• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2019 Six Nations] Ireland vs England (02/02/2019)

To be fair about it though Murray has been way off his best for a while and probably isn't the best Irish SH based on recent form.

+1

I suppose since he's so much credit in the bank, Joe is gonna give him a bit more leeway, but I'd have hooked him before an hour on Saturday.

I hope Joe gives him some bench time in Murrayfield and gives Cooney a go (who has operated superbly behind an absolute sh!te pack with us).
 
https://www.the42.ie/analysis-engla...4432-Feb2019/?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true

https://www.the42.ie/analysis-ireland-england-opening-minutes-4474219-Feb2019/

Kinsella's articles from the weekend. A big Irish focus as you'd expect but he also outlines how England knew exactly where our weaknesses were and how they exploited them. Long reads, I'd expect the second one I posted is more enjoyable for the England fan.
A quick browse shows alot are turning on Schmidt and his "caveman tactics".

And these were the same lads that basically said Schmidt is like god after November.

My own personal view is yes we have to alter tactic a bit but the main problems were Henshaw was lost a bit at 15 and it spread to the others around in terms of trusting eachother positionally. And we have way to many undercooked.
An example being I have called for Alby to start ahead of Murray in both HEC games in Jan. He's not in form and isn't at level he needs to be. Sexton is the same. They aren't at level required due to lack of games. Now I'm not saying they should've been dripped Saturday just to many have too little game time in recent weeks and others had no form.
 
A quick browse shows alot are turning on Schmidt and his "caveman tactics".

And these were the same lads that basically said Schmidt is like god after November.

My own personal view is yes we have to alter tactic a bit but the main problems were Henshaw was lost a bit at 15 and it spread to the others around in terms of trusting eachother positionally. And we have way to many undercooked.
An example being I have called for Alby to start ahead of Murray in both HEC games in Jan. He's not in form and isn't at level he needs to be. Sexton is the same. They aren't at level required due to lack of games. Now I'm not saying they should've been dripped Saturday just to many have too little game time in recent weeks and others had no form.
Saying Schmidt's tactics don't work more or less shows they know nothing about rugby, England played exactly like we did in 4/5 of our Grand Slam games last year. It was basically a reverse of Twickenham last year.
 
england once did a lap of honour vs the ABs when they drew. was very confusing

I think you're even more confused as I think you're referring to the 1997 game at Old Trafford which England lost.

For some reason the England team thanking Old Trafford for hosting them on a rare occasion really stuck in Kiwi craws to the extent it's entered mythology - sometimes as a draw, sometimes as a loss and sometimes as a ghostly ship sighted on eldritch nights when St Elmo's fire crackles in the rigging...
 
Small point but England did a lap of honour after the game. It was a great win and well deserved but it was only 1 of 5 games for them in the Championship. I didn't take offence to it and applauded them in their victory but do a lap of honour after winning a championship, not a game.

I can see how this could be misconstrued but England players tend to go around thanking the travelling fans after most games, including defeats.
 
Saying Schmidt's tactics don't work more or less shows they know nothing about rugby, England played exactly like we did in 4/5 of our Grand Slam games last year. It was basically a reverse of Twickenham last year.
Well thats the way media work they will put you down as fast as they build you up.
England did exploit us supebly though. Tuilagi was picked to do a battering job and he did. Their back 3 were like dogs all day and they had much more hunger and want.
I do think we may need to alter tactic a bit but as I said earlier the main reasons for big loss were personnel issues such as gametime and form mixed with what not enough aren't saying. England were the better team
 
I do think we may need to alter tactic a bit but as I said earlier the main reasons for big loss were personnel issues such as gametime and form mixed with what not enough aren't saying. England were the better team

Having spent a couple of days thinking through what I watched, and trying not to get too carried away, this seems fair. This game really was a perfect storm for England. Mako (subjectively) got through more work than whole England front rows of recent times, Jonny May was outstanding, Curry played his best game in an England shirt so far and Ben Youngs remembered how to play scrum half, while the 8, 9 10 backbone of the Irish side performed well below their usually high standards and Schmidt dropped a clanger by playing Henshaw at 15. On top of that, England were much closer to full strength than recent history dictates is reasonable to be able to rely upon on an ongoing basis.

The biggest positive to me was that the set piece held up well enough to put the idea of England needing to chose between set piece front rowers and dynamic ones. I have no idea where the improvement came from given that the players and coaches remain the same (injuries excepted), but long may it continue. Similarly, there seemed to be no lack of leadership, so no need to choose between having a leader in the pack or having a hooker.

