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

Wales vs Ireland buildup [MOD WARNING POST #8]

Options
12357…22

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    Tox56 wrote: »
    If accurate that is absolute insanity

    I haven't seen the official figures, but according to the official percentages we won 98.3% of our own rucks. Which isn't quite 116 out of 117, but as I said on the match thread is surely unheard of at this level.

    One thing I noticed on re watching the game last night though was how often England stood off the rucks and didn't contest at all. That obviously helped.


  • Options
    #123
    CIARAN_BOYLE
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 14,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭CIARAN_BOYLE


    molloyjh wrote: »
    I haven't seen the official figures, but according to the official percentages we won 98.3% of our own rucks. Which isn't quite 116 out of 117, but as I said on the match thread is surely unheard of at this level.

    One thing I noticed on re watching the game last night though was how often England stood off the rucks and didn't contest at all. That obviously helped.

    Its 115/117 only one in the difference.


  • Options
    #124
    bilston
    Registered Users Posts: 17,744 ✭✭✭✭bilston


    errlloyd wrote: »
    Off the top of my head. Ireland v Italy 2015

    Keatley, Zebo, Henshaw, Payne, Bowe, Kearney. Madigan, Jones

    8 playerss with Fullback experience in one squad.

    I'm pretty sure Sexton played FB for the Wolfhounds/Ireland team during a Lions tour a few years back.


  • Options
    #125
    crisco10
    Registered Users Posts: 6,173 ✭✭✭crisco10


    bilston wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure Sexton played FB for the Wolfhounds/Ireland team during a Lions tour A few years back.

    And he played for Leinster at 15 in Thomond Park.


  • Options
    #126
    wittycynic
    Registered Users Posts: 532 ✭✭✭wittycynic


    So, where do people think we're going to come under pressure for this fixture?

    We've lost just twice to them in Cardiff in the last thirty years, we're chasing an eleventh consecutive test win, the Joe plan worked wonders last year when we gave them a pretty sound kicking, and we have arguably the best half back pairing in world rugby.

    But. . .

    From 11 to 15 they have very strong personnel, probably better than ours, and are on paper well equipped to deal with aerial bombardment. In addition, they have plenty of ability in the back row, with Lydiate, Warburton, and Faletau being an effective and experienced unit that could trouble ours, especially with the injuries to O'Brien, Heaslip, and Ruddock.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Yeah, they're strong, and have won the tournament before from a shaky start. They know how to win. So do we. It won't be an easy game for either team, so plenty to be nervous about.


  • Options
    #128
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »
    Its 115/117 only one in the difference.

    Just looked at the 6 Nations stats and it was 116/118. That really is a crazy stat.
    wittycynic wrote: »
    So, where do people think we're going to come under pressure for this fixture?

    We've lost just twice to them in Cardiff in the last thirty years, we're chasing an eleventh consecutive test win, the Joe plan worked wonders last year when we gave them a pretty sound kicking, and we have arguably the best half back pairing in world rugby.

    But. . .

    From 11 to 15 they have very strong personnel, probably better than ours, and are on paper well equipped to deal with aerial bombardment. In addition, they have plenty of ability in the back row, with Lydiate, Warburton, and Faletau being an effective and experienced unit that could trouble ours, especially with the injuries to O'Brien, Heaslip, and Ruddock.

    The one thing to remember is that the last 2 years we've played them early in the Championship (Round 2 last year and Round 1 the year before). And Wales normally get better as the competition goes on. They'll be really pumped for this for a number of reasons. For starters they have the last 2 years to make up for. This will be their only other home game this year and they won't want to lose both. They are back in the running for the Championship and a loss against us would put paid to their chances. And all of the talk has been about Ireland so far and they've been effectively ignored.

    They have quality players in their squad and are near full strength where-as we have a few injuries and are not sure just now exactly who we'll have available.

    But all those talking about how Wales have good fielders and so the kicking game won't work against them have obviously forgotten last years display where an intelligent kicking game utterly neutralised Wales. I'm not at all convinced that Gatland has it in him to come up with a plan to counter us. We're solid across the park in all areas of the game and if we front up and don't give them an early foothold I'd back us to win it. But we need Sexton fit.


