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

Ireland vs England - 6N 2025 match thread

1232426282931

Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,528 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I'm struggling to see how Boyle wouldn't be a better bet at this stage.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,554 ✭✭✭niallm77


    Phog specifically picked out Crowley for his movement to the right of the breakdown, made no mention of the other players who did likewise. It's a bog standard movement that happens every few seconds around a breakdown. It's not something to use to big a player up. They are professional rugby players in a 6n match doing a very basic thing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,486 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    It's pointless discussing anything with you. I'm sure if Prendergast was there and didn't do it you'd say something like he was smart to stay away in case things broke down or something like that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    And you specifically picked out Crowley for his “glaring errors” and made no mention of… other players who did likewise. Right?

    I facetiously asked “now do Prendergast”.

    This all stems back to the suggestion that, because Prendergast was directly involved in a try, he was somehow better. Which doesn’t tell half the story yesterday.

    Like, there was one reg here who couldn’t get in quick enough with “Crowley howler intercept” in the Autumn. Yet conspicuously silent on Prendergast’s in much the same situation yesterday.

    My point in all this? Some consistency would be nice…

    And to be fair to someone like AbusesToilets, someone I’ve often disagreed with, but at least he’s done that, even if I disagree with his conclusions.

    It’d be nice if that was a bit more universal.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,528 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    This is an incredible strawman of an argument.

    "The debate" was not SP vs JC, it was whether JC played a key role in Beirne's try to the degree it should be highlighted as great play by him. He had some other lovely interventions in the game but it is utterly bizarre to highlight the Beirne try that he had nothing to do with.

    I only properly watched the match this morning as I was travelling. For me there is little enough between their performances either way. They would both want to improve their kicking from hand, there was a lot of kicks too long for a proper competition (and occasionally too short that just caused havoc). Also, our ruck protection was unforgivably poor at times and that caused a number of promising moves to fall apart. England were clearly targeting it though and I'd put more weight on that and the English rush defence in setting the game than the performance of either 10.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,857 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    For me, the mistakes Prendergast and Crowley made are indicative of what makes them good players. Victims of their own success to an extent. SP had a couple of opportunities where he could've exploited a gap to possibly create a try scoring chance, but chose to pass instead. Crowley cutting inside instead of passing out the line.

    I think they'll both come away with some solid work ons that will stand to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Long kicks is an interesting one - especially as both 10s were guilty of it.

    To get around the usual tribal blinkered analysis, I wanted to get an English perspective so listened to Eggchasers podcast this morning and they felt long kicks were a specific tactic from Ireland, aiming to negate the risk of shorter contestable kicks where England could be more dangerous if won than having England start from deeper in their own half. They saw it as being a successful tactic.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 511 ✭✭✭sheepysheep


    Does anyone have a link to a replay of the match?



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,528 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Maybe, but I don't understand any logic in kicking so long the opposition has a choice of taking a mark or running it out of their 22 under no pressure. I thought we were challenging fairly well in the air and the longer kicks were just miscues, but maybe it was on purpose.

    The biggest one for me was in the lead up to the eventually disallowed try. Prendergast threw a pretty awful pass straight at an English player, but I think he possibly could have gotten under the posts if he just put the head down. But it was off a batted ball and under pressure, he'll learn.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,486 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Well I gave SP a 5/10 for his performance which is below average and Crowley 6/10 which means average.

    My response to you initially was that the only reason he brought up Crowley was the comparison between him and SP.

    I'm finished with this now. You can respond if you wish and I won't reply.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,857 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    So explain your thinking there. I've gone through and listed both players contributions in attack. What has you coming to your conclusions, specifically?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,857 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Eggchasers saw it as being a way to neuter the best attribute of Freddie Steward and to make Smith run/kick from a distance with a structured defensive line.

    I doubt we'll ever get an answer but the fact both of the Irish 10s were guilty of it gives some credence to the suggestion. Especially with Crowley coming on, having seen SP do it several times, with the coaches having plenty of time to give Crowley the message that it shouldn't be happening.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,486 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I'm not going through my assessment again.

    I'll give you something though. Sam was standing back and it takes him more time to make a decision on whether to kick or pass. His passing is awesome most of the time. He also stands back in defense and I think he's worried about getting knocked and wants more time to set himself. One of his kicks led to the first England try, he missed two conversations, I'm taking the easy one only, so that's 7 points he was responsible for against Ireland, I'm not including the conversion of the England try.

    Crowley was almost always up at the line and there's a legitimate threat that he'll run, pass or kick and that gave him a little more time. He converted the two tries. He had some poor kicks like SP, he bore some responsibility for one of the English tries where he missed a tackle but that was a complete disaster with Henshaw missing a tackle too. I honestly think he made an educated guess that Henshaw would stop it which was a little foolish and left him out of position.

    Neither of them had great or even good games for me. I had Crowley as pretty average and SP below average.

    I do think Crowley gave Easterby something to think about but I don't think he'll change things but if something similar happens against Scotland we might see Crowley start.

    I personally think Crowley is the more complete out-half right now but I think SP is the future and someone that excites me a lot as I think he's going to be a great not just a good one.

