Great effort and Ireland's best world cup performance wise
What a game for the casual viewers!
Ireland needed the set piece to work well and it didn't. Well targeted by Nz. Congrats to them
When people were critical of Farrell's choices before, they were often told to shut up because he was getting results.
You can't judge a man purely on results when he's winning, and then when he loses, make excuses.
It's not like Ireland were beaten by a better team. We should have won that game. We under performed and Farrell failed to use his bench even when Sexton was playing playing objectively poorly. Farrell hoped instead of acting.
Ah come on now the lad was out on his feet after 60 minutes. There was a phase of play in one of the last 40 I think around 29 or so and he had a wide open long throw to touch, can't remember who to, maybe Lowe and he just couldn't make the pass.
He was exhausted, his kicking deteriorated to the point he tried a chip kick and couldn't even run to it :(
I am in NO way saying subbing him means we win, we may have lost by more. But, he should have been subbed.
Look at the ABs yesterday they subbed off Aaron Smith. There was no sentiment only a will to win and he was flying but they wanted to shake things up
I don't need to. We lost to a team we should have beaten. Sexton was playing badly. Farrell should have taken him off. No 'IMO' needed
He didn't take him off and I think if he decided he wanted experience it was 100% the right decision at the time. Your opinion is based on a sideline/sofa view with the benefit of hindsight and knowing what we now know.
Coach's don't have your luxuries.
Fwiw, I know plenty of people who I watched it with were calling for this substitution during the game.
New Zealand also saw it
I was shouting at the TV to take Sexton off when I could see that he was exhausted at 55 minutes
Posts during the match were saying he's out on his feet.
I said this already, Sexton was not a threat to them, they could concentrate on the receiver, they knew he was no longer a threat with the ball.
So he went with his own conviction.
I saw Sexton still moving along the line and at the last play, trying to organise the next phase in which we were going forward. Tired like a lot of them, without a doubt, 'Exhaustion' is exaggerated IMO. Move came to an end on a dubious no release from Whitelock.
Happens.
By that logic during the 17 match win streak Farrell made every choice correctly...
17 wins, so f*cking what? We fell at essentially the first hurdle when it mattered, yet again.
You think SA give two sh*ts that we beat them last year? No, they're the true World no.1 because they delivered at the World Cup, which we've never done.
But sure according do our captain, "we won".
I feel 'capable' is a key element that many are jumping over.
As was discussed at length in the lead up to the tournament, for me, and likely Farrell, Crowley has not been significantly tested at top level at 10. It is a pity he didn't push on sooner or Munster give him an earlier opportunity. Not sure Farrell could have gotten him in quicker, aside from maybe exposing him more during the group stage but that is a gripe across the team.
So we've gone from Sexton was tired, to Sexton was playing badly now. How long til you work your way around to saying Crowley should've started I wonder?
I wasn't agreeing with the poster, I was pointing out the huge flaw to their logic that wins make the coach always right and losses make them wrong.
SA were a tiny margin from losing every game in the knockouts so I wouldn't put them up as poster boys for their coaching team making every decision correct. I appreciate their aggressive approach to decision making, and I hope Nienaber brings similar to Leinster, but in tight matches the tiniest things completely outside of the coaches control can mean their team wins or loses, no matter how many of their decisions were correct.
Agree totally.
Who would I want making the decision - somebody who had all the available facts/stats in front of him, including knowing the player or random people on the internet operating on what is a speculative hunch?
Choice is easy for me anyway.
Nah. Farrell has regularly picked guys who weren’t first choice for the Province, so wouldn’t have had the same exposure at the top level.
It wouldn’t have been anything new to do the same with Crowley.
Laying this at Munster not picking him sooner, so he’d have more experience and then Farrell could pick him is a non-sequitur.
And they 'delivered' because they had luck and things went their way at key moments.
They were no more entitled to the title than we or NZ etc were.
They won, past tense now. The important WC is the next one, as it is in every sport.
Lol
I still dont see how Sexton being tired had anything to do with the fact our line out couldnt hit a barn door? I think that's a far bigger concern tbh.
This is probably one of those statements that I'm sure feels right to you but isn't really supported with evidence.
Can you give me that sizeable list of players in as key and specialist position as 10 that Farrell 'regularly' picked to start that weren't first choice for their province and had as little experience in their position against top tier opposition as Crowley?
I think we overestimated our chances pre-tournament. There was practically nothing between SA, NZ, Ireland and France in ability. Any one of the four could have beaten the other narrowly in a QF, SF or the final.
Even without the bad draw, we would have had a big battle on our hands to win a semi final and the final (and would probably have needed whatever luck was going too).
And our scrum had no plan B when Porter's crooked scrummaging was finally sanctioned by a referee.
There are plenty of areas to discuss, going forward. Which is what a "post-mortem" thread should be about.
But instead there seems to be a tidal wave of bad faith from posters who seem to just not want any decision by Farrell to be subjected to scrutiny.
Well that’ll depend on your definition of “specialist positions” and “top tier opposition”.
Which we know are moving targets.
And for me the main reason I am critical of the coaching staff in this regard is the line out has been a coin toss since the Italy warm up game and realistically bar the Scotland game what changed? That for me is what cost us the game more than anything.
If the big negative against Crowley was that he hasn't played significantly at the top level then why did Farrell make the decision to bring him and then pick him in the match day 23 for such a massive game? Munster didn't force Farrel to do that. It's quite simple really, if he didn't trust him, he shouldn't pick him.
You claimed it 'regularly' happened so an absolute open goal for you to list off the many players you appear to believe that Farrell gave those kind of opportunities to but didnt for Crowley.
Yeah if anything the Scotland game was the outlier. A team whose lineout we can beat with a flanker throwing.
Farrell wouldn't have trusted Byrne to come on either.
OH was always going to be a break glass in case of emergency option if the game was that tight given the circumstances - neither backup had given enough confidence for it to be different.
But I didn’t say he didn’t for Crowley
He did for Crowley too. Just not in the QF.
But go on, I’ll entertain this… what’s your definition of “top tier” and a “specialist position” and I’ll provide the list.
