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
Because what were the alternatives?
He wouldn't have brought Ross Byrne on in the same scenario either, but for different reasons.
Well, he's gonna have to start trusting them now.
The same alternatives he's going to have to pick for the next four years.
Yes, our play from 10 will diminish from here on out.
You absolutely did say that:
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.
You clearly imply it wasnt done for Crowley but it was for others.
Top tier is international games or the top level club competitions - ERC or Super Rugby. I'll leave you open for whatever position you'd like.
I suppose the (luxury) problem with a long undefeated streak is that you never quite learn what the policy is for the closing minutes when we're chasing a game.
But going back to the 2020 6N, Sexton was brought off for Byrne with 10 minutes to go when we were chasing the game in Paris.
And in the 2021 6N, Sexton was brought off for Burns (not a typo) with 10 minutes to go when we were chasing the game in Cardiff.
Assuming injury wasn't a factor in either of those instances (open to clarification on that), it seems that at least once upon a time, Farrell saw the value in freshening things up when chasing a game in the dying minutes.
And it didn't work either time...
Outcomes alone are not how to assess a decision made in uncertainty. Otherwise you could just say "we lost the game. he must have been wrong", which is not fair.
The discussion I'd like to have is why he made a decision that went against:
(a) his apparent former policy.
and
(b) the policy of other coaches facing that scenario (e.g., NZ).
Think in 2021 Sexton left with an injury or HIA which brought Burns on. Don't believe Sexton was able to play the next week because of it.
2020 might be closer but it wasn't for a Grand Slam so probably less pressure than a WC QF. Ireland were also in a far bigger hole when the sub was made so more drastic action was needed. Not only did they need to beat France but they also had to win while scoring two more tries or 14 more points than France did when Sexton came off - throwing everything at it made sense as there was nothing to risk.
I'd suspect in that scenario against NZ, Farrell would have also brought on Crowley - it was the tightness that meant it was a close decision. After the 64th minute Ireland were never behind by more than a score
Yup. I took a look at the SA game again and the line out and scrum issues were blazingly obvious in that game, as they'd been earlier. Much as we all noticed it at the time I'm sure ABs studied it very closely. Lo and behold they minced us in both departments and primed the ref to look at Porter more closely. Whoever's fault it is that that wasn't fixed after the SA match (or long before) is secondary to the fact that we went into the 1/4 final with obvious weaknesses and paid dearly for them.
I completely agree, though others here do not seem to believe so.
I mean, in the case of b, NZ left their sub fly half on the bench for that game also. France left Dupont on the pitch for all of their QF etc.
Already responded to a) above and for b) I don't think it is accurate - against Ireland in an incredibly tight match, NZ were even more conservative than Ireland and brought on neither Christie nor McKenzie at any stage.
I get why people are focusing on the NZ match, my issue is far more with his wider squad rotation, and in lesser way the initial squad selection. Maybe a fresher Crowley does something to win the game in 10 minutes, I'd however argue that it is far more likely that several of the players being fresher rather than flogged during the tournament and Ryan being fit it would have been far more impactful to Ireland progressing.
Also far more impactful was that POC and everyone else involved with the line out took the mess more seriously and took actions to resolve it rather than to deflect.
I've literally clarified "for the QF" in the post you're responding to. That's been my point since the outset. The whole discussion was around Crowley not getting on in the QF.
Top tier is international games or the top level club competitions - ERC or Super Rugby.
So they need experience in internationals so Farrell can play them.... in internationals? Again, non-sequitur.
Pretty transparent why you would say only ERC or Super Rugby, but lets go with it. (And indeed, you previously made the argument that only Leinster, La Rochelle, Toulouse and Saracens were top tier. Right?).
So going with your premise, and by your criteria:
So ya, pretty regularly. And indeed Crowley himself is another example. This notion that:
It is a pity he didn't push on sooner or Munster give him an earlier opportunity.
as if that's something Farrell required for selection is not remotely true. But sure, "not really supported by evidence"...
What exactly is your evidence they didn't take it seriously? Or that they deflected it??
Leaving a player on the pitch for the full match isn't necessarily a problem. Given there's 15 players who start a match and only 8 subs are allowed, it means at least 7 players will have to do it.
Dupont is 26 years old, Mo'Unga.is 29 years old. That's quite a difference yo a 38 year old. I'm not sure how anyone could watch the last 10-15 minutes of the Ireland game and not realise Sexton was out on his feet.
Edit
Nvm, that was supposed to be a DM
Every interview I heard by him and every player involved they downplayed the issues.
Each match they appeared to just melt down rather than be able to pivot when things weren't working.
There seemed to be zero pack leadership when either SA or NZ pushed the laws - one thing against SA but even after that experience it was crickets against NZ
I think Crowley will develop faster than many believe. As well if he stays injury free I think he will transform into probably our best Number 10 ever
NZ cleared the bench in both games they trailed at the death, i.e., France and SA.