    Somebody was mentioning Borthwick and his talking about the third quarter before Crowley came on but he said Crowley coming on made a significant difference and improved Ireland.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,857 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    So let's get into this. First off, it's a bit much to blame SP for an English try that happened 3 phases after his kick, with a set Irish defensive line. Especially when you are making accommodations for Crowley missing a tackle.

    Crowley was almost always up at the line and there's a legitimate threat that he'll run, pass or kick and that gave him a little more time.

    This is just wrong. The attacking shape was quite different when Crowley came on, we didn't look to run any loops or screen passes in the way we did in the 1st half. SP took the ball to the line multiple times, and created two clean like break opportunities with his running and delayed pass. Crowley has one sequence where he threatened the line in a similar fashion. It was the attack where Healy rumbled up on the left wing. The only other time he ran with the ball was when he ignored an overlap and got turned over on the English line.

    I'm not trying to criticize Crowley, but it's simply untrue to say he did more than Prendergast in attack.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,528 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Crowley - 1 defender beaten

    Prendergast - 2 defenders beaten, 1 clean break.

    And that's just themselves, Prendergast released players on line breaks multiple times with passing on the line.

    I don't understand how this "doesn't attack the line" narrative continues to exist. They attack it differently and Crowley is much more likely to take contact which can be great at times. But to your earlier point, one probably takes it into contact a bit too much, and the other passes instead of taking contact a bit too much.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,486 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Simple question, yes or no answer. Do you think Crowley played better than SP?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,857 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    No, I don't. SP was directly involved in creating line breaks and try opportunities, with some genuinely elite passing. Crowley has a couple moments getting passes away under pressure, one to Hansen in particular that was excellent.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,486 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    You do realise you are in a very small minority then? Are you a Leinster fan? Have you constantly saying, for two years, that POM shouldn't be in the Irish squad?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,857 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    I think my opinion is based on watching the match, as laid out in the boringly long posts detailing both players actions.

    Yours seems to be based on vibes, and yes, I do feel that we ought to have moved on from POM post WC along with others.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,260 ✭✭✭Ben Bailey


    When a person cites an authority in support of one particular view, it's not unreasonable to enquire as to how great that authority's standing is, in that person's opinion in another context. But you knew that.

    Barnes is entitled to his opinion, which unlike mine, is paid for. I'm unaware of any existing or upcoming job vacancies at Leinster Rugby. Equally, I'm completely unaware of whoever the poster you refer to is, and indeed what his views on Borthwick, or anything else, are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,486 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    But you were saying here that the coaches know more and are selecting Prendergast but constantly criticised them selecting POM. Do you not think that is hypocritical?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,857 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    When did I say that specifically? I can disagree with a selection while recognizing why it was taken.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    …which is why I suggest coming to your own conclusion.

    I, and the majority of others, seem to think Crowley played better. That includes Borthwick.

    Maybe there’s actually something to what he’s saying… but you knew that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,260 ✭✭✭Ben Bailey


    It seems to me that

    (1) @AbusesToilets acknowledges that the coaches know more than we can know

    &

    (2) Sometimes he disagrees with them

    Multiple posters disagree with (some of) the coaches' selections & agree with others. It's doesn't feel like 'hypocrisy' to me.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Did Borthwick say that or are you taking a leap based on a vague comment from a coach who hadn't even watched the match back yet?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,260 ✭✭✭Ben Bailey


    In Borthwick's view, Crowley was the better of the 2 Ireland 10's. He is an international coach & his opinions receive much coverage. Was there anything else in Borthwick's respected opinion that you'd consider worth sharing ?.

    Said the person most responsible for England player selection

    “If you look at today’s game, you see two different teams,” said Borthwick after the match. “You have seen an Ireland team that has been together such a huge amount of time, nearly 1,200 caps, and an England team that has been building over the last six months, with just over half that number of caps."

    In depth analysis from Borthwick.

    Borthwick said: ‘The change at 10 was pretty significant. I thought he (Crowley) played really well when he came on there in that final part of the game.

    ‘They have got quality in their team. I was looking at the teams beforehand and on their bench I think they had almost as many caps as we had in our whole 23.

    (Italy had 739 caps in their 23 v Scotland, including 2 players with 1 cap between them. Using Borthwick's analysis does this mean that Italy should start as favourites against England ?.)

    ‘I was looking at it going, ‘this is going to be a test for us’ and ultimately we came up short, and I am really disappointed we came up short because I thought we could come here and win the game.’



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,554 ✭✭✭niallm77


    So Borthwick didn't say Crowley was better.

    Borthwick also said post match that the third quarter was critical to the outcome and IIRC Crowley came on at 59 minute.

    The big momentum swing in the game came between 49 and 59, Sheehan and conan came on and in the following 10 minutes it went from 5-10 to 13-10.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,486 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I'm sorry but you don't think he's saying that Crowley played better with this comment?

    The change at 10 was pretty significant. I thought he (Crowley) played really well when he came on there in that final part of the game.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,837 ✭✭✭✭phog


    Eggchasers could well have decided that kicking long was a tactic but no one seems to have told Easterby as he said on WM that we kicked too long in the first half.



Advertisement