Rugby world cup post mortem

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121297818#Comment_121297818

Not when the clock hit 80 he didn't.

Of course people can discuss, but it also ok to ask what is the point of discussing it and speculating that it might have worked. You have to give equal weight to it not working. So pointless really.

thebaz

I agree Crowley should have been brought on for last 15 , also think Farrell should have rested players like Furlong and Van der Flier , but it may not have made any difference, we'll never know , will be very hard for the players to move on , given its 4 years away to put things right.

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121297393#Comment_121297393

The current position could actually be giving the NH an advantage. That also has to be looked at clinically. Maybe the gap between the teams is actually bigger and the timing of the world cup helps narrow it. If the world cup had been switch around, Sexton wouldn't have even been available for it this year.

I think 6N would need to very clinically look at it before trying to push for any change.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121297818#Comment_121297818

There is a credible argument.

What there isn't, is a credible argument that it was definitely the right thing to do and definitely a mistake to leave Sexton on.

Speculation is fine. This whole "now we'll be left die wondering" nonsense is ridiculous.

robbiezero

You would have thought if the RWC had SH teams more battle hardened for the WC, it would have manifested itself in the pool stages especially, which did not seem to be the case.

aloooof

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121297868#Comment_121297868

You have to give equal weight to it not working. So pointless really.

You don’t, tho, that’s the point. On the balance of probabilities, I think Crowley should have been brought on.

To be clear, I’m not saying we absolutely would have scored with Crowley on the field. But I feel it may have given us a better opportunity.

Neil3030

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121297675#Comment_121297675

The key point is in here for me.

You have to look at everything in context.

It's not Crowley vs Sexton. It's Crowley vs a Sexton, who hardly went 80 mins, in the final 10 minutes of a QF, 38 years of age, struggling to keep up with play and leaving our attack predictable.

The 60m gained is both irrelevant (because the objective was to score a try) and missing context - a tired NZ defense will be easier for basic 10 play to pick at, i.e., before they go to their full line in the 22. Crowley or Byrne could have also brought us 60m up the field in that scenario.

Once inside the 22 is where things get a lot more difficult. And was there upside in Crowley's freshness, superior athleticism and linebreak threat? Yes.

In that scenario, i.e. losing in the final minutes of a knockout game, a coach has no downside when going for broke. Foster/Schmidt made a call in this vein last night, bringing on McKenzie for Mo'unga with 5 to go. Nobody is currently cribbing that Mo'unga might have been the better organizer and gotten them into range for a penalty.

Add it all up for me, and Farrell made an error of judgement based on probabilities. To say certain outcomes need to be 100% proven to say this is a straw man.

phog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121298030#Comment_121298030

Nutshell

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121298030#Comment_121298030

Sexton was no longer able to make loop runs or staged plays at that stage. We had bought on a fresh center and winger. We needed to get the ball out to them or to make NZ believe it was an option to move the ball wide. NZ knew that Sexton was incapable of loop runs at that stage and that he was also incapable of line breaks so they would have set there defence up with nobody marking Sexton as he was not a threat

Must love hardship

Sexton had not played 80 minutes in 12 month and that game was as result to injuries to two other backs. Sexton wasn't even taking the last kicks at goal in that game.

Farrell has gotten a lot right over the last 2 years.. but personally I think he wasn't ruthless enough ultimately in not taking off sexton and POM and bringing Earls and Kilkoyne to the world cup.

riddles

Farrell seems to be practicing servant leadership with devolved responsibility. This is popular within the group but can be tricky to unpick when the component parts don’t seem to be clicking.

Arasmus seems to apply a more command and control model which appears to be more applicable in the knock out rugby context at least.

AbusesToilets

Going forward, for me the most important thing is to keep building on the playing philosophy we've espoused for the last 2 years. Out of the top 4 teams, it's the one that's shown the most effectiveness and adaptivity. Neinbar coming in to Leinster gives me some concern that the core aspects of high ball skills and tempo will be degraded .

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121298030#Comment_121298030

It’s a coach’s in game decision to make and he decided it was better to keep him on the field.

I think we needed experience at that point.

Another game it might be right to bring on Crowley.

I would have no worries the coaching staff could see what a few people on the internet could see and I I don’t think it was an oversight, or Sexton’s status or incompetence that had him there it was a thought out coaching decision.

Whatever, it’s done now.

phog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121298103#Comment_121298103

💯 this

aloooof

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121298966#Comment_121298966

I would have no worries the coaching staff could see what a few people on the internet could see and I I don’t think it was an oversight, or Sexton’s status or incompetence that had him there it was a thought out coaching decision.

But nobody's making the argument that they could see what Farrell etc. couldn't, or that it wasn't a thought-out coaching decision.

It still doesn't mean it was the correct one.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300404#Comment_121300404

??

So you are saying that Farrell could see that Sexton 'was out on his feet' and knew that on the 'balance of probabilities Crowley would be better' but still decided not to replace him?

That a coach of Farrell's ability would not 'think through' the options?

OldRio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300567#Comment_121300567

Coach of the year. But randomers on Internet know better.

aloooof

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300567#Comment_121300567

Nope, not at all what I'm saying, and you're conflating things here.

I'm saying on the balance of probabilities, I think Crowley would have been better. Farrell clearly thought Sexton would be cos he left him on. It's axiomatic.

And of course Farrell would think thru the options; I haven't said otherwise.

And, in case it needs pointing out and you pick me up wrong again, it's possible to think Farrell is an absolutely brilliant coach, and still disagree with him on the odd decision. It's not a massive sleight on him.

phog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300617#Comment_121300617

Breaking News: Farrell is infallible

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300633#Comment_121300633

I'm saying on the balance of probabilities, I think Crowley would have been better. 

And Farrell clearly didn't think that.

So as I said earlier, perhaps you just have to live with the decision.

P.S. OK, I accept what you in particular are saying but you did say 'but nobody is saying that'.

If people are saying that Farrell was not aware of what they think was happening and that he ignored his options then they are implying this:

it was an oversight, or Sexton’s status or incompetence that had him there 'or'  it was not a thought out coaching decision.

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121284794#Comment_121284794

We'll eventually reach parity with Fiji and Argentina

aloooof

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300650#Comment_121300650

So as I said earlier, perhaps you just have to live with the decision.

Yep. And people are going to disagree with that decision and voice their opinions on it on a rugby forum. Perhaps you just have to live with that.

OldRio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300637#Comment_121300637

Toys out of the pram. Bless.

phog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300688#Comment_121300688

If that how you feel then maybe a discussion forum isn't the best place for you.

OldRio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300716#Comment_121300716

And who are you to tell me what I should do?

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300679#Comment_121300679

No problem with that and never had.

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300650#Comment_121300650

Farrell was wrong.

Sexton was already having a bad game and getting worse as he got more and more tired.

We had a fit and capable replacement on the bench that never got used.

We lost the game, Farrell clearly got it wrong

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121300734#Comment_121300734

Farrell clearly made the decision that the fit and capable replacement was the wrong choice.

I won't use hindsight or second guess him because at the time my in game feeling was that an experienced player who had navigated just such a scenario before to win all or nothing games trumped an untried and inexperienced head.

Akrasia

We lost. Farrell made the wrong choice

phog

Farrell trusted in Sexton, you can see why he would but he really should have subbed him.

I wonder will we see a page on this in Sexton's book.