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 Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread IV

Options
18586889091319

Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 14,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭CIARAN_BOYLE


    TommyOM wrote: »
    Can someone tell me how a kick 50 minutes into a game is a pressure kick? You'd swear it was the 78th minute and Ireland were trailing Wales by 2pts.

    Also can someone tell me how getting 7/9 kicks is now considered as an issue?

    It was the first two kicks where if he got it would have moved Ireland to the top of the 6 nations.

    Some members of the forum are telepathic and know that this is what Johnny was thinking about.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    TommyOM wrote: »
    Can someone tell me how a kick 50 minutes into a game is a pressure kick? You'd swear it was the 78th minute and Ireland were trailing Wales by 2pts.

    Also can someone tell me how getting 7/9 kicks is now considered as an issue?

    It's very straightforward really. It was a pressure kick because it was for the "Championship Points".

    Likewise, Madigan was kicking at the death 30 points ahead yet still had pressure on the kick. Why?

    The 'issue' that was raised was that Sexton appeared to have an issue with knocking over the 'Championship Points' kick. A cynic might point to the game that never happened vs NZ to see a similar blip.

    To suggest that a player scoring 7/9 renders him immune from criticism is rubbish tbh. If he scored 9/9 and they all went over like a bag of scaldy lepers trying to hurdle a low wall he could warrant criticism.

    Now that the logic is plainly visible, I'll say "it's one to think about but we can't know either way as the sample size is tiny. Keep an eye on it basically".


  • Registered Users Posts: 315 ✭✭TommyOM


    It was the first two kicks where if he got it would have moved Ireland to the top of the 6 nations.

    Some members of the forum are telepathic and know that this is what Johnny was thinking about.

    it was 50 minutes into the game, there wasn't really much pressure. If he missed them then there was obviously going to be more points to come. I honestly think that its a mountain out of a molehill by the usual suspects. Sexton kicks 7/9 winning his second six nations title in a row and people latch on to the two missed kicks.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    To suggest that a player scoring 7/9 renders him immune from criticism is rubbish tbh. If he scored 9/9 and they all went over like a bag of scaldy lepers trying to hurdle a low wall he could warrant criticism.

    :pac:


  • Subscribers Posts: 41,228 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    TommyOM wrote: »
    it was 50 minutes into the game, there wasn't really much pressure. If he missed them then there was obviously going to be more points to come. I honestly think that its a mountain out of a molehill by the usual suspects. Sexton kicks 7/9 winning his second six nations title in a row and people latch on to the two missed kicks.

    its already been explained why the timing of the kick didnt matter.... i think youre deliberately not seeing this


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 315 ✭✭TommyOM


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    its already been explained why the timing of the kick didnt matter.... i think youre deliberately not seeing this

    Imagine the pressure on the third attempt so

    which he nailed.

    Surely if he was a 'bottler' that was the kick he'd be most likely to miss.

    He missed 2 kicks and nailed 7. Shocking stuff.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,883 ✭✭✭shuffol


    It was the first two kicks where if he got it would have moved Ireland to the top of the 6 nations.

    Some members of the forum are telepathic and know that this is what Johnny was thinking about.

    Are you arguing that he wouldn't have been conscious of this? As that would've been a bigger failing.


  • Subscribers Posts: 41,228 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    TommyOM wrote: »
    Imagine the pressure on the third attempt so

    which he nailed.

    Surely if he was a 'bottler' that was the kick he'd be most likely to miss.

    He missed 2 kicks and nailed 7. Shocking stuff.

    i didnt call him a bottler

    but do you not agree that each of those 3 kicks were more pressurised than every on that had come before?


  • Registered Users Posts: 315 ✭✭TommyOM


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    i didnt call him a bottler

    but do you not agree that each of those 3 kicks were more pressurised than every on that had come before?

    I reckon the first one was like the others to Sexton. The second one was added pressure due to missing the first and the third was massive pressure due to missing the second. Funnily enough, the biggest pressure kick (the third) he nailed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,883 ✭✭✭shuffol


    Could the next person to use the term "bottler" please quote the post it was used in.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    TommyOM wrote: »
    I reckon the first one was like the others to Sexton. The second one was added pressure due to missing the first and the third was massive pressure due to missing the second. Funnily enough, the biggest pressure kick (the third) he nailed.

    Let's go with this logic for a half second.
    If he missed the third, and then got the fourth, would that 'show bottle'?
    If so, what if he instead missed the third AND fourth and got the fifth?
    Or if..... etc etc


  • Registered Users Posts: 811 ✭✭✭Flipper22


    Let's go with this logic for a half second.
    If he missed the third, and then got the fourth, would that 'show bottle'?
    If so, what if he instead missed the third AND fourth and got the fifth?
    Or if..... etc etc

    I know you're being tongue in cheek, but imo it actually would show bottle if he missed four kicks and then put us ahead with the fifth. The pressure most certainly increases with each miss. It would also show bad goalkicking...


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    I think the only kicker that truly 'bottled' it over the weekend was Palisson, he had a horror and he looked visibly shaken by it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,178 ✭✭✭Quint2010


    .ak wrote: »
    I think the only kicker that truly 'bottled' it over the weekend was Palisson, he had a horror and he looked visibly shaken by it.


    Think that might have been Lawes tackle too in fairness (which the French are asking to be cited BTW)


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Quint2010 wrote: »
    Think that might have been Lawes tackle too in fairness (which the French are asking to be cited BTW)

    Yeah, but I am talking before that happened. I'm actually surprised he played on, or that PSA couldn't see he was struggling and bring Tales on sooner.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,178 ✭✭✭Quint2010


    .ak wrote: »
    Yeah, but I am talking before that happened. I'm actually surprised he played on, or that PSA couldn't see he was struggling and bring Tales on sooner.

