• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2018 6 Nations] Round 5 : England v Ireland (17/03/2018)

Do people honestly think professional sports teams get fired up by press chat?

Whenever people say things like "stick that on the dressing room wall" or "that's or pre-game speech sorted!" I cringe my dick off

You're kidding yourself if you don't think they do... it absolutely happens. I remember Sydney Morning Herald journo Spiro Zavos massively slagging off the Crusaders one year as being no-hopers and when they went on to win the comp the coach unabashedly said he made the players read that article before every game for the rest of the season.

Professional players are still human beings that take offence, and I'm not sure if you've noticed but the Irish tend to relish the chance to beat England to begin with, so having the coach refer to them as "scummy Irish" will definitely add to their motivation and intensity.
 
Larmour is a massive call, too massive perhaps. Considering his 100% understandable nerves showed against Italy at home I think playing in a Grand Slam decider at Twickers is too much for someone so ridiculously inexperienced (albeit talented). I mean he was 12 when Tommy Bowe scored a try in our last victory at Twickenham, a mere 8 years ago. But realistically who else do you have? McFadden had his shot. Might as well think of the future. It basically worked with Brunel and Jalibert.

A part of me would love to see Carbery play at 15 for Ireland sometimes but given how poor our depth at OH is since the Jackson trial it's probably not worth it in the long run. We are ok at FB when Conway is available.

It'd be interesting to see who would come on for Kearney if he went off. I'd say that Carbery would probably go on as he's more trusted by Schmidt especially in defence. I wouldn't be that surprised to see him there for Leinster against Saracens in two weeks.
 
Larmour is a massive call, too massive perhaps. Considering his 100% understandable nerves showed against Italy at home I think playing in a Grand Slam decider at Twickers is too much for someone so ridiculously inexperienced (albeit talented). I mean he was 12 when Tommy Bowe scored a try in our last victory at Twickenham, a mere 8 years ago. But realistically who else do you have? McFadden had his shot. Might as well think of the future. It basically worked with Brunel and Jalibert.

A part of me would love to see Carbery play at 15 for Ireland sometimes but given how poor our depth at OH is since the Jackson trial it's probably not worth it in the long run. We are ok at FB when Conway is available.

It'd be interesting to see who would come on for Kearney if he went off. I'd say that Carbery would probably go on as he's more trusted by Schmidt especially in defence. I wouldn't be that surprised to see him starting there for Leinster against Saracens in two weeks.
 
I think that is giving Jones too much credit, I think it's much simpler, he has his core of favourites and is too stubborn to change them. He has put an over-emphasis on fitness and not enough on technical skill. We gain nothing from pushing the same group of older players to the limit and losing games from it, we would have gained more by resting them properly and rotating in younger prospects to see how they dealt with the pressure. The last year has been wasted because all the talent highlighted in Argentina has not been utilised since. That tour was little more than a side show filling out the numbers so he could again thrash his core players who hadn't gone with the Lions.

He has been playing by basic statistics which say you need an experienced squad to win whilst ignoring that the players with experience also need to be good. Cole is ****, no 2 ways about it. His main point was a strong scrum and he is not better than any alternatives there. Outside the scrum he is worse than useless, he is a liability and yet Jones persists with him. Why? He's not young, there isn't some hidden talent yet to be uncovered, he simply isn't good enough. He has the most caps though so he stays. The same again to a lesser degree with Hartley and his competition. Lock is ok and yet we are using an abundance of locks in the squad when we don't need to. Back row is the issue and yet is completely ignored. Pushing the team as hard as possible also doesn't explain not having a 3rd choice SH, I mean does any other top team do that?

No the current problem stems from Jones having his favourites, those favourites not being the best in their position and thrashing said favourites by making them work more for club and country than any other players in the world. It is unravelling and he MUST start rotating the squad or we are going to be in a really, really bad position next world cup.
What he said.
 
Multiple factors here without Billy we struggle so much, Ben Young's being out has certainly made a bigger impact than I would have expected.

The game itself is an interesting one, England have clearly been shocking on the road but I would expect to see big improvements at HQ.

Ireland didn't look great in the France game and I genuinely believe they were lucky to win, credit to them they really put in very strong performances in against Wales and Scotland but were both Home games, at this stage it is pretty hard to call.

Whilst England have been shocking they could have won the France game at the end, the Scotland game clearly got away from us but the score line probably slightly flattered them given Owens controversial descision to disallow the try, in summary we haven't been getting beaten to heavily given how poor the performance is, I don't believe A ranked two team in the world become **** over night.
 
Why were we lucky? The team masterfully controlled 41 phases. Sexton executed the kick. Drop goals are a valid way of scoring. Literally no luck at all.

Were England lucky last year when they scored a last minute try against Wales? No. Im a bit taken back by the double standards shown by a few English fans since we won
 
Why were we lucky? The team masterfully controlled 41 phases. Sexton executed the kick. Drop goals are a valid way of scoring. Literally no luck at all.

Were England lucky last year when they scored a last minute try against Wales? No. Im a bit taken back by the double standards shown by a few English fans since we won
100% agree it was a hard win that you ground out, i think he meant lucky as so many times in that situation with that many phases it goes the other way and a DG from 40m out under pressure will often go the other way too. But tbh ireland deserved that win through sheer determination and accuracy show at the end, not luck.

But ireland have been pushed close and showed some defencive lapses at times, tbh as much as its at twickenham i think ireland deffinatly have to be the favourites. But then again ireland could use this to blood young players, a loss might be worth the experience of the atmosphere and pressure put on young players like porter and lamour.
 
Why were we lucky? The team masterfully controlled 41 phases. Sexton executed the kick. Drop goals are a valid way of scoring. Literally no luck at all.

Yes as has already be said to drop from 40 meters after who knows how many faces certainly requires a hell of a lot of skill deterninination and a little luck, taking nothing away from Sexton that was a super kick and the forwards maintaining posession for so long but saying they had some luck and have played and looked more convincing since doesn't diminish the effort.

And yes England were lucky last year against Wales to get the win can't fully remember the game but the context of the try Daly scored at the death as a result of a loose Kick, very well taken try don't get me wrong but an element of luck required for the oppertunity to present itself.

Not sure where you are getting double standards from Ireland are with out a doubt the inform team baring in mind that was the first game, teams are most likely to be slightly below their best on the first game whilst adapting to the environment for the first time in a while....
 
Do people honestly think professional sports teams get fired up by press chat?

Whenever people say things like "stick that on the dressing room wall" or "that's or pre-game speech sorted!" I cringe my dick off

The quotes themselves are cringe-worthy, but players definitely do get motivated by the press/social media, even if their media training tells them never to admit it in public. Speaking both from personal experience and from what we've seen multiple times from top sports teams. Most of what the media presents has stemmed from a comment made by one of the opposition coaches/players or is a general reflection of public (fan) sentiment. To suggest that this doesn't get to players is pretty crazy!

Psychology plays a massive part in professional sport - why do you think home advantage is so significant? Familiarity with the surface and pitch dimensions possibly plays a small part, as does the pre-game routine. But without question, it's the support (or lack thereof) from fans that drives teams on to better/worse performances.

No athlete operates at 100% consistency. The higher the level, the less is left to chance or emotion, but there will always be scope for an extra push if the motivation is there. Whether it's a situation as powerful as the Anthony Foley tragedy, a team standing up to the Haka, the local news lambasting your head coach as a clown...until sport is literally played by robots, emotion and psychology will always play a huge part. Personally I think that's a good thing.
 
The quotes themselves are cringe-worthy, but players definitely do get motivated by the press/social media, even if their media training tells them never to admit it in public. Speaking both from personal experience and from what we've seen multiple times from top sports teams. Most of what the media presents has stemmed from a comment made by one of the opposition coaches/players or is a general reflection of public (fan) sentiment. To suggest that this doesn't get to players is pretty crazy!

Psychology plays a massive part in professional sport - why do you think home advantage is so significant? Familiarity with the surface and pitch dimensions possibly plays a small part, as does the pre-game routine. But without question, it's the support (or lack thereof) from fans that drives teams on to better/worse performances.

No athlete operates at 100% consistency. The higher the level, the less is left to chance or emotion, but there will always be scope for an extra push if the motivation is there. Whether it's a situation as powerful as the Anthony Foley tragedy, a team standing up to the Haka, the local news lambasting your head coach as a clown...until sport is literally played by robots, emotion and psychology will always play a huge part. Personally I think that's a good thing.
Home advantage in rugby is stems from the home crowd making infringements against them more obvious to a ref. Refs blow quicker for holding on, high tackles will be looked at etc... when boos and jeers ring through a stadium. I'd imagine that with each lower level you go home advantage means less and less due to less spectators.
 
Why were we lucky? The team masterfully controlled 41 phases. Sexton executed the kick. Drop goals are a valid way of scoring. Literally no luck at all.

Were England lucky last year when they scored a last minute try against Wales? No. Im a bit taken back by the double standards shown by a few English fans since we won

"Literally no luck at all" is something that can never be said about any rugby victory ever. Even the bloody ball is designed to bounce erratically! The kick-off is determined by a coin-toss. The contest for an up-and-under is a least partially down to chance. Not to mention the inconsistency in referee interpretation of multiple aspects of the game. Even Sir Lord Highness J Wilkinson The Brave's sweet right-footed deliverance of '03 was the beneficiary of a few droplets.

Was the Ireland victory a masterclass in composure and execution under pressure by an excellent team? Absolutely. Was it totally devoid of luck in any form? Absolutely not.

What we should really be talking about is how much your win percentage would increase if you added a fourth leaf to that shamrock...
 
Why were we lucky? The team masterfully controlled 41 phases. Sexton executed the kick. Drop goals are a valid way of scoring. Literally no luck at all.

Were England lucky last year when they scored a last minute try against Wales? No. Im a bit taken back by the double standards shown by a few English fans since we won
I think we were pretty unlucky that game, Owens had his usual homer, we were turned over under the posts illegally twice and play ran on. Had we lost there would have been talk of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
 
I think for England to stand a chance of winning, Jones has to start Ford and Farrell.

Our problems are on the outside edges (even with Ringrose's greater agility) - so England need to be able to get the ball to (and beyond the 13 channel) quickly and with precision.

Going with Farrell @ 10 and Teo at 12 just plays into our hands. Bundee Aki will happily take Teo running at him all day.
 
I think for England to stand a chance of winning, Jones has to start Ford and Farrell.

Our problems are on the outside edges (even with Ringrose's greater agility) - so England need to be able to get the ball to (and beyond the 13 channel) quickly and with precision.

Going with Farrell @ 10 and Teo at 12 just plays into our hands. Bundee Aki will happily take Teo running at him all day.
That opens up the risk of us bullying Ford and stopping any chance of English momentum, it's happened in two of his three games against Ireland and two of his three games against Leinster. Ford can just be ignored by a defence and Ringrose will be allowed to shoot in defence more than he already does, he's also the best since Him at doing that, last year it resulted in EmglEng getting nothing out wide.

Ford - Farrell - Daly would be what would scare me most, Daly can beat a defender with no space whatsoever and would likely slip Him Jr at least once.
 
Top