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

South Africa v Ireland, Second Test. Match Thread

Options
1…2021222426

Comments

  • Options
    #692
    Jump_In_Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 3,689 ✭✭✭Jump_In_Jack


    Schmidt made a fatal error not substituting the tired players sooner.
    Marmion and Madigan should have been on around 55-60 mins.
    As soon as we were 16 points ahead and players were flagging the bench should have been emptied.
    I think Schmidt underestimated the tiredness until too late.
    Also anyone claiming the bench was weak are deluded.
    That bench was fine, it just wasn't used early enough.
    Simply, if you keep tired players on the pitch it makes the other players have to work harder to defend and slows down the overall linespeed.
    If players had been on earlier then the other players could have relaxed a bit more, knowing a fresh player could cover them.


  • Options
    #693
    Rightwing
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,101 ✭✭✭Rightwing


    I didn't like the look of the team, felt we'd concede plenty of points, which was what subsequently transpired.

    Opportunity is probably lost now, as momentum is firmly with the boks.


  • Options
    #694
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,276 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Rightwing wrote: »
    I didn't like the look of the team, felt we'd concede plenty of points, which was what subsequently transpired.

    Opportunity is probably lost now, as momentum is firmly with the boks.

    That really is laughable.

    Your saying "I fancied a team that were 10 point favourites would win the game".... Well whoop de doo for you... They only won by 6 after by the way.

    Ireland (yeah the team you "didn't like the look of") were totally in control of that game for 40 minutes and it was altitude that made the most significant difference to the reversal.

    Why don't you come out now and predict the last game? Remember that the boks are currently 9 point favourites.... So Come on... Will ireland cover that spread or not??


  • Options
    #695
    Rightwing
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,101 ✭✭✭Rightwing


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    That really is laughable.

    Your saying "I fancied a team that were 10 point favourites would win the game".... Well whoop de doo for you... They only won by 6 after by the way.

    Ireland (yeah the team you "didn't like the look of") were totally in control of that game for 40 minutes and it was altitude that made the most significant difference to the reversal.

    Why don't you come out now and predict the last game? Remember that the boks are currently 9 point favourites.... So Come on... Will ireland cover that spread or not??

    I didn't bet the last day, but I felt we'd stay within the 10. But I would say the boks are value @ -9 next week.


  • Options
    #696
    mfceiling
    Registered Users Posts: 12,791 ✭✭✭✭mfceiling


    Bigbok wrote: »
    So it's ok for the guy to
    Write whats "choke" in
    Afrikaans but
    My comment gets to u??yes we lost but u never played a bok team but I guess that doesn't matter to u.people
    Taking about how
    Great ur depth is and yet a Mickey Mouse team beat u yesterday

    Yeah but my comment was to where you were all week?

    Your "Bok" team was comprehensively beaten last week by 14 men.

    Almost beaten at altitude this week by our "2nd" team - we don't play at altitude ever so you really should have hammered us out the gate - more so that we had our second choice 10 who is only finding his feet at international level.

    So again - where were you all week that you gave this place a miss but came back after your Bok team fell over the line this week?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #697
    Bigbok
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 291 ✭✭Bigbok


    Beast,Strauss,Malherbe,mvovo,pieterson,kolisi,leroux,Mapoe shouldn't be anywhere near the green and gold shirt.


  • Options
    #698
    Hagz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,257 ✭✭✭Hagz


    Bigbok wrote: »
    Beast,Strauss,Malherbe,mvovo,pieterson,kolisi,leroux,Mapoe shouldn't be anywhere near the green and gold shirt.

    Who should be there in their place? I would have thought that with Bismark unavailable, Strauss is the obvious choice.
    Can't think of who else would be an improvement at full-back. Kriel and Kolbe are very exciting but I wouldn't say they'd be an improvement on Le Roux.


  • Options
    #699
    Bigbok
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 291 ✭✭Bigbok


    Hagz wrote: »
    Who should be there in their place? I would have thought that with Bismark unavailable, Strauss is the obvious choice.
    Can't think of who else would be an improvement at full-back. Kriel and Kolbe are very exciting but I wouldn't say they'd be an improvement on Le Roux.

    Kitschoff for beast
    Kriel for leroux
    Julian for Malherbe
    Would have liked to see hougaard for mvovo
    Jaco kriel for kolisi
    Dejong for mapoe


  • Options
    #700
    nehe milner skudder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,182 ✭✭✭nehe milner skudder


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Don't forget, we know that CJ Stander isn't good enough to play for the Boks because he plays for a 2nd rate team like Ireland

    he shouldn't be eligible for ireland. but thats another thread


  • Options
    #701
    former total
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭former total


    It's been confirmed that Lambie will miss the third test.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #702
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Jump_In_Jack wrote: »
    Schmidt made a fatal error not substituting the tired players sooner.
    Marmion and Madigan should have been on around 55-60 mins.
    As soon as we were 16 points ahead and players were flagging the bench should have been emptied.
    I think Schmidt underestimated the tiredness until too late.
    Also anyone claiming the bench was weak are deluded.
    That bench was fine, it just wasn't used early enough.
    Simply, if you keep tired players on the pitch it makes the other players have to work harder to defend and slows down the overall linespeed.
    If players had been on earlier then the other players could have relaxed a bit more, knowing a fresh player could cover them.

