The IRISH RUGBY thread

[Declan]

How careless is it to tear his hamstring  when doing some basic running  in the first few minutes?

You can tear your hammer for a number of reasons but I reckon for a professional sportman carelessness is not one of those

[Hound]

Kidney has shown a little bit more adventure in his selection this year with the two young wingers. He might be slower to do that at out half, but I think he'll at least consider it.

A problem is that each of Jackson, Madigan and Keatley are pretty similar abilitywise. All now better than O'Gara in my opinion, but who to choose? If the media jumped on one bandwagon, I think Kidney would follow. But the media still has a great love for O'Gara. Ryle Nugent was practically cheering as he came on. And there was practically no mention of his woeful display in the commentary or the after match analysis.

[highorlow]

Not sure if ROG's criticism here is fully warranted and it might be worthwhile for lads to have a look at the match again. Our half backs were not making themselves available.

The English backroom team had their homework done and were able to stay offside during the whole match knowing the new ref wouldn't pull them up on it. ROG was swallowed up due to this.

Granted some of his kicks went astray (he had a mighty kick with his left foot though) but I don't believe this merits him to be kicked off the squad and in particular when it is based on one average game.

People tend to forget quickly how many games he has won for us with a last minute dropgoal or penalty. Grand Slam anyone?

If they went for the corner that time and mauled in a try and ROG had got the conversion all the slight errors would not be even mentioned today.

I think it was a poor decision and if BOD or POC were in charge it would have been a kick to the corner!

[Dinny Breen]

Not only us but pretty much most non-RTE commentators

Taken from the excellent Whiff of Cordite Rugby Blog - http://whiffofcordite.com/2013/02/11/dereliction-of-duty/

Just so we're clear, the once great O'Gara turned in an awful display.  In conditions which could comfortably described as 'O'Gara-friendly', his kicking from hand was woefully inaccurate, with his penalties down the line scarcely gaining more than 15 metres.  His passing was similarly abject and his management of the game – so fabled down the years – was dreadful.  He fared better with the placed boot, knocking over two difficult penalties but missing a third, which would have reduced the deficit to three points.  Ultimately, it was sad to see a great, even legendary player reduced to such a shabby level, and underlines the danger of players hanging on for too long.  The old adage of the boxer taking on one too many fights sprang to mind.

[fearglasmor]

What do any of you lads that know a bit about rugby think of George Hooks punditry.

I played the game as a juvenile but wouldnt claim to know anything about it. So I always follow John Giles take on punditry that a good pundit should be able to explain the details of a game to the likes of me and add to their enjoyment of any game. I think Most pundits do this, Conor O'Shea especially. But all Hook seems to do is come out with over the top sound bites that create a bit of faux controversy and he adds nothing to my understanding or enjpyment of the game.

[trileacman]

What do any of you lads that know a bit about rugby think of George Hooks punditry.

I played the game as a juvenile but wouldnt claim to know anything about it. So I always follow John Giles take on punditry that a good pundit should be able to explain the details of a game to the likes of me and add to their enjoyment of any game. I think Most pundits do this, Conor O'Shea especially. But all Hook seems to do is come out with over the top sound bites that create a bit of faux controversy and he adds nothing to my understanding or enjoyment of the game.

Whatever about Hook, I have no time for John Giles.

"A strong header, good defending, tight midfield," Apart from Barcelona he has absolutely no time for a team who try to play football. Also all goals result form a mistake somewhere in the build-up that means, irrespective of the quality of the goal it can always be 100% blamed on some lad who was out of position/slipped/missed a tackle.

The annoying thing is he reiterates the same tired old position, to the point where it is almost impossible to distinguish an apres match sketch from the real thing.

