91热爆

91热爆.co.uk

Ireland v England player ratings

  • Phil Harlow - 91热爆 Sport journalist
  • 24 Feb 07, 05:48 PM

Phil Harlowire_badge.gif eng_badge.gif
Ireland produced a tremendous display to record their best ever win over England in a pulsating encounter at Croke Park.

See if you agree with my ratings for both sides.

IRELAND:

Dempsey - 6: Ran in a simple try, and was brave under the high ball. As Ireland turned on the style in the second half, found himself in the line more and more. An unsung hero in a superb team performance.

Horgan - 7: Gave opposite number David Strettle something of a lesson in the realities of international rugby, and ran some excellent lines off his centres. Took his try well, and caused problems every time he touched the ball.

B O'Driscoll - 7: Showed exactly what Ireland had been missing last week with a classy performance. Ran through his full range of skills with ball in hand, and was his usual dependable presence in defence.

D'Arcy - 7: Quiet early on, but a touch of genius - flicking a terrible pass between his legs to keep the move going - led to Dempsey's opening try. Had the measure of Farrell in defence, and thoroughly enjoyed himself in attack.

Hickie - 6: Always comfortable with ball in hand, Hickie did not get as many chances to impress as some of his colleagues in the back-line but did everything he had to with applomb.

O'Gara - 9: Totally outshone opposite man Jonny Wilkinson, his kicking out of hand pinned England back time and again, while his cross-kick gave Horgan his try on a plate. Add in his faultless goal-kicking, and there is very little to criticise.

Stringer - 6: Some occasionally sloppy service and kicking, but had the luxury of playing behind a dominant pack, and made the most of it. Made one crucial tap tackle on Harry Ellis to stop a potential breakaway dead in its tracks.

Horan - 6: Gave nothing away in the scrum, and was much more evident in the loose than his English counterparts. Showed his kicking skills as well with one punt to touch when Ireland were under pressure.

R Best - 7: Ireland's line-out went like a dream and Best can take full credit for his role in that, as well as for his impressive display in the tight.

Hayes - 7: Another fine display in the Ireland front row. The often criticised prop was in tears during the pre-match anthems, and he converted that emotion into a good all-round display

O'Callaghan - 7: Gave his usual all-action performance, and was a key part in Ireland's forward dominance. His athleticism in the line-out was up to his usual standards.

O'Connell - 9: One of the best performances of the Munster lock's career. Imperious in the line-out, on Irish and English ball, and a menacing, aggressive presence all over the pitch. Totally lived up to his reputation and just pipped O'Gara to the man of the match award.

S Easterby - 7: Did all the unglamorous work often at the bottom of a pile of bodies. England got very little quick ball, and Easterby's presence on the field may well have had something to do with that.

D Wallace - 8: Another outstanding performance from Wallace. Took his first-half try well, driving through three English defenders and was always among the first on hand at every breakdown.

Leamy - 6: Slightly quieter than some of his colleagues in attack, Leamy just got on with the job in hand, which was tackling anything in a white shirt and clearing out every ruck.

Replacements

Flannery - 6: Kept Ireland's momentum going, hitting rucks with enthusiasm and getting ball in hand on a couple of occasions.

Boss - 6: Grabbed an interception try during his few minutes on the field.

Other replacements did not get a chance to earn a mark.

ENGLAND:

Morgan - 6: Defended bravely in difficult conditions early on, but was forced off by a shoulder injury after 30 minutes before he'd really got going.

Lewsey - 5: Some good moments, but needed to rely on his upper body strength on a few occasions to get himself out of tight corners that bad decision-making had got him into. Knocked-on when in the clear in the second half, and simply unable to compete with the significantly taller Horgan for Ireland's third try.

Tindall - 5: With England's backs enjoying little by way of possession, Tindall did not get the chance to shine. Held by O'Driscoll over the line, but his charged-down kick at the start of the second half was just what England didn't want.

Farrell - 4: The former rugby league man was exposed by O'Driscoll and D'Arcy. Seemed out of kilter with his team-mates in defence, and gave away a penalty after getting isolated in possession. Improved after the break, but has it been too much, too soon for the Saracens man?

Strettle - 6: Not the best game to make your international debut in, but the Harlequins youngster can be proud of his display. Showed finishing of the highest class to squeeze in at the corner and did his best not to be bullied by opposite man Horgan.

Wilkinson - 5: Goal-kicking apart, a disappointing display from a player England needed to be firing on all cylinders. Not able to get the backline moving with much fluency, although he was starved of possession for much of the match.

Ellis - 5: Something of a return to the bad old days after a good start to the Six Nations. With his forwards struggling to gain parity, Ellis kicked poorly and found himself scragged on more than one occasion, as well as getting pinged for a crooked feed. A couple of half breaks could not paper over the cracks.

Freshwater - 5: If England were expecting to exploit a supposedly fragile Ireland scrum, they were disappointed. Substituted just after the break, after England's creaking scrum had conceded a penalty.

Chuter - 4: Ireland were all over England's line-out and while it is not just Chuter's fault, the Leicester hooker needs to take his share of the blame. Lacked nothing in effort, but unable to make an impression.

Vickery - 4: Looked to be struggling to keep up with the pace at some stages, while he was part of the scrum that was not at ease with itself. Is he another player rushed (back) into the international set-up too soon?

Deacon - 5: A hard-working display, but nothing to write home about from Deacon. Thoroughly outdone by O'Connell and O'Callaghan.

Grewcock - 5: The veteran lock was sin-binned for a cynical foul at the breakdown with the score at 9-3. When he returned 10 minutes later, the score was 23-3. Not a match to remember for Grewcock.

Worsley - 6: Did plenty of work on the floor, and put in some big hits but could not turn the tide. Nothing to be ashamed about in his performance but will have enjoyed happier days in a white shirt.

Lund - 4: Consistently slower to the breakdown than the outstanding David Wallace, and struggled to make an impact. Looked to have been shaken by his misjudged, and highly dangerous, tackle on Girvan Dempsey for which he should have been sin-binned. Cannot have been surprised to have been taken off at half-time.

Corry - 6: A mixed bag. Did well in the line-out and tackled strongly but gave away penalties, and was almost anonymous in possession.

Replacements:

Tait - 6: Got 50 minutes to impress and made a brave tackle on Shane Horgan early on. Blotted his copy-book with a bad knock-on after being put in the clear by Lewsey's inside pass, but showed some impressive strength when barging potential tacklers out of the way.

White - 5: Shored up the scrum, but conceded an absolutely brainless penalty for stamping just as England were building some momentum at the start of the second half.

Palmer - 5: Made little impression after coming on for Grewcock, although there is little he could have done to change the result.

Rees - 6: One of England's better forwards after replacing Magnus Lund, showing real enthusiasm for work in the tight and out wide.

Perry - 4: Given a couple of minutes at the end, and threw an interception pass to Isaac Boss for Ireland's final try.

Other replacements did not get a chance to earn a mark.


Comments  Post your comment

  • 1.
  • At 08:24 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Ed2003 wrote:

I think you're a bit harsh on the England backs. I thought they actually created about the same as their Irish counterparts. It was just the last pass that was either knocked-on or the forwards not retaining possesion at a break-down which made it seem like there was little penetration.

The English forwards were pretty awful and the Ireland forwards showed a lot of intensity and composure. That's where the game was won and lost.

Well done to Ireland.

  • 2.
  • At 08:42 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • AshFell wrote:

Wake up England selection panel!
Having just witnessed what can only be described as a disgrace full performance isn't it about time we as a nation woke up?
The front 5 are a joke, Freshwater was close to useless, Chuter couldn't throw or scrummage if his life depended on, and Vickery having made next to no appearance's through injury for the last 2 years was terrible, I was fortunate enough to see his 1st proffessional appearance for Glos, and he was binding on the arm even then, you CANNOT teach an old dog new tricks!
Danny Grewcock was his usually terrible self and could scarcely go a game with out a yellow, and i would be intrigued to know what if anything Deacon brings to the English pack?
Corry was also rubbish, why? when we have some of the best young forwards in the world in the premiership do we insist on picking these useless "journey men"?
Although JW is one of the best kickers in the worl he proved today that he has sadly lost all the other abilities that made him the worlds best Fly Half.
And I can only assume that we have all proven Farrell to be a total waste of space all he has shown to be is a bad shadow for Tindall, a man who constantly gives his all!
Dave Strettle had a superb debut but will undoubtedly be dropped for for another journey man who can seem to do no wrong in the eyes of the selectors JR!
And well done Olly Morgan, sadly injured thanks to falling awkwardly from O'Driscolls forgetten disgracefull foul, Olly is the future at 15 for England no question!
Thats it, rant over, bring on the backlash!?

  • 3.
  • At 08:43 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • jamie smith wrote:

England were very poor today. Well done Ireland. To blame Andy Farrell exclusively is wrong. The forwards were never in the game. Faz is big & skillful, but doesn't have the pace to play centre. Stand off is more his position, kicking, offloading & passing his strength, as in league. He never played in the outside backs for Wigan or Great Britain during his league career. Why now for England RU?

  • 4.
  • At 08:45 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • s lawson wrote:

A much heavier pack yet pusged off the ball; huge centres exposed for a lack of pace; tiny wingers exposed for a lack of height. Two scrumhalves who can' pass. England have neither power nor pace nor guile. Answer? A full time squad a la cricket and rethouhgt selection. Jones into the second row for mobility, Rees into the back row, Richards at scrum half, Noon in at centre,Cohen and Sackey on the wings and Ashton out to pasture.

  • 5.
  • At 08:49 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Simon Webber wrote:

As an England fan,I would like to congratulate Ireland on a highly impressive display. They were simply superior to England all over the pitch today. The Irish public also showed true class and sportsmanship in applauding the England team onto the pitch, and giving the utmost respect to the English national anthem. The hysteria which the media attempted to whip up about the Croke Park issue in the days leading up to the game was shown to be ludicrously mis-judged and totally out of step with the feelings of ordinary people. Well done Ireland!

  • 6.
  • At 08:50 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Matt wrote:

Firstly, well done Ireland. You were the better team and deserved the win. But was there really any doubt? You should try to keep your feet on the ground because, lets face it, England aren't the most formidable set up at the moment. I don't think Ireland will be good enough to win the world cup, they need more games against quality opposition like the ABs and France. Also, a little comment for rogisgod: O'Gara had a good game, but you can no way compare him to Wilko on this match. O'Gara had a huge adavantage in being behind a superior back, and having the best centre partnership outside him. If ROG and Wilko switched sides? ROG would be eaten alive.

  • 7.
  • At 08:50 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Gerard Burns wrote:

Apart from one error,when he was unable to release the ball early enough, his long range passes impressed again,including the one that led to Strettle s try. Give credit where it s due please- Guscott. Rememember,Jeremy,you rarely broke sweat let alone ever got your shirt dirty! Farrell has a better Rugby brain than you will ever possess. Ireland deserved to win due to committed team effort.

  • 8.
  • At 08:50 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • james wrote:

England were well and truely outclassed. Ireland deserved the win.

  • 9.
  • At 08:51 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Kellyizer wrote:

Sorry Ed2003, you simply have just gotten it all wrong.

  • 10.
  • At 08:53 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Kevin wrote:

Agree with many of your ratings, get in Wallace! There's no number beside Corry, though I agree with the description of his game - I'd give him a 6.

Maybe some of the England backs deserved better ratings, but not significantly so - for the little offensive creativity they made of the meagre possession earned by their forwards, they were exposed in too many defensive situations to warrant better ratings, in my opinions - all in all, it wasn't just the Irish dominance in the tight that won the match, it was England's inability to deal with Ireland, player for player, play for play, Ireland had England on their knees for at least 70 minutes of that game.

Excellent summary of Grewcock's performance as well :-D
"score before sin-bin = 9-3.
score on return from sinbin = 23-3" - says it all really!

  • 11.
  • At 08:53 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Denis wrote:

Loved it! What aperformance from Ireland on such a huge stage. O'Connell was immense, also O'Gara and O'Driscoll just has an influence beyond anything he does with ball in hand. It was a great win but we shoudl guard against too much triumphalism. Wilkinson was OK considering he was behid a beaten pack and a scrum half who dodn't quite click today. The pack was hammered - a real cause for concern (if you're English) and the nrewly neacent Worls Cup dreams look very premature. Great nity-gritty performance from Irish back row. Think Farrelll may be a busted flush for England (all that money..) As an Irishman almost proudest of all of the reception for "The Queen" - and then teh stunning rendition of The Soldier's Song. Ireland grows up!!

A great match, a great occasion

  • 12.
  • At 08:53 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Pat wrote:

Wooohooo
Ireland were very good and outclassed England in the Line-out and the breakdown.scrummaging was poor for both sides.
Please can somebody beat France. Cumon england and wales against France.

  • 13.
  • At 08:58 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Paul wrote:

Dont think farrell was that bad, english pack were awfull and never fronted up, changes need to be made, so many needless penalties, julian white stamping and does corry give a penalty a game away for grabbing his opposite number in the lineout!! he's mmeant to be a leader yet has shocking disipline himself!

  • 14.
  • At 09:01 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Andypandy wrote:

England's problem was that their back row was ineffective and Jonny was anonymous - in particular, his direction of the game was poor and his kicking from hand was lacking in ideas.

To give Andy Farrell a worse mark than Jonny is jaundiced - he did nothing wrong apart from giving away one penalty for getting caught in possession. Ireland's famed midfield of Darcy and O'Driscoll were kept out of the game all evening. What has he got to do to get more than 4 out of 10?

  • 15.
  • At 09:04 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Larry wrote:

Unfair on Corry to give him zero!!!
Ireland answered most critics. What style! What composure on a wet day! What unity! What power! What tackling! What passion!What an occasion! What a performance! What a result! What an emotional national anthem and Irelands Call! What respect for the English national anthem!
O'Connell immense! O'Gara class! Horgan soars!
Go Ireland! Bring on the World Cup!

  • 16.
  • At 09:04 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • steve wrote:

Ireland were superb today and all credit to them. I thought the english back three weren't too bad and was especially impressed by tait and hope he gets a run in the centres against France.

Our pack is simply not good enough anymore, it is as simple as that. which of those 8 would get into the side of 2003? only vickory, the rest are just not world class. desperately need richard hill back and maybe give rees a bit of a go. god knows what to do about the second and front rows

  • 17.
  • At 09:07 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • steve wrote:

It's so easy to knock Farrell. He is the one player England have in midfield that fires quick ball out wide.

He is expected to be everything all at once and his team mates must try harder. He is expected to be no.1 defender and attacker.

  • 18.
  • At 09:11 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Nick wrote:

Picking on Farell seems very strange - he passed well, ran straight and had some good tackles - not a great game but similar to the other backs. There seems some resentment among union die hards to seeing a league player come straight into the team, and it is fair to say he is inexperienced, bot not to say that the experiment has failed. Today England were outclassed much more seriously in the forwards, you can't compete if you can't retain your own lineout ball.

  • 19.
  • At 09:13 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Dan wrote:

Agree completely, although mark for wilkinson might be too high, but i think lund/rees makrs should be reversedm frist half i thougth lund played well and was at every breakdown quickly, made about 5 very good tackles, and i thought rees was ineffective and quiet!!!

  • 20.
  • At 09:16 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Millar McDowell wrote:

Well done ireland on a superb win over the "world cup favourites". HA HA. wHAT A JOKE. win 2 matches against a plodding Scotland and played off the park by the much more superior forwards from Italy.

Is this the best england can put out. Bring back andy robinson.

today england were shown the true spirit of a team. not the prima donnas of wilko, farrel,etc. my granny could do more with a rugby ball than corry. and as for the front row- and i thought john hayes was a plodder.

well done ireland. thoroughly deserved

  • 21.
  • At 09:16 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Charlie wrote:

The discussion about Brian Moore masks a deeper seated issue on sport's commentary, and that is that the TV channels recent reliance on ex-players has been in line with the dumbing down on British television in general. If we want to have unbiased, more objective commentary then the TV bosses should bring back the gifted amateur journalist types and leave the has-beens to the after dinner speaking circuit and any blog they wish to create. The brutal truth is that running round a sport's field in the formative adult years of life does not prepare the mind for quick, unbiased analysis. The default, so-to-speak, is to fall back on the changing-room logic which B Moore is now famous for.

  • 22.
  • At 09:18 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Yedbawon wrote:

Farrell was found wanting today but I do not honestly believe anyone else could have played in his palce and salvaged that performance. However the critiscism from the pundits is pure tosh.

All of them however cannot see past the end of their noses to the root of the problem- the pack!

The pack is slow, toothless, unskillful and lacking any mongrel at all. Can any one show me an England forward running with any aggression at the line and making yards? They all trundle forward, fall over or get knocked backwards.

Any rugby team, RL or RU needs a pack to go forward aggressively and dominate the opposition if the team is establish territory and create anything for a backline- Guscott and Moore should teach that on the skills web- site!

The forwards couldn't create anything other than trying to biff and barge their way up field with a maul- which they can be matched with. Ironically the best two or three teams in world rugby at minute have forwards running aggresively off the back of quick rucks RL style!

Me thinks an athletic, aggressive, skilful pack with good passing skills must be picked and stuck with. This lot are past their sell by date.

The character assasination of Faz by the the game's media, pundits and commentators is embarrassing and reminiscent of the kind of garbage written by tabloid journalists trying to oust the latest/ last/ current England soccer team manager.

If they want the best of Farrell, stick him at stand-off. He'll organise, boss the game and he can kick penalities too- which means he can do two more things better than Wilkinson.

  • 23.
  • At 09:20 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Scotty wrote:

A well deserved win by the Irish, in various ways they have been getting better over the last few years and this day they put it all together. It was going to happen some time.

As an Aussie I knew they were on the upsurge when, although they lost to NZ when they played them they did not look out of thier depth (as they had done before).

As for England all this approbrium for Farrell is, as my London freinds would say "bang out of order". Some of the passes he did today were superb, including the one leading to Strettle's try. His defence was OK as well, but lets be honest Tindall/Farrell vs O'Driscoll/Darcy is a mismatch if ever I saw one. Tindall, Strettle, Morgan, Lewsey fought like hell and can be proud of thier effort, if not thier execution. The forwards were found out big time; end of story. It's all very well to say you will "dominate" set pieces with strength, when technique is lacking. O'Connell ruled the lineout -the Irish loosies rules the park.

  • 24.
  • At 09:20 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Tom Henderson wrote:

I'm absolutely shocked nothing has been mentioned with regard to the referee. Ireland deserved their win, but the referee ruined the game. Grewcock gets sin binned for his usual stupidity yet the Irish get away with elbowing Johnny in the head, kneeing him on the floor and Horgan's running forearm into Strettle's face was a sickener. The referee's incompetance was nearly matched by England who seem unable to grasp the rules of the sport. Vickery's persistant causing of the scrum to collapse (which the referee didn't punish) was a prime example. I'm certain it would be difficult to concede more penalties for basic errors if they actually wanted to. The England team is in a shambolic state and there will be no quick fix, things won't improve before the world cup - in 2011!

  • 25.
  • At 09:22 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Ed2003 wrote:

Good call on Richard Hill, Steve.

What a difference in skill and intensity between Back, Dallaglio, Hill and Lund, Corry, Worsley. It's the back row that is costing us quick and tidy ball game after game.

I really don't think that we need to make massive changes to the back line.

  • 26.
  • At 09:23 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Frank wrote:

Ireland were brilliant I think they could win the world cup

  • 27.
  • At 09:25 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Paul wrote:

Well done the Irish rugby supporting public for their magnificent applause as England ran onto the Croker Park pitch and their equally magnificent response to the playing of God Save the Queen - wonderful, and heart warming.

As for the match: I believe England lost through a lack of charismatic on-field leadership, something Ireland had in abundance. Even if they could not have outplayed this brilliant Irish side, leadership may have avoided such a heavy defeat.

  • 28.
  • At 09:28 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Curran wrote:

You need to have a few players in any rugby team who can frighten the other side with their speed, if nothing else it changes the pattern of marking and makes room for other players, that's the way NZ think and that's how the England coaches should be thinking, today England only had Strettle with any sort of a spark. Lewsey isn't quick, deceptive or even hard to put down. Farrell should be shown the door as an expensive mistake, they'll want him back in league, let's face it he's still playing league, that's all there is to his game, he certainly doesn't belong on the same pitch as a centre like O'Driscoll. Tindall doesn't look fit, if he is fit and that's him at his biggest and best he shouldn't be in the squad either.

  • 29.
  • At 09:30 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Happydownunder wrote:

Mesmerising display, did Ireland proud. Sydney morning streets full of happy Irish people wandering around in a daze, if only we could bottle that intensity we could start to believe in world cups, Full credit to EOS, might quieten down a lot of the critics on this site! Great to see the respect from the anthems after all the hype.

  • 30.
  • At 09:32 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Tim Kelly wrote:

I think each of the Irish back row should have gotten 8, they were all immense in defense and attack.

O'Driscoll deserves an 8 as well, as always looked dangerous, but was especially dogged in defence, not giving the English midfield any time or room.

  • 31.
  • At 09:35 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Michael wrote:

Ireland forwards were immense. As I said yesterday, if Ireland's forwards compete then the backs will overrun England. The forwards more than competed, they demolished England's pack.
Where will England go from here? Ashton will probably make a couple of changes to the pack (Freshwater, Grewcock and Corry out).
I'd still like to see Tait in as a centre, Cueto back on the wing now that he's fit and Lewsey or Robinson at full back.

  • 32.
  • At 09:35 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Dannny wrote:

I think saying that farrell played well is wrong, he made poor decision after poor decision and wasn't incisvie with his running, didn't make any notable breaks!! As wilko played fairly poorly, again doesn;t look like he is gonna det the world alight again, i think england's best option for the world cup is pray hodgson is fit, hodgson 10, wilko 12, and also I think cueto should be brought back into the team sharpish, his scoring record is sensational and move lewsey to full back cos he isnt getting in the games on the wing!!!

  • 33.
  • At 09:36 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • carter wrote:

when we won the world cup worsley, grewcock, corry and freshwater were all nearer their peak than they are now. that shows how we haven't replaced the likes of johnno, hill, back, big lol etc. we haven't moved on. we were completely outplayed upfront. they murdered us at the line out and forced us into how many errors?? blaming farrell is hilarious. how many line breaks did his opposite man (the much hyped darcy) make? faz has a great rugby brain and fast hands. perfect for any good o-centre to play off. writing wilko is hilarious too. if he'd been the Irish 10, behind that pack display, he'd have been untouchable.

  • 34.
  • At 09:40 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Keo in Melbourne wrote:

If wilko switched with ROG he would have been eaten alive? another hypothetical situation. What a load of complete clap-trap, and to be expected. Hardly worth commenting on, but I couldn't help myself. ROG has been playing brilliant rugby for the last 3 years while wilko has been nursing endless injuries, really good rugby players dont get injured as much as he does, Wilko is foolish to think that he can tackle bigger men, thats why he keeps getting smashed up. ROG was unsurpassed today, and played a better all-round game than wilko has ever played. simple as that. Kicked everything to perfection, controlled the match, and created an amazing try. What has wilkinson done in the six nations this year? even the try he scored wasn't a try. He was exposed as a one dimensional player that has been overhyped, sounds like the english premiership (he is the Rugby equivalent to Beckham). Great win for Ireland, and bring on the world cup. B

  • 35.
  • At 09:41 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Andy Tee wrote:

Art - who's using the family brain cell this weekend?

  • 36.
  • At 09:47 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Defoe8 wrote:

Today proved that England are a 1 man team, you keep JW quiet and you'll easily beat England.

It was obv that JW had not recovered from his hamstring injury and was thus useless today. Even when he was fit, he has lost the pace, skill and ability to skin players that made him one of the best fly halfs in rugby.

The English rugby team and English football team have one thing in common - they're both useless!!

  • 37.
  • At 09:51 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • simon wrote:

Art u r an idiot, he has had far more than 1 good game, he did smash the hell out of you in 2003 so dont be stupid now. But well played Ireland, far better team on the day..however you wont get near the world cup I'm afraid. France, NZ and South Africa will murder you.

I happened to be next to one very one eyed Scot during the match who told me he didnt care about Scotlands result as long as Ireland won even though we beat Scotland as well. Tell me...is this a general Scottish mentality or just a eye eyed idiot!

  • 38.
  • At 09:55 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • adam o connor wrote:

wheeerrrrrrrrrrrrs jonny?

  • 39.
  • At 09:55 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • tony wrote:

As an English fan I would like to congratulate the Irish team on a convincing win. It now looks almost certain that they will pick up another triple crown which will I suppose be fair. I think the French are in a different league to the home nations and I fear for the thrashing they will give England if we are as poor in Paris.

However, any hopes I had of an England win were destroyed when I saw the England team selection - Ireland fully exposed the shortcomings in the England selection and for this they must take the credit for doing the homework on their opposition but I feel the result was flattering to Ireland because Ashton chose a team that was not up to the job.

As for England where do they go now? Unfortunately time has run out on us to get together a team capable of even mounting a half decent defence of the WC in France and that is a tragedy.

Farrell was exposed today but I still think it was right to play him. He needs experience and there is only one way to get that. Grewcock - please give him a brain transplant someone. Time and time again his indiscipline lets down hit country. Ellis - I can think of only 1 game where he has played well.

Not much wrong with your player ratings but I think rating 9 for O Gara and 5 for Wilkinson is a bit excessive. Wilko was limited today because he was playing behind a creaking pack and the reverse is true for ROG. Switch the players around and the result wouldn't have changed a tiny bit.

The only negative point to me today was Keith Wood. The man annoys me every time he opens his mouth and is so one eyed it is unbelievable. Any Irish who complain about Brian Moore should take a look at Wood with his at times almost hilarious lack of objection. As a player he was top class but as a pundit he is bottom of the pile.

  • 40.
  • At 09:55 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • mcd wrote:

I have to say - as an England fan i am honoured to have seen the way Ireland handled the game today. The Irish fans were amazing and gave the utmost respect to the visiting players. The run out onto the pitch and anthems were fantastic. Ireland for the RWC 2007. I will be behind them 100%.

As disappointed as i am - an awesome display.

  • 41.
  • At 09:58 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • willy wrote:

a great day for the "entire ireland" truly historic on and off the pitch

  • 42.
  • At 10:00 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Denis wrote:

Comments for 27. Largely I agree - the ref was useless. missed endless Vickey binding probs, pulling down. Right about Horgan's elbow, not so sure about the knee on Wilikinson being deliberate, but, for God's sake, what about Lund's shocking hit on an airborne Dempsey. One of the biggets threats/risks to the wonderful game of RU is inconsistent, sometimes stupid/blind refereeing. Get the principles right: straight put-in, watch for tightheads driving in / binding, defenders pulling in attackers in loose play...

  • 43.
  • At 10:00 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • maxime wrote:

just stop looking in the past and talking about Wilko !!
He is NOT the future of the english team, just a good foot player.
He made today many individual mistakes.
Why can't english fans admit they have to build a new team ? I just can't understand that. 2003 is over, wake up!
A french supporter.

  • 44.
  • At 10:05 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Callum wrote:

At the end of the day, England simply aren't good enough. Time and time again they get built up as being potential this and potential that, but when push comes to shove they can't hack it against a better, hungrier opposition. The forwards are a joke considering how many good forwards haven't been selected. Why is simon shaw not in the team? The backs have no flair and guile. Its just embarrassing now.

  • 45.
  • At 10:05 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • PatC wrote:

nah - Corry deserves a 0 - not least for the 'opinion' he delivers in the Grauniad. England outclassed - again. How many times has 4 in a row been mentioned, cos I am too drunck to read the posts?

  • 46.
  • At 10:06 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • AlexT wrote:

Not sure what's gone wrong with England. A year and half ago, they had a pack which got the better of New Zealand, with no sparkle and creativity in the backs.

Today the backs played OK - not great, but the pack was bullied and out muscled. The front five were especially poor - when can we have Stevens back?

I thought Strettle played very well for a debut. Farrell was again, OK but nothing more. I think Antony Allen is more of an attacking threat.

  • 47.
  • At 10:08 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Breda Bower wrote:

I lived in Dublin in the 60s Croake Park was where we went every Sunday. Before the Stands were Built we met on 'hill 16' with our packed lunch and watched the match.
I cried tonight when I saw the England and the Irish teams come through the tunnell. I was so proud that the spectators were so respectful when the teams entered and the national anthems were played. I am Irish but have lived in England for over 40 years, but tonight is so great for me.

  • 48.
  • At 10:12 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • old hoss wrote:

so in the space of one game is jw crap.Art get get alife . if you've ever played behind a pack thats not worth its weight in dog bisquits and living on scraps then controle is virtually impossible.
world cup winners ireland,doubtfull.england no chance
france maybe.nz deffo if they dont choke.

  • 49.
  • At 10:15 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • ta2625 wrote:

Every comment I hear about Jonny Wilkinson being crap annoys me - it shows a distinct lack of understanding of rugby. Any fly half in English rugby would have had a hard time out there with the quality and amount of ball presented to him.

I'm not saying he had the best game - he didn't - some poor decision making cost us but this is purely indicative of lack of match practice not the players quality. Maybe now the six nations is lost Flood should be given a chance but Wilkinson is an asset and shouldn't be written off

Also the centre debate - We haven't seen enough of Farrel to really make a judgement - rugby is such a team game that the performance of every player affects the other - if England's forwards start firing and the backs start moving forward and he still looks out of place then yes drop him, but until then he needs a chance.

Just look at the french side, their centres are much the same mould as Farrel and Tindall yet their back three hits the line with such pace and they bring their flankers into the line so hard that they create oppourtunities everywhere.

Fair play to Ireland they played really well and showed their true potential. I'd love to see an Ireland New Zealand world cup final.

  • 50.
  • At 10:17 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Stephen wrote:

Yeah .... bring on the world cup ireland. Just like this year's Grand Slam.

  • 51.
  • At 10:18 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Nick wrote:

In response to a number of post. England selection is as good as it is going to get. Lets face it the players just aren't in England even at club level these days.
As for somebody here trying to say that Wilko is miles ahead of ROG. You have got to be kidding. ROG may not be as good a place kicker as W but he definitely is a more complete player than Wilko is or has been in the past.
I think this display has highlighted a number of things. That Englands displays in the past couple of games were nothing to get carried away with. This England side is still a very bad side. Italy and Scotland always have the potential to make a day hard for the others but only if they play at their best and the opposition play at their worst. Another thing this result proved and the result of Italy and Scotland has proved too how bad the current Australian side is. Their only good result against Scotland has been shown up for what it was. Nothing. On current form I believe that a full strenght Ireland are the only team in the world who could be competitive with the All Blacks, of course that's at full strenght.

  • 52.
  • At 10:19 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Paul Nickels wrote:

Ireland deserved to win they played with real fire.But please can we be spared the awful commentary from Eddie Butler! His irritaing asides and dislike of Brian Moore spoiled an exhilarating match.

  • 53.
  • At 10:19 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • leo wrote:

I think that ireland played brilliantly and o'connel in particular had a great game. I agree with most of the ratings but i think most people are being too harsh on jonny wilkinson. Ellis didn't have a good game today so 'wilko' had nothing to work with and the england forwards were pretty terrible. Ireland would have beaten france had o driscoll and stringer had been playing and the captain really showed that on the pitch. 100% effort all the way and ireland can win the world cup!

  • 54.
  • At 10:20 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Mark wrote:

Hi guys in the north

have just watched a tremendous Ireland performance Im a kiwi and from my perspective I think Ireland
will be a worry to Henry and our boys more than France.
As for England well wot can I say ARGHHHHHHH!!!!!!there were only 2 players that were worth anything on the day Young David Strettle played his heart out and Andy farrell u guys pot him but the score would have been higher had he not put the brakes on the famed Irish pair.Sure his decisions were sometimes alien but give him a break hes just joined
the squad .As for the England coach
BAD BAD BAD decision should have expanded the idea of an International coach NEW fresh approach New ideas New way forward
England have got All the talent they need but are still stuck in the VICTORIAN days.Cmon England we want u all to be competative down here not just a few of u.

  • 55.
  • At 10:21 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • EMBL wrote:

Re post 8

Wilkinson's kicking from hand and ball is generally excellent. His defensive play is also excellent. However ROG's kicking (from hand and ball) on current form is at least as good. What sets ROG apart from Wilkinson is his playmaking. Wilkinson does not have the running game that O'Gara has and I am not confident he ever will.

O'Gara and Carter are the two form fly-halfs in the world.

I never felt England were in the game today - and after the Italy game I didnt expect much of them. As an Irishman, I spent most of the second half thinking of that last minute against France - ARGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

  • 56.
  • At 10:24 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • bluey wrote:

Felt a bit sorry for England in the end. They're really letting themselves down by not sorting out this club vs. country row, and I thought the occasion merited a better English side than the one we saw. If England could at least sort out their pack that'd be a start.

As regards the hoopla surrounding the national anthems, it was all a load of nonsense stirred up by the Irish media. I'm Irish and, although I now live in England, it was pretty obvious that the anthems and the teams would be well respected.

And by the way, let's not get carried away too much by the result. It was a surprisingly poor English side and there's no evidence yet that Ireland are good enough to win a world cup, especially with New Zealand in the form they're in.

  • 57.
  • At 10:25 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • andrew hannah wrote:

Right. ireland totally outclassed us but. True the back row was poor the england of old won games due to speed at the breakdowns, players were being isolated due to the forwards not being fast enough. Would be good when moody is bak. yeah farrell wasnt amazing but y is everyone expecting him to do wonders in his 3rd game to be honest he was the most solid of the backs today,, he hasnt shone yet.. but he hasnt really done anything wrong?! agree.

Julian white needs to start he is an imense scrummager. so heres my starting line up if all were fit what u think??

1 Julian white
2 George Chuter (thompson serious injury)
3 Phil vickery
4 Lewis decon
5 Ben kay
6 joe worsley
7 lewis moody
8 martin corry

9 harry ellis
10 jonny
11 robinson
12 farrell
13 tait (we need some pace farrell is the strong head tait the pace)
14 cueto
15 lewsey

  • 58.
  • At 10:27 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • ORP wrote:

What a brilliant occasion - Croke Park is awesome!!!
Great to see the Ulstermen on at the end - but not before time!!!
91热爆 website commentary attributed the conversion to Boss' try to ROG - when it was actually Paddy Wallace who scored the final three points.
Well done to all.

  • 59.
  • At 10:27 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • NP wrote:

Ireland are a seriously good team at the moment, and everything came right today. World cup though? - dream on. The first twenty and last five minutes against France are what happen when they take their eye off the ball. France are the only team that I can see even remotely challenging the ABs.
I agree about the England recylced has-beens. Its a sorry state of affairs when Worsely looks good in comparison to the rest. However, teams around the world would be delighted if we wrote JW off. Yes he is overhyped, yes he's been rushed back too soon, yes he may never be quite the same again, but if he can now stay fit he's is light years ahead of Hodgson or anyone else seen in a England number 10 shirt.

  • 60.
  • At 10:29 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Sarah wrote:

To TOM HENDERSON

'Horgan's running forearm into Strettle's face was a sickener''


To be fair, you must remember that it was evident from that incident that Strettle was a newcomer. Horgan may have been wrong to elbow him in the face but Strettle was in his way as ROG kicked the ball ahead.

Horgan had every right to push Strettle aside as he was just standing there rather dozily.


To England, fair play for a good match and an unfortunte loss. I think the team is in a bit of a pickle but Jonny Wilkinson could have done so much more with a stronger and more together team behind him - He is still a world-class kicker although Ronan O'Gara did outshine him today

To Ireland, I am just so proud. Fair play after the frustrating and loose game against Wales and an unfortunate game against France

  • 61.
  • At 10:29 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Adam wrote:

England were utterly shambolic, most of those England players did a half-arse job, full credit to the Irish for staying silent during the English anthem.

  • 62.
  • At 10:29 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • joe wrote:

Well Ireland dismantled us i just find it ironic hoe this time 3 year ago we dismantled Ireland by pretty much score. Aslo Ashton saying tht all the players played badly makes achange from Robinson excues of the matches last year when we played badly. I aslo found it amsuing how sum people were trying 2 compare Farrell to Greenwood , greenwood had pace farrel does not. Lets now blood the young lads like Allen , Tait and Cipriani

  • 63.
  • At 10:31 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Andy F wrote:

Do you not think that the scoreline was a bit flattering? A bit of slight of hand from Stringer resulted in Grewcock getting sent off, leading to the 2 tries which sealed the game. As for "completely outshone" he kicked into touch. That's it. A good performance, but O'Gara was definately not spectacular.

  • 64.
  • At 10:31 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • disgruntled Cornishman wrote:

Who writes these pathetic reviews - have they ever played the game?

It is pointless even reviewing the performances of the backs (other than defensive performances) when the forwards have caved in and capitulated as completely as England's did today.

England's front row is a problem, Vickery does not scrummage well - he works hard around the field, but that is a 'secondary' duty.

England's back row is very pedestrian and provides very little 'go forward ball'but it's very hard to do that if you're having to stay bound in to the scrum to stop it rolling backward because of the front row's inadequacy.

England's line out has a very vulnerable look to it too, and as for Grewcock - how much sin bin and sent off time has he spent in his long international career. Is he unsackable? I'm a Bath member but he is a nightmare.

Sort the pack out, they were also turned inside out by Italy, and when we've done that perhaps we can get a balanced view on how good (or not) England's backs are.

  • 65.
  • At 10:32 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Will wrote:

Ireland were very very good today, ROG included, but I think the comparisons with, and criticism of Wilko are unfair. He did not have a great game by his standard, but he is still the only other fly half in the world fit to lace Carter's boots. Hook is potentially there too, but ROG is not. His game is hugely reliant on kicking which was perfect tonight for two reasons. First the conditions required it, second his pack had England's on a plate.
Farrel was poor, I thought he would step up tonight but he looks dreadfully slow off the mark, his passing and kicking skills are very good, but I dont think he can make up for his lack of pace.
Strettle was a psoitive tonight, looks to be a good find.
In the pack I think Rees should take Lund's shirt, hes more dynamic.
And please can we replace slow-motion Corry, he doesnt put work in at breakdowns and is so slow on the ball. Lineout work was gd before tonight, but we must have a more threatening ball carrier at 8, Easter? Lol?

  • 66.
  • At 10:33 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • mark b wrote:

Couldn't agree more with old hoss! There is no shortage of talent or skill in the English side but I'm dismayed with the lack of passion that the English team have compared to the Italians and the Irish. If only Wales could've beaten France!

  • 67.
  • At 10:35 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • huge wrote:

As an Ireland fan living and working in England I was 10 feet tall for the last 73 minutes of that match.
Immense double tackles, supreme line-out and a marauding back row supported by ball playing brutes in the tight five.
The omission of Robinson wasn't a factor - kicks found touch (unlike the France game) backs had go forward ball and Easterby, Wallace and Leamy made the english back row look subetteo versions of themselves. No blame on Wilko or Farrel - you can be as talented as you like without ball or space.
How many contact situations did Ireland rule? Tight and loose!

I know a pinch of salt required in terms of Irish world cup terms but when did they last beat England 4 times on the bounce?!
Echo previous comments about the respect shown to Enlgand - marked contrast to booing kicks at Murrayfield.
Murphy vs Dempesy debate is now settled for me too.. Stringer one remains wide open!

  • 68.
  • At 10:36 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • pete wrote:

farrell was ok again, wilkinson was mmmm, strettle was the only player in the england side who even knew where the line was, what is corry,chuter,vickery and white doing in the squad?. the back line to me looks fine its the forwards that need sorting out. strettle need to play in the next match too, he`s the only one that even looked like scoring

  • 69.
  • At 10:37 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Angela Wixted wrote:

Ireland wanted this one. They played with passion and focus. Ireland had a problem with the ref against the French. These things happen. To quote all the Lads in Califorina it was a great day.

Congratulations Ireland.

  • 70.
  • At 10:38 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Blind Bob wrote:

Wales to win WC

  • 71.
  • At 10:40 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Blind Bob wrote:

Wales to win WC

  • 72.
  • At 10:42 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Troff wrote:

Very well played Ireland. You were magnificent and your challenge now is to play to that intensity in every game leading up to the world cup. If you play like that on a regular basis, you will blow away every northern hemisphere team and have a WC final with the AB's. I really didn't think the front row was up to international standard but I've been proven wrong today and its the English pack that needs major surgery.

From an English point of view, today was a major reality check and while we're not as bad as in the Autumn, we're not in the same league as the best teams. However, the World Cup draw has been very favourable (we can't meet NZ, France, Ireland or Argentina until the SF), so if the pack can be sorted out, we still have a chance of a respectable defence (although progression beyond the SF is out of the question). Strettle showed some promise and Tate must be given a go in the centre. We need another '8' until Ward-Smith is fit but I can't think of a likely candidate.

  • 73.
  • At 10:42 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • biscuit wrote:

well done the Irish; tons of respect for the whole day, anthems etc. You deserved to win but why do we english seem so unable to raise our game above talking and endless newpaper interviews ? Time for young bloods, do away with the old guard. What did JW achieve today ? thought he was uninspired, good in parts. Freshwater, Vickery Deacon & Lund not to mention Corry need a dose of reality and to be dropped; Grewcock tho' much maligned and a bit of a liability is one of our better forwards and should be kept. Is this the same Ellis who played against Scotland ?

  • 74.
  • At 10:46 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Irishman in England wrote:

In reply to 27 Tom Henderson...

Lets not be daft and start talking about the referee here and your comment about horgan's 'running forearm into strettle's face' is outrageous! strettle was taught a lesson, if you deliberately get in the way of a train at full speed its gonna hurt and you deserve it! thought the referee was ok, not great, but didn't make that many terrible decisions (other than lund's horrific challenge on dempsey in the air and was it chuter's nasty stamp which you conveniently forgot to mention! but there will always be some mistakes in a game)

also as far as one or two people on here go who were saying ireland were no good and particularly that they were overhyped, i suggest you go downstairs find your hat and eat it! i agree that wilko was given no chance to perform today as he got little ball outside his 22 and when he did was constantly rushed but he is still a class act and a FAR better player than hodgson will ever be...also farrell is a good rugby player and doesn't deserve the stick he's got after performing respectably against a formidable midfield pairing

hopefully those who doubt O'Gara's ability will now have finally seen him play and keep their mouth shut as he is pure class.

still the vast majority of both english and irish fans have taken this game in good spirit and accepted it for what it was which is very refreshing to see so cheers and good luck to england against france!

  • 75.
  • At 10:46 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • NP wrote:

P.S ... seen in an England number 10 shirt, RECENTLY.

  • 76.
  • At 10:49 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Zack wrote:

honestly, i felt that Strettle was impressive.

  • 77.
  • At 10:50 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

when will ashton grow up and drop Corry. He has been less than anonymous in the last few games and is almost working against the development of english rugby. If Ashton is determined to pick the old guard then at least pick someone decent.

  • 78.
  • At 10:52 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Les Fisher wrote:

England were totally outclassed by a much superior pack. The England forwards should take most of the blame. Backs cannot operate without good ball and today they always seemed to be receiving under pressure or not at all.
The vitriol and remarks about Andy Farrell are ridiculous - he seemed one of the few English players trying to get things going. He cannot help it if he was surrounded by some donkeys and butterfingers. Some commentators, especially Guscott, seem to have been biding their time and barely keeping their anti-league prejudices under control. Guscott, himself, must be one of the most overated centres England have had, who had a few spectacular and lucky moments, but most of the time could always be relied upon not to pass if individual glory was a possiblity. No, today England were failed by their forwards and that is what needs urgent attention. Well done Ireland.

  • 79.
  • At 10:54 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Les Fisher wrote:

England were totally outclassed by a much superior pack. The England forwards should take most of the blame. Backs cannot operate without good ball and today they always seemed to be receiving under pressure or not at all.
The vitriol and remarks about Andy Farrell are ridiculous - he seemed one of the few English players trying to get things going. He cannot help it if he was surrounded by some donkeys and butterfingers. Some commentators, especially Guscott, seem to have been biding their time and barely keeping their anti-league prejudices under control. Guscott, himself, must be one of the most overated centres England have had, who had a few spectacular and lucky moments, but most of the time could always be relied upon not to pass if individual glory was a possiblity. No, today England were failed by their forwards and that is what needs urgent attention. Well done Ireland.

  • 80.
  • At 10:54 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Barry In Greece wrote:

I think all the pundits got it wrong today it wasn't BOD and Darcy running rings round Farrell. It was the Irish Pack who were supurb. Nobody would have guessed that England would be outscrummaged and beaten and out muscled. The Irish pack were immense. Freshwater and Vickery are poor scrummagers. Bring on Sheridan and Stevens. Yes drop the captain he is not good enough. Better 2nd row and back row combinations are required. Stick with Tait, Strettle Wikinson and Farrell. Lewsey at Fullback.

The English back line did ok with the amount of possesion they had.

  • 81.
  • At 10:54 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • andy wrote:

i think the english are been overly critical on there team and i think its being very disrespectful to ireland. 3 weeks ago after beating scotland there was talk of retaining the world cup. this has been a wake up call for them. i dont believe that ashton has his selection right yet but they are getting there. fact of the matter is they got beaten by one of the best teams in the world!

  • 82.
  • At 10:56 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Nick wrote:

God we're getting like football, slamming all our players!

First of all we lost to a good, organised side. Full credit to Ireland.

Leave off Farrell. Holding on - why were we running out of our 22 and where was the support?

In my opinion we can't criticise the backs if they hardly get any decent ball. They got one decent bit of ball all night after decent go forward from our forwards (comprehensively outplayed - again) and we scored a good try. Enough said.

At the end of the day chaps who on earth can we bring in? I'd swap Rees for Lund and bring in Palmer for one of the second rows. Hopefully Stevens can come back in at prop soon. Other than that I think we've got the right set of players - I think we've got to accept, esp in the forwards, we're not very good at the mo, although the forwards do need a fire being lit under them.

  • 83.
  • At 10:58 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Bruce - Queensland Aussie wrote:

Great win again over the proms again Ireland, you guys are entering a new era in International Rugby and every success to you.
Having beat the Australians and South Africans, also not looking anyway out of depth against the All-Blacks the writting was On The Wall for England. I don't think English forward could have done anything on the day even if they had trained with the Irish pack and coaches for the week!!! England was just not up to it, extreme sad to see such a rapid decline in the English standard of play.

Croke Park looks like the Best Ground in that part of the world

  • 84.
  • At 11:00 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • nicholas wrote:

There's no doubt that England's performance was disappointing. Most of the players had an average game, and some had a poor game. There was no player who rose to the occasion. As we saw against Italy England can't always rely on Jonny to play as amazing as we know he can. Again today he wasn't at his best and as we saw in the second half against Italy the England team was torn. It is unbalanced and changes need to be made. The team also has to put this defeat behind them and keep confidence otherwise England will finish as badly as they did last year. I for one don't wish to see the English team get torn apart by France again.

  • 85.
  • At 11:01 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • imrama wrote:

* At 10:17 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
* Stephen wrote:

Yeah .... bring on the world cup ireland. Just like this year's Grand Slam.


nobody likes a sore loser:)

Wilkinson is only as good as the forwards in front of him. He is a brilliant place kicker but without the likes of Johnson, Dallaglio, Hill and back in front of him, we saw today he is an average player in open play.

  • 86.
  • At 11:02 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • adrian wrote:

as an englishman, i congratulate ireland on their magnificent display and on that form even nz would find it difficult against them. i would personally like to compliment the irish fans for their reception and respect shown to our boys during the national anthem. i will be supporting ye during the world cup. well done ireland!

  • 87.
  • At 11:04 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Bruce - Queensland Aussie wrote:

Great win again over the proms Ireland, you guys are entering a new era in International Rugby and every success to you.
Having beat the Australians and South Africans, also not looking anyway out of depth against the All-Blacks the writting was On The Wall for England. I don't think the English forwards could have done anything on the day even if they had trained with the Irish pack and coaches for the week!!! England was just not up to it, extreme sad to see such a rapid decline in the English standard of play.

Croke Park looks like the Best Ground in that part of the world

  • 88.
  • At 11:13 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • john Palmer wrote:

What's happened Honest Tim? You were going to win?

  • 89.
  • At 11:15 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • john Palmer wrote:

What's happened Honest Tim? You were going to win?

  • 90.
  • At 11:22 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • brian wrote:

Massive congratulations to ireland.
It is difficult to imagine the pressure that the Irish team were under today. To display such determination on such a (world) stage is a remarkable advert for the game.
I also have to congratulate the entire match crowd, the restraint and support that they displayed was amazzing.

  • 91.
  • At 11:34 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • GirveTheSwerve wrote:

Agree with most of those ratings, but I do believe that Girven Dempsey produced a particularly excellent fullback display, thoroughly making a fool of me as I had been wearing my throat dry telling mates that it should have been Geordan Murphy in there today.

As an aside, although I am thoroughly proud of what was a thunderous Irish performance, it still worries me that we have failed to beat Les Bleus in 5 matches now. The WC final might just be a step too far.

Let's hope not.

  • 92.
  • At 11:35 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • nearo wrote:

Just a note note to the 91热爆; The coverage of both games at Croke
Park has been amazing. I have watched many a gaelic game with RTE over the years. But it has taken the 91热爆 to show it off in its full beauty. Well done
A great day for both nations

  • 93.
  • At 11:37 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Leo wrote:

I feel so proud to be an irishman today. There was no trouble and what a match! Ireland even dominated in the scrums (our achilles's heel). I think if we play like this we can give any team a good game and have the potential to win the world cup.

Before this match i thought O'Gara was an average out half but after seeing his maestro performance i would say he is definetely the second best, if not the best( Carter has never really had to play on the backfoot cause of the team around him) out-half in world rugby. Wilkinson i thought had a good game though he just lacked a bit of creativity and control in attack.

As for Farrell he is a solid player and smart no doubt but at Test level you need to be able to make breaks which he can't. I think England should consider Ollie Smith at 13 because a couple of years ago he outplayed O'Drisscoll against Leinster and is a genuine threat with pace.

I think Horgan and Leamy did not deserve their low marks they were both contenders for man of the match in my opinion particularly Leamy. I thought the new guys Morgan and Strettle did very well considering the pressure they had to deal with.

  • 94.
  • At 11:37 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Kate wrote:

Can i just say the ref was a total waste of time today, harsh on both teams and then ridiculously not noticing things again on both sides, i mean binding on the arm in the scrum, how can you not see that if your standing in front of them and watching out for it?????specsavers anyone?.
However that is no excuse and I think Englands whole way of thinking is still at that world cup in 2003.
We need to update the side and bring our attitudes up to the modern day. Most other teams have got over 2003, and have modernised. As much as ill always support England, changes seriously need to be made. It was bad luck that our first 2 6nations matches were against, lets say less competitive sides( at the time, I thought Italy were better today, not kicking the damn ball every 3 seconds), if we'd started against France or Ireland we would of had our heads in the game and might of pulled something out of the bag, instead of struggling.
All credit to Ireland though, they were most definately the better team, and deserved their win.
Also Brian Moore is not half as bad as Keith Wood, god i wish we could just watcha game of rugby without silly comments.


My advice is change the total front row, bring back Matt Stevens when hes fit, we need better, fresher players.

  • 95.
  • At 11:44 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • sam wrote:

i rekon poeople are waking up to how bad a player grewcock is. fine he might be able to do a second rows job but he is a nut case and shudnt be anywer near a national team. he is seen as an inforcer but any good enforcer dusnt get caught. dunno wot deacon does, farrel is a big lad....

  • 96.
  • At 11:46 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • Jeremy Wilson wrote:

Although Farrell didn't have a particualrly good game he was far from being the worst England player. He seems to be being picked on as an easy target by some ignorant commentators. The forwards as a whole were poor, England's kicking was dreadful and Tindall continues to be a waste of space.

  • 97.
  • At 11:47 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • collie21 wrote:

You know what? I had friends text me from home saying the margin wasn't big enough. Their comments had nout to do with Rugby but plenty to do with the crap that came from people saying the Irish had choked, or were crap or whatever. I don't think we will win the WC but I know the meaning of choke. It is not what happened against the French, it's what happened in the English game against the Irish. They were awful. The English got punished by an overated Irish side because the English played terribly. The Irish played well. World Champions my arse. We beat you straight after, we beat you today and we will beat you again in the WC. Does it stick in your throat? Choke park for ever.

  • 98.
  • At 11:49 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • whambamtha... wrote:


anyone heard from honest tim?

  • 99.
  • At 11:51 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:

come on ireland!!!!!!well done,well deserved result!!!for the recent messages about englands performance you shouldnt be so hard on england,they have just come out of the worst proformances ever recorded in the nation,they are still yet to learn the ways of modern international rugby but with ashton it will be a faster proccess.i beleive the problem with their recent games is that they will just give a young player 1 cap and put them under tremendious amount of pressure to proform.what i beleive they should do is to stick with strettle and morgan for their starting line up and to develope them so they can go onto be world class player because they have it in them but just a lack of experience.also dont depend on the players to proform,depend on the team.
i am an irish fan and i would just like to say that both english and irish fans and players today showed great sportsman ship and i will hope to see a greater relationship come between ireland and england after todays game.
lorcan

  • 100.
  • At 11:53 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • sam wrote:

i rekon poeople are waking up to how bad a player grewcock is. fine he might be able to do a second rows job but he is a nut case and shudnt be anywer near a national team. he is seen as an inforcer but any good enforcer dusnt get caught. dunno wot deacon does, farrel is a big lad....

  • 101.
  • At 11:58 PM on 24 Feb 2007,
  • ross wrote:

i think we've just seen how behind england are!!!

while i think (maybe hope) they can still have a successfull world cup they need to sort many things out.

the forwards, who are we kidding yes many play well in the premiership but since austraila in the AI's wat 2 year ago when have they lived up 2 there bill, i think many are there on reputation. vickery esp looked off the pace

  • 102.
  • At 12:02 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • eoin wrote:

Contrary to what kate has said I think the ref was very fair throughout. It must be that age old case of blaming the referee for your own inadequacies. Some English bitterness perhaps.

  • 103.
  • At 12:04 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • joe wrote:

Don't be harsh on the English. They ran into a far superior side. When Wales lose to the All Blacks, everyone "expects" it. When Argentina loses to the Wallabies, everyone "expects" it. Every team in both the nothern and southern hemispheres should start "expecting" to lose to this Irish side. That's the reality. I said this before. The All Blacks are the measure of rugby superiority. Right now, which team would they least like to face on a French pitch?

This Irish side is special. Like it or not.

  • 104.
  • At 12:08 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Andrew K wrote:

Irishman agreeing that Keith Wood a dull commenter. Philip Matthews infinitely more interesting.

  • 105.
  • At 12:09 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Duella Pause wrote:

What a great tribute to Ireland that the crowd was its usual self, passion and dignity overiding any nonsense the press had hyped all week.
Wonderful for them that their team played England off the park. England wont want to go back to the Croke for one historical reason 43-13. I wish the front 5 hadn't bothered to go there today, they damaged the grass! As for the next 3 only Worsley looked like a rugby player until Rees came on.
To make a comment on the attacking skills of the girls in the backs would be wasteful, they just didnt get ball of quality and if they did any back row support arrived a long after Wallace Easterby and co. From a defensive perspective they were in all kinds of trouble and thats worrying. Because they will be doing a lot more of it. England can foret victory against France but Wales will be a stern test, they have shown enough to say that they have a game in their somewhere and thats probably enough to beat England on this showing.
Ireland should go on to do well in the World Cup and with France they pose the best the world has to offer against the All Blacks

  • 106.
  • At 12:10 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Enda wrote:

I would thank the English team for a sporting game, hard but fair im sure you'd agree, their fans were exemplorary also.

Makes the game against France even more painful, England were domiated physically today more than anything else.

I was wrong on most of my earlier comments about this Irish team(C'mon hands up!, im not the only doubter) we have a good team, although we are not World Cup contenders by any crazy stretch of the imagination.

  • 107.
  • At 12:11 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Kia Rose wrote:

Well I enjoyed the match - especially as I am Irish.

Have come away from all three 6N matches saying how good John Hayes was. This is not family bias (he comes from Bruff which is v. close to my dad's home town). But before this season I really didn't rate him.

Always knew the back row were real terriers - of the pit bull variety! But before the tournament started EVERYONE said Ireland would be v. good shame they had no decent front row. Well that not very decent front row looks pretty damn good compared to a lot of what else is on show.

ROG - do you remember when he missed that last minute penalty in the HC Final a few years ago. He bottled that. He also grew up that day. He has become a very good sound reliable o-h since. His place kicking is great, his touch kicking is better than most and he has learnt how to boss a game. That was probably the most valuable penalty kick ever missed.

Stringer v Boss - it's a difficult one to call, but in WC year, every team needs plenty of cover and this is a level of cover many coaches would be happy with.

Dempsey - much safer than Murphy, but I was disappointed Murphy was not in the squad for today, great impact player, GM, but England were so poor he wasn't needed.

Sorry England, it really is back to the drawing board. Should have been done three and a half years ago. Now is too late for this year. But it beggars belief that with the number of registered players in the country that after a drubbing like today the coach says that none of the fifteen played up to international standard.

The WC will be very difficult for Ireland - look at the draw, in the same group as France and Argentina, second place to play prob NZ, therefore MUST win group.

On the other hand, first half against Aus. in the autumn was awesome. And the displays they put together against NZ in the summer were very impressive, enough I should think to make NZ take them seriously in a competition where NZ have not performed to potential.

Watched France against Wales - v dull second half, yawn. But what has Laporte done to Gallic flair? He has coached it out of them imo. Real shame for neutrals watching France. Also really dangerous, so much easier to play against the plan than the flair.

Well done Italy - so pleased for you all. Wales propping up the table! Who would have thought it a few weeks ago?

Three w/es gone and the best matches have involved Ireland. Says something.

Website said 81,600 in Croker today. Where were the other 700? Reliably informed tickets going for 1500euro each today. But today was a good day for Ireland, not just the win or the manner in which it was done, but for the behaviour of the crowd during GSTQ. All we need now is to get a Thomond style silence for the place kicks - too much noise during those.

  • 108.
  • At 12:19 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Dave wrote:

i think people are missing the point on Moore, isn't he at least supposed to be impartial as the co-commentator?

Keith Wood is in the studio with Guscot giving the English point of view and is there to be asked for the Irish opinion. Moore is totally biased in every single game I have ever seen. Usually he calls everything for england and when he is wrong says 'oh, it's a mans game' or something similar, it's a farce having him on the team for the 91热爆.

He is completely unable to be anything but a fan with a mike and not even a decent fan like a lot of the people posting above.

  • 109.
  • At 12:23 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • colin wrote:

Well done ireland, makes last weeks performance all the more fustrating though! England were very poor today but it was a game ireland were always going to win. some of the comments about rog and jw are been made with the heart rather than the head i feel. the two no. tens are completely different in their styles of rugby, but both outstanding in their own right. the biggest difference is jw poses more of a treat taking on defenders and tackles miles better than rog. but rog is a much better play maker simple as that. wouldnt tade him for any one(well ok cater). houdini at no. ten for england today wouldnt have affected the result. ps on elbow incident shrettle was commiting a professional foul blocking horgans path, and so deserved a little "direction". comon england and sort your shit out and do a job on france for us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

  • 110.
  • At 12:23 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • jim wrote:

i fairness to the english, no team that they put out there today would have won that match. john hayes' tears during the anthems spoke volumes for what this occasion meant to ireland as a nation. nothing could have beaten such raw emotion.

  • 111.
  • At 12:27 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Richard W wrote:

A thoroughly enjoyable game of rugby, spoilt only by one Englishman - Brian Moore!

  • 112.
  • At 12:28 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Mark wrote:

What sets Ireland apart is that they play with the equivalent of 5 back-row forwards... Wallace, Easterby and Leamy were outstanding but D'Arcy and O'Driscoll continue to demonstrate the impact centres can have when they are quick in at the breakdown. Beautiful to watch such all-round players in action.

  • 113.
  • At 12:31 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • squib wrote:

simon (comment 40), france will murder ireland....did you even watch the france - ireland match? fair enough ireland underperformed but the passion was there and france stole the game in the last minute... now in perspective, ireland murdered england and deserved to win by 30 points they so soundly beat them by... and you think art is an idiot?!

  • 114.
  • At 12:32 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • londonwelsh89 wrote:

Well done Ireland today on a deserved win; payback for the times that england have done the reverse to you! I personally feel ireland are going very strong and will be semi-finalists at least at the world cup assuming they win their group; if they dont they get the ABs in the 1/4s! However I still feel that england were quite hard done by some of the refereeing at the scrums: every time england got into the irish half they usually knocked on or made a mistake, resulting in scrums. John Hayes was like a Jack in the Box: he popped up and collapsed at virtually every scrum, and the ref usually gave this AGAINST the english. The resulting penalties could have made the game very different. Horgan was very lucky stay on the field and not get a straight red for his altercation on Strettle. However, apart from these, Ireland convincingly played england off the park, and proved what many of us have suspected for a while-that JW is 1-dimensional and only good behind a dominant pack! Certainly O'gara played much better than him. Wales couldn't give you the result you needed, but at least they played a lot better! And scotland were just comical...France still to take the slam, ireland 2nd, england 3rd, wales 4th, italy 5th, scotland 6th is my final prediction, with the bottom three on points difference. Ireland still need to actually win something other than a triple crown though to be reckoned real world-beaters, especially since this group have been together so long. Lets just hope they stay lucky with injuries and the core of the team stays intact, because the replacements are nothing on the 1st team

  • 115.
  • At 12:33 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Joel wrote:

Farrell had a solid game and made an overall positive contibution. Wilko and Tindall did little to set the world shaking bt are avoiding any flack! Faz is a very promising part of England's world cup defence, and needs more support. Ireland's dominance in the loose forwards was the difference today. They played exceptionally!

Look, JWs good but he's no Dan Carter and as an Ulster and Ireland supporter i can admit that, namely because Dan Carter is in a league of his own. It's true that ROG had a good game due mainly to his forwards, but he did play well. JW may be good too, but he's not that good! it is a team game of 15 players and if England are depending on him then no wonder they got destroyed.

Rugby games are one and lost in the forwards and the backs decide by how much and this was evident today. The bigger English pack where bullied about the pitch by a great irish pack! However, i dont see why Easterby is getting so much credit as he didnt do much and shouldnt have been starting in the first place! Neil Best should be on instead of him easily, but obviously Eddie O'Sullivan doesn't watch Ulster games as last Friday night he was absolutely amazing! Man of the match twice in the Autumn but he doesnt get to play now? Someone please explain!!!

If it wasnt for that slip up last week Ireland would have the Grandslam in the bag! Think we have a good shot for second in the world cup and at the moment England are struggling to get out of the group stages!!!

P.S The Ulster players from Northern Ireland have to put up with a foreign national anthem every irish game, get over it!

  • 117.
  • At 12:36 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • sam daniels wrote:

england can still win the six nations, but today was a big wake up call to Ashton, and just reminds us all how far off the 2003 world cup team we still are. england need to sure up there forward play and carry the ball better

  • 118.
  • At 12:44 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • JOHN O wrote:

So it鈥檚 one thing to get beat, it鈥檚 another to get beaten up. Congrats to Ireland on a fabulous performance, we can take nothing away from them. England鈥檚 performance however, is another matter. Surely we have to ask how the fundamentals have changed so quickly, with the history involved at this venue, England were in for a nightmare before they left the changing room and yet they didn鈥檛 seem prepared!! Yes every team gives up big plays & oppositions will always score but, what happens next is the key ingredient. Remember when鈥here is the unity, the team huddle, who is calling the side together and marshalling the troops, who leads by example and commands respect, today no one. 15 men standing under the posts looking lost? Was it that many years ago that Martin Johnson horrified the Irish by deliberately taking the wrong end of the pitch and then some? So, we鈥檝e changed coaches and brought in trainers鈥ast time I checked they didn鈥檛 play on Saturdays. Isn鈥檛 it obvious, this isn鈥檛 rocket science; the game is won on the field and I鈥檓 sorry if I am old school, but the fundamentals are the fundamentals and today the England team looked timid, insecure and in need of leadership. On field leadership. Oh brother where art thou?

  • 119.
  • At 12:46 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Dan wrote:

Well you can't rely on the Welsh for anything. They had their chance against France and failed to do the job properly.

What hope now of England beating the French? I'll certainly be cheering you on.

Thank goodness that the world is finally waking up the sorry state of rugby commentary when the deplorable duo (the Brian and Eddie show) are on air. Bring back some realism. If you get the chance to hear the 91热爆 commentary again, listen out for Brian Moore just as Issac Boss makes his intercept. Professional? Unbiased?

Congratulations to Ireland, now bring on the the Scots and Italians!

Come on England, you can take the French!

  • 120.
  • At 12:52 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • LJ wrote:

Firstly, well done to ireland for an outstanding display of rugby. A thoroughly deserved win.
Ashton is still trying to weed out the weaknesses in the team. The potential of a good team is there but needs to be developed. The main weakness is the english pack. Vickery and worsley are the two world class players that appeared in todays pack. The rest are near to useless at international rugby. Todays performance shows that we need thompson back for the line-outs, andrew sheridan for the scrums. We also need a decent second row and no 8.
Farrall is still new to ru and has done extremely well in the transition. I agree with the switch to stand-off but he should definately be kept in the team.
People are too harsh on ashton. He has had 3 games as coach, all in the six nations, and should not be expected to automatically turn to fortunes around. There should not have been much expectation after the autumn internationals yet people moan for something that takes time.

  • 121.
  • At 12:53 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • David wrote:

Thought Ellis did o.k. considering he was playing behind a well beaten pack. Strettle was the only positive, he certainly provides a spark and I hope he keeps his place v France.

Vickery doesn't look fit to me and is only getting in the side as Ashton rushed him back as captain.
Freshwater and Chuter have got to go. Would also like to see Rees in the back row for the next game.

Farrel/Tindall combo isn't working either, Tait or Allen must be considered for France.

Well played Ireland, a well deserved victory.

  • 122.
  • At 12:55 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Bwalker wrote:

''I'm afraid. France, NZ and South Africa will murder you''

simon commenting on ireland.
new zealand are the only team soundly able to beat anybody.france did not convincingly beat ireland it was dead even til the end without brian o driscoll & stringer its a big difference.if u hav drico and darcy together its a different story and they wud of beaten france.as for south africa and australia , they were beaten by ireland well a few months back

  • 123.
  • At 12:56 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Bwalker wrote:

''I'm afraid. France, NZ and South Africa will murder you''

simon commenting on ireland.
new zealand are the only team soundly able to beat anybody.france did not convincingly beat ireland it was dead even til the end without brian o driscoll & stringer its a big difference.if u hav drico and darcy together its a different story and they wud of beaten france.as for south africa and australia , they were beaten by ireland well a few months back

  • 124.
  • At 01:03 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Steve P wrote:

Comment No.7 about Farrell being better than Guscott!! What are you on? It's time you borrowed someones videos (as you obviously have not seen Guscott play, EVER.) and take a look at what Jerry Guscott was like as a player. Having said that, I bet Guscott would do a better job today than Farrell. Good grief!

  • 125.
  • At 01:16 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Guy Carpenter wrote:

Ireland - total respect and bloody well played . Dear ed2003 scotland probably thought the odd handling error wasn't the end of the world! Also hope i'm not alone in thinking the 91热爆 late night coverage of Scotland V Italy was short to the point of ill mannered! Italy won their 1st away game (sorry scotland ) but it deserved more than a " it happened " entry .

  • 126.
  • At 01:27 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • PATRICK wrote:

i just thought ireland were better all over the field on the day.
o'gara at last seems to have the
mental strength for the big occasion,
but lets not get carried away just yet. we didn't play too well against
the welsh and they weren't at the races in the first half against the french.so its difficult to judge how good ireland really are. historically
we,ve been a nation of underdogs. ready to except defeat and suprised
when we win. so what they need to take them to semi finals of the world cup is arrogance which nations like the germans english and americans have in abundance.they don't hope to win they expect to win.so come on ireland start to believe you can win your next two
games against scotland and italy
as the advert goes believe !!
as for england they need to make themselves horrible to play against.thats why all the celtic nations feared and respected them down the years.

  • 127.
  • At 01:37 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Ruairi wrote:

Lucky it was raining;. would have been twice as many in the dry. darce and Bod would have scored a rake each.

england were lucky to get off so lightly.

  • 128.
  • At 01:43 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Abu wrote:

To Goodie. Give it ten year and it wont be a foriegn anthem for you.

  • 129.
  • At 01:44 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • David C wrote:

Better team won - no question. Ireland played better but they also played the ref better - reminiscent of England 4 years ago (Wallace and Easterby are nearly the equal of Back and Hill in the dark arts and that is high praise indeed from an englishman). What do England do? Recall Olly Barkley at 12, start Lewsey at 15 and recall Cohen on the wing. Look how effective Lamont and Horgan have been to see the impact Cohen could have!
The no9 jersey is still a big worry for England and I would start Perry next time out. As for the forwards, Stevens must come in as soon as he is fit and Palmer and Chris Jones need to play at Lock. I would also suggest (with great reluctance as Corry works so hard for his country) that Worsley plays at 8 with Lund at 6 and Rees at 7.

  • 130.
  • At 01:51 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Connal wrote:

I think that today Engand fans have been very decent about the Irish effort today - it was quite a heave. But Irish rugby plays some great stuff when their at it. I do remember some cretin on here last week though saying Ireland were lucky to win last year - they weren't and today confirms the superiority - David Wallace is the constant great in the Irish side

  • 131.
  • At 02:00 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Richie wrote:

''But well played Ireland, far better team on the day..however you wont get near the world cup I'm afraid. France, NZ and South Africa will murder you.''

Ye like SA murdered us in the Autumn. And like France did 2 weeks ago. Scored a last minute try, hardly murdered us. And if I recall we ran NZ pretty close over the summer. Probably the best game they've had in a while.

  • 132.
  • At 02:02 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Derek Fallon wrote:

Having been at the game all I can say is England were toatlly out-psyched by the Irish public respecting the english anthem and also a long standing ovation for the english team running out onto the pitch. The Irish public wanted its team to do its talking on the pitch and how they did that. Just an awesome display. So utterly proud to be Irish for lots of reasons today.

  • 133.
  • At 02:03 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • fonda cox wrote:


what if the irish pack were to strangle new zealand like that - would carter get as much quick ball? as all the english fans have quipped in dear jonny's defence; an out-half can only be effective as the forwards allow him to be...

  • 134.
  • At 02:32 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Tosh wrote:

team for france

15 - robinson (if fit, ceuto if not)
14 - strettle
13 - lewsey
12 - catt/barkley
11 - cohen
10 - wilkinson
9 - ellis

1 - white
2 - mears
3 - vickery
4 - jones
5 - grewcock
6 - worseley
7 - moody
8 - hill

dont really care about subs, so long as there is no tindall or farrell

  • 135.
  • At 02:57 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • John Ackerley wrote:

Very well done to Ireland, what a great atmosphere and a superb advertisement for Rugby Football and the passion that a game such as this can create. Big respect for the whole crowd in the way that the anthem was respected and I hope that you can now go on and win the Championship, such a shame that BOD was not available for the French game!! I am actually an Englishman and an England fan but sometimes you have to admit that you have been stuffed by a far superior team and that was the case in point today. It seems that far too many of Brian Ashton's selections have not come off as there are several players who were out there today in an England shirt who are either not ready for international Rugby Union or are simply going through the motions. Harsh, maybe, but the reality is that we now need to be building towards the World Cup in 2011 and can forget France in autumn for any success other than possible QF.

  • 136.
  • At 03:07 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Luke Swan wrote:

England is a disgrace to the jursey. I''m a big bath fan but after danny crewcock got himself sent off AGAIN! I don't think he should ever play for England again he's a disgrace to all of England. I used to say "give him a chance" and "it's his hard style of play" but he might of well have give Ireland there first two tries.

The whole England pack was poor from start to finish. As for the back line, apart from strette,
(who to, I doubted his abiity to play international rugby I apologize he had a good game) was out ran and over powered.

I love rugby and I love England Rugby more but tonight I am not to happy to be an Enlgand supporter.

I recored the game because I was working but I was so disgraced by Englands performance I deicided to hit the pub after the 60th minute mark (horgans try)

1. Freshwater- Got Bitched in the scrum and never turned up in the loose. 3

2. Chuter- Not much he could do apart from Throw the lineouts as best as he could (apart from martin Johnson MR 2 covering them!) 4

3. Victery got away with alot that the ref did not spot and was quite franly lucky he did 4

4. As I said earlier grewcock is a disgrace- 0

5. Deacon did not do to badldy but needs to shrapen up his line out. 6

6. Worsely again showed he cannot repeat his club form at internatioal level. 6

7. Lund- put in a stupid tackle which he should of been sent of for. 5

8. Corry did ok apart from having to fill grewcocks place. 6

9. Elis was arguealbe England best player always willing to try the gap and ask questions of the Irish. 8

10. Limited by the lack of possesion and still not the Wilkinson of old. 7

11. Strettle was rather good considering it was his fisrst game good try. 7

12. Farrell kicked when he should of past and visa via. 6

13. Tindell showed a good rush defence but not to much attacking skill. 7

14. Lewsey did not do much but defend (lack of possion or a drop in form?) 6

15. Ollie morgaqn was quite good till he injuried himself. 7

It would take me too long to go on about the subs or the Irish team

I feel sick to call myself a English rugby fan after that and I don't care what anyother blogger thinks England were a disgrace.

  • 137.
  • At 03:11 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Benjamin wrote:

Realistically, respect for the English anthem is the bare minimum I would expect (and reciprocally provide for the opposition 鈥 HQ is always silent for both 鈥楾he Soldiers Song' and 鈥楩lower of Scotland鈥) from a knowledgeable Irish rugby crowd but what has that go to do with the 21st century?

In rugby terms, how Stringer stays on the pitch is beyond me but the majority of the Irish team played very well today. Well done.

  • 138.
  • At 03:25 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Colin Hickey wrote:

One simple thing gave Ireland the win. The Irish forwards dominated their opposition in all areas not just the lineout. Without forwards getting stuck in for the hard yards and cycling the ball back quickly the English backs could do nothing.
The one time England did do this Strettle scored. The difference was that it was the only time the English forwards really played.
I think the England front eight need a real shake up, Worsley and Rees being the only two England forwards I thought anything good of.

To your debate on Johnny, simply put he's the best sniping place kicker around. If you give away a penalty inside his range it's normally the same as giving England 3 points. Don't be too hard on the guy he's just got back in the squad.

The rest of the backs can't really be spoken of as they weren't in the game. Sure they get most of the points on the board but today was a study in why you have to have strong forwards.
You can be the best back row in the game if you don't get the ball you're next to useless, whether you come from league or a union background.

As to Ireland winning the world cup this summer, I think we're close to the form we need to be on, but I think not close enough. If we had treated the French to the same dish we fed England then maybe we could be more confident of that dream coming true.

  • 139.
  • At 03:59 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Johnny Clash wrote:

Stop moaning about the Irish pack making Ronan OG look good. This is rugby. Forward dominance is crucial. Very few no. 10s can play off a bad platform - Jonathan Davies was one. Look at how Robert Jones performed in the 1989 Lions, given a decent pack at last.

England had an astonishing pack up to 2003, which obviously made their backs' lives easier. Doesn't mean Wilkinson was over-rated, does it?

Anyway, now you're in your post-golden years phase, perhaps you understand how us Welsh fans feel!

At last, common ground.

  • 140.
  • At 04:02 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Willybach wrote:

Great performance from the Irish...

Ireland, surely have one of the most balanced, dynamic back rows in world rugby at present. O'Gara's definitely in the top 3 flyhalves...the centre partnership has gotta be right up there too, D'arcy has been a thorn in every side hes come up against this season. O'Connell was Irelands Jonhson today, immense presence. The hooker Best and the second rows combined well in the lineouts..if you had to nit-pick the irish selections at present, youd have to say that perhaps Boss is a better player than Stringer...

England...well, where to begin? I dunno, and im Welsh so perhaps take my opinions on the matter with a pinch of salt...but the English pack is in SERIOUS trouble (hows that for obvious statement of the year?) and lets not overlook the ages of these guys...they have to be replaced sooner rather than later...i think Grewcock is 32, Vickery plays like a 42 year-old, good player in his day but injury has ravaged him. Corry is 32 maybe older. We keep hearing about youngsters who should be getting picked for england, and recently Ollie Morgan and that Strettle (sp?) have proved that they can hack it with the big boys...so maybe its time to bight the bullet, get thumped a few more times with a young developing squad rather than recalling players who have had their best days.

  • 141.
  • At 04:04 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Blind Bob wrote:

Wales to win WC

  • 142.
  • At 04:31 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Joe wrote:

Ireland-23 France-18

The score of the group game.

Ireland-19 New Zealand-18

The score of the final.


  • 143.
  • At 04:39 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Joe wrote:

Willybach

Are you kidding me? Stringer's game was sublime. He's superb for that backline. Immdiate Ball! No messin' involved! O'Gara and O'Driscoll are the heads of this Hydra. Let the All Blacks try to chop off one or the other while the little man serves up perfect ball.

  • 144.
  • At 04:42 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • el craic wrote:

Yes Indeed...As EOS spoke about his out-half being as good as anything around? oh and God forbid that jonny might get his shirt dirty. To think there was a post here yesterday doubting our No.10. All you cynics and you mimics wasting all our precious time. Nice one Ronan!

  • 145.
  • At 04:53 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Pedrito wrote:

First of all, absolutely delighted by Ireland's performance today. They played with passion, commitment and focus and were rewarded for their efforts. If only we had played this way against France two weeks ago.

Secondly, let us not get carried away and start predicting a WC final appearance. Stay confident and focussed and take it one game at a time.

Third, to the many English fans who are acknowledging the Irish performance, thank you. To those English fans who blame the referee or whatever else...as someone else said, no one likes a sore loser. Give credit where credit is due. You were beaten by the better team on the day.

Finally, I believe Ireland can compete with any team in the NH, including the France. The last two years have basically seen the Irish beat themselves. We have shown that we can compete with them, now we just need to prove it where and when it counts in the RWC.

  • 146.
  • At 05:02 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • gareth wrote:

England didn't play well but the critism of Wilkinson, Farrell and Tindall is unfair. The forwards were awful and didn't provide the backs with a platform. Lewsey had another poor game and should be dropped for a Robinson/ Strettle combination.

  • 147.
  • At 05:04 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Dubian wrote:

As an Irishman living abroad I have never felt as proud as I did yesterday when I watched the match in Croke Park. What an advertisement for sport in Ireland. I am a passionate Irish rugby supporter (flew home to Dublin 2 weeks ago to be at the France match and will be flying to Edinburgh in less than 2 weeks' time to hopefully see the lads win the Triple Crown) and the hairs were standing on the back of my neck when the national anthems were being played. However, one thing I noticed here in Dubai was when God Save the Queen was being belted out by the Irish Army Band not one English supporter stood up in respect. Totally different story when our anthems were being belted out. And to see the passion in John Hayes, well it set the tone. The sense of inevitability was there.

I think the most rounded and reflective comment posted so far from an Irish point is Kia Rosa's - we are at best a RWC semi final team at this moment. Remember we have to beat Argentina AND France to win our group. Second place and we have NZ in Cardiff (providing of course Scotland can do us a favour?!?!?). Let's not get carried away with all this talk of the RWC - we haven't even won the Triple Crown yet and the elusive GS has slipped us by for another year. Once we have a few of them under our belt then I think we can start comparing ourselves on a consistent basis with the Southern Hemisphere teams (and France). We remain the second best team in the Northern Hemisphere and we will have to overcome huge obstacles and physcological issues (i.e. NZ) to progress past the QF stage in this competition.

However all that aside, let's all deservedly bask in the glory of a comprehensive victory - I was at the drubbing we received in 2003 (GS decider) so it was nice to be on the other end this time. Martin Johnston had some very decent things to say about our progress recently in The Times (compared us to where they were after that match) - let's hope he is right but let's finish one job first and not dwell too much on the next.

Well done lads - another very proud night being an Irishman abroad.

  • 148.
  • At 05:09 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Tony McNamara wrote:

I listened to the radio broadcast via the web, and extend congratulations and thanks for a coverage that was superb, truly almost like being there in person, and and as an Irish epxat so appreciated here in Perth Australia.
I know that on the day Ireland were totally dominant but really I don't think England players are as poor as perhaps they are being painted. Tactics need to be changed, players need to be allowed to express their individual flair; perhaps a little less coaching and a little more passion.

  • 149.
  • At 05:10 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • paul mc allister wrote:

as ian irish fan i was quite surpirsed at the lack of heart england played with. i was expecting a good game close came with ireland to just come out on top, but was not expecting the drubing that ireland handed out. i have been unimpressed with farrell so far after so much was made about his switching of codes while in reality he has been poor in all englands games. if england play like this in the world cup then they have no hope in retaining their crown and it will be with out a dout the most embarising title defence ever.

  • 150.
  • At 05:18 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • jcintokyo wrote:

I agree with Tim Kelly - also think Hickie and Horgan deserve 8 too.

What a match! The emotion during the anthems, the passion and ruthlessness of the Irish players (ok so Shaggy's elbow went flailing but can someone explain to me when it became ok to tackle someone in mid air?!!?)

I never thought we'd put 40 over on anyone, especially in such miserable conditions! I'm glad it was yesterday - absolutely fitting! And fair play to the supporters too - there wasn't a dry eye in Croker or in Paddy Foley's in Tokyo!

C'mon Ireland for the championship (c'mon England, let's see a backlash against France!!!)

  • 151.
  • At 05:33 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • James wrote:

The ratings on the Irish team were harsh. The ratings on the English team were generous. I'm disappointed the English lost, but given the fact my mothers Irish this occasion turned out well. I'm sure the Irish wish that they played France with the same intensity, because they surely would have won. Regardless of whether Ireland win the 6N, I'm sure they're World Cup contenders. This was just an emotive occasion from my point of view, one that was respectful and brief, but it's gone now, and the better team one on the day. England were outclassed. You just can't argue with that scoreline!

One thing I do have a problem with, is English saying that they're almost "suprised" the Irish could handle such an occasion. As if the Irish can't respect foreign customs, or a foreign anthem (which ultimately GSTQ is). Considering the occasion, you'd have thought the English would be less patronising. Regardless of that though, I consider it a massive part of a healing process. Not that anything will take away from the fact the Irish/Scots/Welsh will always want to beat us :P.

I was also never under doubt that the Irish would disrespect GSTQ. There are many ways to protest in a democracy without being insulting.

PS. Anyone or any team who dismisses the Irish will do so at their own peril. This is a quality side, one even the kiwis will be wary of. They play like clockwork when they get their ass in gear. They would have crushed the French had they started with the same intensity they did against England. Regardless of the 6N result, if they work themselves up, they will be a match for any team come the World Cup.

  • 152.
  • At 05:57 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • LL wrote:

Ireland played out of their skins.

Watch out the rest of the world we are bringing the world cup home to Ireland.

  • 153.
  • At 06:11 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • jcintokyo wrote:

Willybach - have to disagreee. Ok so Stringer with tired legs might not have made that run but he certainly would have seen the opportunity. And the tackles he put in, my particular favourite being his ankle tap! (I have fond memories of one of those stopping Robinson a couple of years back!) He also kept Ellis quiet.

He punches above his weight all the time and he's worth 3 times his weight on the pitch! Do you ever wonder why he always stands between O'Connell and O'Callaghan for the anthems? It's to make himself look even smaller so he won't be noticed for the threat he is!!!

  • 154.
  • At 06:13 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Dr Adrien Youell wrote:

England seemed to have feet and brains of lead. The Irish passed balls out the line from scrum and lineout. Whenever an Englishman got the ball an Irishman was slap in front of him and when the English kicked they consistently found an Irish player - not a white shirt.

I cannot help feeling the Irish were intelligent. The English team did not play as a team or certainly not international rugby. The crowd were not threatening, that was not the reason.

  • 155.
  • At 06:20 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • tom wrote:

I'm not an avid rugby fan, but I reckon this first real test of the 'Ashton Era' revival has shown just how much work he has left to do! Back in contention for the RWC...? Ha Ha Ha

Well done the Irish! You really kicked that English butt good 'n' hard!

  • 156.
  • At 06:50 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Sean wrote:

YOu can blame Grewcock all you want for getting sin binned, but calls for him to be removed from the team altogether are stupid. He's been the form 2nd row for the past 2 seasons and I can't think of another lock who provides his grit and strength. Deacon needs to go, he's had his chances and has always looked outclassed. Tom Palmer and Alex Brown should be given chances to prove their worth. Lund and Ellis were particularly dissapointing, as was Shaun Perry for the few minutes he was on. Give Pete Richards more game time or at least bring in Paul Hodgson! Richards was one of our best performers on the Australia tour and Hodgson has been consistently outstanding for London Irish. England still need to find a good balance in the back row. One positive that can be taken from the game was David Strettle's performance, hope he gets to start the next game.

  • 157.
  • At 06:53 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Jim wrote:

Best thing about watching the match was Brian Moore having to commentate through it all - not that I mind - just that it was quite funny.

Only pity is that Ireland wanted to wallop England so badly when France was the team to beat in terms of World Cup preparation.

Ireland have the squad but they need to play the bench more and make those final mental steps they still seem to lack to beat the very best.

Beating England is great for the Irish schoolboy inherited mentality -and it showed up the true state of the England team (didn't Farrell make Strettle's try?). But Ireland need to crack on - this is the best team in our lifetime and beating the south sea islanders is the real task? They are good enough but can they do it ?

  • 158.
  • At 06:56 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • sandeno wrote:

I am convinced that Ireland have won the tournament with that display. England will beat the French rotation team at Twickenham and Ireland will take the trophy on points difference.

  • 159.
  • At 07:00 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Bruce wrote:

Ireland are now probably the best NH team and have an even chance of getting ahead of France despite their home advantage. It's just a pity the World Cup draw does not have them seeded through to the semi-finals with France, New Zealand and South Africa or Australia.

England need to accept their forward pack donminance days are done and pick an attacking backline and a younger more mobile forward pack capable of being a functional part of 15 man rugby. This means Allen and Tait as the mid-field combination with a back three capable of using space. Playing a second five too slow to loop and support outside backs is self handicapping madness.

The only team the AB's fear at the moment is Australia. They know how to win.

  • 160.
  • At 07:52 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Larry Ger wrote:

Looking at some of the comments above, I dont think fans realise how good France and Ireland really are.

The French look impecibly mentally and physically prepared. The Irish did not 'lose' to the French because of poor play. The Irish are a darn good side and played damn good rugby... but are just not as good as the French right now.

Its dissapointing that when Ireland have amassed arguably their best team in the sport's history, France has moulded their most professional team in their long legacy.

Heartbreaking still, is that as impressive as both these N. hemisphere sides are, this world cup will see the likings of the best 30-man squad ever to sink their studs on a rugby pitch - the invincible All Blacks!

Seeing Ireland and France working so hard to peak for RWC 2007, only to be flicked aside by the brilliant AB team will be heartbreaking for the players... but by g-d, RWC 2007 will be a spectacle for the fans.

(FYI- I am SAcan and nothing would please me more than to see Ireland pip the AB at the post,...well nothing except seeing a team with a slightly darker shade of green do the very same :)

  • 161.
  • At 08:14 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Will wrote:

Are you Ronan O'Gara's Dad?

  • 162.
  • At 08:16 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Larry Ger wrote:

Brian Moore has come up for a lot of criticsm.

I would hate to think how a detraction of Moore as commentator would detract from my viewing pleasure. Without him and the rest of the colourful team ( Woody, Guscott etc.) it would be a sterile, politely correct, boring disservice to the fans.

As a player, I loved to hate Moore. As a presenter I love to hate his commentry and thoroughly enjoy the lively jibes (many a result of his dogged attitudes) that are launched amongst the commentry team.

I would say Moore is opiniotated and this is unfairly interpretated as bias. He is not arrogant, is intelligent and knowledgable.

full credit to the 91热爆 6-nations team, its compelling, addictive... in a sense... Moore'ish.

  • 163.
  • At 08:21 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • disgruntled Cornishman wrote:

Wake up Les Fisher.

Guscott overrated, a few lucky moments?

Guscott was a sublime natural talent, worth the gate money on his own, who kept me entertained for many years.

Therein lies the rub. He had a natural instinct, he was not an 'analytical' player and on the few occasions he captained Bath he was hopeless. This lack of analysis is not a strength in a pundit.

To sum up; superb player, nice bloke, crap pundit.

  • 164.
  • At 08:37 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • erin wrote:

Did no body else think the Irish were consistently half to three quarters of a metre offside at the break-down?

  • 165.
  • At 08:49 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Bluehaven wrote:

Well said Simon Webber below re the media frenzy on the anthems.

The RFU need to create a club in the Premiership if they want to get the players they want.

Just like the IRFU have done in Munster and Leinster.

Well done Ireland.

  • 166.
  • At 08:53 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • mark lyndon wrote:

An amazing Irish performance such talent and passion. England you were dire.

Fact: England have won the WRC Ireland haven鈥檛.

I don鈥檛 see England retaining their title (not even a blind dog鈥檚 chance) but Ireland could do it. If Ireland fail this year they will have to wait another four years and then England won鈥檛 be the same team they were on Saturday .


  • 167.
  • At 09:10 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • John stopson wrote:

i think england were the better team i know we lost but still we should have won

  • 168.
  • At 09:12 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • v_a wrote:

One of England's problems was their defensive kicking form their own 22.

How often they kicked to areas where their own players being caught offside became inevitable, or straight down the throats of the Irish back 3.

Tait was unlucky as his touch kick from 'outside' the 22 led to the 2nd try; the linesman must have had second thoughts as he gave the lineout inside!

Apart from that we hardly ever went to touch. Was it the weakness of our lineout, or was it the sybolism of firing it into the crowd?

  • 169.
  • At 09:17 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Matt B wrote:

I think many of the pundits have been very harsh in their criticism of Farrell. Yes, he has not had an 'amazing' match yet in international rugby, but how many of the England XV had a good match yesterday? None. Farrell currently has three problems affecting him: firstly he is still not 100% fit and 2 years out from playing has meant he has lost a good deal of pace which he still needs to get back, secondly he did not play enough rugby union before being put onto the international stage, and finally he is playing in the wrong position - here the england management have to be questioned as they appear never to have seen him playing league, or they would realise he never ever played centre, he should instead be played at number 8 (or flanker) as he did for most of his league career (loose forward), or second row or stand-off (fly half) where he also played at times (he even played in the front row, but never further back than stand-off). So my advice is not to make Farrell the scapegoat for an all-round poor performance yesterday (where the 3 worst players were the front row) and instead move him to a position he is better suited.

  • 170.
  • At 09:17 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • John wrote:

All credit to the Irish for great sportmanship during the Anthems and also for silence when JW kicked penalties. Showing that rugby really is a game for gentlemen.
Pure passion drove the Irish to an incredible and deserved victory.
The forwards gave perfect ball for Stringer and the backs = ROG had good time to execute his tricks with the centres, who were as dynamic as predicted, or with the boot. Defense was awesome driving the english back in most of the tackles.

The irish pack also caused trouble for the english pack - they simply couldn麓t secure any decent ball for the backs. This, of course, makes life really hard for the backs as they depend on the extra time good ball gives. The backs couldn麓t do better than they did - they had no time and scrappy ball too!!
The English backs came alive in the second half and did well in the first phase - elaborate set plays from the base did confuse the Irish. After the nice-looking set plays, i thought that England was struggling. They have trouble after the second phase and its a sad sight. It gets real slow and is easily read by the opposition (being hammered back by a fired up defense doesn麓t help).
The irish brought their hearts and minds into this game - the english did not.
It was great to watch a team giving it all !!!
Good show Ireland !!!
The 6Nations is out of reach, im afraid. I dont see England beating France.
I guess there麓s a score to settle with France come RWC pool games - let麓s see.

  • 171.
  • At 09:18 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Mike wrote:

Hi all,

Firstly, congrats to Ireland for a compelling performance - it wasn't unexpected, I think, for those of us in South Africa who have been following the progress of the Ireland and the other N Hem teams. When our "B" team of young, inexperienced fellows managed to beat England at Twickenham some months ago it was obvious their pack was weak - Ireland proved that emphatically last night with their performance. There are a lot of, understandably, bullish comments about Ireland's chances in the WC, but I would advise you look at the situation a bit more objectively please - its not as simple as recent results suggest! Firstly, you're closer to NZ than ever before, but you still don't know how to beat them I'm afraid! As long as Ireland employs a drift defense, it has no chance of beating NZ. That bit of space it gives the NZ backs will effectively seal your fate 9 times out of 10. Your victory over SA "B" in the Autumn is as deceptive a result as you will ever see - a SA team without Bakkies Botha, Victor Matfield, Schalk Burger, Jacque Fourie, Os du Randt and Percy Montgomery is not something you measure yourself against - the only team to beat NZ last year was SA - we know how to do it and believe we can do it every time we step on the field with them. At the end of the day, full strength SA, Ireland and French teams probably stand an even chace of beating each other on any given day, while Aussie lags behind just a bit because of the relative weakness of their pack. NZ obviously hold more cards in their deck than anybody else. But ask any Kiwi who they would least like to face in a WC final or semi-final in France later this year and my guess would be, at the risk of sounding biased, that it would be a home-proud France or their old nemesis South Africa - Ireland wouldn't worry them as much I think. Maybe I'm wrong - any Kiwi's out there like to reply to that?

cheers
Mike

  • 172.
  • At 09:28 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • weathers wrote:

Awful English forwards performance.

Dan Carter would have looked 2nd rate behind that English pack.

That this English pack isn't good enough we know. Sadly, I can't see who Ashton can bring in to change it around. At the risk of sounding like Clive Woodward, England need to pick a squad of young forwards and play them now ahead of the next world cup.

The use of Farrell as the scapegoat is hilarious. It's a team game and going from 9-3 to 23-3 in 10 minutes can't be blamed on 1 former rugby league player.

Time to admit that Ireland have the best rugby players in Britain at the moment. Come on all fellow Englishmen, we can admit it.

  • 173.
  • At 09:31 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Nick wrote:

A thoroughly enjoyable game but why do the rest of the UK have to listen to the likes of Brian Moore. The guy is an embarrassment to your country. He is the rugby equivalent of Ian Wright who provides commentary on international football coverage. Arrogant, totally biased and whose only skill was to provide one sided remarks throughtout the entire game. As somemone mentioned earlier, he is just a fan with a mike....

Next time can we have some neutrality around the commentary? 91热爆 should not assume the entire nation is English.

  • 174.
  • At 09:35 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Kate wrote:

contrary to eoin's comment, contrary to my comment.

I gave Ireland all the credit they deserved, which was a lot, where it was due.Also if you read past the first line, you'll see that i wasn't complimenting England at all, so to say a bitter english fan, is what i call RANDOM. The ref WAS a waste of space, he didn't pick up on Vickery's constant arm binding, or Horan's! And Lund's tackle was appauling, should of bin sent off straight away, and don't even get me started on the offside rule, that was ridiculous.
As i said in my earlier post for England that is no excuse though.

  • 175.
  • At 09:39 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • KJ Frazer wrote:

No hiding place at all... England were not in the same park. I can't think of any 2 England players that gelled in any form today. Ireland were dominant in every position, the back row especially doing what back rows should do...getting after the man and the ball. England were awful.

I agree with comment 77. Martin Corry is just nowhere in the back row. He has no presence at all. You get the feeling that each player is looking to the next to get some bearings and it's all a bit sad.

Strettle showed huge potential. He is unlikely to have had a stiffer test in a 6N game and he took his chances. Farrel may as well have been on the bench and Danny Grewcock's granny should read him the rule book at bedtimes.

If I can pour a teaspoon of scorn on an otherwise convincing Irish victory it has to be that England made Ireland look a whole lot better than they really are in terms of WORLD rugby. Ireland weren't under pressure in any form and not all of that came from their own doing. I still can't work out how England scored that try.

If Ireland can go up another 2 gears then a win over the ABs could be on the cards but that's for another time.

Well played Ireland. An excellent win. Good to see a team play this game properly.

  • 176.
  • At 09:43 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • r0nin wrote:

Not a single comment on the refereeing of the game, which i have to say was excellent why can't we have another 10 referees like him... He let the game ebb and flow and on the whole got all the decisions spot on...

Well done Ireland they played extremely well, this comparison between Wilko & O-Gara are imho completely daft, you've got a world class no.10 who's coming back from a long term injury and is not going to be back to his best for some time, to compare him to ROG who is very one dimensional is not good, let's wait until the World Cup and then we'll see the star quality coming out...

  • 177.
  • At 09:43 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • alec wrote:

England winning the world cup in 2003 was probably the best sporting moment in my life, but with that team you always felt they would win, no, you *knew* they would.
With the current England team you think that maybe they won't lose, until they do.
As Shel Silverstein sang "If nobody's told you, it's time that you knew, It goes from so good to so bad so soon."
But that is not to take anything away from a superb Irish performance, they were excellent, but it's France who will get the Grand slam and it's the All Blacks who will win the World cup.

  • 178.
  • At 09:52 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • therobin wrote:

I watched my second full game of RU yesterday.

Can anyone tell me why Austin Healey at half time highlighted Andy Farrell's play. There were any number of poor areas he could have highlighted. He showed 2 instances were he thought he was found out in defence yet Ireland made no breaks in these instances. I also thought Guscott focussed on him with glee. OUT OF ORDER.

What do you expect from Farrell playing behind that poor pack performance and a poory condition front row. Farrell must have lost 2 stone in weight and looks like what he is, a novice. If England think he is going to be the saviour they will be dissapointed.

  • 179.
  • At 09:53 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • charlie grace wrote:

I agree with most comments that Farrel cant be blamed for his all round game. The forwards where the obvious culprits having lost alot of ball and not able to get dominance over the ireland pack. I think although Corry played really well id like to see worsly at 8 and moody at 6 and we should keep lund. This might not make a huge difference but someone with moodys pace and fitness is a good asset to the English pack.
I think Farrel should be dropped from the team, If you watched the irish team they drifted whenever Farrel got the ball because they realise he's not a threat. Which means who else can play inside? I believe a partnership of Tait and Tindall could be fantastic, people underestimate Tindalls passing and Tait has played well in every game he's come on for England.
I hope Strettle can stay he showed amazing confidence and given a couple more metres he could of killed Horgan. But how much longer will it take England to realise LEWSEY IS A FULLBACK, this leaves room for strettle and robinson.

  • 180.
  • At 09:55 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kieran wrote:

I am an avid GAA supporter and was one of the many against the English anthem being played in Croke park. However i was really proud to be Irish yesterday the way we respected the English anthem, and the hair was standing on the back of my neck watching Jerry Flannery and John Hayes in tears at the start of the game.I still think the English dont realise the significance of the occasion and the pressure on the Irish players to produce a performance to match the occassion.
the ratings are reasonalby accurate maybe a slighty higher rating for Leamy.David Wallace player of the tournment so far?

  • 181.
  • At 09:56 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Daron Jewkes wrote:

very well done to the Irish team and their fans it was vey humbling to hear God save the queen treated with such respect.The Irish will be a force at this world cup and apart from if they play England I will be cheering them to the rafters, but for winners we can look no further than the ABs their forwards are quicker and stronger than most northen hemisphere backs and their backs are quicker still

  • 182.
  • At 10:06 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • joy wrote:

i disagree with strettle's rating, i think he played fantasticly for his debut and deserved at least a 7. He was imaginative and played off the line.

  • 183.
  • At 10:06 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Lee wrote:

Good on you, 127! Glad I read through all....I needed a good chuckle....and I came to you... Stay around!!!

  • 184.
  • At 10:07 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Daniel Jones wrote:

Would be quite interested to find out in Danny Grewcocks international career, how many minutes he has spent on the field!! He is an absoulute liability, England are not good enough with 15 players, let alone 14. Quarter final will be the best they will acheive and lets sit back and enjoy a possible Ireland All Blacks final!

  • 185.
  • At 10:08 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • KjJ Frazer wrote:

If ROG is one of 'the top 3 fly halves in the world' it just proves what a bad state that position is really in.

He had a good kicking game yesterday. Kept his head and slotted them through. Very true.

But what else did he do?

He can't tackle, his passing his average , his general positioning is awful and against a team like England yesterday anything else he did looked far better than it really was. At times the England back three were simply kicking the ball to him. With that much time and space he could do what he liked. What did he do? Kicked it back.

Ireland - to a man - were the better team by a mile yesterday. The pack especially were awesome. They were a joy to watch. As an ex No 7 myself I like to see the loose forwards get across and support their man. I love that aspect of rugby. But ROG... And stringer as well. If Ireland really did have a top 3 fly half they could make more use of some pretty nippy feet and hands in the backs and probably score a lot more tries.

There HAS to be a better no 10 in Ireland.

  • 186.
  • At 10:09 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:

You missed out on one mark:

The Crowd - 10.
I've never seen a international crowd behave with such dignity, given all the hype beforehand. They respectfully stood to God save the Queen and you could have heard a pin drop at Wilkinson's penalties. I have difficulty thinking of anywhere else that would have done that.

Grewcock should actually be a 1. in fact I'd go further and say that the Irish should make a statue of him outside Croke Park, in memory of all England's historicall follies. On this historic day, England were competing before Grewcock did his party trick. Is the man obsessed with yellow?

As a neutral, I think England were better than the score suggests, but Ireland took their chances.

  • 187.
  • At 10:14 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Mike wrote:

This makes very depressing reading, so much ranting and over hyped critical comment from people displaying a very limited perspective of the game and international sport. Surely we should learn from our poor press and avoid snap judgments on players based on one game! There is no doubt that England were beaten by a better team and the forwards were not able to compete. The truth is that this combind with a lack of confidence and belief meant we looked far worse than we were.
There are players who need to be dropped but that is because they have not played well for a number of games. Martin Corry struggles to produce the dynamism of modern number eights and lacks the cunning to make up for it. The two second rows do not contribute enough as ball carries to keep their place. I think Ellis has much to offer but must stop this modern fault of stepping with the ball before passing it, all that happens is that players in the midfield are getting closed down. The two centres are both good players but far to similar, we need a genuine outside centre with some pace and running skills. I thought Strettle looked an interesting prospect with plenty of ideas and a little arrogance, he needs a run in the side to get himself up to speed and intergrated into the team.
So please can we stop this rash condemnation of all players just because they were outplayed on this occasion and also remember that England are rebuilding and settling into a new coaching regime which will take time, just as it did with Clive Woodward.

  • 188.
  • At 10:15 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Larry Ger wrote:

Hi Mike - post 171

I agree with you in that Ireland will be defeated by NZ - as will any other team :).

On current form, I can see Ireland and France taking both SA and the ozzies. Both teams look like professional outfits. It would be difficult to find an ounce of fat on either team's tight-5. The way they are playing with discipline, intense well-worked and intelligent gameplay shows me that they are both hungry and ready for a RWC final.

I also feel that both Ireland and France have the ability to up the temp of a game at will - a mark of intense training, good coaching and committed players.

I hope Im wrong but SA has lost the professinalism it needs to convert its talent to results.

NZ will win the RWC, I reckon the only available position - runner's up - is up for grabs btwn Ireland and France.

Larry

  • 189.
  • At 10:16 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • honestview wrote:

A weak irish scrum - dont think so

Full marks to irish front five in the scrum, 10/10.

A strong english midfield - dont think so, 3/10.

A world class outhalf - only one yesterday, 10/10.

Doesnt seem the RFU have learned anything in the past three years, still staffed by stiff shirts more worried about their own positions than what is best for the english team. What difference has Rob Andrew really made. Stop living in the past and bring in fresh blood.

  • 190.
  • At 10:17 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • David Storey wrote:

You union guys make me sick,its the same old story poor performance blame the league convert.It was the same after the world cup get rid of the league guys,Larder and Lydon.
How on earth can you blame the centre for that defeat yesterday,the pack was awful and thats where the game was lost.
How many union players with big reputations never made it in league,John Gallagher probably the biggest name.
Andy Farrell is still very inexperienced at union,he has had a serious injury and been tried in a number of positions.Give the lad time to adjust he is in a very poor side at the moment.
I remember years ago Inga Tuigamala switching to league and he was awful for the first season,but boy what a world class rugby league player he became,the only difference was he was surrounded by world class players,something Andy Farrell has not got in this England side.

  • 191.
  • At 10:24 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • William wrote:

Just one question for all those who still critisise ROG. You are all saying he is only good when behind a dominating pack. I think this can be said of most number 10s.
Jonny , for whom I have great respect, was at his best when the English pack dominated world rugby, coincidence , I think not !!!
The sign of a really great no 10 is when he shines even behind a poor pack, Larkam springs to mind !!!

  • 192.
  • At 10:24 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

English fans, we must give credit where it is due to Ireland. They dominated the game, and fully deserved a comfortable win. England are not at the top table of world rugby at present, and therefore a win of this magnitude should be the least this quality Irish team should have been aiming for.

But why oh why must this talented Irish side consistently resort to cheap shots? They don't need to, and whilst referees are not punishing them at present, including Mr Jutge yesterday, at the World Cup this indiscipline may hamper their chances.
For instance:

(1) It has been discussed above, but HHorgan's forearm smash to Strettle's fface was a cynical and illegal act of violence and should have merited a yellow card. The fact that Strettle was stood still in front of him does not give Horgan the right to lead with a forearm off the ball. Push him out of the way, by all means, but do not risk seriously injuring him with unnecessary and dirty play.

(2) Marcus Horan kneeing Jonny Wilkinson in the face. Simon Shaw was sent off in New Zealand not too long ago for a similar offence. A knee to the face is totally unacceptable in modern rugby. This was a red card offence. It also followed another example of an Irish player elbowing an Englishman in the head (Wilkinson again).

(3) David Wallace's try. Wallace would probably have scored anyway, but careful study of the replay will show you that he ran through George Chuter on the way to the line. Chuter was, however, already moving backwards, having been cleared out off the ball by O'Callaghan a split second before. The difference between a defender who is stood and set or even going forwards, and one that is already going backwards is significant. And no, it was not just "clearing out at a ruck". Chuter was not bound on to a ruck, and O'Callaghan was in breach of the rules. No try.

(4) O'Connell. High shot. Unacceptable. Tried to deny it. Nothing to deny.

(5) O'Driscoll's hot-headed retaliation after Magnus Lund's illegal tackle on Dempsey. O'Driscoll has previous for this. He often involves himself in altercations when he should not. IRB guidelines are very clear (I speak as a qualified referee). Retaliation is completely unacceptable, and should lead to a reverse of a penalty, and, depending on the seriousness of it (I do not think this was that serious) a yellow card. Lund's tackle was certainly dangerous and unacceptable, but O'Driscoll should set an example to his team and keep his discipline. Ireland would do well to look at the tapes of England's 53-3 win over South Africa in 2002. Under the most intense provocation witnessed on a rugby pitch in modern times, England did not lose their discipline once. Other referees may have reversed that penalty rather than just giving O'Driscoll a ticking-off. Talent wins games. Discipline wins World Cups.

(6) As stated above, Lund's tackle was not acceptable. Look back at the footage of Olly Morgan taking a high kick earlier in the game and calling for a mark. He too was smashed around the ankles while still in the air. This was as much of a penalty offence as the incident involving Lund. Referees must be consistent.

(7) Horgan's try. Watch the footage carefully. Horgan jumps INTO the English defender (Lewsey, I believe). This is not permitted. The Englishman's attempt to jump for the ball was negated by his contact with the Irishman moving forward PRIOR to the ball coming down. Horgan is a big chap, and would have won the leap for the ball anyway, but he did, in fact, breach the rules in doing so.

When all is said and done, congratulations must be extended to the Irish team. Their pack stood up to a supposedly superior English set of forwards, O'Gara bossed the game, and the handling and finishing of their experienced backline was slick. They must learn better discipline if they aspire to challenge for a World Cup though.

Two final thoughts:

(a) Can referees please pick up more (but consistently) on crooked feeds - Ellis was penalised once yesterday, but Stringer not at all, despite having not put the ball in straight all game - and on forward passes out wide - for BOTH sides - touch judges should be picking these up better.

(b) How can a side get on the front foot against Ireland? Look at the tapes of all the games in the last couple of years when Ireland have struggled. Teams get on top by running big men through, and over, O'Gara at 10. He is the one weak link defensively, although he is well protected by the Irish back row. If you want to get going forward, run hard down the 10 channel. It is how teams have beaten Ireland in the past, and indeed how Wasps and Leicster beat Munster at home in Heinekin Cup games in recent seasons. It is the only way to get up and over the gain line against the Irish.

  • 193.
  • At 10:31 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Diarmuid wrote:

I wanted to answer a comment about no one standing for the English anthem. I was at the game (rather than watching it from Dubai as the poster was) and did not see anyone seated during any of the anthems. Both sets of supporters showed great respect to all three anthems. The question I have is can God save us from "Ireland's call"???.

  • 194.
  • At 10:39 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • confiseur wrote:


...Congratulations to Ireland..on that form they would be world cup finalists...I am not alone in thinking then that Farrell didnt have such a bad game...what on earth has happened to our forwards though?

  • 195.
  • At 10:40 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • andy wrote:

post 39

i wont hear a bad word said about keith wood. the arguement is flawed that you cannot sla brian moore off cos keith wood is worse. keith wood is in the studio representing ireland for the bbc so has to give the emotions of an irish fan and his professional opinion. brian moore is a commentatory whose job is not to support england but to help enlighten us and add to our viewing enjoyment. he does neither!

  • 196.
  • At 10:44 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Rodney wrote:

We all know the facts of what we saw yesterday, the Irish did a proper job on England all over the park. A superb job.
Some other points, No one likes a bully, and thats what Horgan was yesterday, not just one forearm, but I spotted 2, and use of the boot on Strettle on 53 mins when Strettle wasn't part of a ruck. If you guys want to see these things stop looking at the ball, think like a ref.
Lund should have gone, ref bottled it because DG was in the bin.
DG was in the bin because Stringer did him by dummying a pick up. Come on experts, who committed the first offence?
Vickery , when he did bind he used it to pull down the scrum, should have been yellowed.
All these secondary to the result, man for man 25% better than us and you cant argue with that.

  • 197.
  • At 10:47 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • honestview wrote:

190; Chris.

Guess your english.

Just like an englishman to blame the opposition for beating them.

  • 198.
  • At 11:01 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Dubain wrote:

Response to Diarmuid - Comment 193

Hi Diarmuid

misunderstanding here - I was taking about the few dozen English ex-pats watching the game in the Irish Village here in Dubai, not at Croker. Not one of them rose from their chairs nor sung God Save The Queen. On the other hand, you couldn't hear the TV coverage here when the Irish National Anthem came on for the way the Irish supporters here belted out our anthem with pride. The crowd at Croker were very obviously respectful of each other's anthems - just like it was 2 weeks ago.

  • 199.
  • At 11:01 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • honestview wrote:

193.

Dont be silly. God was an irishman

  • 200.
  • At 11:01 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • William Wright wrote:

Lets get things in perspective. Well done Ireland, played England off the park.

However, being from Northern Ireland it sickens me to see the hype and nonsense surrounding this Irish team. Its a sad state when second is celebrated, maybe the fact the All Blacks only celebrate winning shows why they are where they are.

Maybe its the attitude of the Irish team that shows despite having the second biggest playing pool in the 6 nations, there is only 1 Grand Slam to show for it.

If you're not first you still a loser!

  • 201.
  • At 11:03 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris Parnell wrote:

I believe that England's defeat by Ireland was the result of a conspiracy. When you think about all the history behind yesterday's match, such a victory for Ireland was the only politically correct solution. A simplistic view that sport and politics are separate is not an option these days (and never was in the past).

  • 202.
  • At 11:07 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:

Ireland you were brilliant. From the reception of the England team, through the anthems and then doing what you were always capable of, and stuffing us. We have no excuses!

I love watching rugby at all levels and whilst I support England I prefer to see the game played well than just won at all costs. One of the great things about rugby is that it changes and one team never maintains its dominance (with the possible exception of the ABs). Ireland are great at the moment, France are looking to get there and not too far off it, Italy are developing into a good side, Wales can be awfully good and just awful and Scotland and England need to improve. This will change. No team has ever stayed on top.

England should forget about the world cup and start picking players to develop for the next one. There is no way they will progress past the Qtr final with team as it is at present. There are good players in England but they are not developed properly for the England team. They all play too much and end up picking up injuries at an early stage in their career and never fully recover. The Premiership can be exciting, just as it can be down right dull. Most clubs have to use overseas players just to maintain any interest and cover for the Internationals who are absent when they play key games (just look at the Leicester v Northanpton game). so put a better structure in place, let the key players develop without being forced and enjoy playing the game.

Don't worry too much that we might get thumped by France and Wales. Go for the future!

Just a point about the ratings. If you compare the ratings of the Scotish and Welsh teams to those given to Ireland all the Irish players should be above 8 and most on 10. Either downgrade the others or upgrade the Irish.

  • 203.
  • At 11:11 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • luke wrote:

we need lawrence dallaglio

  • 204.
  • At 11:29 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • martin lawler wrote:

tiofaidh ar la,is an phrase in the irish language,it means our day will come.yesterday it arrived

  • 205.
  • At 11:33 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Jim McGuigan wrote:

Hard luck England. The French were lucky to play against an Irish team with the BOD factor missing. His influence must not be underrated. With BOD present Ireland even outclassed France in Paris in the second half last year. His abscence agianst the NZ ABs was possibly no accident on the Lions'tour. Let's hope there are no cynical take outs for BOD in the next World Cup.

  • 206.
  • At 11:36 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

Just read all your comments , found them very interesting . I'm new to this site , so i would just like to know , who did you pick on last year when England couldn't even pass the ball. Why are you picking on Farrell , the forwards are Englands problem, Farrell was the only English player to make a decent pass and his tackling in the second half was second to none ,blameing the ex-league player will not solve Englands problems.
Thought the irish were very good .

  • 207.
  • At 11:38 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • David Noble wrote:

I find it amasing that you have rated Corry and Leamy the same. Leamy has consistently been a big ball carrier for Ireland and was vital in the rain yesterday. Corry has been consistently poor, he was clearly outmuscled and there was even a phase when Corry had his back to play after disengaging from the scrum, his Irish counterparts (Wallace and Leamy) were roght over Farrell and they forced the turn over. Leamy is becoming world class, Corry isnt even international standard.
My Irish Ratings

Dempsey- Solid 7 didnt do anything wrong and made few breaks

Horgan- 8, used his pace and power to good effect always lokking menacing

D'Arcy and O'Driscoll- perhaps didnt make the characteristic breaks but there work at the breakdown was something international 7s would be proud of, and their handling set up many breaks 8

Hickie- solid performance 7

O'Gara- could he have done anything else - 9.5/10

Stringer- Irelands only weak link, surely Boss should take over soon 6

Backrow- 8, they are becoming world class, i rate Neil Best above Easterby but he does the job aswell, the 3 of them turnd over so much ball and their tackle count was phenomenal, the tackles were also big hits not allowing England go-forward ball this is crucial

O'Connell- huge 10

O'Callaghan- 8

Hayes-7

R.Best-8

Horan-7

  • 208.
  • At 11:43 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Niall O'Kearney wrote:

Thanks to all the English posters for their sporting recognition of a sound Irish win yesterday. Personally, I was as delighted with the win as I was the courteously of the Irish crowd from the moment England walked on to the pitch from the moment they walked off it. Well done to all concerned, that's what this game is all about.

  • 209.
  • At 11:46 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • ian macko wrote:

England lost the battle upfront and failed to lay a platform.For the pundits to blatently blame Andy Farrell is a disgrace,he has done no worse than any other player,yet he been labelled by Guscott,Moore and Healey as the scapegoat.People should realise when Farrell finished in RL he was in the front-row,making 30 plus tackles a game a distributing the ball.In RU he hardly touches the ball,so he's being deprived of his skills because he's in the wrong postion.Farrell has a good rugby brain that needs to be used correctly,he should be played at 8 or 10.RU has learnt alot from RL in terms of professionlism on the pitch.I remember the pundit Guscott when he refused to play in the Wigan-Bath cross-code challenge against the League lads,i wonder why.

  • 210.
  • At 11:48 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Peter Munday wrote:

England's performance yesterday was poor, but we can be thankfull that England were beaten because it will give Ashton an idea of what needs to be changed in the team. He is going to have to ditch the "old" players and get some younger ones in that can gain experience and adapt to the new ways of playing quick, expansive rugby.

The forwards need to me more dynamic in the loose, Rees and Moody should start in the backrow, Moody is as just as good as Lund, and Dan Ward Smith should play 8 (when back off injury, Farrell at 10, not quick enough for centre, Wilkinson should play 12, now we have good disributers and kickers. Tait should play 13 to inject some much needed pace, and the back three is fine (but keep Morgan, not Balshaw). With a more electic team England can play a much better game of rugby and hopefully will not be so out classed by a team such as Ireland.

  • 211.
  • At 11:49 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • DL wrote:

I see the knives are out for Farrell. Typical - highlight just one of the symptoms and ignore the cause. The best centre in the world would have struggled behind such a poor pack. Mention is made of the penalty that Farrell conceded. This was as a result of a hospital pass from Wilkinson. I'd like to see Farrell playing with a decent pack and a fit fly-half.

  • 212.
  • At 11:50 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Peter Munday wrote:

England's performance yesterday was poor, but we can be thankfull that England were beaten because it will give Ashton an idea of what needs to be changed in the team. He is going to have to ditch the "old" players and get some younger ones in that can gain experience and adapt to the ways of playing quick, expansive rugby.

The forwards need to me more dynamic in the loose, Rees and Moody should start in the backrow, Moody is as just as good as Lund (in the loose and in the lineouts), and Dan Ward Smith should play 8 (when back off injury), Farrell at 10, he is not quick enough for centre, Wilkinson should play 12, now we have good distributers and kickers. Tait should play 13 to inject some much needed pace, and the back three is fine (but keep Morgan, not Balshaw). With a more electic team England can play a much better game of rugby and hopefully will not be so out classed by a teams such as Ireland.

  • 213.
  • At 11:51 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Scotty wrote:

Comment 192 - Chris you wasted all that space on Irish indiscretions and yet only a few words on Lunds' tackle that could have ended someones career?

Bizzare.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Scotty - ScrumV veteran since 2000....longing for the days of GOKG, Juggler, and the CornishPirate.

  • 214.
  • At 11:52 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • andy wrote:

I don't agree with the cndemnation of Brian Moore. He says it as he sees it and is nowhere near as 'biased' as Eddie Butler who is dreadful. EB would rather die than acknowledge a good piece of play by the English (not that there were many yesterday). BM repeatedly pointed out the incorrect binding by Vickery and was quick to point out when penalties should have been given against both sides. His knowledge of front row play helps those of us who have never understood what goes on in the murky depths.
Full marks to Ireland yesterday - they were by far the better side.
Hopefully England will use it as a good chance to learn some lessons.

  • 215.
  • At 11:52 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • tim wrote:

As an Ireland fan looking at Englands performance, i was shocked at how poorly they played. In rugby, you have to get over the gain line consistently because you have to pass the ball backwards!It is the only way to attack! England seem to be unable to do this. Where are the big bll carriers that English rugby is renowned for? The question now for England is which way do they go? Do they stick with these guys or do they make them scapegoats? Under Andy Robinson i felt he kept changing the team too much. Never letting players build undertandings with one another. Ashton must understand that he will lose the respect of the players if he changes things now.

  • 216.
  • At 11:53 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Brockard wrote:

was an amazing game and display by th irish and no dought they deserve to win, but how do you expect england to have chance to win if they are playing the ref too!!!

  • 217.
  • At 11:54 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Dan wrote:

Carling banging on about Farrell - he needs to pipe down. All this 'no pace in the England mid-field', well the finest England team ever (2001 - 2003) played with Tindall and Greenwood in the middle relying on guile and some good bosh work with Lewsey, Cohen and Robinson cutting lines. In my book Farrell is extremely similar to Greenwood but he just needs some time to settle - no changes should be made, that was the error under the Robinson era that everyone panicked so things were changed regularly. Early on in Woodward's reign defeats were taken on the chin but crucially the team was allowed to gel. You have to a lose a few initially in order to build and come back stronger - that Irish team has been together a while now and has had its fair share of drubbings, now they're reaping the rewards. Leave Ashton and the England team to get on with it!

  • 218.
  • At 11:55 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Peter Munday wrote:

England's performance yesterday was poor, but we can be thankfull that England were beaten because it will give Ashton an idea of what needs to be changed in the team. He is going to have to ditch the "old" players and get some younger ones in that can gain experience and adapt to the ways of playing quick, expansive rugby.

The forwards need to me more dynamic in the loose, Rees and Moody should start in the backrow, Moody is as just as good as Lund (in the loose and in the lineouts), and Dan Ward Smith should play 8 (when back off injury), Farrell at 10, he is not quick enough for centre, Wilkinson should play 12, now we have good distributers and kickers. Tait should play 13 to inject some much needed pace, and the back three is fine (but keep Morgan, not Balshaw). With a more electic team England can play a much better game of rugby and hopefully will not be so out classed by a teams such as Ireland.

  • 219.
  • At 11:57 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Gavin Kelly wrote:

Three Points;
1.I think your ratings of the Irish Players(Averages of 6/7) is very unfair to the individuals themselves. Give credit where it is due and try not to be as Frugle with your ratings in future.
2.Irrespective/INSPITE of the Media yesterday went off without a hitch.
3.Rugby Football was the winner y'day,it goes to prove you dont have to be big ogres to Play to game anymore(which is the way the game was heading....you have to wonder would the likes of the Great JPR Williams have found himself on a side with the sizes that modern day Players were becoming).

  • 220.
  • At 11:57 AM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

honestview, 197:

What? I congratulate Ireland. They played supremely well. They outplayed England in every department and strangled their ball at source.

All I am doing is observing the indiscipline that is constantly present in Ireland's game, which might just come back to haunt them come World Cup time. And I hadn't even mentioned the obsession of Easterby and O'Connell to throw flurries of punches to people's backs and heads during/around the fringes of rucks and mauls.

What exactly did you take issue with in post 190?

  • 221.
  • At 12:01 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Tom Manton wrote:

Ireland were fantastic. O' Connell is a true great and is it now unrealistic to put up O' Gara on a par with carter as the best fly half in the world?

  • 222.
  • At 12:03 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Barry wrote:

One of the 91热爆 commentators referred to Britain as back on the mainland. I'd just like to point out from an Irish point of view this is a very ignorant and disrepectful comment. Britain is not the mainland of Ireland, it's just another island and it and the Republic of Ireland are two seperate countries! I would have thought at this point in time your commentators should be well versed enough not to make insensitive and inaccurate statements like this.

  • 223.
  • At 12:04 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Tom Manton wrote:

Ireland were fantastic. O' Connell is a true great and is it now unrealistic to put up O' Gara on a par with carter as the best fly half in the world?

  • 224.
  • At 12:07 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Simon Hill wrote:

I am glad to see Farrell being at last exposed as a poor selection. All I wonder is why its taken 3 games. He was totally useless against Italy and made it difficult for the other midfielders. Against both Italy and Ireland Jonny Wilkinson was trying to cover for him and do his own job. There are better rugby union midfielders out there than him.

  • 225.
  • At 12:07 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Derek Fallon wrote:

Re Chris (Post 192). You are of course entitled to your opinion. But think of this. Ireland are a talented team playing yesterday at the top of their game. But even as importantly, they are experienced and streetwise. They play the referee. Successful English teams did exactly the same down the years. They are just following an English blueprint.

  • 226.
  • At 12:08 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

212, Scotty,

There's nothing to say about Lund's tackle. It was disgraceful and merited a yellow at least (think of the hit that Alesana Tuilagi put in on Mark Cueto). So did the Irish hit on Morgan which was identical - and NOT punished at all by the referee.

All I want to draw attention to is that the referee was inconsistent - he DID penalise Lund, but not the Irishman who flattened Morgan in the same way. Nor Horgan for his cheap shots. Or any others...

Is there any dispute of the litany of cheap shots by Irish players that I listed?

Anyone?

I doubt it, unless we are looking at it from an extreme point of view. Look at it from a cold, calculated viewpoint. This was a collection of illegal play. At some point a referee will spot it.

  • 227.
  • At 12:09 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Stewart wrote:

Ireland were brilliant and England were poor.
Will an influx of new players turn us into worldbeaters? No it won't! Ireland have better players than us in the same way we were better than them 4 years ago.
This is not to say that we should keep this team the same for the World Cup. Farrell was picked to prove either way if he could make it as a 12. It appears not. Vickery does not appear to be the player he was (but may improve) and Wilkinson has only played a handful of minutes, let alone games!
Ashton should be given time to develop his ideas and players with the aim be to beat S Africa in their group and see what happens.
England will struggle while their league is set up for the clubs and their competitors are designed for the national team. New Zealands players taking part in a training camp while the Super 14 is taking place, demonstrating, if a demo was needed, of their phenomenal strength in depth!
I include my starting XV for the World Cup for the sake of interest, however I am sure many will disagree.
1. Stevens
2. Chuter
3. Vickery (c)
4. Palmer
5. Deacon
6. Moody
7. Lund
8. Ward-Smith
9. Ellis
10. Hodgson
11. Robinson
12. Wilkinson
13. Tait
14. Strettle
15. Lewsey.

  • 228.
  • At 12:12 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Sean M wrote:

A great Irish performance. I just couldnt see that the England team were up for it. Paul O'Connell played the best game i have ever seen him play for Ireland. The problem with the England performance was that the pack, with their 5 kg per player advantage, just could not max it up with the Irish pack. If i may be so bold to say without fear of persecution, the English front row were less than average. vickery did every thing to bring down and double up his opponent at any opportunity. Why? Because after the first couple of scrums he didnt have the presence of a Captain to get the front row working. Personally I think he is a major problem for Englands performance, and I am sure that being captain affects him. J W didnt have a particularly good game, because he was never allowed to have the posession he has enjoyed so much against other teams. Irelands game plan was to attack for 80 minutes, single out the playmakers, thus nullifying any threat whatsoever. I cant understand some of the English fans jumping on the bandwagon to slate Farrell. IMHO, Ireland made him look average, and I personally think that he is a better player than people are giving him credit for, just on that performance. If anything, i think he played well, yes he is slower than some peole may want him to be. But thats the problem, everyone will slate a teams performance when they are on the end of a heavy loss. If it had been by a couple of points only, would Farrell be receiving so much negative press.
The simple resaon England lost is that they came up against an Irish team that WANTED to win, a team that rose to the occasion, and had BELIEF and PASSION. As an Irishman, the best thing about the game, obviously other than our Victory, was the setting aside of the old political history and the total respect each set of fans payed each other. Thats why I love Rugby so much. you dont get that in football.......

  • 229.
  • At 12:12 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • James wrote:

These are my Palyers Ratings!
And well done to the Boys In Green!

GIRVAN DEMPSEY 8

Absolutely superb. The conditions suited Dempsey's brand of uncomplicated, guaranteed security but Dempsey also flew around in attack. Always seems to know where to position himself at the back and his try was a fitting reward.

SHANE HORGAN 8

Ravenous for work and, restored to his favoured position, was back to his roaming, rampaging best - reminding us why he is one of the world's most feared wide men. Had to be careful about getting sucked infield in defence, as happened for Strettle's try, but terrified the English midfield every time he cut back in and his try was sweet.

BRIAN O'DRISCOLL 8

The captain's return infused his team with confidence and belief. Assured in attack and defence, O'Driscoll and D'Arcy completely embarrassed the opposition centres. Mike Tindall was shown to be one-dimensional while the Andy Farrell experiment may be over. A nation prays the sight of O'Driscoll hobbling off late on was nothing to worry about.

GORDON D'ARCY 8

Along with O'Driscoll, dictated matters in the centre. Gave a sublime flick for Dempsey's try and provided his usual excellence on the ground and in possession.

DENIS HICKIE 7

One felt sympathy for Hickie as, with the greasy conditions and ball magnetically drawn to Horgan, the game pretty much passed him by for the first 50 minutes. The winger tried to force it a bit which led to a couple of errors but then contributed superbly in the last 30 minutes.

RONAN O'GARA 8

Wonderful control. O'Gara's reading of the game was faultless. Tormented the English with his kicking out of hand and piled on the pressure with his consistent place-kicking. Passing also gave the outside backs something to run onto. The kick for Horgan's try was a beauty.

PETER STRINGER 8

Stringer's return was instrumental in giving his half-back partner the time to execute his string-pulling duties. An essential cog, his covering was also as exemplary as ever.

MARCUS HORAN 8

Ireland's scrummaging ability was ridiculed by the English media beforehand but, if anything, Horan and his front-row colleagues had the upper hand. Continues to astound in the loose and wouldn't look out of place in the English three-quarter-line.

RORY BEST 8

The lineout was the platform that launched Ireland's dominance and Best performed his throwing duties admirably as well as putting himself about around the park.

JOHN HAYES 9

Industry personified. Despite being constantly written off, Hayes is surely in the running for Ireland's player of the season.

DONNCHA O'CALLAGHAN 8

May not have been as prominent as his second row partner O'Connell but tore into everything in an all-consuming effort.

PAUL O'CONNELL 9

If O'Driscoll was the focal point in the backline, the snarling, grappling O'Connell was the figurehead in Ireland's stunning forward effort. Called more ball on himself in the lineout from the start, as well as stealing a couple of England's, and grew into the game as a result. The quiet period has ended.

SIMON EASTERBY 8

Immense in defence, assured in the air and threw in a barnstorming run in the first half for good measure.

DAVID WALLACE 8

Tirelessly physical and, along with his backrow colleagues, tormented the England in the close exchanges.

DENIS LEAMY 8

The focal point of swarming backrow performance that blew away their opposite numbers for whom only Joe Worsley offered meaningful resistance. Charged about wreaking havoc on the opposition, completely outshone his opposite number Martin Corry, making the him look ragged & old.

REPLACEMENTS

JERRY FLANNERY 7 (for R Best 62) Put himself about when he came on.
The rest of the subs were not on long enough to be rated in my estimation!
SIMON BEST
NEIL BEST
ANDREW TRIMBLE
ISAAC BOSS
PADDY WALLACE.


Also, I have no ratin gfor the English team as they were not on the pitch long enough to be rated!

  • 230.
  • At 12:13 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • old hoss wrote:

is it me but all this belly aching,moaning and groaning about refs or irish fouls misses the point that english forwards are CRAP!!!!!
theres not a single ball carrier in the whole sad bunch.oh what would be ,to have a irish loose,a italian front row and maybe 2nd row from ,ok, ireland.
dont punish the backs who had'nt a chance to play.But then again some speed in the centres would'nt go amiss.well done Ireland but dont think eng gonna beat the frogs with this team

  • 231.
  • At 12:13 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • rugbypat wrote:

I'm very disappointed but not surprised at the lack of respect given to ROG. English fans should really try to take on board the idea that JW is never going to be saviour of England's World Cup dreams. It's a team game. Try someone like Geraghty or Flood. Incidentally, ROG can tackle but was shamefully vilified by Stuart Barnes for 1 missed tackle in a Lions warmup game. He was the form no.10 going into that series.

  • 232.
  • At 12:17 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Niall M wrote:

Was a great match however, will the Wilko fan boys please shut your mouths, without a doubt wilko is good but O'Gara was behind a beaten pack against France and still managed to score all Irelands points including a try. Also why is it these guys who do the ratings seem to be English. 6 for Morgan!!! he played 30 mins. Compare that to Dempseys 6!!! He scored a try and played the whole match constantly taking English kicks and making tackles.

  • 233.
  • At 12:18 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Mark Whitehead wrote:

ANDY FARRELL

Why is Andy Farrell coming in for so much criticism after yesterdays match? Yes, he didn't have the greatest of games but which of the England players did? Were England not hammered in the pack? I'm sorry but I think the rugby union pundits, particularly on the 91热爆 are incorrectly using Farrell as a scapegoat for England's problems. Austin Healy picked up on a point at half time yesterday regarding Farrell's defence which was complete nonsense. Sliding defence, Wilkinson took the man on the inside. He singled out Farrell for criticism where Ireland gained no advantage to the game whatsoever. What a joke. The pundits have it in for him and now he has no chance.

Why is Josh Lewsey a golden boy? What has he done since the world cup? Tindall ??????????????? What does he do? Which England backs make clean breaks?

NONE of the England backs other than Jason Robinson can beat a man.
What it boils down to is that Rugby Union has so much more to learn from Rugby League but the old school (for example Guscott, Healy, Moore, Carling) don't like it.

OK drop Andy Farrell, who are you going to pick? What would he have done to change yesterday's game?

Farrell will, given time, create gaps in the opponents defence through his vision and ability to read the game. He is a CHAMPION rugby player and needs more time. Get off his back please.


  • 234.
  • At 12:20 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Mark wrote:

A marvellous win for Ireland , and all the media hype regarding the playing of the British( not the English by the way) national anthem at Croke Park came to nought.
England were singularly lacking in skill and enthusiam for the match, whereas Ireland were inspired. I'm afraid it will take more than Jonny( god's gift to rugby- I don' think so)to solve england's woes.
As for the biased commentators, it is time the 91热爆 got some good sporting journalist types to to an unbiased job, Eddie Butler should be run out of town!

  • 235.
  • At 12:25 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • LeXVdeRob wrote:

Well done Ireland, a deserved win. England has lost any passion it might have had with Johnson et al. You could see the fire in the Irish lads' eyes before the game, it isn't that England lacks talent, although selection could be reviewed, they have no hunger, they think too much. As a Frenchman in France, I hadn't heard about Farrell until the switch and the hype, but from what I've seen, what on earth is he doing playing international rugby? No sidestep, no pace, no progression in his number 8 type moves...bland. Will you stop saying Wilko is a god!!!! He's just a very good kicker, and happens to do some of the rest reasonably well enough. You can't compare the styles of ROG and JW, I actually believe ROG's a better runner.

I know Ireland are brilliant at the moment, but will you stop saying France is their understudy, we beat Ireland didn't we? Good teams don't look as good against a better opposition. We don't have Pelous etc and change the team every time. Look at the difference between Eng vs Scots and Eng vs Ire. France defends well, makes it hard on any pack of forwards. Then they unleash their backs...

  • 236.
  • At 12:25 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Karl wrote:

Can I just take this opportunity to publicly apologise to Girvan Dempsey?

As an Irish supporter of many years it is true that I have often questioned 'The Swerve's' position in the team.

The word 'solid' was always used to describe him. That's rugby code for 'harmless'.

Yesterday, and indeed over the past 12 months or so, he has been a revelation.

He doesn't look like an international rugby player but his positioning on a big Croke Park pitch was truly excellent.

The way he ran on to and attack the English positional kicks and time after time set up good possession by finding his support and making a half-break was superb.

As for the rest of the ratings and overall impression of the match....

Brian O'Driscoll makes a massive difference to this Irish team. The amount of work he gets through on defence is astonishing. He hit Josh Lewsey yesterday, stopped him in his tracks, ripped the ball off him and secured a turnover in one memorable incident. He is an absolute mongrel on the deck as well.

Despite what some people are saying above his hit on Morgan looked legal to me. If you watch the replays Morgan's foot touches the ground just before he is pulverised by O'Driscoll.

The Irish back row was a different class. Leamy hasn't won many plaudits but he was everywhere and one of the most incredible moments of the game was England being shunted back over their own line to concede a five metre attacking scrum. Yes, the English pack was down a man at the time but the Irish back row hit Worseley (I think it was) as one.

I'm surprised at the amount of criticism that Farrell is copping here. He wasn't great but he can pass a ball (he has Jason Robinsonitis when isolated though - typical rugby league instinct of not being able to release the ball).

Vickery had a shocking game. He's unfit and past it. He can't even scrummage without constantly cheating.

Lund had a good 15 minutes. He was lucky that Grewcock was already in the bin when he took out Dempsey in the air but to be fair I don't think it was a malicious hit.

Strettle has rightly received some praise but I don't think anyone should get carried away. He proved he's an excellent sevens player with some potential and he knows how to finish but I thought some of his positioning was all over the place and O'Gara was able to turn him very easily. Hickie on the other hand always seemed to be in the right spot and Dempsey was lurking very close.

Strettle was also miles out of position for Horgan's try (as, in fairness, was Horgan for Strettle's finish).

I think it would be a huge mistake to dispense with Harry Ellis though. He struggled with bad ball and some of his service was a bit wayward but he has serious potential and is infinitely better than Perry and Richards (the worst scrum half I have seen play international rugby in more than a decade).

I would have liked to have seen Ireland be more clinical, not because it was England, but because it's important that Ireland learn to put inferior teams away with more panache.

There were six or seven tries out there for Ireland yet they only managed four, including a breakaway intercept. Ireland dominated the game for 70 minutes and should have put up 60 points. We may live to regret our failure to score those points. Ireland lost the championship on points difference last year.

The bottom line is that Ireland without O'Driscoll can probably beat any team in the world apart from New Zealand and France.

With O'Driscoll we can beat France.

Whether or not we can give New Zealand a game is another matter. But we're getting closer.

  • 237.
  • At 12:28 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • ian macko wrote:

Ireland should be congratulated on restricting England,i can't understand the tatic when England were 26-10 down and decided to kick for goal from fifty metres out.Surley a kick to the corner and go for the try was the answer.England need to get away from all this kick for goal policy and bring the entertainment factor back into their play.I see Carling has decided to knock Farrell in the media which will turn into a witch-hunt.This is certainly a drop in standard to what Farrell is used to and people should realise this.

  • 238.
  • At 12:40 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • john savage wrote:

Looking at all of the comments made and the widely varied alternatives to the current England Team just proves how difficult it must be to get the balance right in selection Brian Ashton and R Andrew etc have got a very difficult task ahead if they are to push the English game forward. I agree Sheridan and stevens would bring a lot of power and weight to an ineffective front row but are they fit and in form? Changes need to be made after that forward performance.

  • 239.
  • At 12:41 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Joe Cullen wrote:

Ah, no matter what the result there are still some English whingers.. get the hell over it, you lost and you're lucky lund didn't get a straight red, because it was much worse than BODs. For every bit of so called foul play we can simply pick another from the other side. Just watch rugby and enjoy it!

  • 240.
  • At 12:41 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Connal wrote:

1.) Both Ireland and England committed a smatter of offences.
2.) Horgan's hit on Strettle seemed accpetable; Horgan was watching Strettle approach to block off his run, and Strettle was duly dispensed with.
3.) Ireland were a superior side all over the park, forward play, lineout - more spirit, more quality, better to watch - End

  • 241.
  • At 12:43 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Al Phillips wrote:

I agree with others to merely blame Farrell is ignoring the major issues. England could have had B O'D in the centres, and it would not have made much of a difference. If your forwards are winning little or no ball there is not much you can do!

It was essentially the pack that lost us this game. And some changes need to be made there. I think Rees needs to start instead of Lund and the front row needs a bit of a shake up too

  • 242.
  • At 12:43 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Darran Mather wrote:

Interesting comments on yesterday's excellent match. It was a unique and emotional occasion and one that proved Union internationals are imcomparable across the sporting spectrum.

The scapegoating of Farrell by the usual menagerie of tedious rugby pundits like Carling, Guscott and Healey is an absolute disgrace. For a player who has played no more than 15 domestic matches and 2 internationals he performed well alongside a very, very average flyhalf.

If only the donkeys in the pack would release the ball to the backs and let them run with it! The forwards were pathetic and the pundits target Farrell!! Corry is simply an embarrassment to the 'running game'. He can't pass or run with ball in hand. This team will click but the pack needs sorting. We need athletic and fluid forwards who can lay the foundations for the backs to show off their skills. They are skillful but lack confidence and they need the bloody ball!!

Strettle is a real find and he's ex-league which gives him even more reasons to embarrass the tedious bores like Carling and the odious Guscott. He must be the most annoying pundit the 91热爆 as ever employed. Pompous and vile in his anti-league rants.

I thought union is a 15 man game but it seems we lost the match against Ireland because Farrell is crap. JW was awful today but do the pundits call for his head. What about Corry and Vickery? The list is endless.

If Ashton drops Farrell then thats it. I don't believe Ashton will succumb to the demands for his exclusion. He is his own man. I bet he despises the the likes of carling and Guscott.

rant over

  • 243.
  • At 12:44 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • daniel o'connell wrote:

i must complain about wot pppl are saying about rog in the opening minutes he tackled he passed he kicked and he even shrugged off the wounderful wilkinson by the way when leicster and munster met harry ellis beat stringer all night but look whats happened now 1 weeks rest and stringer fights back furthermore i think dempsey is 2 slow and murphy shuda played AND phil vickery is doing it again i watched him against scotland and italy and he shuda been sin binned and today was no acception i read a few comments few weeks ago about how good o callaghan and o'connell are now i think they have shown u how good they really are and how deadly dey r

  • 244.
  • At 12:51 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Peter Lawther wrote:

Do you know what makes victory so sweet - it is reading Chris's comments at 192!
Re Brian Moore's commentary- i really enjoy it because he explains what is going on in the scrums/lineouts! If anyone wants to hear really bad commentary- then listen to Jim Neilly on 91热爆 NI!

  • 245.
  • At 12:51 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

Derek, 225:

There's a difference between playing the referee/being streetwise, and committing unprovoked cynical acts of violence.

Playing the referee and being streetwise is in things such as knowing how much you can get away with illegally slowing down opposition ball at ruck-time, something Easterby does well, albeit not as well as Richie McCaw.

Smashing your forearm into an opponent's face, or kneeing an exposed opponent in the head is not streetwise, nor is it an example of playing the referee. It is cynical, dirty play, the sort that should be punished severely by referees, and if they miss it, by citing commisioners.

This is the exact same sort of cynical violence that ended O'Driscoll's Lions tour in New Zealand. Top international players such as Shane Horgan and Marcus Horan have a duty to cut this sort of dirty play out of their game.

It is unacceptable, could cause very serious injury, and gives a horrible impression of a game that has built its reputation on being hard but fair.

  • 246.
  • At 12:53 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • old hoss wrote:

lets stop moaning and groaning about bad refs and cheap shots.Lets just face it the english forwards where worst than inept er.......Bloody Crap i think the word was.no ball carriers and sooooo slow. we got beaten fair and square end of story.oh wouldnt it be nice to have a team with passion matched with skill and commitment.a italian front row,french 2nd row and of course a irish loose forwards.....we can but dream!!!!dont blame the backs ,without ball, is a difficult task even for good backs.one gripe pace is one thing we miss over the whole park.
well done ireland but dont hold out to much hope of us beating the frogs with this team

  • 247.
  • At 12:54 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • tony mc keogh wrote:

haveing read the comments on this site i cant belive how much crap you english e.r.f.u, fans and media come out with.you still have a player rateing scale on the 2003 match, eng v irl match (the last time england beat the mighty ireland)how sad.also after a along line of defeats since the world cup you beat, (yawn) scotland and struggled with the help of your own country man as ref, (welsh/uk)a vastly superiour italian team.as for the win against the scots,jw was in the car park when he supposedly got his try.the winning margin was 29 points but if you know your rugby and try in your hearts tobe honest it shold have been only 2 points

  • 248.
  • At 12:58 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • tony mc keogh wrote:

haveing read the comments on this site,, i cant belive how much crap you english e.r.f.u, fans and media come out with.you still have a player rateing scale on the 2003 match, eng v irl match (the last time england beat the mighty ireland)how sad.also after a along line of defeats since the world cup you beat, (yawn) scotland and struggled with the help of your own country man as ref, (welsh/uk)a vastly superiour italian team.as for the win against the scots,jw was in the car park when he supposedly got his try.the winning margin was 29 points but if you know your rugby and try in your hearts to be honest it should have been only 2 points.ur crap?

  • 249.
  • At 01:07 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Tom wrote:

Wilko was the worst player on the pitch yesterday. Certainly O'Gara enjoyed a far greater platform behind a dominant Irish pack, but Wilkinson failed to make anything of the ball that he did have. Based on the last two showings, it's going to be very difficult for Andy Farrell to stamp his mark on the Union code unless his fly half starts to give him some early ball, rather than running a few yards sideways before shipping it on into no space.

Farrell cannot be blamed for England's flawed decision-making, which alongside an inferior forward pack, was the major downfall at Croke Park. He has the skill and composure to prove himself an effective No.12 at international level, if he is used properly. If all England want is a crash ball, then Farrell is not the man for the job. If, however, they truly aspire to play a fast, wide game, Farrell surpasses any English rival for his position. It is the combination between Tindall and Farrell that is of utmost concern- England need pace and depth at 13, in the shape of Matthew Tait, if they are to execute the game everyone wants to see.

Very impressed with both Morgan and Strettle, both of whom had brave games in difficult conditions.

Lack of energy and commitment in the tight 5, and a poorly balanced back row, meant England could hope for little more than second best. Well played Ireland- shame they couldn't do the same when they were still in the competition.

  • 250.
  • At 01:07 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Pedrito wrote:

John - 162...England the better team? Did you watch the game, or were you watching video from 2003?

Chris - 190 - I am also a certified referee. I don't know your background, but the game played at the International level is so much fatser and intense than club rugby. Also, it is very different to critique a game on TV where incidents can appear mpre or less harsh depending on camera angle, slomo replay etc. Given this I would hesitate to pick apart a referee as you did.

Also, as others pointed out...what about English infractions...or did they lose because they palyed within the rules and Ireland are cheats...

Have you heard the news...

Jerry Adams is laying a wreath outside Croke Park today in memory of the 15 English men slaughtered there yesterday...

Thankfully we got a good 91热爆 Northern Ireland commentary yesterday because Brian Moore is unberable...

  • 252.
  • At 01:09 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Mick O'D wrote:

Agree with Sean M 228. England looked like a team defeated when they ran (or ambled) out for the second half. Just look at Vickery's expression as he comes out of the tunnel. Compare that to John Hayes' expression during the singing of the national anthems. Sums up the attitude and performances of the two team - Ireland wanted it more.

  • 253.
  • At 01:17 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

238, Connal:

Put your nationality to one side for one second and look at the incident from a neutral or official point of view.

(1) Yes, offences were committed by both sides. The issue is the cynical, deliberate, or violent nature of those incidents, incidents of "foul play". For England, only really Lund's dangerous tackle falls into this category - note that this was not malicious, and Lund was apologetic instantly.

(2) 'Duly dispatched'? If you have a basic understanding of the movement of the human body, biomechanics, etc, then you will understand this situation better. Strettle was running TOWARDS Horgan, Horgan was running TOWARDS Strettle. They were heading straight for each other.

Horgan kicked OVER Strettle. Thus Strettle, moving in the opposite direction from the ball, had to slow down, stop, turn, and run back. All the while, Horgan was moving in the same direction as the ball.

Hence Horgan reached Strettle before he had the chance to stop and turn. He was not looking to block Horgan - he's not streetwise enough to do that yet, otherwise he might not have done it in such a way that Horgan was able to 'duly dispatch' him.

Horgan raised his forearm to head-height, and then propelled it into Strettle's face. This is violent, cynical, malicious, and deliberate. Just as you cannot lead with your arm in football, nor can you hand off using your forearm when in possession, you cannot go around delivering forearm smashes to people's faces. It is seriously dangerous. Strettle could easily have emerged from this incident with a broken jaw or cheekbone.

If this is simply 'duly dispatching', then do we not take issue with the 'duly dispatching' of O'Driscoll by the All Blacks on the Lions' tour? I think we do - both incidents were off the ball, deliberate, and unacceptable.

(3) Yes Ireland were superior in all departments, well done, and congratulations to them. Not in doubt or disputed for a second.

Just lose the dirty stuff, that's all...

  • 254.
  • At 01:24 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Barry wrote:

I have to make my comments entirely on what I see on the box. Where I now live there are no local teams of stature that the England selectors would even dream of watching and so I don鈥檛 have an arsenal of players to suggest that would put England鈥檚 woes to rest. Premiership talent is too far away. Yesterday鈥檚 game showed up England鈥檚 pedestrian pack again, but that鈥檚 not to say they are all not up to it. We鈥檙e missing Thompson and so I would play Titterell again. I鈥檓 not so sure about either Freshwater or White. Maybe we need a fit-again Andrew Sheridan. Grewcock is a liability. I鈥檇 make Palmer a regular in the second row and would consider bringing back Ben Kay. In the back row I鈥檇 play Rees at 7 and we need a more imposing, more mobile figure at 8. We were taken apart again by a more cohesive pack of forwards who provided quick ball to Ireland鈥檚 talented backs.

I鈥檇 keep the half back pairing of Ellis and Wilkinson. In the threequarters I鈥檇 bring back Cueto on the right wing and the inspirational Jason Robinson on the left. In the centre we鈥檙e missing a Greenwood, someone with some size who can make a break. And whilst Andy Farrell has good hands, an excellent pass and defensive skills he鈥檚 very short on pace for a back and needs to go back to the drawing board. I鈥檓 not sure about Tait. He offers a lot of skill but needs to bulk out a bit more for an international centre. Mike Tindall is not back to his best yet but IMHO he鈥檚 getting there. In view of the injury to the brave Olly Morgan, I鈥檇 transfer Lewsey to full-back again. Forget about matchstick man Balshaw even if he鈥檚 fit.

From a refereeing perspective, when are referees going to start penalising the blatant illegal (crooked) feeding of scrums? And so-called rucks are starting to look like pile-ups again.

  • 255.
  • At 01:30 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

Peter Lawler,

Which bit of my comments makes it sweetest? Is it the querying of the incidents of foul play? Or is it these bits:

"English fans, we must give credit where it is due to Ireland. They dominated the game, and fully deserved a comfortable win. England are not at the top table of world rugby at present, and therefore a win of this magnitude should be the least this quality Irish team should have been aiming for."

"When all is said and done, congratulations must be extended to the Irish team. Their pack stood up to a supposedly superior English set of forwards, O'Gara bossed the game, and the handling and finishing of their experienced backline was slick."

???

Peditro, I am happy to take criticism when I make errors when refereeing. My issue is not with the referee so much, but with the players who are failing in their duty to keep the game clean...

  • 256.
  • At 01:35 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • frank murray wrote:

The only thing England got right was the line out - to meet our president!

  • 257.
  • At 01:35 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Callum wrote:

True Moody is a good player but he is no openside. For years England had a strong pack, now its very very ordinary. Freshwater will be lucky to keep his place with the return of Sheridan earlier than expected.

  • 258.
  • At 01:35 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • robert yates wrote:

I THINK YOUR FIND ENGLAND WRE WELL BEATEN IN THE BACK ROW AND THAT WAS THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE,WORSLEY PLAYED WELL BUT CANNOT DO IT ON HIS OWN!WHY CORRY IS STILL AROUND I HAVE NO IDEA,HE COULDNT LEAD AS CAPTAIN AND HE WILL ALWAYS BE FOUND WANTING IN A GAME AT THAT LEVEL,LUND MADE WAY FOR REES AND RIGHTLY SO,IS IT A COINCIDENCE THAT WORSLEY AND REES PLAY WITH DALLAIGIO(ONE OF ENGLANDS GREATEST BACK ROW FORWARDS)WHO OBVIOUSLY HAS HELPED THE NEXT GENERATION OF WORLD CLASS BACK ROW FORWARDS..DALLIAGIO IS NOW READY TO LEAD FROM THE FRONT FOR ENGLAND ONE FINAL TIME......

  • 259.
  • At 01:41 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Niall O'Kearney wrote:

I don't think English fans should be that disappointed or surprised by that defeat yesterday. Too much was made of the victory over Scotland and, in particular, Wilkinson's performance. England were made to look good against 2 lesser sides (Scotland and Italy) but as soon as they came up against the top NH side their weaknesses are exposed.

As for the RWC - we can, of course, beat France but the ABs will be a mountain.

  • 260.
  • At 01:43 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • england expects wrote:

England's midfield lacks threat. Those who defend Farrell's contribution praise him for not letting D'arcy and O'Driscoll break the line, however, this is not enough. Farrell and Tindall must provide this tight defence but also offer inspiration in attack. A new combination needs to be tried. Personally I would like to see Jason Robinson and Jamie Noon paired in the midfield.

Strettle and Lewsey offered hope yesterday.
Bring Cueto and Ben Cohen back into the fold as well and suddenly England's back offer power and pace. A back line that would take some heat off of the forwards would be:

F/B: JOSH LEWSEY
L/W: BEN COHEN/STRETTLE
R/W: MARK CUETO
I/C: JAMIE NOON
O/C: JASON ROBINSON
F/H: JOHNNY WILKINSON
S/H: HARRY ELLIS

  • 261.
  • At 01:46 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Alain wrote:

I love the game of rugby, for the respect, passion and dicipline showen by players and fans alike.
Unfortunatly it seems that many are now turning to the football way of blame and shame.
Leave Andy Farrel alone in the right set up i'm sure he would shine, he's a leader and a winner.
Certified ref or not, it's easy to critisise from the comfort of an armchair, anyone who knows what they are talking about knows that on the pitch its not always so black and white.
Bad ref desicions and iligal moves help along the way to a victory... a 30 point pounding is down to pure and simple technical, phisical and pasionate superiority.

  • 262.
  • At 01:50 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • John wrote:

How can you say that Horgans push was violent? Strettle knew what he was doing standing in Horgans way. Strettle does not have a broken jawbone or anyother injury from the incident. As far as i know he didnt have any complaints either so what are you moaning about.
Watching the O'Driscoll tackle on morgan again it was a little late. Probably dangerous but no where nearly on the same scale as Lunds on Dempsey.

  • 263.
  • At 01:55 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Connal wrote:

Strettle was one of the better performers yesterday for England, capped by a decent try. But he was facing Horgan and could have moved out of his path - the fact he was watching Horgan's run and not the ball is key. Chris, I think what needs to be outlined is that all the offences you are referring to are committed during every game of rugby. That is the nature of the sport; nowadays things are analysed more because of the technology, but these misdemeanours are to be found in every contest, and are not qualified or unique to one side. It seems that you have only highlighted Ireland's machinations, and not England's, and none of them interfered the theme of that match, which was that Ireland were simply superior. I appreciate that you have accepted this like the gracious Brian Ashton, but his commendation of Ireland was not allied with a turgid list of Irish offences

  • 264.
  • At 01:55 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Terry Doyle wrote:


253 Chris
Gee! get a life. I look at the Horgan/Strettle incident differently. If you look a little closer you will see that Strettle was trying to obstruct Horgan's run..illegal in itself. How Horgan dealt with this was to shield himself from what would have been a high tackle by Strettle.

It was also a good example of a seasoned international player showing a young debutante the realities of the game... and before you ramble on about niceties and biowhatever I think you should consider Lunds tackle and what could have been the outcome, broken neck, serious back injury or head injury. Yes he did apologise, so what! He should be as guilty in your mind as Horgan clearly is..apology or not. I suggest that Horgan may have apologised to strettle at some point yeaterday...if he fealt it neccessary...I do not!

As far as 'dirty stuff' you are in a minority of one if you think Ireland were 'dirty'.

  • 265.
  • At 01:57 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • David wrote:

Surely the point to be made about Farrell, who has proved his skill as a footballer albeit in a different code, is that he had only played 15 competitive Union games at club level before being picked as an international in a critical position. Bad selection and unfair to Farrell who clearly shouldn't be on the pitch against the likes of O'Driscoll. Yet.
On a different note Ashton now has the distinction of having coached Ireland to their biggest defeat against England and England to their biggest defeat against Ireland. Some record!

  • 266.
  • At 02:01 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Karl wrote:

To be fair, Brian Moore was excellent yesterday.

He's obviously English, I have no problem with that. English people do get a bit of rough deal in the tribal stakes. It's alright to be passionately Irish or Welsh or Scottish but the English get slammed for being patriotic.

Moore pinged nearly every offence yesterday. He didn't have a problem with the hit on Morgan because I think he believes the full-back had touched the deck before he was hit. And Morgan was rammed backwards, Dempsey had the legs taken out from underneath him.

But Moore had a big old go at Vickery for binding on the arm and was generally very very knowledgable.

What I can't understand is Eddie Butler. The man is a former international rugby player and now makes his living as a pundit/commentator yet he either doesn't know the rules or pretends he doesn't.

I appreciate that having a commentator like that might help the casual watchers of rugby who don't understand but Butler actually doesn't seem to know anything about scrummaging or the breakdown.

He actually asked Moore yesterday to explain what Vickery was doing yesterday because he claimed he didn't understand.

Anyone with a pair of eyes could see that he was binding on the arm constantly and turning in.

  • 267.
  • At 02:11 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

John,

Have another look at it - if you've even seen it that is. The fact that Strettle isn't injured makes no difference, neither does the fact he's not complaining. Dempsey isn't injured or complaining, yet you mention Lund's tackle on him...be consistent (for the record, I have condemned Lund's tackle already.)

So. Watch it again. It makes no difference whether Strettle deliberately blocked Horgan's path or not. Even if he did, Horgan is not justified in raising his forearm and smashing it into Strettle's face. As I said before, by all means push him out of the way, but a forearm smash is crossing the line, and Horgan should be subject to a citing and a ban for it. Malicious and dirty play has no place in the game we all love.

  • 268.
  • At 02:14 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Owen wrote:

Re Chris, # 192.

U are one truly bitter, bitter man. U start off and finish with "we have to give credit...", but in between u just rant and rave at all of these alleged injustices. Hilarious. Wiped the floor with the England team yesterday. The current England team have zero imagination and no leaders on the pitch, while Ireland are awash with both. Ireland and France both starting to look extremely good for the WC, while England, Scotland and Wales are going backwards fast.

  • 269.
  • At 02:14 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Declan Gallagher - England Based wrote:

I have just spent a few hours reading 240 comments. Fair play to the English supports for congratulating the fantastic Irish performance. As a Irish supporter myself I find it extremely disappointing to read the negative comment from Northern Ireland based supporters, especially the following comment "that they (Ulster supporters) have to listen to a foreign national anthem each time they visit Landsdown Road. I thought we got over this problem years ago with the wonderful "Irelands Call" - regonised and understood by all rugby nations. Its attitudes like these that have gone unnoticed by the public at large. It will happen - formation of an all Ireland soccer team!!! What will be said then?? We are a small nation 5 million people and we need all to pool together.

To go back to the question Dempsey scoring is a little low at 6. He had a great game and his taking the position his. In my opinion he should have got an 8!!

  • 270.
  • At 02:18 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • honestview wrote:

220:Chris

See 213 and 250.

Perhaps one is a frustrated referee1

  • 271.
  • At 02:21 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • tony mc keogh wrote:

how much pleasure can one person take ? to watch moore,davis and hair on me gusset, cringe when england lose yet again is better than you know what?I never watch them during the match,it's to much to take, but when you always lose it's straight over to bbc to watch there faces.i have to thank the e.r.f.u.for the last four years of pure bliss.i dont care if ireland do not win another match so long as france and wales give us two more days like saturday.so come on les blues and le reds. p.s. bbc, give us some stills of there faces to saver in every rugby club house in fantastic ireland.

  • 272.
  • At 02:23 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • polemic wrote:

It may have been a great party at Croke, come the twilight haze of yesterday evening. Trouble is; England didn't turn up.

I don't know from which nursing home Brian Ashton got his forwards, but he ought to return them lest they fall off their, 'Zimmer Frames' and do themselves an injury (always assuming they were not the recipients of a Horgan, forearm smash during yesterday's pleasantries).

Is Mr. Ashton being clever, I asked myself?
Is he trying to deceive other International sides into believing that England is a spent force pror to the World Cup?
An interesting tatic but I don't think it will work.

Your player ratings were a hoot; which suggests you know little or nothing about rugby (not unusual for journalists to prattle on with wild pen in the hope that authority will give sense to their facile imaginings).

For the conspiracy theorists I say, blame the referee....I do.
Let's face it, these days the outcome of a game is more likely to be determined by the referee than the players on the field.
I have one dying wish. I want to see a game where a player turns to the referee and screams, SHUT UP! You're beginning to **** me off. Gone are the days of Clive Norling and his persuasive humnour; more's the pity.
Mind you, in those days we also had housebricks in our handbags.

If you must give ratings then give ratings for value.
A couple of weeks back I raided the pension fund to take my grandson to 'Twickers' (probably, the worst rugby venue on the Planet and designed with the sole purpose of stealing money from the the foolish). I jammed myself into a seat fashioned by a very small pixy and having watched for a while, I turned to my grandson and said, 'If you want to play International rugby then best you change your Nationality - otherwise you will have to play like them. Rugby in a strait-jacket. No, 'joie de vivra' from England. No 'puppy dog' frisk with wagging tail.
Time was when I could walk away from 'Twickers' having watched England lose to Wales and yet, still with a smile on my face. I had watched a great game of rugby with both sides giving it their all. Some with blatant skill, others with Gung-ho charge.
Today we have....Forget it. Why bore you silly with something you already know.

Whom do we blame? The players; the myriad of stupid laws that have been recently introduced; the RFU; the coaches; the referees....Or our own heightened expectations? You choose.

Have to go back to work now. Got to top-up the pension fund. Just think, My grandson will be a young man before next I can afford the pleasures of a day out at, 'Twickers'

  • 273.
  • At 02:26 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Neil wrote:

Ireland won because they played as a team and had the better individuals. Wallace, O`Driscoll and O`Connell were World Class.

The scoreline flattered England but I`d suggest limiting the changes.

The focus, initially, needs to be on teamwork. As Ashton said before the Scotland we need "no bullshit rugby". Go back to basics and limit the changes.

The pack need an old fashioned Telfer style beasting. The support play, not just from the back row, was dire yesterday. The penalty conceeded by Farrell in the first half was a classic case in point. I counted three Irish players, and three seconds, before the English support arrived.

The English maul is generally good. Use it. I can only remember one English proper maul yesterday.

The line out is generally good. They pannicked after losing two on the trot but were generally secure.

I`d play Farrell but keep it simple. Stop moving him about all the time. Work on having runners off his shoulder, coming at depth, and get him to kick more to take the pressure of Wilkinson. The long passes and crash balls should be the exception.

Someone needs to discourage Ellis from box kicks which only create pressure. His breaks are good and his serive has improved.

Lund had a poor game although he isnt normally this bad. Rees was slightly more influential when he came on. I`d start with Rees against France.

I have some concerns about Vickery, at the moment. However, I have reservations about a Freshwater/White front row which is the only current alternative until Stevens has played a few more games. Sheriden is overrated and needs to prove himself.

We have a number of very good second rows. I dont think changing the current two will do anything to improve the lineout. We need consistency.

Having said all that Ireland played well and deserved their win. What an occasion.

Currently, they are a clear second best in the world and capable of beating, as underdogs, of beating the All Blacks.


  • 274.
  • At 02:37 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • loopy wrote:

I think everyone here has realised from an English perspective that the pack is shocking at the mo. We need some aggression in there people who can carry the ball, not plodders like Corry, I think Jones can do that, i would like at some point to see Forrester at 8, just to see, i think he's got more physical and will at least inject some pace. i am a huge fan of Moody he was battling with Hill and Back in their prime, he has the aggression and determination that the pack needs. Tight 5 are a real problem, but i would like to see England at least stick to the selection of Deacon we do need a settled team. I don't think the backs are too far off, although having Tindal and Farrell currently seems a bit lacking of creativity and pace. The real answer to Englands problems would be to forget about results and the world cup and bring in our talented youngsters (which we do have) and get them playing as a team for the next world cup and beyond. Does anyone remember the AB team that came over a couple of years before the 2003 world cup, that was full of youngsters and were beaten quite easily by England, i would have thought a good percentage of that team are stil playing and are the key players for the AB. This is what England need to do, and i think if they do, they will reap the rewards.

  • 275.
  • At 02:42 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

re 253
Chris
Ok we get your point, I really hope you get over this!

There is no place for 'dirty play' in rugby..... There I've finally admitted it. England would have won the match if Horgan behaved like a gentleman. How dare he, shame on him, send him eternally to the 'sinbin'

Is there a special clinic we can go to to rid the game of this 'blight' of dirty play.

The six nations is heading for ruin because 'dirty play' is destroying the game......not!

Chris, please forgive us all for having a different view to you.

  • 276.
  • At 02:48 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Smith wrote:

Having watched the match on 91热爆, I was absolutely enraged by the English commentators biased remarks throughout the match. Time and time again they criticised the Irishs' almost flawless performance, always picking out the faults. Why didn't the 91热爆 put on an Irish and an English commentator to make it a bit less biased. I even heard as Boss ran in for his intercept try, 1 of the commentators swear 'oh god' under his breath. Any time Healey gave his views on the match, it was all about England moves, what England are doing, what they should be doing. Not once did he analyse the Irish plays...disgrace

  • 277.
  • At 02:52 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

Seriously terry. Separate the two things.

There is no link between 'dirty play' and the overall result.

Ireland dominated and fully deserved their convincing victory, as I said right from the start. Foul play by Horgan, or Horan, OR LUND, or O'Driscoll on Morgan, did not influence the result, or have anything to do with Ireland winning or England being well beaten.

Your last post suggests that you think it is acceptable for players to use violent conduct, as long as it doesn't directly impact on the result? Surely this can't be the right way to go? Don't players have a duty as role-models not to go around behaving like thugs?

  • 278.
  • At 02:52 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

Whatever ratings you give to the players, I have to give Brian Moore a 10...he played a blinder yesterday!

  • 279.
  • At 02:56 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

Seriously terry. Separate the two things.

There is no link between 'dirty play' and the overall result.

Ireland dominated and fully deserved their convincing victory, as I said right from the start. Foul play by Horgan, or Horan, OR LUND, or O'Driscoll on Morgan, did not influence the result, or have anything to do with Ireland winning or England being well beaten.

Your last post suggests that you think it is acceptable for players to use violent conduct, as long as it doesn't directly impact on the result? Surely this can't be the right way to go? Don't players have a duty as role-models not to go around behaving like thugs?

  • 280.
  • At 03:07 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

I didn't realise we had to comment on the match as well..ok then her goes!

England need a couple of backs that can act as forwards the same way as BOD and Darcy do. Both were in the thick of it yesterday, helping out the forwards in defence and using their running skills in attack. Some of irelands forwards have 'back' related skills too.

Follow Irelands lead in this (new Zealand play this way too) and you might move forward.

  • 281.
  • At 03:15 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • jason wrote:

As predicted here a fortnight ago England were swatted aside like a pesky fly by the strong arm of an irish road worker. After reading some hysterical & unrealistic postings since the start of the 6 nations about how England have all of a sudden become contenders again, its good that they have now played a good team for all to see how in-adequate a squad they have. May i also say that it was also good that they didn't get any help from the ref this time as well as this has undoubtedly been a major factor of their wins in the previous games (free tries & pens) despite no mention from the pro england commentary brigade. The faces of inverdale & guscott were priceless as well as the moans & agitations of the biased chariot swinger himself brian moore. Roll on france for maybe even a bigger drubbing & i also suspect that wales have too much in armoury for the weak english team who are nothing without pens for good old wilko to kick. Well done ireland you were very efficient and skillful in demolishing england in all depts.

  • 282.
  • At 03:20 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Karl wrote:

Chris,

Have a go at Horgan all you want. It was foul play despite the fact that Strettle was trying to block him off. It was made worse by the fact that Strettle is so much shorter than Horgan. If Shane had put his arm up like that against, say, Cohen then it would have been a fairly acceptable shove in the chest.

O'Connell was pinged for a high tackle on Wilkinson which was fairly tame and Wikinson had checked back inside. Fair enough, it was a foul.

Horan's alleged 'knee' on Wilkinson isn't even worth talking about. It had all the strength and malice of the Scottish pack.

But O'Driscoll's so-called foul play on Morgan was non-existent. The referee was right beside the incident, saw everything and awarded the mark. O'Driscoll hit him a milisecond after he had caught the ball. Was he in the air? I don't think so but it was so close that neither the referee nor O'Driscoll could possibly have said for definite that he was (unlike the Dempsey hit).

What are players who follow up and unders supposed to do? Wait respectfully for the full-back to catch the ball and claim an easy mark?

Fair play to Morgan for hanging on but getting smashed after you take a Garryowen is what being an international full-back is all about. You're doing Morgan a disservice by whinging about that one.

  • 283.
  • At 03:30 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Sean Kinsella wrote:

Hmm....You never beat England, you only score more points

Irish biased referee?

Cobblers (frankly)

Grewcock deserved his sin bin (probably booked it in advance to avoid disappointment), whereas Lund was allowed away with the kind of tackle last seen in 'Roger Ramjet' That's before we consider Vickery and his 'interesting' interpretation of the scrummaging laws, and Tindall/Farrell living offside, plus English players (oh the irony of this) complaining about skullduggerous shoving at the ruck, when they gave rise to the practice at Twickenham (against Ireland), in 2004

Horgan should possibly have been yellow-carded for his stiff arm on Strettle, but the boy didn't really do himself any favours by (deliberately) standing directly in Horgans path of advance...if you're going to stand there, then you can (and will) be shifted and clearly that was the official assessment of same, as Horgan stayed on board. Welcome to international rugby Mr Strettle and don't be lording it over British Lions centres (Gordon D'Arcy) when you score, as their contribution to the game (speaking kindly) considerably outweighed yours.

Jonny Wilkinson was anonymous all game...claptrap that he can't play behind a beaten pack, as he's rescued several games for England in that situation...problem is that he's no longer the player whose twisting tricks and turns deceived defences worldwide. JW's been found out...he was average (at BEST) on the Lions tour of 2005 and he's declined still further in 2007. There are other (and better) out-half options for Ashton, but I suspect JW pulls in the sponsorship bucks, that other No.10's fail to reach, Still, if yesterday means an end to all those dreadful newspaper articles he penned (maybe 3 years back) about England being brilliant and the best etc, then that's one particular bonus of beating him and his support cast at Croke Park.

England have problems and they're welcome to them (and the French)

Ireland march on regardless

SEAN

  • 284.
  • At 03:30 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

There is no link between 'dirty play' and the result. Agreed! I object because your view is exactly that, your view of events. Strettle tried to obstruct Horgans run. Illegal right!...what Horgan did was get him out of the way. Unceremoniously, I agree and his elbow was high. I have looked at the event and certain that Strettles attempted tackle was high too, also illegal. Because Horgan is a wily' old winger, he was able to deal with it easily.,..it was nothing more and nothing less. Brian Moore made the point that Strettles reaction to Horgan was that of a player that new what he did in the first place, was illegal.

You go to far by condemning him outright, he is not a dirty player, he never has been and I strongly dissagree with your perception that 'dirty play' is an integral part of the game of rugby. It is not. Think like Brian Moore and you will realise this.

Rugby is a tough contact sport and spectators need to have an expectation that some events on the field will reflect that. lets not go down the road of trying to sanitise it....or it will lose its attraction.

  • 285.
  • At 03:35 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

From reading these posts it strikes me a little sad that the Irish can get so excited about beating such a lousy team as England were yesterday. You would think you had just won the world cup.

The reality is you are going to finish second in what was only ever a 2 horse race. And that's assuming you beat Scotland and Italy. And you're jumping and down over that?

2nd best...first among the losers. You've got the best team you have had in years, settled, well-drilled and consistent - and you still can't win a major championship.

Ever wondered why you can't?

  • 286.
  • At 03:43 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Kieran wrote:

Ireland played well yesterday, but they beat a very bad England side. Besides JW, JL, MT they have NOTHING.
If Ireland want to win the world cup, they need to get cynical. Two weeks ago against France we had a penalty advantage in front of the posts but kept playing and lost the penalty.

If that was George Gregan you'd see him 'accidently' knock it on. I'm not saying cheat like Martin Johnson or Neil Back but just play to the limit of the rules.
If we don't win our group in September which contains both Franve and Arg, we play NZ in next round.

As for Enland's chances of retaining the world cup, the only man who can save you is the guy who won it for you in `03. At full fitnss he is still the MVP in world rugby. Enland's pack (esp front row) and midfield need major surgery to have a monkey's chance however

  • 287.
  • At 03:46 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Honourable Intentions wrote:

Sadly the Chris's of this world are clutching at straws with their bemoaning of 'dirty play'. Playing to the limits of the Laws, and on occasion stepping beyond them, are unfortunately commonplace across all leagues and competitions. Whilst the benefit of video replay allows armchair pundits to exercise their rightous indignation at these actions, I'd suggest they spend more time on the pitch implementing the Laws of the game to eliminate this 'dirty play'.

Shame that these rightous people can't come up with any suggestions on how England can improve. Maybe that requires more thought and understanding than picking out individual events?

  • 288.
  • At 03:49 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Jacko wrote:

Its a simple game; you can't play without the ball and you can't play going backwards. Ireland kept going forward, England had nothing to cut their defence with. What frightens the opposition is pace. England lack cut because they lack pace, both up front and behind. Most of all, they lack a thinking rugby brain, on the pitch, directing play. Bring on Mike Catt, face that fact that England need to bring in the young boys, blood them and let Catty shown them how to think on their feet. And respect Ireland for their sheer passion, skill and pace; they gave us a lesson.

  • 289.
  • At 03:50 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Karl wrote:

QUOTE 281: "As for Enland's chances of retaining the world cup, the only man who can save you is the guy who won it for you in `03. At full fitnss he is still the MVP in world rugby."

Yes, but what chance do they have of persuading Martin Johnson to come out of retirement?

He's the man who won the 2003 World Cup not Drop goal Johnny.

  • 290.
  • At 03:52 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

Interesting suggestion by Owen (268) that Ireland are starting to look good for the World Cup.

Much as it pains me as an Englishman to say it, yesterday was not a big game for Ireland. They are a top-level side at the moment, which England clearly are not. So it was a game that Ireland should have, and did, won easily.

Looking at Ireland's results, the pattern is clear. When they play the REALLY big games, they choke. France in the previous round is just this sort of big game. With the pressure of another lost Grand Slam lifted, and the return of their talisman, England always should have been easily dispatched, and were. (Well done!)

Owen, you're right, France ARE starting to look good for the World Cup. England, Scotland, and Wales ARE going backwards fast.

But Ireland, looking good for the World Cup after one good performance against poor opposition having failed to show up against France two weeks ago? No, no. Ireland are a fine side, but anyone who backs them to win the World Cup is wasting their money. Once they get to the knockout rounds, they will most likely choke. As usual.

  • 291.
  • At 03:53 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • frederic wrote:

It is not fair to slag just a few english players. I will not use the "bad day at the office" says but JW was not there yesterday. He is a great ball kicker, so use him for the kicks, at another position than 10. Their is enought young players in the premiership to choose from to build a good team for the future, calling back 2003 glory 30 years old will neither fix the team or bring any long terms solutions.

In short, over the first 2 games, Robinson 15 points, Wilkinson 42 points - a total of 57 out of 62 totals.

England needs young players to come on board now!!!

O'Connell and O'Gara were very good individually, the Irish pack great and dangerous and Well done to the all team, the win on the day is for Ireland.

  • 292.
  • At 03:58 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Colin HIckey wrote:

To Chris and the others.

All this talk about bad referee calls makes me sick. Ireland lost out on what was very likely to be 7 points against France when the ref didn't play the advantage rule. Did you see the Irish team calling for the ref to be punished?
No you did not, good players accept the referee's calls and get on with the game and good rugby supporters know that we have the benefit of multi angle action replay with pundit's circling players etc. the referees do not. They have to make the call as the see it or based on information from the touch judge.

Lund's infringement was obviously not malicious or the ref would have carded him, yes he was lucky to get away with it. I think only Grewcock being in the bin saved him. If it had been malicious nothing would have saved him.

As for Grewcock he got pinged for what he did get over it. If Stringer did play slight of hand well that is playing the ref and it does win games. Stop bitching about it, England have used the same tactics in the past and will again. I bet we won't hear any complaints then.

The referee cannot see every infraction even when standing beside the players comitting the infraction a ref can miss it because he is watching the ball carrier.
Tricks in the ruck, maul or scum are often missed by a ref because they happen where he cannot see them. We only see these fouls because there are so many cameras.

Take the beating like a good supporter and accept the better team won on the day. It's bad sportsmanship to bitch about the ref even if you win, when you lose and do it........... well it makes you look like schoolboy supporters.

  • 293.
  • At 04:03 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • graham wrote:

i have to say well done to ashton, for the first time in a long time an england coach admitted defeat by a better side, now england might be able to learn from mistakes made yesterday. in the robinson era, excuses meant that they played well enough, decisions went against them, how can any team learn and improve from that??ashton was never going to be a quick fix, and needs to sort of problems left from before, but as an irishman, i would like to see england back to the team they once were (still allowing ireland to beat them obviously) and make the 6 nations the best competition in th eworld, and start to worry the s hemisphere!
congrats have to go to italy too, was glad to see them work a try of their own at the end too, well done.

  • 294.
  • At 04:05 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

I remember when England lost to the All Blacks back in 99 and one of the daftest comments I heard after the game came from Jerry Guscott when he said: " we've shown today that we can win against the All Blacks,"

The Irish are saying the same about the French. If you can beat them how come you lost to them? Doesn't matter if it's by 1 point or ten, by half time or in the last minute. You didn't win. You lost.

Having the mentality that you can beat a team even when they've just beaten you probably sums up why they KEEP beating YOU.

Oh it does make me laugh.

  • 295.
  • At 04:07 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Kia Rose wrote:

On this and other blogs, I have been impressed with the sensitivity shown by most English people to the history surrounding yesterday's match. Like the 1973 match it was a demonstration of true true sporting character. You cannot separate sport from politics no matter what anyone says, but you can use sport to transcend the bitterness and resentments that can exist due to poor politicians. Occasionally sportsmen and women are asked to take on that role. John Pullen and his team did it in '73; Martin Johnson was just extraordinarily rude a few years ago; and yesterday the crowd in Croke Park played their role and told RSF (Republican Sinn Fein) that their continuing harping resentment has no place in an Ireland which no longer tugs the forelock to England. We are passed that, both England and Ireland.

We cannot forget our history, it makes us (our nation, whichever that is) who we are today, but we have a choice - we can wallow in self-pity or we can grow. Yesterday a lot of Ireland - GAA, IRFU, Croke Park crowd, people around the world who claim Irish descent - showed that they have grown and will not remain in the squabbles of yesterday which are gradually taking on the spectacle of playground pettiness.

Be proud of your history - whoever you are - but don't use it to emotionally blackmail others with

Just thought I would share a text which is doing the rounds in Ireland today;

Gerry Adams is to lay a wreath in Croke Park tomorrow to remember the fifteen Englishmen massacred there on Saturday!!

  • 296.
  • At 04:09 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Nick wrote:

Get lost Healey, Guscott and Carling; would like to see what you guys would have done with the rubbish ball provided by our forwards yesterday.

Add to that Stuart Barnes who on Sky's Rugby Club pre 6 Nations was calling for Farrell to be picked as the in form 12. This is the same Stuart Barnes who's calling for him to go in today's Sunday Times. Give him a chance and instead look to our outplayed forwards in need of a rocket.

Clear off to comment on football where all this ridiculous back-stabbing belongs.

  • 297.
  • At 04:17 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

to 284

Excited?, you bet. England are the current world champions so it was good to thrash 'em.

Yes, the six nations is a two horse race but at least we're at the races.

By the way, Egland play france next. I assume from your statement you have already lost that one have you?

  • 298.
  • At 04:20 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Connal wrote:

People seem to forget that England 'choked' at least three times before winning the Grand Slam in 2003, like in the wonderful day when the game was postponed before the foot and mouth outbreak, with Keith Wood rampaging over for the try and yet another deserved Irish win. It is France who have won the Grand Slams over the years; England have actually been poor on this front, though I'm sure the World Cup makes up for that record. The pattern may be similar. Ireland will fight for the Grand Slam again next year, even though vital games will not be at Croke Park. France are also a terrific side themselves, but its strange to find an Englishman admitting their side isn't up to it and pointing to France's brilliance. One things for certain, and it's good that many have recognised - England are certainly hopeless and were pounded to the rafters yesterday by a superior side

  • 299.
  • At 04:29 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Sean Kinsella wrote:

To KJfraser;_

I'm sorry but you're being a bad (and rather disrespectful) loser

Sarurday's scorline flattered your team (quite frankly) and it could have been 50-55+ by the end

And as regards 'major championships' then how about The Triple Crown?

Triple Crowns are the Six Nations buiding blocks for bigger and better things to come....England aren't in contention for same this season, but trust me if you were, then the TC would be the best thing since sliced Webb Ellis bread wouldn't it?

SEAN

  • 300.
  • At 04:30 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Colin Hickey wrote:

To Nick,
I couldn't agree with you more....

  • 301.
  • At 04:33 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Tones wrote:

Re Chris: 289

Maybe it is a little short sighted from me and other posters on this page, but I drew an immense amount of satisfaction from yesterdays performance and result.

The main reason was because of the amount of posts, on these pages and others, saying how England are immesurably superior to us and how we would bottle it in "Choke" Park. Well, we showed all of those naysayers with a phenomenal display and knocked the wheels off that sputtering chariot.

I believe that the loss to France was extremely unfortunate, especially after coming from behind to take a lead into the last few minutes. However, I also believe that that narrow loss could provide the sting that is required to toughen us up for the big prize in the Autumn.

  • 302.
  • At 04:45 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Ed2003 wrote:

Johnson, Hill, Back, Dallaglio, Thompson, Wilkinson, Dawson, Greenwood, Robinson. All of them made the great team of 2003, not just JW. Notice the difference? Yes in all positions the skill level has gone down considerably.

But you know what? When it was said that we needed to start from scratch again, that is exactly what was meant. That means not changing the team after one defeat to a top 3 side in the world.

It means recognising that at the moment we are a really poor side, coming to terms with that and just accepting that this team needs to lose more times before they come together as a good quality team.

  • 303.
  • At 04:56 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Chris wrote:

Tones, I think that's wishful thinking. Teams get ready for World Cups by having finally found the knack of putting ALL the big games away. Witness England before the last World Cup.

After struggling to nail down Grand Slams for a number of years, in 03, they nailed it, finishing off by destroying Ireland even more convincingly than the result we saw the other way yesterday. (Wasn't that a Grand Slam chance spurned for Ireland as well?)

Then they went and won in Australia and New Zealand (twice), then won warm-up games, only narrowly losing to France's first choice XV with their back-up side. If my memory serves me correctly (distant past now ha ha), the World Cup final was their 17th or 18th consecutive win over a Southern hemisphere side.

Losing big games and learning from it is what you need to do the year before, or two, three years before a World Cup. By the year of the competition, you need to be nailing all these big games (i.e. the France game, not so much the England game). Losing and learning is not an option in World Cup year.

Ireland played extremely well against mediocre opposition yesterday, and congratulations to them for the clinical way they dispatched England. But when the big crunch game was on against France, they came up short and were found wanting, both physically (Clerc running through tired tackles easily) and mentally (secure a kick-off, run the clock down, play territory. Don't make a mess of it and allow a French winger to come straight back at you).

Ireland always come up short in the big games - witness just the ONE Grand Slam, and no World Cups. (Any World Cup semis, or is the QF the furthest Ireland have gone?)

There are plenty of worrying thoughts for England, make no mistake about that. The worrying thought for Irish fans must be that their guys simply don't have that extra ounce of quality required to put the MOST crucial games away, and without O'Driscoll in the side, they lack leadership - and dynamism up front as O'Connell creaks mentally when captain. To rest a nation's World Cup hopes on one man's dodgy hamstrings (however good that man is), is optimistic in the extreme. (Not even England did that in 03, they had quality throughout)

Well done yesterday. But its a big leap of faith to make Ireland genuine World Cup contenders.

  • 304.
  • At 04:57 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

re 298
You know..I could not agree more. France v Ireland in the autumn at the world cup is gonna be a good one. Ireland a contender with no pressure like that of yesterday. All the pressure will be on SH teams and England. Croke park against France was painful but the embers will remain and France will be under lots of emotional pressure in September.

The question is not who will win the WC (New Zealand will). It is who will be still standing by the quarter finals? Ireland, on present form can reasonably be one of those teams. Get to that point and it opens up. England used to be the bogey team for what used to be called 'the plucky Irish'. Now it is 'Les Bleu' who play like us, fast, flowing, strong and clever rugby. The difference is we have an 'axe to grind' now and where better to grind it than the World Cup.

You know what the french are like when they are put under real pressure from the french crowd.

  • 305.
  • At 04:59 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • joey wrote:

I must say I am very proud to be an Irish person today and comments like no. 283 just brings to mind the words "sore loser". It amazes me that the fact that we were delighted to win yesterday bothers people. I'm wondering though if the scoreline was reversed so to speak would you be so self critical to your own team. Well done Ireland and well done to the English team for having the guts to come over and play us but then again they came in the 70's when the troubles were at their height and no other country would grace us with a match. Come on 283 let us enjoy our win and have the dignity to accept Englands defeat yesterday.

  • 306.
  • At 05:11 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

to 296

So you delude yourself even further by pretending you beat the 'World Champions'. How many from 2003 are in the team Ireland hammered yesterday? 4? Maybe 5 if you count subs.

Yeah, I am saying France will beat England. I can see it for what it is - an uphill struggle for a misfiring 'team'. ( 15 individuals is a better description).

I really admired the Irish performance yesterday. I love seeing the game played properly. It can be an ugly sight when it's scrappy and disjointed. With the exception of ROG I thought Ireland had the classic qualities in every position. You could look at each member of the team and guess what position he should be playing in. It's good to see that at the moment but bl**dy hell... I think the over reaction to this victory is crazy. Ireland beat a c**p team. So what?

You might think you are at the races... I think you forget about the real thoroughbreds down under who are going breeze past Ireland on their way to becoming the 'real' world champions. I doubt if you'll beat them.

  • 307.
  • At 05:25 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Sean M wrote:

Cant we just be grateful for a fantastic game of rugby, forget the should have beens and he should have been sent off for this or that, its part and parcel of the game.....at least no body ruined their hairsyles and lost the keys to their Aston Martins, while their WAGS spent 拢20,000 on their nails!!

  • 308.
  • At 05:27 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • waino wrote:

Too many pundits have rugby experience outside the scrum. We are actually very lucky to have Brian Moore and Keith Woods providing commentary, but such is the protocol in the front row union that they won't either tell us what really goes on, or how relevant the hooker's role is in the game of rugby, even in these days of politically correct uncontested scrums. Pundits rarely give Moore or Woods the credit for the full contribution they made to their sides.
If the front row dominate, you can start calling the shots of the game. Only then can you start to think about the rest of the side. With the weight advantage England had, they should have taken out Ireland with a decent front row. Play it tight early to soften up the opposition pack, then you can take the steam outof their back row. They don't look as good in the loose, and the backs start looking pedestrian.
Unfortunately Ireland have a very skilled and creative front row. They went about their business very efficiently and quietly. They nullified the weight advantage, which allowed the Irish loose forwards and the girls in the backs to look very good.
Yes I would agree that the Irish backs have strengths which English don't have, but we have never done nippy backs in england like the celts!

Af was a RL loose forward, but the code doesn't translate that directly to RU. He is something like Vinty Karalius of Widnes, who was nearing retirement in my playing days, but was still one great rugby player. Has a helluva pass and a helluva tackle. And a good rugby brain. He is not like snake-hips BOD or kitten hips O'Gara, but he has strengths they don't have, and if used properly could unsettle any side.

Wilco is prabably better behind a losing pack than O'gara. But with a winning front row he will always deliver. I would rather have had the England first receivers when I played hooker. They won't do girlie things with good ball, just to appeal to the cameras

England have athletic and strong centres and wings to draw on, but BA really needs to look at the front row before doing anything else!

  • 309.
  • At 05:29 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • waino wrote:

Too many pundits have rugby experience outside the scrum. We are actually very lucky to have Brian Moore and Keith Woods providing commentary, but such is the protocol in the front row union that they won't either tell us what really goes on, or how relevant the hooker's role is in the game of rugby, even in these days of politically correct uncontested scrums. Pundits rarely give Moore or Woods the credit for the full contribution they made to their sides.
If the front row dominate, you can start calling the shots of the game. Only then can you start to think about the rest of the side. With the weight advantage England had, they should have taken out Ireland with a decent front row. Play it tight early to soften up the opposition pack, then you can take the steam outof their back row. They don't look as good in the loose, and the backs start looking pedestrian.
Unfortunately Ireland have a very skilled and creative front row. They went about their business very efficiently and quietly. They nullified the weight advantage, which allowed the Irish loose forwards and the girls in the backs to look very good.
Yes I would agree that the Irish backs have strengths which English don't have, but we have never done nippy backs in england like the celts!

Af was a RL loose forward, but the code doesn't translate that directly to RU. He is something like Vinty Karalius of Widnes, who was nearing retirement in my playing days, but was still one great rugby player. Has a helluva pass and a helluva tackle. And a good rugby brain. He is not like snake-hips BOD or kitten hips O'Gara, but he has strengths they don't have, and if used properly could unsettle any side.

Wilco is prabably better behind a losing pack than O'gara. But with a winning front row he will always deliver. I would rather have had the England first receivers when I played hooker. They won't do girlie things with good ball, just to appeal to the cameras

England have athletic and strong centres and wings to draw on, but BA really needs to look at the front row before doing anything else!

  • 310.
  • At 05:47 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • frederic wrote:

In reference to 291 and 302:

In order for not changing the team after one defeat, you will need two things:

1/ RFU authorities to step down from their"englishness" to win everything right now.

2/ And to appoint a coach, TO LEAVE HIM ALONE AND GIVE HIM TIME AND SUPPORT to mature new players and yes, it means loosing games at all stages!!!

Italy is showing what they can do, and they haven't got the support back home that Rugby got in England.

In short, without going into politics, GIVE A BREAK TO THE COACH, LET HIM DO HIS STUFF. BUT THE RFU HAVE TO GIVE HIM TIME, NOT JUST 4 AND HALF GAMES!!!

As well, the press could give them a break. I understand the proud history and palmares of England but any teams not planning ahead of team with young players ready in the background will have problems when older players retire from international duties.

As for the few comments on Ireland in the WCR, well it is not only France you need to worry about. Never heard of Argentina? They are breathing down your neck in the world ranking!!!

  • 311.
  • At 05:49 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

to 299,

Sean,

I have enormous respect for the Irish performance yesterday. They played as a team and - let's face it - they can only play what's in front of them.

You say the score flattered England. You're quite right. Against a team that bad you should have put 60 or more on the board but it didn't happen. This is why I am so surprised at the Irish euphoria.

Triple Crowns??? Scotland, Wales and England. If you're going to get the champagne out after beating those three I'd imagine a quarter final spot at the WC will be a National holiday for you.

For all the talk, supposition and pride, Ireland have lost against the one team in the NH that has got their act reasonably together. The other sides are pretty much cannon fodder.

Sorry.

KJ

  • 312.
  • At 05:51 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:

Have to agree with kj frazer and what Brian Moore stated earlier this week about Ireland- we choked and totally blew the grand slam against France.
We have beaten a poor England set- up and it was a great win. However, second best team in the world- I don`t think so! We have consistently failed to beat this French side in the last three years. I have yet to see us really dominate the first 15-20 minutes of a test match against a top 5 world side- Australia apart last november. (Remember the start of the game last year against England at Twickenham?)
In regards to winning the WC from an Irish perspctive- lets keep our heads screwed on! To have a realistic chance of winning the WC we MUST win the group or else face N Zealand in Cardiff. Yes, we could possibly beat N Zealand but we have yet to prove this! Thus, beating France in the group is a huge perogative (not least Argentina). We must remember we have yet to defeat the French in the W C. Lets not run off on a blind tangent after yestersdays display.
I believe this Irish team should not be satisfied with anything less than the Championship. With the team we have developed, we must push on. Yes, it would be nice to win the T Crown again this year but we`re capable of more.
This team has three more great years ahead but with much still to prove. Potential is one thing- lets make it count!

  • 313.
  • At 05:54 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:

Have to agree with kj frazer and what Brian Moore stated earlier this week about Ireland- we choked and totally blew the grand slam against France.
We have beaten a poor England set- up and it was a great win. However, second best team in the world- I don`t think so! We have consistently failed to beat this French side in the last three years. I have yet to see us really dominate the first 15-20 minutes of a test match against a top 5 world side- Australia apart last november. (Remember the start of the game last year against England at Twickenham?)
In regards to winning the WC from an Irish perspctive- lets keep our heads screwed on! To have a realistic chance of winning the WC we MUST win the group or else face N Zealand in Cardiff. Yes, we could possibly beat N Zealand but we have yet to prove this! Thus, beating France in the group is a huge perogative (not least Argentina). We must remember we have yet to defeat the French in the W C. Lets not run off on a blind tangent after yestersdays display.
I believe this Irish team should not be satisfied with anything less than the Championship. With the team we have developed, we must push on. Yes, it would be nice to win the T Crown again this year but we`re capable of more.
This team has three more great years ahead but with much still to prove. Potential is one thing- lets make it count!

  • 314.
  • At 06:00 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • ta2625 wrote:

With respect to the Horgan - Strettle incident. Strettle does not have to move out of his way, by law so long as he doesn't deviate from his line and in doing so block the player kicking he's fine.

Leading with the forearm / elbow is dangerous and illegal in any situation and should result in a yellow card.

Incidently Lund should have been binned as well, it doesn't matter if it's an accident or if you apologise quickly it's still the most dangerous thing players can do to each other and as a full back irritates me intensly.

Well played Ireland deserved winners.

  • 315.
  • At 06:01 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

kjfrazer (303)

Stop spliting hairs and curb your anger. Your comments are unreal and nonsense. Your belief that O Gara is not world class shows you know little of the game that you talk of.

Rugby is a team game, O Gara did everything asked of him including penalties and conversions. He pushed england back with the boot regularly. The other players, subs included, played their part wonderfully too.

Don't use your inept performance or lack of knowledge of the game to put down a team that has beaten you in the last 4 out of 5 encounters! You might want to look at the autumn international results too.

Finally, your attitude highlights a very english trait. When you win its great, when you get beaten you say 'oh our team is not good anyway'. Hence, doing everything to deduct from everyone else's victory ...except you own.

As for the WC, I'll wait to see the games before I pass judgement rather than falling into that other english trait of judgement before trial. Passing judgment on anothers victory celebration is representative of a hidden bitter attitude!

  • 316.
  • At 06:14 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Shane wrote:

Am I the only one who thinks the English backs actually did alright? The defence against a constant onslaught was as good as can be expected given the quality of the players facing them. Fair enough, going forward they have absolutely nothing but in defence I thought they did alright. The forwards are a different matter of course - as a Munster fan it feels quite sweet to have proved that just because an English club won in Limerick doesn't mean we have a poor pack in general - we were just outplayed that day, like England were today.

Ireland were magnificent. I genuinely believe this is what we need; if we can take the France game, learn from it, and use that to demonstrate how important it is to play for the entire game with such intensity then it is a fact that the only team standing in our way is NZ, and I personally don't believe even they could have lived with us yesterday. Playing in patches means you lose 17-20 to France, playing for 80 minutes means you beat England by 30 points.

Two more points - ROG is the best fly-half in the world (alongside Carter). Consistently brilliant for club and country, anyone who saw his performance in the HC semi-final and final and for Ireland in the autumn as well as today will not be able to find any legitimate argument (not to mention the penalty in the last minute to beat Leicester at Welford Road this season). Also, Strings ahead of Boss, purely because he gives us the quick ball and if our midfield is denied that space on the ball, we can be nullified (as we were against France). No contest at scrum-half.

I'm only 19 but this is on a par with Munster winning the Heineken Cup as the pinnacle of pride.

  • 317.
  • At 06:19 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Sean wrote:

I like the fact that Brian Ashton is improving the back's moves (although in fairness, my bathroom door could have come up with better backs moves than Andy Robinson), but Ashton isn't selecting the right players to play running rugby with. With the right selections at 12 & 13 and possibly even 10, I think those moves would become much more potent and penetrating. We have easily the slowest centre combination in international rugby. Farrell has very good distribution skills but is painfully slow which restricts his ability to break the defensive line no matter how good a line he runs. Tindall knows how to run straight at the opposition, about it really... He's an effective battering ram but his distribution, running angles and pace leave a bit to be desired. Bring Stuart Abbott in at 12 to run with pace and at good angles, as well as finally show if he is an international class 12. Then at 13 put Noon or Tait. Noon is an underrated angle runner and can play the battering ram if needed as well as providing decent speed. Tait runs good lines with great pace, still not convinced if he's quite strong enough yet. Flood should get a run at 10. Out of all England's flyhalfs, he has the best distribution skills by far and always seems to be able to create space out wide. I felt bad for Wilko as he was barely 'passed' fit to play and probably should have been rested.

What we needed to do yesterday was get the ball to Strettle and allow him space to beat Shane Horgan. While Horgan is fast for a big man, I doubt he'd have been any match for Strettle and having seen Strettle play 7s in HOng Kong, I can vouch that he is a sublime finisher and absolutely lethal in 1 on 1 situations given a bit of space to manouver, not just against the likes of Madagascar or China, he skinned anyone he went up against.

  • 318.
  • At 06:20 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • dmc wrote:

to kjfrazer et al

Well, you're all such good losers! How sad to see you all disappearing up your own tortured backsides trying to convince yourselves that England getting beaten by Ireland 4 out of the last 4 games doesn't really count because England are just a crap team with a load of crap players. Yesterday's game was decided as much by
national pride and the lack of it as anything else. Can't see much of it among you lot.

  • 319.
  • At 06:29 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • JGK wrote:

Let's be honest folks!

Every game is different and the final result is what counts. Ireland lost to France, but what a great game of rugby it was. Yes Ireland could have beaten the French but on the day we didn't. Yesterday, there was no question as to who would win. Even after 3 minutes when England went ahead, it was clear that only one team had the stamina to go all the way,( Bearing in mind Ireland lost so many games in the last 20 minutes throughout the 80's and 90's).Ireland and France are the current in form Northern Hemisphere teams and both are capable of turning over two of the three Southern hemisphere teams. You don't need me to tell you which S H team could be the problem! But who Knows,,,???

  • 320.
  • At 06:35 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Jim McGuigan wrote:

Great to read such fair, intelligent expert views from such a wealth of astute officiandos. Maybe they should be recruited into running the England Rugby Team. No lack of confidence here. If only all those full time journalists who ranted and raved about JW, BOD, POC and AB-NZ rugby knew as much as these bloggers. But then the journalists must rant and rave before the matches are finished and they have generally observed first class rugby at close quarters. How many of your pundits can claim the same? By the sound of the above post-hoc rantings, not too many. So let's be fair let's have some predictions recorded from the blogger experts above before the next matches are played or as the deluded frazer et al would have it is everybody poor and the winners only slightly less poor in NH rugby.

  • 321.
  • At 06:46 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

Well said, I hope kjfrazer would aspire to your interpretation of yesterday and the future of irish rugby. Instead of taking a view inspired by limited knowledge of the game.

O Gara is unassuming and quietly goes about his business. The only reason he is not rated by some in the UK is they only have eyes for their beloved Wilko. Yes he is good but rugby is a 15 man team and a flyhalf can only direct the game if the other 14 do their job too.

  • 322.
  • At 06:56 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • frederic wrote:

to 320

my bookies ticket:

France to win
Ireland to triple crown
Italy to win at least 2 of their games

as an one bet.

Not that I want to defend myself, but I will not call myself an expert at Rugby. I used to play but am a supporter now. And when I say I am a supporter, I support the game of Rugby and all my comments so far about England are just observations from a distance.
My dream will be that every game I go to will be like NZ versus France back in 1999!!!
That was a game!

  • 323.
  • At 07:04 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Dave wrote:

One thing i just can't seem to understand is people saying we have to win the group at the WC to have any chance cos otherwise we'll face NZ in 1/4s...well chances are NZ will be in the final anyway so what difference does it really make?! I certainly believe that Ireland have a chance at the WC though NZ are heavy favourites and France 2nd faves id say...the squad (not just the starting line up) is very strong and contrary to what some ppl think there are many players outside of even the 22 capable of filling the boots of the majority of players in the side if needed (other than a few obvious essential players!)

It just takes a run of games in the WC with Ireland playing at their best and perhaps NZ misfiring and Ireland have more than a chance...history tells us there have been a fair share of teams with outside chances that have gone on to win big tournaments who just went on a good run at the right time e.g. england WC 2003! nah pains me to say it but they were quality really!

id say at the moment ireland along with France and possibly Australia are the only sides NZ would prefer to avoid in the WC...would be good to get a NZ fans perspective on that if any of you read this!

  • 324.
  • At 07:10 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Kate wrote:

Commenting on 314.

I totally agree with you, i play rugby and i have always since i was small been taught that doing what Strettle did, standing there is completely legal, good tactics in some situations, as long as he did not stop Horgan, Strettle can stand anywhere he likes.Horgan leading with his arm/elbow should of been a yellow card, its just dangerous play.

Lund's tackle was awful and should of been sent off, so to be honest both sides were as bad as each other with dangerous play.

  • 325.
  • At 07:26 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Clothesline wrote:

What is all this nonsense about Horgan's arm into Strettle's face being a sickener. It was a kick ahead and Strettle tried to obstruct the runner. I personally find the deliberate obstruction of the runner after a kick ahead as one of the lowest forms of cheating. The cheat Strettle got punished.

  • 326.
  • At 07:32 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

and they say the English are arrogant...

  • 327.
  • At 07:49 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Niall O'Kearney wrote:

To kjfrazer

You certainly have a bee in your bonnet chap...sad really.

You haven't beaten Ireland during your reign as world champions which is significant despite what you say - very 'Brian Moore' like actually. You poo poo other sides performances by discrediting your own.

On Guscott's point about England showing that they could beat the ABs - I think you totally miss the point. There is a world of difference between narrowly losing a see-saw match and being totally outclassed - the points margin is irrelevant - it's the class and style of play that's crucial. Ireland were not outclassed by France and could have won.

  • 328.
  • At 08:16 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Ed2003 wrote:

"Am I the only one who thinks the English backs actually did alright?"

No, you're not. I don't think they had 'absolutely nothing' in way of attack either. Or at least it was not their fault that large breaks were not made. They put together some nice first phase moves which made decent yards.

The difference is that the Irish backs had started the second phase within 4 seconds of the first tackle being made. At that stage the English forwards were still attempting to make a clear out (pathetically) and Ellis wanted an age before spinning the ball out.

That's the difference.

  • 329.
  • At 08:29 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

All I've said is this:

1) To beat England right now is no big deal. Why the hoo ha ha?

2) France, on their day, can run riot against anyone. Beat them and you can be justifiably cock-a-hoop. In the game against France - a game that Ireland really should have won - they still lost.

3) I don't share the belief that ROG is a world class fly half in the Dan Carter, Larkham mould. A fully firing JW is a much better player , although right now he isn't.

4) I don't think Ireland have a hope against the All Blacks or SA ( The full team!) unless they go up two gears.

5) The other home teams in the 6N are really not that good right now.

And yet, reading through this blog there are an awful lot of real 'experts' who think otherwise - and naturally they all seem to be Irish.

Read the English posts and to a man they are fully appreciative of the Irish victory and well aware of their own team's deficiencies which they plainly state, yet the 'arrogant' tag is never too far away.

Conversely you have a handful of Irish guys getting all hot and bothered just because someone dare have an opinion that might crush the fairytale a bit.

Can I just repeat that I thought Ireland played very well yesterday and showed England up for what they are right now. Against stronger opposition, however, they will be found wanting.

If that makes me ill-informed, please put me right.

France will beat England by 20.

Ireland should beat Scotland by 25. Italy by more.

England against Wales - tough one to call.


.

  • 330.
  • At 08:32 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Ian B wrote:

Having had time to reflect and watch the game again I can see why the Irish won鈥. They were lucky! Lucky that the English pack didn鈥檛 turn up! I don鈥檛 understand all this hype suddenly surrounding the Ireland team and that they have more than a cat in hells chance of winning the world cup 鈥 or even being in the final.

They have won a game against a team that failed in all areas of the field. Any team can look good again such opposition, but to suggest they are contenders for the world cup on this basis is complete blind faith (something the Irish are well know for.)

They struggled against France and got away with so many fouls like in the England Match. If they were genuine contenders 鈥 like England were 4 years ago, they would be a minimum of 20 points better than any side out there, including the SH teams!

Take my advice
Ireland - calm down and get a grip. You are not as good as you think you are. ROG & Stringer are weak, but look good behind an above average pack. Poor discipline but getting away with it (at the moment.)

England 鈥 New pack required! Worsely, Grewcock (after learning the rules again) and Rees the only ones to remain. Farrell looks like a fish out of water..clearly playing in the wrong position.

I cant believe the RFU are allowing this to contine. Some kind of Masonic association if you ask me! My club rugby team at Uxbridge has a more together set of forwards.

World Cup Semi-finals will consist of AB, SA, Argentina and France or Australia. I think SA will win.

Sorry Ireland but im not jumping on the band wagon and pumping even more sunshine up your ass.

  • 331.
  • At 08:39 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Eileen wrote:

Re: 323


The ABs are in the WC to win it so they won't be thinking about who to avoid - just concentrating on one game at a time.

Personally watching the games this weekend I thought that Ireland, France and Wales looked pretty good and on the day and Australia and South Africa are always teams to watch out for. Any thing can happen in a world cup but I will be supporting the ABs and I can see them lifting the cup this year.

  • 332.
  • At 09:34 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • bob wright wrote:

to 320 and others like it,

I think 329 and 330 have got it spot on and I'ma neutral on this one. Ireland are a tight, fully functioning group at the mo but they haven't beaten anybody of any real standing in the game. I wouldnt say that Ireland were 'lucky' yesterday to win but they did get away with things that should have been looked at closer - as did England. The knee on JWs head and the elbow on Strettle. The rule says you don't have to get out of the way. He didn't. It's the runner's job to go around him. There's no excuse for an elbow. Lund should have gone off.

But thats' neither here nor there. Like 330 says...get a grip. I can't see where the Irish are coming from on this one. ROG is playing with more confidence than I've ever seen him play but he's really nothing spectacular at all. I think you are getting alittle carried away here.

I'm looking forward to the WC. Watch out for SA. Come the day those guys will turn up and I think it could get messy. I think the trophy will end up in the southerb hemisphere whatever happens

  • 333.
  • At 09:38 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Paul Moore wrote:

Anyone with any sense knew that if both teams played to their respective,on paper,abilities Ireland would win easily. The question was which Irish team would show up.
Question answered!
France's win over Ireland has proven to be the final catalst to gel this Irish team into understanding what it takes to win. This year is this team's last hurrah and they know it. France wil win the G.S but in the last 2 matches this great Irish team has learned the final lessons. The world Cup will be won by Ireland. Who will beat either beat France in the pool stages or in the final, or both

  • 334.
  • At 09:39 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Big Mucka wrote:

I'd like to add my support to a previous poster who pointed out that Andy Farrel is actually struggling to impress due to the absolutely average Jonny Wilkinson.

JW has always been an average first-five who excells behind a dominant pack, and goes to pieces under pressure. (leans on Catt)

His success was based around putting away penalties extracted by the pack. Or sitting back in a well protected pocket potting for drop goals.

His out of hand kicking has always been average, and his distribution and option taking always ponderous.

Farrel can't can't buy a decent early pass. Jonny either has a stab himself, kicks the ball away aimlessly, or more typically fluffs around for several seconds, takes a few stuttering steps and then takes the contact.

Sad sad sad. But hey - atleast England beat Scotland this year. Cue eurphoria. How bad have things got?


  • 335.
  • At 09:41 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

re 326

'they' are right..you cannot judge others by how you judge yourself. This is clearly what you do again and again. Look, we whipped you in every corner of the field and have done so repeatedly over the last few years at Twickers and Dublin. Ireland will have a go at England every time you manifest in such an arrogant way. Why can you not accept the fact that we are now better than you and we have proved it more than once now.

We slipped up against France, three points in it after clawing back a deficit. France and Ireland are on a par at the moment (you might want to check out the Irish U20 results too)if you think we have no strength in depth. SA, the Aussies and Argentina were beaten by Ireland in the 'Autumns' So this pool in the WC is going to be an interesting affair. We will not go in with a feeling we are already beaten, we go to win everything. We may not, but it won't be because we didn't try. This team is a good team now, not the 'passionate Irish' of the past who played well for half the match and then got trashed.

I believe England are rebuilding. They were poor yesterday but they will get it right. I won't be upset by an England improvement, I will relish the thought of a clash between Ireland and England when you do get your act together. NH countries have to get better to be able to beat SH countries, we have beaten two major SH countries already this year. We have the talent we just need consistency.

So gripe on if you want, but look at Irelands recent rugby record at all levels and you will see a very positive story. From your point of view beating England is 'no big deal'. But we only play what is in front of us. We trashed what you put in front of us yesterday. A rugby playing nation of almost 60 million versus a rugby playing nation of 5 million is why Irelands success lately is seen as so good. So forget what others (SH) might do or not do to us, we'll deal with that. Look at what you have to do to beat us or SH nations. When you do beat us we will accept defeat because you were better not because we were worse.


  • 336.
  • At 09:45 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • NG wrote:

Darren Mather (242) you're a star - great post!

Sack Guscott I say and trust Carling to rear up as usual with the opportunity of putting the boot in on someone.

I too hope Ashton sticks with Faz; I think he will as you say he's his own man.

I know who I'd want beside me 'in the trenches' out of Farrell, Guscott, Healey and Carling.

  • 337.
  • At 09:46 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kit kerzel wrote:

i think that strettle and grewcock had a better game than was said by critics. grewcock is a good player doin wat is required of him always in the rucks and mauls. strettle played well and i think his pace will be a great asset to the england side, his try was a fenominal display of it. i think that had england been on top form, they would have beaten ireland, just, but wilkos lack of domination and command led to defeat.

  • 338.
  • At 10:08 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Connal wrote:

There are some very insipid comments on here from 329 and 330 and the like. Whatever happens it seems you are incapable of giving credit where it's due to Ireland; this is the fourth straight victory over England and it was a crushing yesterday, playing the type of attractive rugby niggly England sides have never played. Australia were beaten in the autumn to the post indicating that the victory against South Africa was undermined by the latter's under-stregnth selection. It seems a shame to mar the goodwill of yesterday but seriously guys, where's the nearest Sinn Fein ard fheis ?(you probably don't know what that means) You can't explain away quality; you were massacred yesterday and you have to live with that and deal with it.

  • 339.
  • At 10:20 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

Re KJFRAZER
When you say world class what do you mean? Wilko was average, has been average or injured. His place kicking is good, funnily enough his kicking coach learned his trade in Gaelic Games.

A world class player like Carter and O Gara, perform well when the forwards do their work. If the pack can't dominate then fly halves will suffer.This is basic stuff. O Gara kicked all 5 of his penalties, all three of his conversions and was instrumental in two of the Irelands tries. Sounds world class to me.

Wilko is world class , but only if, like O Gara, he is given the space. Wilkos performance yesterday is not his fault, he didn't have the ball for most of the time.

  • 340.
  • At 10:31 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

335

Where is the arrogance? From a nation that fully owns up to its team's demise or a nation that wants everyone to believe they are WC contenders after beating also rans?

Where is there any post by me or anyone else that doesn't fully admit that Ireland are a better side than England? Where? I think everyone is pretty certain of that fact. How could anyone argue it. Most other teams ARE better than England right now. Fact!

You say you 'slipped up' against France. No, you didn't. YOU LOST. They got more points than you. They are a better team. Why can't you admit that? What does performance count for if in the last minute some guy runs right through your defence as if it isn't there?

Autumn internationals? SA was a second team. Australia couldn't wait to get back home and Argentina...Even they beat England. Maybe that should give you a wider more informed perspective of your fantastic, world conquering victory yesterday - which I still openly admit - was a really good performance by Ireland.

And don't bang the drum of population size as you only make yourself look more ridiculous. NZ has a pop. of 4.5 million. Australia plays Rugby union in only two states New South Wales and Queensland - 7 million and 4 million respectively. 3 world cups between them.

I'm not 'griping on' I'm just calling it as I see it.

Sorry to differ from your learned, expert and totally unbias opinion.

  • 341.
  • At 10:36 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Jim wrote:

Hey I like Brian Moore - we know and he knows he's biased but at least he has a sense of humour about it and he ain't pompous; he even managed to upset Keith Wood! Saying that the Irish victory high-lighted the loss to France was a compliment!

EOS sometimes gets there in the end -he used to pick big lumps like Corry in the backrow before the penny dropped. He has just added 9 players to the training squad many of them younger: - point being the ABs are way way ahead in terms of having the squad approach; France is plainly on the case in preparation for the World Cup; Ireland need to be doing it too; who is the Irish No 3 second row? Horgan is surely not the No 3 centre? As per 185 there are a number of HBs out there as good as ROG/Stringer I am sure. Dempsey and Hickie aren't the youngest, etc etc. Let's get them on the park with some miles under their belts before the World Cup. For once there's talent out there.

  • 342.
  • At 10:44 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

Re 338

I agree, Ireland as far as these comments 329,330 suggest cannot be that good. Why? Every Irishman knows and expects this sort of reaction to anything Ireland does. As I have said before, if England do it..its great. If someone else dare do well...its just because England were bad. If we get NZ in the WC we may not win but at least we'll give 'em a game and congratulate them if they win.

Credit is not a word used without qualification by these guys. 'Yeah well done but....'is all you hear.

But then again these are the same people that allow their national flag to be turned into underpants!!!

  • 343.
  • At 10:54 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • terrydoyle wrote:

340

you are completely right... for once.

learned...correct
expert....correct
unbiased..correct (unbiased has an 'ed' on the end)


Hey guys, lets give this Irish team a fair trial .....then we'll hang 'em!

sound familiar!

Goodnight

  • 344.
  • At 11:02 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • Ed2003 wrote:

On the ROG/Wilkinson debate, ROG is a top class international fly-half. No doubt.

But Wilkinson possesses more natural skill than ROG will ever have. He isn't showing it at the moment after three games back in an international jersey (perhaps he will never find true form again).

But in my opinion he has, or at least had, more natural talent as a rugby player than ROG.

  • 345.
  • At 11:24 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

At the end of the day the greatest victory of them all was in Limerick yesterday...

England's women won 32-0 - and I don't want to hear a bad word against it!!!

342... if this is what you're like when you hammer the 'world champions' what do you do when you lose - oh, wait a minute... You didn't lose against France, they just got more points than you!

I must remember that one.

And if you check the interviews with various England personel after their games against Scotland and Italy they were more than measured in their responses. I don't think they got carried away at all. The commentary teams did but the players didn't.

But whatever you say...

  • 346.
  • At 12:06 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Honest Intention (honest!) wrote:

Is KJ is seeking to excuse the performance of the Saffers who went down 49 - 0 against the Aussies in 2006? Or is KJ seeking to celebrate the joy of South Africa beating the the All Black Reserves after they'd won the Tri-Nations? Exact0ly which South Africa side is KJ prostating before?

A word of advice to KJ - Ireland, England, Australia & New Zealand have to beat the team that presents themslves before them. It doesn't matter whether the team is at "full strength" or not - you face whomsoever wears the shirt with pride. Let's see the Saffers form for 2007 before you bow to blow their horn - but by all means if you wish to start exercising your excuses of the poor performance of the Saffers then by all means get going/blowing.

Loser.

:o)

  • 347.
  • At 12:08 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Jim W wrote:

Great result for Ireland but surely what this proves is how ridiculous the seeding system for the World Cup is.

Ireland, France and Argentina in the same group when all three would be in the Top 8 of world rugby at the moment and Ireland and France would easily be semi-final contenders. Instead one of the them will be out in the first round and another will most likely end up losing to New Zealand in the quarters.

I hope for 2011 the RWC organisers will see sense and not make the final draw and seedings until a couple of months before the event and not base it on results that are at best two or three years old.

  • 348.
  • At 12:36 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Conor, Dublin wrote:

Chris (192) You must have been slapped around in school. Just watched the Irl/Eng highlights, Horgan was nowhere near Lewsey.
As for the rest of your allegations: utter rubbish.

Ireland are a class act and will get better.

  • 349.
  • At 12:41 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • marco1965 wrote:

Blimey - thought Farrell would've had the Henry Paul treatment but have been pleasantly surprised by the amount of support he's had here.

The majority of the inventiveness in the backs came from Farrell. So he doesn't break the line? - far from it as a number of times you saw him break the line by passing (or trying to pass to a non-existent support runner) out of the tackle. Do you guys not get it? With defences so tight nowadays its no good having gazelle like centres who run good lines or bow down to the battering ram god who was Paul Dodge. They just don't break the line. Passing out of the tackle is what the all Blacks do as second nature and that's what creates the space. England need farrell to educate them and England need players who can be the support runners - the forwards just didn't do that yesterday, always second to the breakdown. There was a marvellous example of this towards the end of the game in what was England's best handling move as farrell broke the line with a one-handed pass out of the tackle from a horizontal position . Pace ain't everything if your brain works faster than everyone else's - just ask Teddy or Matt.

  • 350.
  • At 12:45 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Jim W wrote:

The problem is when you are KJFrazer you've got too many opinions I think.

From this thread
* At 08:29 PM on 25 Feb 2007,
* kjfrazer wrote:
*All I've said is this:
*
*1) To beat England right now is no big deal. Why the hoo ha ha?


From the thread "England cool before Croke Park Cauldron"
* At 07:01 PM on 23 Feb 2007,
* KJ Frazer ( England) wrote:
*
*Forget the politics it should be a great game. Whatever the patriots might think there isn't that much between the two teams. On the day it could go either way

__

It would seem two days is a long time in the life of our friend KJFrazer but a bit of revisionism when necessary is probably acceptable given the result.

'Nuff said

  • 351.
  • At 12:51 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • marco1965 wrote:

And by the way - full credit to Ireland - they deserved to take us apart yesterday. The forwards let everyone else down.

And what was that scrum 5 on our put in with 14 players on the pitch. Unless the rules have changed since I stopped playing why didn't we have 8 players in the scrum, say Tindall/farrell at flanker. 6 pushing against 8!! oh my god! It was embarrassing to see our scrum torn apart and concede a penalty/turnover (can't quite remember!). The naivity was astounding!

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!

  • 352.
  • At 01:07 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • frederic wrote:

To start with, to all the Irish reading or/and writting some of the comments THE FOLLOWING IS NOT AN ATTTACK ON YESTERDAY PERFORMANCE OR IRELAND OR VANITY TO/FROM THE ENGLISH.

Please grow up! Yes the team won against England. Yes they nearly did it against France a few weeks ago, but the reality is as stated before: The team with the most points win on the day! No question ask!

Will it be better to only goes for trials and no drop goals or penalty kicks, well that was a big topic 4 years ago after England decided to play football on a rugby pitch.

The reality is that going back to the French game, Ireland played a more mature side, keeping control of the situation and that realised on the day that as long they keep defending, the irish will be tired or drop their guard at some stage. The end result, 1 trial by Vincent Clerc and sorry to be realistic, but did any of the irish player even tried to stop him?????

When it come to the comments about autum tests, please be realistic, the SH teams camre to Europe for an holiday where they happened to play some rugby here and there. The teams NH teams are going to face in a few months during the world cup will be 10 times fiercer and stronger.

Take my comments the wrong way if you want but at the moment only France can GS the 6 nations and if you go to the equivalent of this blog in French, they are not telling each others that they already won the 6 nations or are WC winner in the making...

The supporters are worried at the moment because twickenham is always at big game even if England is not as good as before, they have nothing to loose!!!

And on the note of the World Cup, no-one is even talking about playing Ireland again. It is too early, 6 nations first and after we will see.

So, please guys, do us a favor, grow up, support your team to win the triple crown (I'vre got money at the bookies on it!) and start worring about the WC in couple of months time. We still have the H cup and the end of the league to go through!

Cheers to all happy or unhappy supporters because your national team won or lost yesterday but all of you should be happy at the end because it was good rugby on overall and some accomplishment for some of the underdogs...

  • 353.
  • At 03:06 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • japanman wrote:

To the 91热爆
Excellent historical commentary on Croke.
But;
Please justify the presence of that nasty female interviewer who continues to offend everybody. She was insulting, ignorant and embarrasing. What will it actually take to get rid of her? Furthermore, if the job of Moore and especially Butler is to irritate and detract from the actual game with their constant bickering, then they are doing a fine job. Jonathon Davies alone stands as the voice of wisdom and reason, a total hero.
I m only echoing the mass of similar comments already left on this subject but feel that undoubtedly, it will fall on deaf ears

As for the game. England; totally outclassed, well done Ireland!

As for England, what to do..apart from panic?

The backs is just very simple;
Pace
Leave Johnny alone, he s the best we have.
Lewsey, Robinson, Strettle (deserves chance)Tait. Thats not a slow backline barring Farrell (an alternative?).
Leave it to grow

The backs are irrelevent anyway, who knows what to do with the pack. oh dear..huffing and puffing..

  • 354.
  • At 03:24 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • polemic wrote:

What's the matter with you who moderate on this blog.
Too politically correct are we to allow my response to the comments made by Kia Rose (295) to be published.
You are as guilty as those who killed my youngest son.
Throw me off your blog by all means. I care not to talk to people like you....If you don't like the truth; then tough.
You are my worst nightmare....George Orwell predicted your coming; I should have realized....News speak! Control the independant voice.

Ria Rose, whoever it is, can say what they like. I am not allowed to answer.
The 91热爆; custodians of freedom and the truth. Don't make me laugh. You are a hostage to, 'Polical Correctness'. Shame on you.

Obviously, you will not post this comment; understandable, really. I have my own blog however, I will pass this message down the line....You have lost my trust and your reputation.

  • 355.
  • At 03:53 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • lostinwales wrote:

OMG why didnt ireland play like that against France, O'Connel always seems to play better against the English than anyone else.

It saddens me but I feel England really have to start focusing on the next World Cup rather than this one, and focusing on developing players to that end. That doesnt mean dropping all the old guys who wont make it- the benefits in learning from the odd wise head has been shown with Catt in the saxons. The talent is undoubtably there - strettle looked scarily good for someone so new to this level and the Saxon's game against ireland A was one sided. A certain fly half will also only be -what- 31-32 by then, and hes taken enought time off over the last three years to be able to last that long. But as is now plainly obvious it takes a long time to build the best teams.

It also has to be said that the preparations for this game werent the best, not that it would have made any difference. All those players playing league matches last weekend. Funny/sad that the only one who got injured was the impressive Chabal.

Nice to see some more intelligent posts for once. Nice to occasionally get away from the Celtic nationalism vs English arrogance crap. There are always a minority of idiots on all sides who end up using language that in other circumstances would be described as racist.

  • 356.
  • At 04:24 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Ben Morgan wrote:

Ok so I'm not an England fan, I'm welsh so I guess you can say I'm as far from it as possible but all these people saying drop this player, drop that player. Who are you going to bring in? I struggle to think of many names you could recall at all, except possibly Mike Catt which beggars belief. I'd never even heard of Strettle before Saturday. Although he did look promising.

Therein lies England's problem. They have zero strength in depth because their young players barely get a chance to play in the Guiness Premiership. The GP is stuffed to the rafters with South Sea Islanders, geriactric Kiwis, Aussies and Springboks (not to mention a few geriactric Welshmen!), marginal French squad players and half the Argentinian team.

The problem in England is the clubs have too much power and until that changes and the RFU can gain some control over who clubs buy in and how many games the few English qualified players left play, it's not going to get better.

England's Golden generation has gone, Dallaglio, Hill, Back, Johnson, Leonard, Dawson, Greenwood, etc. no-one came through for clubs to replace them because they were on the bench or farmed out to lower division teams.

  • 357.
  • At 05:30 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Keo in Melbourne wrote:

343, so how do you define the term 'natural talent'? Do you mean that he was born with a rugby ball stuck to his foot? or are you emplying that Wilkinson doesn't really have to try hard to be a good player? This is a rubbish statement, and based on your opinions only. You even claim that he 'was' better than ROG is now, if that give you a warm fuzzy feeling then go for it. But in my terms 'was' means has-been and has-been means history. I like present and future, History can be very boring, especially if you keep bringing it up.

  • 358.
  • At 06:37 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Keo in Melbourne wrote:

329 and 330, are you related? or do you both live together on rue de la bad loser? There are always people like you who just can't accept an Irish win, nor give us any credit, you have to write 100 lines of rubbish and then at the end try to say that you thought we did well. If your going to be insulting then why not keep it up until the end of your post. It shows a lack of conviction about what your saying and a weakness of character.

  • 359.
  • At 07:23 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Sarah wrote:

It's hard to see how the flawless Girvan Dempsey can manage only a 6 in your ratings. There can't be a fullback in world rugby who provides a safer pair of hands under a high ball as well as an excellent try scoring record.

  • 360.
  • At 09:07 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Paul Riley wrote:

What a joke. First bad match and Faz is a failure. Wilkinson is totaly anonymous could not positionaly kick for toffee and Faz gets it in the neck.

Englands sliding defence is nothing short of abysmal, half are playing the sliding defence and the rest play man on man marking. Poor Faz probably hasnt had to put up with such rubbish in all his years. It also makes me laugh how many on here dont realise how a sliding defence is supposed to work.

What ever code of rugby is played the principle is the same you need field position and this is normally achieved through your forwards. People talk about breaking the line but you never break a good defence down just by running at it you need a distributer and people running off angles. Pretty much what Ireland did to us. We however seem hell bent on achieving overlaps, something that is very difficult to achieve against a good sliding defence. Strangly enough a bullit pass from Faz from first reciever was the only time that a overlap was achieved and that was only converted by some superp wing play. Was this the only time England had decent field position where we managed to win the ball at the lineout/scrum, I seem to remember it that way. Some of these pundits should remember Rugby is different from the day they played it and if England dont catch up they will never win anything again!

  • 361.
  • At 09:21 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • JimW wrote:

Firstly lets distinguish between the Irish fans and the Irish team. I would imagine that nobody in Irish team and management is losing the run of themselves. That has been very clear since the start of the championship.

Its inevitable in the wake of our biggest ever victory over England that people are going to be euphoric. What adds to that is a rather large amount of sour grapes from certain English posters here.

Realistically Ireland are probably number 4 or 5 in the world behind NZ, France, Australia and maybe a full strength South Africa but that is a great place to be going into the RWC and I think this team have the blend to do very well there.

Finally with regard to Ireland choking, lets point out that England choked on 3 successive occassions on win the Grand Slam before finally getting there, Australia choked at the last World Cup final and New Zealand have been complete chokers in at least 3 World Cups. This is not having a go at these teams. Its simply pointing out that all teams are capable of failure when the stakes are so high no matter how good they are.

We choked against France in the final minutes but we're in good company here and we made the best response possible to what happened.

  • 362.
  • At 09:24 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • honest tim wrote:

complete congratulations to ireland.

total decency off the field and ruthless and focussed teamwork throughout all 80 minutes.

two observations - o'connell and o'gara grab the headlines but i have a funny feeling david wallace will have received most pats on the back behind closed doors.

secondly, new zealand will watch that video. probably a good, few times.

that's high respect.

  • 363.
  • At 09:24 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • fistikuffs wrote:

@kjfrazer
I don't understand the problem. You've made many post to the general effect of:

a)Ireland aren't great they only beat a poor English side
b)Ireland lost to france and this one result demonstrates that we really aren't that good
c)A lot of our players especially ROG are average
d)We haven't a hope for the RWC

and so on. Now i'm Irish and I agree with most of the things you are saying. After our 3 performances so far in the 6N we should not consider ourselves a shoe in for the world cup. But is it that bad that Irish people are happy and filled with optimism for our team after saturdays performance? Of course not but it seems like it's really getting to you. The majority of your many posts are pointing out our flaws, telling us that we "LOST" to france (eh yeah we know!)and that we need to cop on and get a grip.

Crazy! Last week these blogs were full of English fans saying lets beat Ireland and then on to win the world cup.What the hell was that all about? At least a great performance is fueling our optimism. England play a woeful match against Italy and you are going to win the World Cup. As if you we ever going to beat Ireland never mind winning the world cup. There is no shortage of people on both sides of a chest beating nature. Is it really that bad?

Apparently so because you just keep posting and posting the same lines each post with a bit more venom than the last(and you're not alone). It's obvious to see that you are hurt(understandably)and to be honest it's nice to see. So keep posting we enjoy seeing how hurt you are. But remeber we are a team on the up England have a good bit to go before they find their way (which they will). And only one of these teams will be in the shake up in the RWC and it won't be England.

  • 364.
  • At 09:30 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Dubain wrote:

Re 349 and Jim W

I have been reading the comments posted with interest (some good, some bad and some down right useless) but I have to say the one that put the biggest smile on my face was the one you posted about KJ and his posting earlier in the week. Ok, the guy has some valid points and also some points I don't agree with (free speech after all) but to contradict oneself - sheer carelessness.

  • 365.
  • At 10:00 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Batman wrote:

Nice to see the typically measured response to what was, obviously, a rather dreadful game from England's point of view. Clearly Ireland were much bettewr than we were, but it strikes me that the main problem is that the pack is both dirty as hell, especially Vickery and good old Grewcock, though White threw in a good bit of thuggery to help Ireland get 3 more points which we could have done without. Why can't we just try to abide by the rules and not give away stupid penalties, particularly when we have the momentum of a good move behind us? Every time we started to look good, we conceded the advantage through stupid penalties.
I agree that the referee did not have a particularly good game, but I think he was rubbish in our favour as often as in Ireland's. The difference is that Ireland used the chances they were given and we didn't. Either way, I don't think we need to be writing Jonny, Farrell, Ashton, Lewsey etc etc etc off just yet.

  • 366.
  • At 10:02 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • John C wrote:

Just a note on the overall Game. Ireland were superb however the English team is a shadow of the W/C winning side. Ireland still have a bit of work to do to have an big impact in the W/C. Thought Strettle was vgood in his first start. Wilko got no protection from the forward line and was always under pressure. England have alot of work to do. Ireland could well do it in France in Sept.

  • 367.
  • At 10:03 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Mac Eddey wrote:

Ireland played fantastically well as a team. I'm no fan of Stringer or Dempsey but they performed for the team on the day, which is what counts. England were comprehensively outplayed for 70 out of 80 minutes although the final score flattered just a bit. Strettle had a promising debut and easily looked England's most threatening back. Shame Horgan found it necessary to deliver the forearm smash on both Strettle and Wilkinson - Ireland were winning anyway. England have much work to do but are not as bad a team as that display might suggest. Lack of confidence seemed to undermine their every effort and Ireland probably played as well as they are able. As England didn't, the result was never in doubt. Congratualtions to Ireland.

  • 368.
  • At 10:10 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Ed2003 wrote:

356:

How to define natural talent? Well I guess what I mean by that is that you have skills that can't be coached, or that you just naturally make the step up to international level when you are 21 and considered the best player in the world by 23. ROG is 29.

In the past definitely. I even said that I doubt whether JW can find that top form again. But some people were saying they thought ROG is better than JW ever was, so I responded to that. Isn't everything written on here an opinion?

  • 369.
  • At 10:14 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • bryan the pirate wrote:

Come on England (or Scotland) against France, you can win us the Six Nations with a stirring display at fortress twickenham.

  • 370.
  • At 10:20 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Houstie wrote:

Interesting reading this blog & all the comments regarding the England team. Just a week ago, lots of English bloggers were on here stating that England should win as they had a stronger pack & JW was back fit. Now, those same bloggers are axing half the team. At least some accept that England were beaten by a better team. Ireland & France are the best teams in the Northern Hemisphere at this point in time.

Why doesn't Brian Ashton come out & say that he is going to prepare the England team for the WC in 2011. Start blooding young players & building a team which will have been playing together a few years like in 2003. The reason he can't do that is the fans won't accept any defeats along the way. Yes, you want to blood youngsters & build a squad but no you can't lose games.

Look at Ireland a few years back. They were a young squad who lost quite a few games but slowly built themselves into a winning team. Well done Ireland, a thoroughly deserved victory.

PS. Like many of the England fans who thought they would win I said on other blogs that Scotland would beat Italy. Cut me a big slice of that humble pie!!

