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
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.
Posts during the match were saying he's out on his feet.
I was shouting at the TV to take Sexton off when I could see that he was exhausted at 55 minutes
New Zealand also saw it
Fwiw, I know plenty of people who I watched it with were calling for this substitution during the game.
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.
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
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
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.
He made 'a choice' as he is tasked with doing.
Was it wrong, frankly we will never know.
So you must preface that with 'IMO'.
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.
We lost. Farrell made the wrong choice
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.
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
No problem with that and never had.
And who are you to tell me what I should do?
If that how you feel then maybe a discussion forum isn't the best place for you.
Toys out of the pram. Bless.
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.
We'll eventually reach parity with Fiji and Argentina
I'm saying on the balance of probabilities, I think Crowley would have been better.
And Farrell clearly didn't think that.
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.
Breaking News: Farrell is infallible
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.
Coach of the year. But randomers on Internet know better.
??
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?
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.
💯 this
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.
Whatever, it’s done now.
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 .
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.