  • Options
    #129
    total former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Just looked at the 6 Nations stats and it was 116/118. That really is a crazy stat.

    TBH, that tells you more about England's tactics than it does about Ireland's rucking work. A pack of that size with that power, especially in the back row? They must have decided either not to risk crossing the ref, for whatever reason, or that if they simply conceded the rucks to Ireland and reset their defensive line, they'd be able to contain us defensively (which was correct).


  • Options
    #130
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    total former wrote: »
    TBH, that tells you more about England's tactics than it does about Ireland's rucking work. A pack of that size with that power, especially in the back row? They must have decided either not to risk crossing the ref, for whatever reason, or that if they simply conceded the rucks to Ireland and reset their defensive line, they'd be able to contain us defensively (which was correct).

    Yeah I mentioned above that I was struck by the number of rucks that England didn't contest when I watched it back. Which is surely crazy as it gave Murray fairly clean and quick ball a lot of the time. If we were looking to run the ball a lot I can understand setting the line, but against a team that is happy to kick a lot surely the most disruption at 9 and 10 the better?


  • Options
    #131
    total former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Yeah I mentioned above that I was struck by the number of rucks that England didn't contest when I watched it back. Which is surely crazy as it gave Murray fairly clean and quick ball a lot of the time. If we were looking to run the ball a lot I can understand setting the line, but against a team that is happy to kick a lot surely the most disruption at 9 and 10 the better?

    But what did we ever do with the quick, clean ball? Maybe Lancaster looked at the total absence of line breaks against France and said, you know what, these boys are no threat with the ball in hand, get back in the line and we'll soak them up. And that's exactly what happened, apart from the initial blitz when Best was held up over the line, we never really threatened.

    The try itself came when the English defensive line got broken up, Goode got his positioning wrong and Murray had a free play to try a low percentage option.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,995 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Shut down Biggar and you shut down wales....

    they may have more star studded names around the back line in DOC, baby face and the freak... but i think in Biggar they have the engine that drives it. It we can get him standing off further back (pressure from our openside and 10) and force him into making pressurised decisions we will profit. I would have no issues at all with DOC being bashed up into Henshaw, but if it starts to go through the hands flat on the gain line id be worried about Davies against Payne. I think Davies would be a completely different challange for anything Payne has faced yet.


  • Options
    #133
    Tox56
    Registered Users Posts: 11,636 ✭✭✭✭Tox56


    total former wrote: »
    TBH, that tells you more about England's tactics than it does about Ireland's rucking work. A pack of that size with that power, especially in the back row? They must have decided either not to risk crossing the ref, for whatever reason, or that if they simply conceded the rucks to Ireland and reset their defensive line, they'd be able to contain us defensively (which was correct).

    Our work at the ruck was still brilliant when they did contest, McGrath in particular is coming on a huge amount in that area


  • Options
    #134
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    total former wrote: »
    TBH, that tells you more about England's tactics than it does about Ireland's rucking work. A pack of that size with that power, especially in the back row? They must have decided either not to risk crossing the ref, for whatever reason, or that if they simply conceded the rucks to Ireland and reset their defensive line, they'd be able to contain us defensively (which was correct).
    molloyjh wrote: »
    Yeah I mentioned above that I was struck by the number of rucks that England didn't contest when I watched it back. Which is surely crazy as it gave Murray fairly clean and quick ball a lot of the time. If we were looking to run the ball a lot I can understand setting the line, but against a team that is happy to kick a lot surely the most disruption at 9 and 10 the better?

    Well yes and no. If you look at the build up to the try ever Englishman and their dog are going for the ball. The reason we had such good ruck ball in that section (apart from when Murray got bumped) was down to all 15 players getting involved in the clear outs. The first clear out on Cole by Zebo and Toner is text book stuff with a two on one, both players just take his arms and lift him bouncer style off the ruck. In the turn over before that Murray, Kearney and Bowe are instrumental to the clear out. The clear out that allowed Murray to get a clean box kick? Sexton.

