenuous. Not being involved in camp I can only surmise he was picked to to make ground in tight, given his lack of dynamism. There were a number of occasions today, in fact I would argue the majority of his carries, where he merely recycled the ball without making yards. It's not like he was brought in as a tackler or a poacher or a lineout specialist. If he is offering so little going forward there has to be more to his game and there isn't. He's a fine provincial player but that's it in my opinion.

I've seen Ruddock play on countless occasions but there is a difference between performing well for a Leinster pack that are decimating all before them in a shoddy league and performing in an international.

TomsOnTheRoof

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Thought Ruddock was excellent. Hugely impressed but then have thought for sometime he is the man for the 6 Jersey. With Doris at 8 and VDF and Connors scrapping over 7 and maybe even Dan Leavy too. Conan and Stander in reserve.

Don't think backrow is an area of concern or a problem.

With Sexton in his twilight years and 9 being constantly chopped and changed I think the half back pairing is our key area of issue. Loosehead a concern as Healy can't continue to carry the load and we have to sort hooker.

For me 9,10 1 and 2 are the big areas right now. 2 looks sortable with Kelleher.

Look, we'll have to agree to disagree with regard to the backrow. I can't envision any situation in which Ireland are a stronger team without Stander starting.

PokeHerKing

Ardillaun wrote: »

Population counts matter more when the people in those populations are of similar potential for the sport concerned. Take basketball as an example. Why does a tiny country like Croatia do better than its population size would predict? Would height have something to do with that?

Obviously, it’s just one factor. Wales and Scotland are our peers in population size and ability. I suspect Welsh rugby recruits attracts more players from its small pool of elite athletes than does rugby in Scotland or Ireland and has a deeper rugby-playing culture too.

Yeah concentration matters more than population, look at China. Useless at sports thet they dont focus on regardless of population.

Its just a nonsense of a thing to bring up in a matchday thread.

dh1985

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

He was poor by any metric. Fair play to him on the lineout steal and the turnover but for carries and ground made, which is one of the main reasons he was picked, he was very quiet.

I have to say it's quite surprising that there has been a turnaround in relation to how we view backrowers on this forum. I can recall a time in the not to distant past where the above stats were enough to have people calling for players to be dropped from the squad.

Thought he was the best irish player on show today pipping Beirne. Added power in tight situations and gave go forward quick ball.

ujjjjjjjjj

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

Look, we'll have to agree to disagree with regard to the backrow. I can't envision any situation in which Ireland are a stronger team without Stander starting.

Done !! Look it is such an abrasive area having 5/6 quality players there ain't exactly a problem.

Disappointed of course today but fine margins. Pack really stood up a huge French unit quite well. And that is without Ryan.

Thought Ross helped things when he came on. If he had started I think we could have all been happier bunnies this evening.

Park the missed goalkick if you watch simply his restarts and passing angles the difference over Burns is significant. Burns struggles simply due to size defensively too. I hope the Burns experiment is over. Alongside Ross we need to look at getting Harry and Carty in the loop if Sexton is out.

Ardillaun

We played well today, a lot closer to our best than France managed. Although we’ve nothing to show for it, our performances so far in this 6N have not been bad. Very few of our players would make it onto that team of VAs, Penos and Jellybears, as our coach might say, and they were always going to score tries. After the second one, I feared we’d collapse and ship maybe twenty more points but we stuck at it.

Gibson-Park did lots of stuff well. When he was rounded by Du Pont late in the game, he just kept after him and made the tackle. What height he gets on those box-kicks! I was surprised the French didn’t do a better job of blocking him - sometimes it was just Du Pont there instead of a second row or flanker. The interplay with Lowe at the end was refreshing to see from lads in green. His passing throughout the game was brisk too.

The forwards can take a bow - dominant scrums and great defensive lineouts. Henderson had some of the fire he started with for Ireland and Beirne was all over the place. Ruddock played his heart out. Kelleher and Connors were both conspicuous arrivals. Porter gradually got into open play and made a few runs into traffic but Furlong looked assured with ball in hand. It’s a nice choice to have at tighthead.

aloooof

Faugheen wrote: »

The fact you are spouting this nonsense suggests you’ve actually never watched him play before today.

This type of nonsense has been said on here a number of times this weekend, and it’s beyond tiresome....

Can we not discuss the merits of players without resorting to this, well... crap?

cantwbr1

In the vein of things that didn’t go our way today. Frances first box kick was blocked down. It still went forward and was caught by the french winger. He was offside from the kick but because it was touched by an Irish player he was fine.
Inches and such

thebaz

Knew it was going to be one of those days - started with no Valentiens card , then Ireland lose and now my football team - Time for bed.

