Jump_In_Jack wrote: » I really want to beat Argentina so I'd save anyone that would have put in a big shift. Definitely would wrap in cotton wool the entire starting 15 if possible. With Tommy O'Donnell injured perhaps Jordi Murphy could be given a call up to the bench to rest the backrows that started. Other than that we should trust our depth to deliver a win against Fiji. Anyone puts in a big performance could put pressure on the starting 15. We are spoiled with the strength in depth we have, and we should use this match with Fiji to really test it. I can't think of a better opportunity to test them. I know the argument is there to mix players with experienced players but I'm impatient to see what they could do. If they are all coached well enough they should be able to deliver the same type of performance that we saw tonight, A lot of those guys have something to prove.
Jump_In_Jack wrote: » Does anyone know if there is an unwritten rule of etiquette that Tier 1 teams must field a lot of their starting team as a show of respect? Or is it just down to the coach to do what he wants? Or is there anything in terms of wages and contracts that the starting players demand the caps, particularly the centrally contracted guys? Still though, Fiji match will be a one-off chance to pick a very inexperienced team before the lead in to the World Cup begins in earnest.
connachta wrote: » http://www.the42.ie/ireland-south-africa-player-ratings-3-3691880-Nov2017/ The 42 agrees with me at least. Worst rated among great performers
connachta wrote: » I've enjoyed the game. Kearney wasn't good, let's be honest, but gosh 38 points to South Africa!
Burkie1203 wrote: » Oh get a life. Seriously you are just coming across as a pathetic loser at this stage. The42 or any other clickbait site is irrelevent. The coach creates a gameplan and the players execute. The coach will be extremely happy with what his players, 1-23 did. He will also know there is loads of things they can do that bit better. Nothing else counts. Especially not some random website ratings. You really need to cop yourself on.
stephen_n wrote: » Did you enjoy how Conway, Sweetman and Carberry played? Because they're the ones ahead of TOH, he's not even remotely close to being competition for Kearney yet.
stephen_n wrote: » connachta wrote: » I've enjoyed the game. Kearney wasn't good, let's be honest, but gosh 38 points to South Africa! Did you enjoy how Conway, Sweetman and Carberry played? Because they're the ones ahead of TOH, he's not even remotely close to being competition for Kearney yet.
prawnsambo wrote: » It's laughable stuff. Conor Murray was given a 7. No reason given for marking him down. Click bait for people to get outraged about and post comments.
MJohnston wrote: » The42 is a great site, but their player ratings are often the worst things they post.
connachta wrote: » I did. Kearney wasn't up to the level of the others. Whatever his past legend was. Wake up. The 42 is right But I'm happy. I don't want to target him more than I did. He was average among very good. And we have to rejoice. FFS 35 point difference against South Africa does not happen often. Greaaaaaat!
The Rape of Lucretia wrote: » Tomas O'Halloran is 5th or 6th choice FB in reality, and comes without the various versatility options of some of those ahead of him. The Good Ship Ireland has sailed as far as TOH is concerned.
prawnsambo wrote: » The rugby articles have dropped a lot since Murray K went on his sabbatical. I haven't seen their scrum guy write an article in a long time either. Quality has slipped imo.
Burkie1203 wrote: » What metric are you measuring Kearney against?
irishman86 wrote: » Who are the five ahead of him exactly TOH will off course play for Ireland again, stupid comment
mfceiling wrote: » You're embarrassing yourself now lad. Kearney was good tonight. Very solid and played well. The one point where he caught the ball by being absolutely inch perfect to the spot was supreme...just looked so comfortable. Thought he was one of the better players out of a good team effort tonight.
The Rape of Lucretia wrote: » Exactly, they are BobbyK, Payne, Conway, Sweets and Carbo.
irishman86 wrote: » He really wasnt buddy, he looked rusty Made a few stupid mistakes defo not one of the better performances.
irishman86 wrote: » He really wasnt buddy, he looked rusty Made a few stupid mistakes defo not one of the better performances. He was possibly the least effective back, lets not hyperbole a performance. He did his job of adding experience to the back three, I dont rate Kearney but since Zebo has been kicked to the curb, he was the obvious choice to start
mfceiling wrote: » Bar the bounce of the ball beating him would you care to name the "few stupid" mistakes he made?
Burkie1203 wrote: » Define effective? Our back 3 were never out of position much, certainly not for kicks. I cant remember the Boks pinging Ireland back with a kicking game. That says to me our back 3 was well organised. Kearney got pinged for one penalty for holding on and had a few other mistakes but Conway put in two nothing kicks on the first half but still had a very good games. He also had a few knock ons from contestables. Everything the back 3 did tonight was pretty much what was expected from them. Just because Kearney isnt in the highlights reel doesn't mean what he was doing wasnt effective. Stander had a really strong game but none of it will appear in the highlights either. But he was super effective where he needed to be.
MJohnston wrote: » Kearney was certainly showing plenty of rust, but it must have been immensely helpful for Stockdale and Conway knowing that they had someone reliable behind them for support. I think we saw the inevitable result of that. Rating players purely on their individual impacts is always a losing game.