To be fair to Hook he at least expresses a strong opinion on the subject and doesn't languish on the fence like Brent Pope, talking up all those around them. Ala Pat Spillane or Brolly he can be wrong quite a bit but at least he speaks his mind and doesn't reiterate the tired old expletives of post match managers comments "We were happy with the win, lots to work, they are a good side, put it up to us again, looking forward, to next week" etc

[Walter Cronc]

What do any of you lads that know a bit about rugby think of George Hooks punditry.

I played the game as a juvenile but wouldnt claim to know anything about it. So I always follow John Giles take on punditry that a good pundit should be able to explain the details of a game to the likes of me and add to their enjoyment of any game. I think Most pundits do this, Conor O'Shea especially. But all Hook seems to do is come out with over the top sound bites that create a bit of faux controversy and he adds nothing to my understanding or enjoyment of the game.

Whatever about Hook, I have no time for John Giles.

"A strong header, good defending, tight midfield," Apart from Barcelona he has absolutely no time for a team who try to play football. Also all goals result form a mistake somewhere in the build-up that means, irrespective of the quality of the goal it can always be 100% blamed on some lad who was out of position/slipped/missed a tackle.

The annoying thing is he reiterates the same tired old position, to the point where it is almost impossible to distinguish an apres match sketch from the real thing.

To be fair to Hook he at least expresses a strong opinion on the subject and doesn't languish on the fence like Brent Pope, talking up all those around them. Ala Pat Spillane or Brolly he can be wrong quite a bit but at least he speaks his mind and doesn't reiterate the tired old expletives of post match managers comments "We were happy with the win, lots to work, they are a good side, put it up to us again, looking forward, to next week" etc

100% agree. Can't listen to Giles. So bloody negative!

[michaelg]

The BBC panel had it right, was it a great game or a terrible game. They agreed it was a both. If you win those type of games, its great, lose and its terrible. Ireland just made the mistakes first and more regular, which handed England the scores at the right times. Also the changes had a negative affect on Ireland.

O'Gara isn't the future but you can't see Kidney been bold enough to change him.

Also, felt the crowds jeering of the English kicker was out of place when he was on penalties.

Was disappointed by that also.  In fairness though, quite a lot of the jeering seemed to be in response to the Engloid fans singing that hateful chariots shite.
By no means an expert, but I felt that the scrum half Murray was dreadful.  Really laboured, slow ball from him throughout the match.

[The Worker]

Thought gilroy was poor throughout.

[johnneycool]

Thought gilroy was poor throughout.

I can only think of about three times Gilroy got the ball in hand and it was inside his own 22, hard to be a miracle worker from there, plus a wet shite pitch is never going to suit a small lad who depends on quick changes in direction to beat his opponent.

You'd have half a dozen in the poor category before Gilroy IMO.

[Canalman]

The BBC panel had it right, was it a great game or a terrible game. They agreed it was a both. If you win those type of games, its great, lose and its terrible. Ireland just made the mistakes first and more regular, which handed England the scores at the right times. Also the changes had a negative affect on Ireland.

O'Gara isn't the future but you can't see Kidney been bold enough to change him.

Also, felt the crowds jeering of the English kicker was out of place when he was on penalties.

Was disappointed by that also.  In fairness though, quite a lot of the jeering seemed to be in response to the Engloid fans singing that hateful chariots shite.
By no means an expert, but I felt that the scrum half Murray was dreadful.  Really laboured, slow ball from him throughout the match.

Just curious but how exactly is the "Sweet Chariots" song/ hymn so "hateful"? How did it cause the booing of the kicker?

[Hound]

The BBC panel had it right, was it a great game or a terrible game. They agreed it was a both. If you win those type of games, its great, lose and its terrible. Ireland just made the mistakes first and more regular, which handed England the scores at the right times. Also the changes had a negative affect on Ireland.

O'Gara isn't the future but you can't see Kidney been bold enough to change him.

Also, felt the crowds jeering of the English kicker was out of place when he was on penalties.

Was disappointed by that also.  In fairness though, quite a lot of the jeering seemed to be in response to the Engloid fans singing that hateful chariots shite.
By no means an expert, but I felt that the scrum half Murray was dreadful.  Really laboured, slow ball from him throughout the match.

Just curious but how exactly is the "Sweet Chariots" song/ hymn so "hateful"? How did it cause the booing of the kicker?

Wouldnt be a fan of "Sweet Chariots" myself.
The Welsh sang "Sweet Chariots" when they beat us in Cardiff to clinch a grand slam a few years back. It was a different version. I preferred it.

The "respect the kicker" is whole load of nonsense. Respect the opposition before the match and after the match is what really matters. But whether its a wall of silence or a wall of noise, the home crowd should do their best to intimidate the kicker. Likewise the hooker, but he gets a lot less sympathy for some reason when a cacophony of noise tries to upset him. In my experience the home crowds at Toulouse and Munster are the best at intimidating oppostion and officials. 

[muppet]

The BBC panel had it right, was it a great game or a terrible game. They agreed it was a both. If you win those type of games, its great, lose and its terrible. Ireland just made the mistakes first and more regular, which handed England the scores at the right times. Also the changes had a negative affect on Ireland.

O'Gara isn't the future but you can't see Kidney been bold enough to change him.

Also, felt the crowds jeering of the English kicker was out of place when he was on penalties.

Was disappointed by that also.  In fairness though, quite a lot of the jeering seemed to be in response to the Engloid fans singing that hateful chariots shite.
By no means an expert, but I felt that the scrum half Murray was dreadful.  Really laboured, slow ball from him throughout the match.

Just curious but how exactly is the "Sweet Chariots" song/ hymn so "hateful"? How did it cause the booing of the kicker?

Wouldnt be a fan of "Sweet Chariots" myself.
The Welsh sang "Sweet Chariots" when they beat us in Cardiff to clinch a grand slam a few years back. It was a different version. I preferred it.

The "respect the kicker" is whole load of nonsense. Respect the opposition before the match and after the match is what really matters. But whether its a wall of silence or a wall of noise, the home crowd should do their best to intimidate the kicker. Likewise the hooker, but he gets a lot less sympathy for some reason when a cacophony of noise tries to upset him. In my experience the home crowds at Toulouse and Munster are the best at intimidating oppostion and officials.

Probably the same one I heard the Scots singing. Does it involve the insertion of a chariot in an orifice?

[Hound]

The BBC panel had it right, was it a great game or a terrible game. They agreed it was a both. If you win those type of games, its great, lose and its terrible. Ireland just made the mistakes first and more regular, which handed England the scores at the right times. Also the changes had a negative affect on Ireland.

O'Gara isn't the future but you can't see Kidney been bold enough to change him.

Also, felt the crowds jeering of the English kicker was out of place when he was on penalties.

Was disappointed by that also.  In fairness though, quite a lot of the jeering seemed to be in response to the Engloid fans singing that hateful chariots shite.
By no means an expert, but I felt that the scrum half Murray was dreadful.  Really laboured, slow ball from him throughout the match.

Just curious but how exactly is the "Sweet Chariots" song/ hymn so "hateful"? How did it cause the booing of the kicker?

Wouldnt be a fan of "Sweet Chariots" myself.
The Welsh sang "Sweet Chariots" when they beat us in Cardiff to clinch a grand slam a few years back. It was a different version. I preferred it.

The "respect the kicker" is whole load of nonsense. Respect the opposition before the match and after the match is what really matters. But whether its a wall of silence or a wall of noise, the home crowd should do their best to intimidate the kicker. Likewise the hooker, but he gets a lot less sympathy for some reason when a cacophony of noise tries to upset him. In my experience the home crowds at Toulouse and Munster are the best at intimidating oppostion and officials.

Probably the same one I heard the Scots singing. Does it involve the insertion of a chariot in an orifice?

That's the one!

[Premier Emperor]

How come the kicker is respected down in Thomond Park but not up in Dublin?