Dupont is surely the outlier - he's both 26 years-of-age and a complete physical mutant to begin with.
We beat the world champions , its got to go down as a success! I no longer see the need for a post mortem
I've literally clarified "for the QF" in the post you're responding too. That's been my point since the outset. The whole discussion was around Crowley not getting on in the final.
Your original response makes zero sense with that clarification. I was clearly speaking about Crowley getting game time earlier in his career at 10. If you got it wrong just admit it and walk away rather than this apparent attempt to backtrack.
Farrell played Dan Sheehan in 7 internationals before he played a top tier club game
Doris had played 3 mins vs Toulouse of top tier rugby before Farrell picked him.
Will Connors had played in 1 solitary top tier club game (52 mins vs Saracens) before Farrell picked him
Similarly, Keenan had played in 1 solitary top tier club game (80 mins vs Saracens) before Farrell picked him.
JGP another obvious one, who was 2nd choice for Leinster when Farrell picked him, and had 40 mins in 2 games vs your top tier opposition while at Leinster.
Mack Hansen another obvious one who had 58 mins in Super Rugby Australia knock-out games.
Not sure where you're getting those from, your info appears all over the place (or mine is). Taking just the first two, from what I see Sheehan played 2 international games (AI Japan & Arg) before his first ERC match, not the 7 you've claimed, and Doris had 6 ERC games before his first Irish cap.
The point that you've proven is that none of your selected outliers have received much more, if any, greater opportunity by Farrell than he given Crowley. He started one ERC game at 10 before Farrell gave him his chance for Ireland. The closest positional importance and specialisation is JGP, and your 'obvious' example had played 3 seasons of Super Rugby, 27 ERC appearances and 4 starts before his first Irish bench appearance.
My original point that you took issue with:
It is a pity he didn't push on sooner or Munster give him an earlier opportunity
I really think it was the former, it was just poor timing - sometimes we cant do anything about where we find ourselves. Munster giving him earlier exposure is as up in the air as whether earlier exposure from Ireland as to whether ir would have helped or hurt him. I simply don't see the argument that Farrell could/would/should have done much more given the games he had to play with before capping him, as I don't believe even the staunchest and blinkered of Munster fans at the time were calling for Crowley to play in the 6 nations in 2022 or travel on the NZ tour - I dont believe many were even calling for him to start for Munster.
That would be great, I do however feel that the next year will be a bit of a rude awakening for some who have taken Sexton for granted and have been looking for the new shiny thing
Sexton was a great outhalf however 2-3 years back he was only capable of 50-60 minutes before being replaced we went to the WC expecting him to play for 80+ minutes.
JC will take 2-3 years to develop it he has the attributes to make a great OH. He was excellent in the URC rugby final
Pat Spillane take on it
2-3 years falls well outside my point about the next year being an eye opener for some. Following an Irish positional GOAT isn't generally a nice place to be - Ringrose will never be properly appreciated given who came before him. Despite ROG clinging on far too long and somewhat tarnishing his memory, Sexton had to still deal with years of grumblings before he was eventually accepted. Similar to those players, JC looks like he is made of the right stuff though.
JC has a very small sample size of 'excellent' matches. I'd be a bit worried for him if he hasn't locked down the starting shirt in next 18 months, as there is a decent chance Prendergast will be getting significant game time with Leinster at that stage. The longer the starter stays up in the air the more likely a different young player eventually comes in and grabs it, be it Prendergast or someone else.
No nonsense points being made here. Cheerleaders take note
“For starters, let’s call a spade a spade. At most there are six, maybe seven, world-class rugby nations.
Yet the stark reality is that Ireland have failed in every World Cup tournament since the inaugural one in 1987 to get past the quarter-finals. It is a terrible record.
Ireland might have achieved notable wins in the autumn series and beat New Zealand in a Test series down there last summer – but those games, like the 2016 fixture in Chicago in which Ireland also beat the All Blacks, are glorified challenge matches.”
I assume this is a joke.
we went to the WC expecting him to play for 80+ minutes.
He did this literally once.
Refusing to give that a click but from the argument you've put there it is fairly weak.
Same thing could be said about Gaelic Football - I'm not a big fan but you hear generally the same counties every year around the QF and SF.
Throwing in 1987 is a lazy way to try to overemphasize the poor record. 10 attempts is not good but we are a small enough nation and were structurally a mess for a decent portion of that period. Talking down test games is the same as saying nothing but the All Ireland matters, which I know many football fans would disagree with and likely Spillane himself, given how much it probably lines his pockets.
I like the moans coming from GAA crowd, they're clearly a bit rattled.
I really couldn't care less about what happened in Irish rugby prior to about 06 because we were chronically ****. If the point is that we were crap from 87-03 world cups then...yeah, we were. Big whoop.