PokeHerKing

cantwbr1 wrote: »

That’s completely wrong. Each GAA county panel has 30 top end athletes with ball skills that are transferable to rugby. That’s >900 players who consistently perform at a high level. Do you not think that they would improve the rugby playing pool if they were available?

You think that Longfords GAA panel sizes up to international rugby standards? I can't argue with that level of stupidity, sorry.

OldRio

This doesn't look good

https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1361068225228857344?s=20

PokeHerKing

PokeHerKing wrote: »

You think that Longfords GAA panel sizes up to international rugby standards? I can't argue with that level of stupidity, sorry.

In fairness anyone with reasonable motor skills can throw and catch a ball......lets not pretend rugby has a skillset worth noting



I certainly dont think on the evidence of last 2 matches,the irish rugby team should count as elite sports team......but thats life i guess,

Lost Ormond

Deleted User wrote: »

In fairness anyone with reasonable motor skills can throw and catch a ball......lets not pretend rugby has a skillset worth noting

Well thats a load of horse **** and completely false. What sports do have skillsets worth noting in comparison?

I certainly dont think on the evidence of last 2 matches,the irish rugby team should count as elite sports team......but thats life i guess,

Because they lost?
Yep theyre not elite then....

cantwbr1

PokeHerKing wrote: »

You think that Longfords GAA panel sizes up to international rugby standards? I can't argue with that level of stupidity, sorry.

Not necessarily but I can guarantee that the worst of them would be AIL standard and the best provincial standard at least. By increasing the available pool you’re automatically increasing the top level players

prawnsambo

OldRio wrote: »

This doesn't look good

https://twitter.com/Murray_Kinsella/status/1361068225228857344?s=20

Nope. You should never do something like this with turnover ball anyway. But that looked like a three on one there.

lawred2

thebaz wrote: »

Knew it was going to be one of those days - started with no Valentiens card , then Ireland lose and now my football team - Time for bed.

I at least got the valentine's card

PokeHerKing

Deleted User wrote: »

In fairness anyone with reasonable motor skills can throw and catch a ball......lets not pretend rugby has a skillset worth noting



I certainly dont think on the evidence of last 2 matches,the irish rugby team should count as elite sports team......but thats life i guess,

Most sports require roughly the same skillset and yet somehow thers only a select few that can rise to the top and make a very profitable living from it.

The belief that GAA players are teachers and not millionaire sports stars is simply because GAA isn't international is ridiculous.

molloyjh

That went marginally better than expected. A fair bit of that is luck though. We were unlucky with Lowes non-try. We were lucky with Kellehers. We were also lucky with at least 1 botched French opportunity. Overall we competed well but just aren't as good a side. Which we all knew coming into it. We never really looked like winning it in the end and with Byrne at 10 we simply weren't able to make any ground at all. That last passage were we simply just went backwards was depressing. France just needed to stay out of the ruck and ignore Byrne as a running threat, giving them huge numbers in the defensive line and good night.

I thought Burns varied our play between the up and unders and running game quite well and 1 missed kick aside didn't do a whole lot wrong. He's still the better option for me of the two, albeit with Byrne more reliable from the tee.

We really need some consistency and cohesion in this side. Even during games we have multiple guys going off with HIAs and blood etc. We obviously have a problem at 9 and 10, but other than that we're not in terrible shape. A strong LH coming through would be nice. And maybe a new SOB or Healy in his heyday somewhere. But we're not going to see fluidity in attack until we get our first choice half backs, mainly Sexton, getting a bit of a run of games. The others just aren't at the level required and so it's stymying our attack.

AbusesToilets

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

Where did I say barnstorming? To suggest he isn't picked to make metres is disingenuous. Not being involved in camp I can only surmise he was picked to to make ground in tight, given his lack of dynamism. There were a number of occasions today, in fact I would argue the majority of his carries, where he merely recycled the ball without making yards. It's not like he was brought in as a tackler or a poacher or a lineout specialist. If he is offering so little going forward there has to be more to his game and there isn't. He's a fine provincial player but that's it in my opinion.

I've seen Ruddock play on countless occasions but there is a difference between performing well for a Leinster pack that are decimating all before them in a shoddy league and performing in an international.

So he did what Stander does, pretty much everytime he plays then? CJ averaged 2ms per carry, making 44m on 19 carries vs 10m with 10 carries. What a difference.

PokeHerKing

cantwbr1 wrote: »

Not necessarily but I can guarantee that the worst of them would be AIL standard and the best provincial standard at least. By increasing the available pool you’re automatically increasing the top level players

I disagree. They're not professional so that automatically means that they compete in a diluted pool of talent, to think that don't is parochial blinkered nonsense.