    It wasn't a matter of Schmidt guessing about the players. Every player is monitored constantly. The management team know exactly how each player is doing at all times. That would be the major factor in the timing of substitutions but he also has to think about the disruption factor.

    But saying that Joe didn't know guys were tiring is nonsense.


  • Options
    #703
    WeleaseWoderick
    Registered Users Posts: 1,441 ✭✭✭WeleaseWoderick


    Very disappointing not to be able to hold on after a seriously impressive first half showing.

    The players were completely out on their feet by the end though and were falling off tackles they'd normally make all the time.

    Thankfully, the 3rd test is back at sea level but I'm not sure whether our lads will be recovered fully as that is now two massive efforts put in.


  • Options
    #704
    Jump_In_Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 3,689 ✭✭✭Jump_In_Jack


    First Up wrote: »
    Jump_In_Jack wrote: »
    Schmidt made a fatal error not substituting the tired players sooner.
    Marmion and Madigan should have been on around 55-60 mins.
    As soon as we were 16 points ahead and players were flagging the bench should have been emptied.
    I think Schmidt underestimated the tiredness until too late.
    Also anyone claiming the bench was weak are deluded.
    That bench was fine, it just wasn't used early enough.
    Simply, if you keep tired players on the pitch it makes the other players have to work harder to defend and slows down the overall linespeed.
    If players had been on earlier then the other players could have relaxed a bit more, knowing a fresh player could cover them.

    It wasn't a matter of Schmidt guessing about the players. Every player is monitored constantly. The management team know exactly how each player is doing at all times. That would be the major factor in the timing of substitutions but he also has to think about the disruption factor.

    But saying that Joe didn't know guys were tiring is nonsense.

    He didn't act early enough, the facts remain, that the subs didn't come on early enough.
    Whatever technology tracking etc was available didn't make a difference unfortunately.

    It's pointless having subs and not using them.
    I'd rather see the subs get a run with a 16 point lead and time to get up to speed with the match, than wait til the players are leaking tries through tiredness and bring on a token sub with a few minutes to go.

    I don't buy the notion that the subs are not good enough to make an impact for 20 minutes.


  • Options
    #705
    Nift
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭Nift


    First Up wrote: »
    It wasn't a matter of Schmidt guessing about the players. Every player is monitored constantly. The management team know exactly how each player is doing at all times. That would be the major factor in the timing of substitutions but he also has to think about the disruption factor.

    But saying that Joe didn't know guys were tiring is nonsense.

    Well he still handled it badly.


  • Options
    #706
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,556 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    I think it was just a simple mistake of underestimating how badly players would fatigue.

    I'm sure he could see the fatigue on the laptops but I reckon the plan was for them to play longer.


  • Options
    #707
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,254 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    All their tries came off players running low and hard at us and our players bouncing off shins.


  • Options
    #708
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    awec wrote: »
    I think it was just a simple mistake of underestimating how badly players would fatigue.

    I'm sure he could see the fatigue on the laptops but I reckon the plan was for them to play longer.

    I don't think it made any difference. The SA bench was far stronger and their guys who played 80 were much better able to last the pace as well. It took New Zealand a pile of attempts to win a series in SA. A touring squad up against the full resources of SA rugby on the high Veldt is one of the biggest challenges in the game. The criticism of players and of Schmidt is mis-placed and ill-informed.


  • Options
    #709
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,556 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    First Up wrote: »
    I don't think it made any difference. The SA bench was far stronger and their guys who played 80 were much better able to last the pace as well. It took New Zealand a pile of attempts to win a series in SA. A touring squad up against the full resources of SA rugby on the high Veldt is one of the biggest challenges in the game. The criticism of players and of Schmidt is mis-placed and ill-informed.

    Ah come on, it made a huge difference. We had guys on who were out on their feet, glorified empty shirts in defence.

    The bench may have been a step down in quality but would have introduced some much needed freshness at least. Murray and Jackson were totally busted.


  • Options
    #710
    Buer
    Registered Users Posts: 24,197 ✭✭✭✭Buer


    The fatigue absolutely played a huge part. But the issue is also that our bench isn't strong enough. Who that came off the bench actually made a notably positive impact on the game? Donnacha Ryan got 30 minutes. Reidy got 16 minutes. Bealham got 20 minutes. Kilcoyne and Strauss got 15 minutes each. They had enough time to do something. We were well ahead with all those players on the field.