If England can bring the same kind of intensity and physicality to every international, this should be an entertaining year for England supporters. I've seen Mitchell's influence written off on the basis that he was involved in the Autumn, but I hold out hope that we are now really starting to see the fruits of his labour. England looked similarly ferocious for the first 25 minutes against New Zealand, but failed to sustain it. Maybe the addition of the returning big bodies made it easier to sustain for longer against Ireland, or maybe they are now better prepared to defend the way that John Mitchell wants them to defend.

As noted by many in this thread, this is reliant on the fitness of a few players who lack a replacement in a similar mould if they go down. Also the count of silly penalties is still too high and is asking to let sides that offer more attacking threat into the game.

I would like to take some credit for masterminding the downfall of the Irish by picking Stander, Murray and Sexton in my Six Nations side! I should know to listen to the well informed Irish posters here who had been questioning their form in recent weeks.
 
Having spent a couple of days thinking through what I watched, and trying not to get too carried away, this seems fair. This game really was a perfect storm for England. Mako (subjectively) got through more work than whole England front rows of recent times, Jonny May was outstanding, Curry played his best game in an England shirt so far and Ben Youngs remembered how to play scrum half, while the 8, 9 10 backbone of the Irish side performed well below their usually high standards and Schmidt dropped a clanger by playing Henshaw at 15. On top of that, England were much closer to full strength than recent history dictates is reasonable to be able to rely upon on an ongoing basis.

The biggest positive to me was that the set piece held up well enough to put the idea of England needing to chose between set piece front rowers and dynamic ones. I have no idea where the improvement came from given that the players and coaches remain the same (injuries excepted), but long may it continue. Similarly, there seemed to be no lack of leadership, so no need to choose between having a leader in the pack or having a hooker.

If England can bring the same kind of intensity and physicality to every international, this should be an entertaining year for England supporters. I've seen Mitchell's influence written off on the basis that he was involved in the Autumn, but I hold out hope that we are now really starting to see the fruits of his labour. England looked similarly ferocious for the first 25 minutes against New Zealand, but failed to sustain it. Maybe the addition of the returning big bodies made it easier to sustain for longer against Ireland, or maybe they are now better prepared to defend the way that John Mitchell wants them to defend.

As noted by many in this thread, this is reliant on the fitness of a few players who lack a replacement in a similar mould if they go down. Also the count of silly penalties is still too high and is asking to let sides that offer more attacking threat into the game.

I would like to take some credit for masterminding the downfall of the Irish by picking Stander, Murray and Sexton in my Six Nations side! I should know to listen to the well informed Irish posters here who had been questioning their form in recent weeks.
Good post.

To highlight 2 things.

Big men consistently hitting hard in defence doesn't half help.

9 is the heartbeat of the side. They make the decisions and set the tempo. When Youngs is good he's very good, but when he's not he stilts the flow of the whole side. On Saturday he was very good.

About the only thing Jones got wrong was not giving Robson a 2 minute scamper at the end. Must have felt like the spectre at the feast.
 
I think you're even more confused as I think you're referring to the 1997 game at Old Trafford which England lost.

For some reason the England team thanking Old Trafford for hosting them on a rare occasion really stuck in Kiwi craws to the extent it's entered mythology - sometimes as a draw, sometimes as a loss and sometimes as a ghostly ship sighted on eldritch nights when St Elmo's fire crackles in the rigging...
so they did lose a game and did a lap of honour. thanks for confirming. was worse than i remembered
classic england. lose and still do a lap. lol
 
Big men consistently hitting hard in defence doesn't half help.
You sir are a tactical genius!

I do think it takes a while to adjust behaviours and get the whole team buying your vision as a defence coach, so yeah it's perfectly conceivable that Mitchell hadn't got them during yet for the autumn but has now
 
so they did lose a game and did a lap of honour. thanks for confirming. was worse than i remembered
classic england. lose and still do a lap. lol
What does "Lap if Honour" even mean? Is it the same as just walking round the pitch thanking your fans? Because there's nothing wrong with that win or lose
 
You sir are a tactical genius!
Taught Eddie everything he knows Which if you'd have been daft enough to have listened to me 3 months ago I really didn't think was very much.

What does "Lap if Honour" even mean? Is it the same as just walking round the pitch thanking your fans? Because there's nothing wrong with that win or lose

Totally. Athletics OOTH is odd. There it's a definite flag waving lap of honour to celebrate success and it's become custom for the first and second losers to join the winner.
 
Nothing wrong if you lose. What's your problem with England players wanting to show appreciation to their fans who travel to support them?
you dont see anything wrong with celebrating a loss? that explains a lot
 
Top