    Ah yeah I know you were. I was being a bit tongue in cheek. Anyone thinks the Lawes tackle was illegal? Thought it was perfectly fair myself.


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Quint2010 wrote: »
    Ah yeah I know you were. I was being a bit tongue in cheek. Anyone thinks the Lawes tackle was illegal? Thought it was perfectly fair myself.

    It's a hard one to judge. I think technically it was legal and fair, no way could he stop it... However, I think he knew what he was at, he knew he was never going to get man-and-ball but how could you ever prove it...

    Still, if it was one of our locks I'd be loving it, leaving on the edge etc.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Quint2010 wrote: »
    Ah yeah I know you were. I was being a bit tongue in cheek. Anyone thinks the Lawes tackle was illegal? Thought it was perfectly fair myself.

    Not a chance it was fair, though it might currently be legal.

    I'll preface this by saying we absolutely don't want the American Football rules, then I'll sound like I'm asking for the American Football rules, but really there's a smart answer in the middle of the two. In American Football, the kicker is protected from a tackle after the ball is moved. Any sort of collision isn't allowed afaik.

    Lawes knows that the player is moving the ball, and launches himself off of his feet in order to hit him. One could argue that he is entitled to tackle the man as the man could potentially be dummying. However imo Lawes would not have tackled a standing player, lining up a pass like that if he could guarantee he'd get to him before he released the ball. Instead he has 'developed' this grey area 'hit' by ensuring that he gets his arms around the player.

    Obviously I cannot judge Lawes' intent, but a more cynical fan might point out that Lawes seems to be the only person that has ever attempted this 'tackle' and has made the rugbydump clips more than once with it.



    It's not late, it's not overtly high, but it's not on either imo.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,178 ✭✭✭Quint2010


    I think if one of our players made that hit we would be all saying what a great tackle it was.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Quint2010 wrote: »
    I think if one of our players made that hit we would be all saying what a great tackle it was.

    Mike McCarthy did something similar for Leinster before and I was pretty annoyed that he'd put himself in yellow card territory tbh.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Ofcourse the biggest problem there emmet02 is how do you qualify the 'kicker'... Basically any marginal contact of ANY player on the pitch after the ball has gone? It'd be impossible to sanction that fairly imo.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,463 ✭✭✭✭AdamD


    Quint2010 wrote: »
    I think if one of our players made that hit we would be all saying what a great tackle it was.

    That wasn't a tackle


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,876 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Lawes was legal, but it can be argued that someone is going to get killed or paralysed by some massive athlete pulling a video game finishing move at full tilt.

    What to do about that is a very tough question.....


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    .ak wrote: »
    Ofcourse the biggest problem there emmet02 is how do you qualify the 'kicker'... Basically any marginal contact of ANY player on the pitch after the ball has gone? It'd be impossible to sanction that fairly imo.

    I don't want the American Football rules!

    The problem is that Lawes has no intention to compete for the ball in the above clip, and his 'tackle' is therefore not a tackle.

    However, someone coming up with a law/rule for it has to balance the accidentals with the intentionals, and I think that's a very tricky thing to get right.
    I also don't think we should be asking a ref or TMO to try to judge intent. It's a difficult area.

    Edit to add - there's quite a few viewpoints and reasoning given in the comments section here


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    Lawes specialises in that sort of tackle. I don't have any doubt that he set out to absolutely cream Plisson, the ball was peripheral to that. Should have been a penalty and a card.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,876 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    ^How do we know he wasnt going to compete? He was committed, he could have wrapped man and ball before it was got away, dislodged it, or detached and reattached while his second man in arrived.

    Id love to know what the French want him cited for. It is neither illegal nor reckless, it was just a highly powered hit.


  • Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭Reps4jesus


    Absolutely nothing wrong with the Lawes tackle. He has a history of crunching tens a little late. Never gets to the man before the ball is gone but is committed to it before its gone so its a legal tackle. The man is a bit of a flat track bully, because for all his big hits, I don't think I have ever seen him smash a forward in a tackle (im sure someone will have about 20 vids to prove me wrong). He knows exactly what he is doing, he is trying to lay down a marker, intimidate the opposition and make the 10 rush things for fear another hit is coming. While it is a little dirty, they are completely legal hits


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I don't like the tackle at all and I don't agree with people here saying that we would love to see one of our second row's doing the same.

    To be honest, I have no issue with a good hard hit, but he tackled the guys spine so hard that he went horizontal and face / head neck hit the ground first.

    It's half way to a spear tackle and that's not counting the impact on the back. I know he is putting in a hit that will make the 10 want to keep more of an eye forward and he is making a bit of a statement, but it's overcooked in my opinion. I saw elsewhere a rumour of citing and to be honest, it would fall into the Ben T'eo category of "it's not a red, but go easy".

    Though I think what T'eo did was not even in that category. Anyway...


  • Subscribers Posts: 41,228 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    The problem is that Lawes has no intention to compete for the ball in the above clip, and his 'tackle' is therefore not a tackle.

    when was a tackle ever a competition for the ball???
    i think youre wrong there.

    I dont like it, its nasty, dangerous and skirts the edges of legality...... BUT its not illegal in the context of the current laws


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 811 ✭✭✭Flipper22


    Lawes specialises in that sort of tackle. I don't have any doubt that he set out to absolutely cream Plisson, the ball was peripheral to that. Should have been a penalty and a card.

    I have no doubt about his intent either, but what was actually illegal about the tackle? It was risky, as half a second later or 6 inches higher and he could have been sent off, but as it was, it was legal imo.

    He's certainly a thuggish player who sets out to cause damage, but he's pretty good at stopping just short of illegality. IIRC didn't he seriously injure one of the argies in WC 2011 with a very similar tackle.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement