bilston wrote: » I would think he might bunk a lot of that queue.
CatFromHue wrote: » I dunno, the incumbents are doing well at the moment so it wouldn't be Schmidt's style to bring an unknown in like that. An unknown in that it's been quite a while since Trimble played.
vienne86 wrote: » RTE reporting all good news from Carton House - SOB, Heaslip, Best, Sexton (have I forgotten anyone? all expected to train fully tomorrow.
.ak wrote: » I'd like to point out this paragraph to people who constantly moan about kicking.
.ak wrote: » SOB to train fully tomorrow would be a massive boost. Hopefully it happens. I think twinges can happen like that, I remember pulling something in my calf before, thought I'd been shot with a tazer, immediately thought it was torn and I'd be out for a couple of months. 2 days later I was sprinting on it without any issues. Sometimes these things feel worse than they are. If it was anything more than a strain he wouldn't have been walking on it anyway.
total former wrote: » Here's the actual stats that Kinsella refers to but doesn't credit:http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/feb/08/rugby-romantics-biff-boot
Quint2010 wrote: » Presume he will have a scan anyway will he?
.ak wrote: » Kicking is part of the game and shouldn't be such a taboo subject. The amount of times you hear people in the stands going 'Ah ffs would ye stop kicking the bloody ball?!', before the ball has even landed. And before they realize yes we just gave the ball back to them, but now we made 20-30 meters. Rugby is still very much about the territory. Inaccurate kicking is awful, yes, but the same should be said for inaccurate passing, or inaccurate tackling, or inaccurate mauling etc., etc. But for some reason, even if the kick works out, we still hear people bemoaning about it, as if it shouldn't be part of the game, and then 10 kicks in a game become a 100 due to overreaction. Unless it's a ROG style dink into the corner people think it's a miss-kick, when it's often very much not the case.
MJohnston wrote: » Ah you know how it goes sometimes though - playing 10-20 minutes without a glimpse of possession, and then when it's got, it gets kicked right away. It's hard not to want something a bit more thrilling than kicking (although arguably when you understand the minutiae, it can be thrilling in its own right).
.ak wrote: » Yeah but that's the joy of rugby. So many ways to skin a cat, and often without the ball you'll win a match.
total former wrote: » He was reportedly having a scan yesterday, so if they're now saying he'll train tomorrow then presumably it was clear.
andymx11 wrote: » 3 interesting facts I just learned; 1) We are no longer favourites 2) We dropped to 4th in the world rankings 3) If Ireland do the slam we will be second in the ranking. Ok so they arent that interesting.. but still!
awec wrote: » I dunno. I don't think we'll retain our title.
MJohnston wrote: » Murray Kinsella doing his usual great analysis work on each individual Irish try scored in the 6N: http://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-italy-conor-murray-try-1928118-Feb2015/
SaveOurLyric wrote: » Id question it. Possible that the successful teams win more possession and so are in the position to kick more balls out of their own half? Also, assuming the kick is into the opposition half, to immediately counter the advantage, all the defending team has to do is kick it back - even stephen again and neither team has gained by this tactic.
Kick into that area, pressurise the opposition exit strategy as much as possible [whether at set-piece, the breakdown, forcing a knock-on in the collision, a choke tackle, forcing a poor kick, or a block down], regain the ball and score yourself. Simple, right?
CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: » The kick is really unimportant imo, whats more important is what I've bolded below. If you can play the ball in the opposition part of the pitch and pressurise them and force a turnover or penalty good things will happen.
SaveOurLyric wrote: » Well of course. But thats not much more than saying if you can touch the ball down more times over the opposition tryline than they do over yours, you will probably win the game. The articles mention kicking, unqualified.
Having the ball inside your own half simply isn’t worthwhile in international rugby at present. Though there are obviously a number of individual examples that could disprove that assertion, the data shows that teams who kick out of their own half regularly are successful. Where you really want possession of the ball is inside the opposition’s defensive zone, where there is a far greater chance of scoring points. Kick into that area, pressurise the opposition exit strategy as much as possible [whether at set-piece, the breakdown, forcing a knock-on in the collision, a choke tackle, forcing a poor kick, or a block down], regain the ball and score yourself. Simple, right?
CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: » I don't think Keatley or Madigan's experience at 15 is relevant when debating their merits as a bench option at this time.