    The backs should have been changed up but it's hard to take off those halfbacks when they're absolutely key to the team.


  • Options
    #711
    former total
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭former total


    BTW, it's been confirmed that TOH did indeed get 4 minutes so three new caps on Saturday.

    Buer is right though, the subs who did come on made very little impact. If they were raring to go, they hid it well.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #712
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    awec wrote: »
    Ah come on, it made a huge difference. We had guys on who were out on their feet, glorified empty shirts in defence.

    The bench may have been a step down in quality but would have introduced some much needed freshness at least. Murray and Jackson were totally busted.

    We were still ahead when the subs came on.


  • Options
    #713
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,276 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    First Up wrote: »
    We were still ahead when the subs came on.

    We were being battered from the 48th minute onwards


  • Options
    #714
    mfceiling
    Registered Users Posts: 12,791 ✭✭✭✭mfceiling


    former total wrote: »
    BTW, it's been confirmed that TOH did indeed get 4 minutes

    If they were raring to go, they hid it well.

    To be fair 4 minutes wouldn't give you a chance to do much.


  • Options
    #715
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    We were being battered from the 48th minute onwards

    So you agree that the subs didn't make any difference?


  • Options
    #716
    Jump_In_Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 3,689 ✭✭✭Jump_In_Jack


    Just for the record,
    Tries came 55, 63, 69, 75, and last penalty came at 80.
    3 out of 4 tries were converted.
    If we had held out just one of the converted tries we would have won.
    If the 3 sub backs had been on at 55-60 minutes we could have seen a difference.
    The forward subs did come on roughly in good time.
    Perhaps Best and McGrth could have gone off a bit before their eventual exit at 65 mins.
    Also perhaps Henderson could have gone off for Reidy before the 70th minute.
    With margins so thin, and a few costly errors between Jackson and the backs (crossing when on their 22, and knock on due to miscommunication) perhaps with fresh legs those mistakes could have been avoided and we could have kept possession better towards the end of the match.


  • Options
    #717
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Jump_In_Jack wrote: »
    Just for the record,
    Tries came 55, 63, 69, 75, and last penalty came at 80.
    3 out of 4 tries were converted.
    If we had held out just one of the converted tries we would have won.
    If the 3 sub backs had been on at 55-60 minutes we could have seen a difference.
    The forward subs did come on roughly in good time.
    Perhaps Best and McGrth could have gone off a bit before their eventual exit at 65 mins.
    Also perhaps Henderson could have gone off for Reidy before the 70th minute.
    With margins so thin, and a few costly errors between Jackson and the backs (crossing when on their 22, and knock on due to miscommunication) perhaps with fresh legs those mistakes could have been avoided and we could have kept possession better towards the end of the match.

    And if the 3 replacement backs came on at 55-60 mins then we would have had nobody on the bench to replace Henshaw when he got injured. So it's hard to look at it in hindsight like that really.

    Also, had SA been pinged for blocking Murray for the try from the quick line-out we'd have had a penalty instead of them a try. Had we not ballsed up a move off a scrum in their half we might have gotten points there as well. Had SA not gotten away with numerous side entries on their own rucks....

    Should've, would've, could've. At the end of the day there's a number of things that could have been done differently by a number of people. But the tough game last week, altitude and the seriously large difference in benches were always going to leave us with a bit of a mountain to climb in the last quarter. With several players missing we just didn't have the depth to compete at the end. Killer was a complete passenger, Strauss was poor by his standard, Ryan was fairly anonymous for the most part, Reidy is a long way off the level required etc.

    It was a kick in the nuts to blow that lead, and I did think Heaslips try would see their heads drop. But they knew we'd run out of steam and they just kept coming at us. And now we're going into the last test with some very important players having put in some serious shifts over the last couple of weeks. On the other hand SA are ramping up. I think SA are rightly favourites now for the series, but it's still credit to the squad that they are still in with a shot. There's been a lot of positives. Furlong, Dillane, Ruddock, Murphy, Jackson, Marshall and Payne at FB all stand out, most of which are young guys with real futures for the Ireland side.

    And you can't help but think that with a full strength squad we'd have sown up the series on Saturday....


  • Options
    #718
    thomond2006
    Registered Users Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    I had never heard of Ruan Combrinck. I have now.


  • Options
    #719
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,276 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    First Up wrote: »
    So you agree that the subs didn't make any difference?

    I agree that the significant factor was the altitude, not the bench.


  • Options
    #720
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    I agree that the significant factor was the altitude, not the bench.

    I agree


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #721
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    I agree that the significant factor was the altitude, not the bench.

    I'm not sure about that. I think there may have been a bit of six of one, half dozen of the other. The altitude was always going to be a huge issue, but if we had better options off the bench they probably would have been used earlier and made a greater impact. We just had a very callow bench overall which delayed the use of them and meant they had feck all impact.


Advertisement