    We secured so much ball because literally every one of our players are looking to clear out and do so effectively. Even our halfbacks.


  • Options
    #135
    total former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    Tox56 wrote: »
    Our work at the ruck was still brilliant when they did contest, McGrath in particular is coming on a huge amount in that area

    Definitely, Best too had a great day in that area, just it might be an indication that teams are beginning to adapt to our tactics and team selection.


  • Options
    #136
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,995 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Yeah I mentioned above that I was struck by the number of rucks that England didn't contest when I watched it back. Which is surely crazy as it gave Murray fairly clean and quick ball a lot of the time. If we were looking to run the ball a lot I can understand setting the line, but against a team that is happy to kick a lot surely the most disruption at 9 and 10 the better?

    i just think we pulled their back row all over the field and they were simply too slow to be effective when rucks formed. We sealed off our rucks very efficiently as well...

    for the try i think what we were doing was all summed up in a micro snap shot.

    Henshaw on the wing
    Payne takes a pass from sexton and draws two defenders (croft and watson) Watson follows payne until he realises payne has switched back to sexton... watsons legs are like jelly at this stage
    Sexton immediately hits Kearney where theres a 2 on 2
    Kearney steps back inside where hes tackled by watson and nowel.
    Most importantly Kearney stays active on the ground to force a long placement which gives TOD that extra split second to clear out Croft, who had gotten over the ball first... Kearneys actions are very significant.
    Sexton aids TOD as Murray signals to Henshaw for the kick.
    The kick, catch and placement is perfect......The rest is history


    Everyone in the back line was active for the try... even zeebs had come off his wing as a potential inside receiver. Payne had also gotten o his feet to be first receiver AGAIN.

    Communication, Intensity, clearness of plan, constant activity... but most of all, simplicity....


  • Options
    #137
    yabbav
    Registered Users Posts: 247 ✭✭yabbav


    whats with all the football like hated before the game on this thread


  • Options
    #138
    davegrohl48
    Registered Users Posts: 1,530 ✭✭✭davegrohl48


    Guys like Zebo/Henshaw/Murray are hitting rucks with intelligence and commitment. That is not a widespread thing among sides. Hence I think one reason we're securing so much ruck ball. Our backs are clearly undergoing the same practice in this area as our forwards. No token or off script efforts allowed. Intelligent and committed.


  • Options
    #139
    Shero1985
    Registered Users Posts: 42 ✭Shero1985


    Presume there will be no changes to the starting XV. Is that the consensus? I think McGrath will hold Healy off while Murphy has been so good that Heaslip won't be risked. Actually, I don't even envisage a change on the bench.


  • Options
    #140
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Closed
    Shero1985 wrote: »
    Presume there will be no changes to the starting XV. Is that the consensus? I think McGrath will hold Healy off while Murphy has been so good that Heaslip won't be risked. Actually, I don't even envisage a change on the bench.
    Yes, I don't think there's any need to make changes other than if forced through injury.

    But Joe is an unreadable book in that respect, he could change things for a reason that only he can see.


  • Options
    #141
    total former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    I think Joe is very readable really.

    Last 6N, he really only made changes due to injury (or guys returning from injury); so we had:
    Tuohy and Marshall replaced by fit-again O'Connell and D'Arcy after the first game.
    Boss replaced on the bench by fit-again Reddan after the second game.
    Murphy displaced O'Donnell after the second game based on form/ability.
    Henderson replaced injured O'Mahony for the fourth game (and was then dropped again)
    Madigan replaced Jackson on the bench for the last game based on form/ability.

    So there you have it, only two changes in the entire 2014 6N that weren't related to injuries, and that was to our replacement back-row and out-half.

    With three games down so far, we have seen exactly zero changes that weren't injury-related. I don't expect to see any for the Wales game. There will be lots of people arguing for Jones to go and Fitzgerald or Earls to come in, and I'd agree, but I don't see it happening.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    The point is there was nothing between TOD/Murphy or Jackson/Madigan and certainly nobody predicted those changes.


  • Options
    #143
    total former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭total former


    .ak wrote: »
    The point is there was nothing between TOD/Murphy or Jackson/Madigan and certainly nobody predicted those changes.

    Fair enough, but my point is that the "Joe Curveball" notion is long gone, his selections have been very slow to change at all.

    In fact, Madigan only came in because Joe was concerned about his midfield carrying injuries, so actually poor old TOD was the only player dropped on the basis of ability/form across five matches.


  • Options
    #144
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Closed
    total former wrote: »
    Fair enough, but my point is that the "Joe Curveball" notion is long gone, his selections have been very slow to change at all.

    In fact, Madigan only came in because Joe was concerned about his midfield carrying injuries, so actually poor old TOD was the only player dropped on the basis of ability/form across five matches.
    .ak got what I was saying ;)

    I didn't say he makes rafts of changes but often the changes he does make are not readily understandable.

    There are still people scratching their heads as to why Felix Jones is on the bench and not say Keith Earls or Luke Fitz.


  • Options
    #145
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    total former wrote: »
    Fair enough, but my point is that the "Joe Curveball" notion is long gone, his selections have been very slow to change at all.

    In fact, Madigan only came in because Joe was concerned about his midfield carrying injuries, so actually poor old TOD was the only player dropped on the basis of ability/form across five matches.

    Would you not say that Mads was "dropped" in favour of Keatley against Italy? I know Mads was on the bench but to have someone leap frog him like that isn't a whole lot different.


  • Options
    #146
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    molloyjh wrote: »
    Would you not say that Mads was "dropped" in favour of Keatley against Italy? I know Mads was on the bench but to have someone leap frog him like that isn't a whole lot different.

    No, when Joe was asked about Madigan on the bench before he made it clear he considers 22 and 10 to be very different selection decisions.


  • Options
    #147
    SaveOurLyric
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭SaveOurLyric


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    No, when Joe was asked about Madigan on the bench before he made it clear he considers 22 and 10 to be very different selection decisions.

    But didnt Madser start inthe Autumn? As the second choice standoff. Which means he was dropped for Italy. Or was Keatley injured in November ?


  • Options
    #148
    SaveOurLyric
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭SaveOurLyric


    total former wrote: »
    Fair enough, but my point is that the "Joe Curveball" notion is long gone, his selections have been very slow to change at all.

    In fact, Madigan only came in because Joe was concerned about his midfield carrying injuries, so actually poor old TOD was the only player dropped on the basis of ability/form across five matches.

    I think tbe Joe Curveball was an illusion anyway, and is really just people picking a team for how they would play the game, not how Joe wants to. I. if you guess the team from a Joe perspective, then you dont see many curveballs at all. Like those who would pick Earls or Fitz - its because you want to play a different game than Joe - not because they are the best playera for what he wants to implement.


  • Options
    #149
    SaveOurLyric
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭SaveOurLyric


    total former wrote: »
    Fair enough, but my point is that the "Joe Curveball" notion is long gone, his selections have been very slow to change at all.

    In fact, Madigan only came in because Joe was concerned about his midfield carrying injuries, so actually poor old TOD was the only player dropped on the basis of ability/form across five matches.

    I think tbe Joe Curveball was an illusion anyway, and is really just people picking a team for how they would play the game, not how Joe wants to. I. if you guess the team from a Joe perspective, then you dont see many curveballs at all. Like those who would pick Earls or Fitz - its because you want to play a different game than Joe - not because they are the best playera for what he wants to implement.


  • Options
    #150
    timaru89
    Registered Users Posts: 265 ✭✭timaru89


    A giant marquee with Warren G's face on it will be erected
    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/wales-v-ireland-only-six-8765818

    Welsh article making a composite team of both nations. 9 Welsh v 6 Irish. More than a hint of bias! :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Noopti
    Registered Users Posts: 2,776 ✭✭✭Noopti


    Let their media (and soon their coaches will join in too in all likelihood!) talk all they want. Ireland will just go about their business without fuss, and do their talking on the pitch. ;)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement