Last chance/another chance no. 478 for Murphy.....
Changes otherwise speak for themselves but Kidney lets end the fiddling and put our best back (Kearney) in his best position (15).
Printable View
Last chance/another chance no. 478 for Murphy.....
Changes otherwise speak for themselves but Kidney lets end the fiddling and put our best back (Kearney) in his best position (15).
Well, in fairness to Murphy he just spent the last 6 and a half years under a coach (EOS) that clearly didn't rate him and wasn't given a protracted run in the side. I don't think anyone can argue that he is undoubtedly one of the most skilful players we have ever produced, and you don't last 10 years at a club like the Leicester Tigers unless you've got what it takes. I think he'll be fine.
As for Kearney at full back, I don't think it really matters as he'll rotate with Murphy. Murphy would be a bit more creative coming in to the line, but Kearney offers better kicking options which are vital with the ELV's.
I don't think you can completely blame EOS - Murphy fooked up enough defensively to make it a decision that could be easily justified.Quote:
Originally Posted by joeSoap
Ireland lack any pace in the backs, very poor. This is a very inept performance.
England 6-42 South Africa
Powerful, impressive stuff from the Springboks against a truly inept England.
New Zealand beginning to bottle it again.
I know I'm in a small minority as I argued with everyone on my way out of the game, and after, but by and large I thought it was a very good performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
Firstly, let's set the context, the national expectation is ridiculous. Argentina have a great record against us and are ranked higher and have been for quite a while. They are also probably the most physical side in the world.
Right from the first minute we fronted up to them and knocked the back at every breakdown. It was tremendous stuff from 1-8. We nullified their scrum (no mean feat) and our lineout was much better.
The first half was spent softening them up and then possession turned our way in the second half and we proved the adage that defending is much tougher than attacking as despite them putting more subs on they were knackered with 10 to go and we killed the game.
Our success was evidenced by the number of brawls, punch-ups and off the ball stuff. We got under their skin and they don't like it up them.
Sure O'Gara was poor, O'Leary hesitant & O'Driscoll clueless but let's remember forwards win games and our pack put in a huge performance to win an important game.
It was enjoyable to see an old-fashioned war of attrition and if you want to see the backs throw it around like a womens basketball team, the Super 14 starts again in the spring.
Even taking the opposition into consideration I still think it was a poor performance & no signs of improvement by Ireland from last year.
The lines of running by the backs was terrible & kicking even worse.
I suppose for the 6 Nations Ireland will be playing poorer sides like England & Scotland so might get a few tries.
ELVs seem to have widened the gap between north & south. Usually the northern teams win a few games in the Autumn.
Argentina would have minced us if Hernandez and Contepomi were playing.
How? Their backs were absolutely anaemic and clueless. If our running lines were bad, theirs were non-existant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jinxy
Happy with the result but as a spectacle it was a poor showing from both sides. Argentina are a hard side to break down but we didn't seem to have many ideas on how to make the hard yards other than give it to Wallace (another solid performance and to be fair it always takes two men to take him down) or give it to O'Gara to kick it.
I was at the WC game last year in Paris and it didn't surprise me one bit how nasty the match was yesterday. Argentina got away with murder in that final group game (sly punches at various Irish players and numerous other off the ball incidents that went unnoticed by the ref and the television cameras) and it was fair to say that O'Gara did not forget or forgive!!!
Concerns?
1) Rory Best is not an international hooker and seems to panic every time he has a lineout. He's fine everywhere else but on a pressure throw he seems to freeze up. Flannery needs to stay fit.
2) BOD - superb defensively but going forward? Seems to have lost yard of pace so will opt to kick instead of take his man on. Fingers crossed this was just a knock.
Good assessment of his International career now. I think he pace is permanently lost. On the plus side his kicking has improved.Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
I think you just answered your own question.:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
I'm not as convinced two players would have made up for the lack of ambition of the other 5.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jinxy
Hernandez was a big loss but I'm rarely impressed by Contempomi in the Argentina jersey.
Hernandez and Contepomi might have made some difference, but not a great amount. The reason being we beat them up up front, were going to do that regardless of Hernandez or Contepomi, and therefore the quality of ball they would have got to play with even if they were on the field would have been inadequate for them to change the game with.
I agree with ORA. This was a much better performance than people give credit for. I agree that Flannery must come back, but the rest of the pack were excellent and Heaslip, Wally and Ferris look to be an excellent combination. I know I'm going to be slated here, but I'd still have Stringer at scrum half for purely his quickness of delivery and busyness around the field. And you can throw his defensive skills into that too. The other two lads look too cumbersome for me, and might be pacier than Stringer and can kick better, but I believe we would benefit more out of having the little baldy guy there.
Bowe has to go. Shaggy or Earls are far far better options. I would also think about swapping BOD and Luke Fitzgerald. O'Driscoll does not have the initial pace required now for an International outside centre, but still brings so much to the table.
WC Cup draw:
Not too bad.Quote:
2011 Rugby World Cup draw:
Pool A - New Zealand, France, Tonga, Americas 1, Asia 1
Pool B - Argentina, England, Scotland, Europe 1, play-off winner
Pool C - Australia, Ireland, Italy, Europe 2, Americas 2
Pool D - South Africa, Wales, Fiji, Oceania 1, Africa 1
Good draw for Ireland. Of the top 4 Australia would be preferred team & in 3rd pool Scotland/Italy were best option. Even in pool 4 & 5 getting the weaker sides.
Pool D looks tough as I guess that is where Samoa will end up.
Uh oh, those pesky Georgians again! (perhaps)Quote:
In Ireland's pool, the second European team is likely to be Georgia or Romania and the second Americas team the United States.
Not a bad draw at all to be honest Australia are best of top four to get IMO
Anyone else enjoy england drown out the haka?
So...as we come to the end of 2008, it struck me that Leinster, Munster, Connacht and Ulster are all as they were this time last year.
Leinster, despite a few performances to the contrary earlier in the season, proved to one and all last Friday night in Castres that they are the true bottlers of the game...oozing class and talent and not one pair of balls between the 22 of them. They proved all who refer to them as 'Ladyboys' right and I'm not going to start again on my rant about them not having a quality out-half to control a game. I believe they are now in big big trouble for the rest of the season.
Munster on the other hand are currently flying in both Magners and Heineken competitions, showing the exact opposite of Leinster, in a much much tougher Heineken group. Even the waterboys for Munster have more liathroidi than any Leinster player and it is evident in their results. They will go mighty close to winning both competitions.
Connacht and Ulster are doing what they always do...although theres a little revival taking place in Ulster.
Player to watch in 09: Ian Humphreys.