  • 371.
  • At 10:25 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Fat10 wrote:

I find it very hard to watch at the moment with no direction or clarity on what we are attempting to do . People keep going on about results v Performance yet you will not get results with out the performance and if you do it is usually short lived success.
I have been watching closely since the joy of 2003 and one clear thing that has emerged in that time is the physical pace of the players in the premiership. Our 7's squad has achieved world acclaim and that is built around pace . Why are England obsessed with the grunt of the forwards and winning games in the forwards ! I remember watching the Lions back in 1997 in South Africa when McGeechan selected Paul Wallace and Tom Smith at prop instead of the more traditional props like Jason Leonard . They were ball players who could pass , link and hold their own in the set piece . They were thinkers and could make decisions as their natural instinct was not always to stick the head down and charge forward.
The point I am trying to make is that our strength in English Rugby today is our pace .

Strettle
Robinson
Cueto
Sacky
Tait
Voyce
Varndell
Allen
Lamb
Geraghty
Armitage

Forrester
T.Rees
Ward Smith
C.Jones
Palmer
Moody
Worsley

Our forwards need to win ball and use our backs who I beleieve are true world class potential. We have to accept that the drudgery of our pack is not our strength anymore but will become better as teams start fearing our backs more and openings happen within the forwards.

PACE PACE PACE PACE . Ask anybody who has played this game and ask them the one think that they fear on the opposition more than anything else and that will be pace !!

  • 372.
  • At 10:26 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • CillDara Culchie wrote:

IanB and KJFrazer, thanks for that, it makes winning oh so sweeter, 4 and counting, Maybe Uxbridge might take a trip to Ireland and pump some more sunshine up our ass, I can set up a challenge game against Naas under 12........
And from comments you made previous to this stream, you will never dictate when we "forget the politics".
Anyhow, just to finish,
heres a tip to run along into Paddy Power with Ireland to win the WC cause honestly, everyone in out backwater over here know Ireland is going to win the WC, Bertie has just put the national debt on it and we're bringing the 2008 budget forward to June so we can throw an extra few billion on it!!! Oh and if your into accumulators, Kildare to win the All Ireland, dead certs.......

  • 373.
  • At 10:30 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Dave wrote:

Re: 343, Ed2003

I think you've got a point, no-one can deny that Wilkinson was instrumental in the fantastic England side and as of yet O'Gara is only in the process of matching up to Wilkinson's achievements but not sure who has more talent and its not easy to call as they have very different styles. One thing for sure is that JW worked extremely hard to achieve what he had done and deserves the tag of having been a world class fly-half, which i believe is something ROG is starting to develop.

Re: kjfraser....

please grow up! A couple days ago you claim you have a great side that could beat the Irish and now you turn it around on its head. More to the point on your comment about Ireland's LOSS to France...i wonder if you had that attitude when England were beaten in close games by Ireland the previous 3 times! I somehow think you were one of many English who were moaning for a long time, wouldn't accept it and claimed you deserved to win. Yet here you are saying France ARE the better team as they won...how perceptions have changed! I wouldn't be surprised if England go on to give France a good match...but then you'd have to say the only reason that was is cos France played poorly and should have stuffed them! Then again you could go back the other way and start talking up your WC chances again! Is there ever an inbetween??? Could the result not just be that England were beaten soundly by a team that played very well on that day?

  • 374.
  • At 10:37 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Dave wrote:

Never thought i'd say this but i agree with Batman and John C (Robin perhaps?)! Don't write off those players cos they are quality and also on the comment about the referee who gave some poor decisions both ways...good to see balanced level headed views on things

  • 375.
  • At 10:45 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Cill Dara Culchie wrote:

IanB and KJFrazer, thanks for that, it makes winning oh so sweeter, 4 and counting, Maybe Uxbridge might take a trip to Ireland and pump some more sunshine up our ass, I can set up a challenge game against Naas under 12........
And from comments you made previous to this stream, you will never dictate when we "forget the politics".
Anyhow, just to finish,
Here鈥檚 a tip to run along into Paddy Power with Ireland to win the WC cause honestly, everyone in out backwater over here know Ireland is going to win the WC, Bertie has just put the national debt on it and we're bringing the 2008 budget forward to June so we can throw an extra few billion on it!!! Oh and if your into accumulators, Kildare to win the All Ireland, dead certs!


  • 376.
  • At 11:07 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Jay wrote:

Chris at 303
鈥楾o rest a nation's World Cup hopes on one man's dodgy hamstrings (however good that man is), is optimistic in the extreme.鈥

And resting a nation鈥檚 revival on one man鈥檚 dodgy shoulder is realistic? Maybe his dodgy knees鈥

I think you鈥檒l agree that players with true leadership qualities are a rare breed. If not, then you might explain why this England team has lacked real on-field inspirational leadership since the retirement of Martin Johnson? We know that we need O鈥橠riscoll - he is absolutely irreplaceable, just as Wilkinson and Johnson were in 2003. Was pinning hopes on JW in 2003 optimistic in the extreme?

I think every Irish fan will agree that we have moved on from the French debacle. We played diabolically - some of the sloppiest rugby we have played in a long time - and yet we came very close to beating a decent French side, and the French will remember that.

  • 377.
  • At 11:23 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • the bull wrote:

i think to say that the irish front row is a weakness would be an understatement. the 1st few srums were a lesson for john hayes; you are too old! rory best is by far the worst hooker to ever receive an interantional cap: my dog can throw a better lineout (although i have to say, chuter was awful as well)bring back jerry flannery! marcus horan, no comment needed. apart from that the ireland pack dominated, O'Connel towering as usual. wilkinson was disappointingly absent from the game as well, giving ROG an easy time. Andy Farrell, well he was really thrown in at the deep end with BOD and D'arcy, so we cant blame him for the english defence being in ruins. Shane horgan played very well, running great lines and taking a good try, and also giving the so called "strettle express" a well deserved elbow in the face. welcome to rugby union son!


i think O'Sullivan needs to look at his selection problems, mainly with ulster players; i believe neil best should be starting and rory best should not even be on the squad!

moo moo

  • 378.
  • At 11:35 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • terry wrote:

re 371
Well I never thought that I'd hear somebody say 'Kildare for the All Ireland'. Wouldn't that be somethin' I hear we did well this weekend. I am from the Pat Mangan/Pa Dunny era and the best we could do was getting to the leinster final where we got beaten by Offaly or Dublin most of the time, great days though! (Athy)

Now onto the rugby (again) the word now for Ireland is consistency. We gotta keep performing like we did on Saturday and maybe we will show Les Bleu in group stages of WC.

I would like to see your offer to KJFrazer taken up and also suggest to him that he should have a read of the welsh thread even though they lost. Passion in loss and 100% support for their national team anyway is similar to us Irish.

We beat England, we will win the WC, we'll win the grand slam next year..and Kildare to win the All Ireland....and if we don't sur' no harm done`

  • 379.
  • At 11:38 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • John lee wrote:

This is a copy of an e-mail I received from a " colleague ", in one of our depots in the U.K.on Friday afternoon.

I didn't respond at the time and my only response now is to ask whether the" sole " he refers to, is from Dover !!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

" So, the WORLD CHAMPIONS are back in town tomorrow, ready to roll you over

I know jack-all about rugby but somebody on the radio said Ireland were favourites to win ... I simply can't believe

that Ireland would be favourites to beat England at anything - except for that girly-game only Ireland play with a small ball and funny shaped sticks.

And it's being played at Croke Park so you are all getting over emotional about it

I'll make an effort to watch and I'll be singing along to the the national anthem of the worlds greatest country, being sung

right in the place that is the very heart and sole of one of our former colonies !!!!

all the best !!!!!!!!!

Tony "

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Sport was the winner here...

Cheers

John Lee

Dublin

  • 380.
  • At 11:51 AM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Sean wrote:

Its not so much that England didnt turn up (although this English team is lightyears behind the 2003 vintage), but rather that the pack which would have been recognised as very physical and strong, were absolutely obliterated by the Irish 8. Currently, the irish backrow is the 2nd best in the world without a doubt, superior to Bonnaire Chabal & co., let alone the english version.

To think that the game would have been much different had England played more to their ability is frankly a ridiculous statement given the Irish had another gear to step up to & the fact they were evidently cruising.

O'Gara is at the top of his game at the moment. As a positional kicker, he is as good if not better than Wilkinson at his best, his place kicking isnt too far behind & this year he has been able to get his backline moving more like contepomi.

O'Driscoll/Darcy v. Farrel/Tindall = Ferrari v. Lada

All the same.......keep the chin up!!

  • 381.
  • At 12:03 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Pedrito wrote:

Wow...intersting comments and insights from all sides...and some flawed logic I would guess. Not that mine is perfect, but here is my tuppence worth.

It seems some England fans are talking out of both sides of their mouths at the same time. They want their team to be recognised as the reigning world champions, except when they lose and it is brought up that those players aren't around anymore...make up your minds.

It's all rather moot anyway, as come September there will be a new WC Champ.

I think it is a disservice both to Ireland and the SH teams to say that the AI's were a holiday for the SH teams. In the old days, before professionalism that might have been the case, not so sure now. Also, if the AB's were on holiday in November, I'd hate to see them when they are at work.

As for Ireland's chances in the upcoming WC, I have not heard anyone affiliated with the team claim they will win. As an irishman I would dearly love to see them win, but there are a few hurdles they have to clear first...one being the pool stage where the teams seems fully aware of the challenges they will meet from France and Argentina.

That being said, we are optimistic that this will be our best WC...whether we win or not.

Sadly, don't know the Gaelic, but as they say in Ireland..."our day will come."

  • 382.
  • At 12:11 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • John wrote:

Great win by Ireland and a never to forget occasion but can Irish fans stop going on about the World Cup. Beating England in front of 80,000 Irishmen is completely different to beating France and Argentina in the world cup. Some of the arrogant posts on this blog amaze me. And we accuse the English of arrogance but I can imagine the furore if the result was reversed and you had English fans logging on to the RTE website and posting things about winning the world cup. We need to learn to win with as much grace and dignity as the English had when they lost yesterday. Their fans were a credit to their team on a difficult day.

  • 383.
  • At 12:12 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • brennan07 wrote:

ok first off, can you not just let us have our moment in the sun for once.we have listned to your "world cup glory" for the past 4 years! saturday was one of the proudest days for an entire ireland, and it's people, so go off and sort out your sorry team and allow us to celebrate!!
and as for us not bein a great team we have beaten you on the last 4 occasions so whats that just pot luck?!
well done ireland!

  • 384.
  • At 12:14 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Houstie wrote:

I am pretty sure that the mentally deficient KJFrazer is obviously someone who sees the world through rose (england) tinted spectacles. The fact that your team got thumped by 30 points must be embarassing for you & therefore you come up with the england womens team winning as a rebuttle.

I'm glad you acknowledge how crap England are at rugby & how much better the Irish are. Why souldn't the Irish claim they have a chance in the world cup? Just last week, a number of England fans were stating that they were on the way to a Grand Slam & possible retention of the WC.

Population figures don't mean anything but player numbers do. England have around 1.4 million registered rugby players at all levels. Ireland have about 101,000 registered players. Don't tell me that this means nothing because it obviously does. Even with huge numbers of players & lots of cash, the England team remain useless at rugby.

  • 385.
  • At 12:23 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Davo wrote:

Yedbawon (22) is correct. English pack needs mobility, not size.

  • 386.
  • At 12:25 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:

Chris in Post 290 wrote:

"....Looking at Ireland's results, the pattern is clear. When they play the REALLY big games, they choke. France in the previous round is just this sort of big game. With the pressure of another lost Grand Slam lifted, and the return of their talisman......"

"....But Ireland, looking good for the World Cup after one good performance against poor opposition having failed to show up against France two weeks ago? No, no. Ireland are a fine side, but anyone who backs them to win the World Cup is wasting their money. Once they get to the knockout rounds, they will most likely choke. As usual..."

Firstly, I would say Saturday's game constitutes a "REALLY" big game considering the hype and overall buzz of expectation created before a ball had been kicked.

Secondly, all of the current Irish XV have been playing top class competitive rugby over the last number of years both at club and international level and as is the case with the French, or English will have won some important games and lost some others. Munster won the Heineken cup last year yet lost their unbeaten record to Leicester this year, who in turn were beaten by Munster in the opening game of the tournament at home. Ireland were beaten by France at home in the six nations in 2004 yet they beat the world champions England at Twickenham!

Would anyone suggest that the All Blacks were chokers??? Yet they have over the past five or even ten years won lots of big games but as the French would tell you have been beaten in some also (world cup semis come to mind!!!)

Winning at the highest level a lot of the time hinges on the smallest of details and while I agree Ireland as a team are not quite there yet, (loss of concentration at the re-start against the French)I believe to brand us as CHOKERS is an over simplification!

Messers O鈥機onnell, O鈥橠riscoll, Leamy, Horgan and Wallace to name but five may have some development opportunities in terms of their skills, preparation, etc, but I challenge anyone to question their leadership abilities and whether or not they can hack the pressure at this level.

Having said all that, I still believe that our squad is not strong enough to mount a truly realistic challenge for the World cup. Right now on sheer talent and ability, the All Blacks are top of the pile followed by the French who just shade it over the Irish.

It is in the end not a question of choking but getting beaten by teams who, if everything goes to plan on the day, just have the edge talent and physicality wise to beat us!

  • 387.
  • At 12:30 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Will wrote:

The point the game turned was after England had given themselves the glimmer of a chance buy kicking a penalty............. and White immediately gave it straight back.

  • 388.
  • At 12:53 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Richard wrote:

Re: comments by 376 on the Irish front row.

So John Hayes is too old, Rory Best is the worst ever hooker and Horan deserves no comment?

I must have been watching a different game to the one you did! In the one I watched, the English front row were consistently pulled up for illegal binding and dropping the scrum (maybe they couldn't cope with the Irish shunt?), we won all of our lineouts and a good deal of yours and our forwards (1,2 and 3 included) were noticeably more effective in the loose.

I admit Hayes and Horan aren't the best scrummagers in the world and would probably struggle against the likes of Carl Hayman, but their lineout lifting puts them head and shoulders above any other props in that respect. Why do you think our lineout is so good? It's not all down to O'Connell.

Why is it, that when the English lose at something they can't be gracious and accept that the other team were better on the day? For years you were better than us, now we're on top.

  • 389.
  • At 12:55 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • crampo10 wrote:

Lay off Faz! I can't believe everyone is getting on Farrells back, I don't think any one would have made a difference in Defence, and the attacking opportunities we had were very limited. We (England) were starved of ball, by a brilliant and passionate irish pack, and the ball we got was generally very static or on the back foot.

I also personally think far too much is being made of the Irish performance, which as brilliant as it was, was a to some extent enhanced by the level of passion the Irish team had (fueled by the Crooke park factor, lossing to the french the previous game, recent press criticism too name but a few factors)can this level of passion be recreated game in game out? only time will tell!

  • 390.
  • At 01:09 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Richard wrote:

How can England recover after Saturday? The demolition by a superb Irish side demonstrated the depth of the problem the RFU currently face - they must regain control of their elite squad and control who plays where and when.
I can only see 1 solution to this. Could the RFU buy 3 or 4 of the premiership clubs and load their elite squad in to those teams - as Ireland have done. They could then have control of their players and have them working and playing in the same way instead of the current situation where money men with little interest in rugby tell them what to do.
If the RFU do not get control of the situation they should never have allowed to occur, England rugby is only going to continue to get worse!

  • 391.
  • At 01:27 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Andrew F wrote:

Why is it that if the English lose it is automatically down to a poor performance from themselves? This is purely down to their air of superiority. Ireland were always going to win this match no matter how well this poor England side played. A touch of realism, please!!

  • 392.
  • At 01:28 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • HaylingFOUR wrote:

I guess this is all about personal opinion so here is mine.
Ireland always compete hard against England, Saturday was no different to this. They got on top and stayed there, they mugged England time after time. England looked dangerous, until they started to be pushed back, there was no fight there. In the game you can see the tide turning, what England needed was inspiration, a massive hit (remember Micky Skinner in Paris), they did not get it and all these international sides can play a bit you know and when things stick they really do... see the Italians.
Give the English team a chance, make a couple of changes, keep the squad together. Faz will make a huge difference to any team with his brain. Bring in some pace, in the pack as well as the backs, but dont change everything.

Well done Ireland, the day was a credit to you and your culture. The result should become history and the bad memories should fail

  • 393.
  • At 01:35 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • TomO wrote:

ireland could have put 60 past england that day. it wasn't a fair match anyway - ireland have 4 flankers if you count d'arcy and o'driscoll, and 3 centres if you count david wallace. there's no point comparing fly halves in a match where the forwards of one side had total dominance. o'gara was excellent. a lot of credit must go to the backs / skills coach for ireland - they flung the ball around so confidently that it was easy to forget how heavy the rain was. horgan now has the skill levels to back up his bulk, and hickie is still on form. dempsey is solid in defence and dangerous in attack. and then there's arguably the best centre partnership that rugby union has ever seen. i don't think i've ever witnessed a more exciting backs line-up than the one ireland have at the moment.

  • 394.
  • At 01:36 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Bruce wrote:

As to the World Cup, as a Kiwi it's fortunate we have a good squad, as playing France or Ireland in the quarter-final is doing it the hardest route. Each would have to see off Argentina to even make the quarter-finals, so should be well prepared for the early contest.

Of the rest, Australia is fading but still retains knowledge of how to win at this level. The current South Africa is not yet a known quantity.

Wales has fallen off the pace but still has the players who promised much earlier. England have work to do. They do not seem to have a viable game plan (this is vital to team building/combination development) that is a confidence in having a "winning edge" over their opponents.

Playing someone who takes it to the line to offload (an extra loose forward) might be effective, if there was a forward with run-off capability. But most play is second phase and any loose forward can do what he does then and without taking up a backs position. Surely there is someone with a backs pace who can pass the ball in England?

  • 395.
  • At 01:50 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • MikeC wrote:

Can I just be very boring here and say "Well done, Ireland. Great display and thanks for the rugby lesson".

Disappointed though I was our (England's) performance, I wish to take nothing away from the Irish. The team was a credit to their fans and the fans a credit to their nation.

However, I'm not too downhearted. I still have faith in BA. He'll do what's necessary. Perhaps we don't have many players with that 'X' factor that we had in 2003 and which Ireland certainly do have in bucket fulls. Sometimes that factor develops with time and experience. Too late for us for 2007, methinks, but I see enough of the Premiership week in and week out to know that the shoots of recovery are there, if they are nurtured correctly.

I certainly think the Irish have benefitted from concentrating their players in two or three teams and playing in the Heineken - sadly the situation is a tad more complicated here as we know all too well. But that's for another blog....

Once again, well done.

  • 396.
  • At 01:59 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Rory wrote:

Read through a large section of the comments and have made a few observations.
Some genuine rugby supporters among you, but some guys are calling themselves English rugby supporters, yet they abandon their team, dismissing them as total crap the first minute their pre-match predictions were not realized and they suffer a heavy defeat. (Fans also suffering from amnesia, based on some of the pre-match predictions I read). The next action is to look for the scape goat ~ so predictable and often so typically English.
It seems to be the general theme for many so-called English "fans" across different Sports. I remember reading 2 separate articles in the English bradsheets (some Months apart) between the rise and fall of another English sporting hero, which really sums the whole "bandwagon supporter" syndrome to me. First article read:
"Linford Christie wins Olympic Gold for Britain"
Second article, some Months later read:
"Jamaican born sprinter fails doping test".
Guys, some of you really need to grow up and know what it means to be a real supporter. You also need to learn to acknowledge when another team is simply superior to yours.
As an Irish man, we know how to support teams through the good times and the bad, granted there have been plenty of bad times in the past. You stand by your country men and carry them through to the good times. What matters is that every player on the pitch gave it 100% and played to the best of theire ability.

Ok, so maybe Ireland aren't quite World beaters yet (getting damn close though), but at we are at least playing rugby with passion and flair, something which England have failed to do for many years now, including when you were at your peak.
Hats off to England, you won the World cup final, however let me just say in no particularly spectacular fashion which would win over the hearts of any potential new spectators to the sport. Ireland lost against France on Saturday (partly due to overly cautious start, and lack of cover in the centre) but there were a hell of a lot more rugby skills demonstrated by both teams 2 weeks ago, than in the last World cup final.
The world of rugby has moved on my friends.
Credit to the countries who strive to play expansive rugby, such as Ireland and Wales. Long may it continue

  • 397.
  • At 02:02 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Stuart Wells wrote:

Humbled and awed by the welcome of the Irish supporters in Croke Park and to a greater extent, humbled and awed by the performance and passion of the Irish team. As an Englishman I only rue the fact that they lost to France the previous week. What a 15. If ever a team deserved to win a tournament it is this one: from Paul O'Connell via the flawless Ronan O'Gara to a backs line up that would grace any world class team. Let's be realistic: England do not have the squad to defend their title, Ireland cruelly exposed the limitations of our pack. Ireland, however, with the confidence that comes from their game against us and O'Driscol's prescense (and a bit of luck like the All Blacks going out in the other semi final in Paris) might just pull it off.

  • 398.
  • At 02:06 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • damien wrote:

Heres the thing... or things about the historic meet we witnessed; saturday saw two teams walk out onto a sacred ground once thought never to hold a foreign game other than GAA and the pressured team obviously being ireland. Both teams began playing and as far as i could see England started the pace for the first...five minutes and from then werea simply not allowed to play, its not that England as a team played badly rather that they were not allowed to play by a superior team playing a "foreign sport". The referee did very well, he blew up Ireland for their mistakes and the same for England (but then there is always one that wants to blame the ref!!)..and all in all Ireland showed strenght in thier capabilities as a team and as a nation, never was i so proud to be an Irishman as i was on that day! tough look England but when you're outclassed you're outclassed!

  • 399.
  • At 02:14 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

re 349:

I openly admit to my revisionism. Before the Irish game England looked to have found their way slightly - if not as much as the press suggested. A slightly more cohesive unit, some general idea of where to put the ball. Jason Robinson looking hungry. On that basis I thought the game against Ireland would be much closer.

On the day... well we all know what happened. England fell apart. Ireland played well. Game over. Whatever steps England had taken they took an exponential number backwards. Ireland's job was far easier than anyone realistically imagined - even by the Irish judging from their totally euphoric posts. Despite what you might think I don't begrudge your win. There is no hiding place on a rugby pitch. The better team wins. That's it.

My posts don't argue the Irish game. There can be no argument. What gets me is how the Irish keep calling the English arrogant when it is they that are jumping up and down for very little reason. Double standards here I think.

And what's really got up your noses is that I point this out.

If it ain't true ignore me. Very simple.

  • 400.
  • At 02:23 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

to 357

I have to say... it's enormous fun getting up your noses

  • 401.
  • At 02:27 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Paul wrote:

Well done Ireland you deserve the win.

The only positive for England was the performance of Strettle.

  • 402.
  • At 02:30 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • damien wrote:

Heres the thing... or things about the historic meet we witnessed; saturday saw two teams walk out onto a sacred ground once thought never to hold a foreign game other than GAA and the pressured team obviously being ireland. Both teams began playing and as far as i could see England started the pace for the first...five minutes and from then werea simply not allowed to play, its not that England as a team played badly rather that they were not allowed to play by a superior team playing a "foreign sport". The referee did very well, he blew up Ireland for their mistakes and the same for England (but then there is always one that wants to blame the ref!!)..and all in all Ireland showed strenght in thier capabilities as a team and as a nation, never was i so proud to be an Irishman as i was on that day! tough look England but when you're outclassed you're outclassed!

  • 403.
  • At 02:54 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • DN wrote:

Firstly, Ian B at 330,

'World Cup Semi-finals will consist of AB, SA, Argentina and France or Australia. I think SA will win.'

France, Argentina and ABs in semis? That can't actually happen but I'm sure you knew that already, being such a rugby fan and all...good man, keep it up.

As for all other purveyors of 鈥渋nsightful鈥 opinions; this blog was not created as a means of airing the verbal diarrhea that spews from sore losers. The English game is rotting from the inside out and some of the above comments only serve to illustrate why this occurring 鈥 harking on about past glories, and using scapegoats and finger-pointing, rather than providing objective analysis of what is actually happening 鈥 and this goes right up to the very top of the game.

The English national team fall victim to the clubs鈥 ever-increasing dependency on foreign players coming in and filling key positions. Success at international level comes a very distant second to the commercial importance of success at national and European levels for those in charge at the clubs.

In direct contrast to the English set-up, the Irish system actually supports the national team, but not at the expense of club silverware. I鈥檓 not saying that ours is the model framework for others to follow, but for a country with a relatively low number of registered rugby players we really make the very most of our resources. The development of the game in Ireland in recent years is based fundamentally on the provinces system. But most importantly, we have Irish players in key positions 鈥 bar Contempomi 鈥 and playing together on a regular basis, which means that guys like O鈥機onnell, O鈥機allghan, Leamy and Wallace, or Hickie, Horgan, O鈥橠riscoll and D鈥橝rcy all know each other and can read each others game instinctively.


Finally, to John at 378, I completely agree that some grace and dignity wouldn鈥檛 go astray for some, but generally I think this grace and dignity is upheld by those who actually know the game, and know how far we have come in recent years!

  • 404.
  • At 03:09 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Mac Eddey wrote:

How about a little more grace here, guys? "If you can meet with triumph and disaster..." Ireland played well and were deserved winners. England played poorly and deserved to lose. However, beating a poor side does not turn a team into world beaters. (England fans note the victory over Scotland.) I would dearly like to see the World Cup remain in the Northern Hemisphere as I have little time for the way in which it has been corrupted in the South in the name of providing a TV spectacle.

The point for England to remember is that we were already on the wane when we won in 2003. We actually peaked the season before and played our best rugby before the WC finals. Ireland are still on the way up and might not be quite ready for this year. It will be a shame for them if I'm right because the present side won't be around in four years' time.

Sir Clive set out to win the WC and he did so - at the expense of 'grooming' the next generation. It was very much a case of 'eyes on the prize' and that team was six or seven years in the building - there wasn't very much lined up to come along after it. England do have the players but bringing them up to full international level is not an overnight job. I hope Brian Ashton sticks with the squad. It's easy to attack the players for losing but a bit disrespectful to a very good Irish side who played out of their skins on the day.

I do think England need a bit more pace in the centre, though. I'm not sure we can afford such a pedestrian midfield and would also prefer to see Peter Jackson at 9 rather than Sean Perry.

As for Ireland, Geordan Murphy for Dempsey, Boss for Stringer and Best in for Easterby from the start. I still think the front row is suspect and will get turned over in France.

I think the truth is that Ireland aren't as good nor England as bad as Saturday's result might suggest.

  • 405.
  • At 03:10 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Stuart Wells wrote:

From one Englishmen to all the other Englishmen on this post: would those who take pleasure in rubbishing the Irish performance kindly remove themselves from this post and go boil their heads. Ireland were magnificent. England were'nt dire - they were just beaten by a better team. Let's get over it and enjoy the rest of what has been so far a superb competition. As for John in 378 - if you think that idiot in Dover was in any way representative of this nation you are sorely mistaken. Let's hope the joker goes back to Bowls or Darts or whatever sport it is that he plays - he clearly knows nothing of rubgy.

  • 406.
  • At 03:13 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Stuart Wells wrote:

From one Englishmen to all the other Englishmen on this post: would those who take pleasure in rubbishing the Irish performance kindly remove themselves from this post and go boil their heads. Ireland were magnificent. England were'nt dire - they were just beaten by a better team. Let's get over it and enjoy the rest of what has been so far a superb competition. As for John in 378 - if you think that idiot in Dover was in any way representative of this nation you are sorely mistaken. Let's hope the joker goes back to Bowls or Darts or whatever sport it is that he plays - he clearly knows nothing of rubgy.

  • 407.
  • At 03:31 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

383

To Houstie

Interesting...

You say England are 'crap' ( probably so on Saturday's showing) and also that they 'remain useless at rugby'.

I won't argue with any of what you've just said. Quite right. Playing numbers, money - it's all there but nothing comes from it. No argument at all.

You then go on to suggest that by beating a 'crap' and 'useless' team you've earned the right for a chance at the world cup.

What can I say... Thank you for proving the very point I set out to establish in the first place.

And you call me 'mentally deficient'

Thanks again.

  • 408.
  • At 03:39 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Honest John wrote:

Well it's been an interesting few days to say the least and the comments here on the blogs have been mixed.
I would like to point out one or two things - firstly nobody was predicting a complete drubbing of England - In actual fact there were more than a few English contributors who predicted the Irish choking in 'Choke Park'. There were also a few who said 'We will beat Ireland and then build towards retaining the WC'
A very good Ireland side beat up a lost England side. Simple as that.

Secondly a very good Ireland side lost to a very good French side two weeks ago. They were mugged and looked like mugs but fair is fair, I doubt if many teams would keep the French scoreless for near sixty minutes in any game.

Thirdly, While I don't believe Ireland are a 'one man team', the loss of our captain left gaping holes in the centre for the french to exploit. Hopefully those holes won't be there come September.

Lastly, I won't try to predict how Ireland will do in the WC. I will leave that to the more 'knowledgeable ones' who have decided that the All Blacks will murder us. (The same knowledgable ones who predicted a close game on Saturday with the boot of JW just edging it for England)

  • 409.
  • At 03:41 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • kjfrazer wrote:

383

To Houstie

Interesting...

You say England are 'crap' ( probably so on Saturday's showing) and also that they 'remain useless at rugby'.

I won't argue with any of what you've just said. Quite right. Playing numbers, money - it's all there to hand but not utilised as well as it could be. No argument at all.

You then go on to suggest that by beating a 'crap' and 'useless' team you've earned the right for a chance at the world cup.

What can I say... Thank you for proving the very point I set out to establish in the first place.

And you call me 'mentally deficient'

I tell you what, I take that back. I don't want to personally insult anyone. I just believe that the Irish are getting very carried away with their expectations and their constant use of the 'arrogant' tag against the English is totally unfounded.

Thanks again.

  • 410.
  • At 04:42 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:

I previously stated England would shit a chicken at Croke Park- The occasion proved to be too charged and always favoured the home side. Hard luck to the English. This is where the slate is wiped clean and preparation for the W C begins.
For our boys, to quote a famous British ex Premier- "Seldom in the face of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." Well done BOD and the boys!

P.S. France to be hit by a monsoon for the four weeks of the W C and Ireland to win a landslide final, literally!

  • 411.
  • At 04:43 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • georgie wrote:

57 Andrew - Leicester fan perhaps!!!
As for Saturday-
Well done Ireland, you deserved it and simply wanted it more that was obvious to see.I don't think anyone could have beaten you! The fans were gracious and should be proud of themselves and their team.
When it comes to England what can you really say... the front row Freshwater - still not convinced by him. Chuter - Lineout is just not good enough and not any major impact anywhere else. Vickery - Doesn't look at his best at the moment, but who else is there! Deacon - what does he bring to the team! Grewcock - there really is nothing to say! What exactly did Palmer do last autumn that meant he didn't retain his place, not to mention the fact that he is on fire for Wasps, he also happens to be a lineout specialist which corrcet me if I am wrong is what we need! Corry - If the best thing we can say about our No. 8 is he caught the ball in the lineout then we are in trouble! he gives away penalties, slow getting to the breakdown and when we have the very rare situation of men over out wide he picks the ball up and runs 1/2 meter into a wall of shirts!!! Hurry up and get better Dan Ward Smith!
Worsely - Did nothing wrong and as usual put his body on the line!
I think the future of no. 7 is good with Lund/Rees although Lund didn't have his best game. How ironic that when he did that dangerous/late tackel (which prob did deserve a yellow) the person most offended was O'Driscoll who just happend to do them same thing to Morgan( Who subsequently had to be replaced) earlier in the game!!!
Ellis - is back to his old ways! Wilko - Struggled, but who wouldn't behing that pack. ROG may have had a better game but you can't re-write history based on 1 game. Johnny has still achieved more and should still be considered one of the Best. O'Gara will have to achieve more than one good game against England to be thought of in the same way. And for the record (to all the Irish fans that think I'm being biast) I think he is very capable of doing so!!!
Farrell - Needs more time to prove him self, but he doesn't look to be the answer at 12. Abbott is yet again being overlooked!
Tindell - again an ok performance but surley if we are going to compete with the best in the world we need a dynamic centre who can pick holes and run good lines not bulldoze into people( thats what the forwards are there to do!)! Give Tait a go and see what happens! We have nothing to loose now!
Lewsey - is a fullback, pur and simple!
Strettle - Looked bright and did little wrong and got an elbow to the face for his troubles!
Morgan - looked solid and sucure under high balls, did well until he went off.
As for the France game Ashton has to change things or we will suffer the same fate!

  • 412.
  • At 04:45 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • george wrote:

57 Andrew - Leicester fan perhaps!!!
As for Saturday-
Well done Ireland, you deserved it and simply wanted it more that was obvious to see.I don't think anyone could have beaten you! The fans were gracious and should be proud of themselves and their team.
When it comes to England what can you really say... the front row Freshwater - still not convinced by him. Chuter - Lineout is just not good enough and not any major impact anywhere else. Vickery - Doesn't look at his best at the moment, but who else is there! Deacon - what does he bring to the team! Grewcock - there really is nothing to say! What exactly did Palmer do last autumn that meant he didn't retain his place, not to mention the fact that he is on fire for Wasps, he also happens to be a lineout specialist which corrcet me if I am wrong is what we need! Corry - If the best thing we can say about our No. 8 is he caught the ball in the lineout then we are in trouble! he gives away penalties, slow getting to the breakdown and when we have the very rare situation of men over out wide he picks the ball up and runs 1/2 meter into a wall of shirts!!! Hurry up and get better Dan Ward Smith!
Worsely - Did nothing wrong and as usual put his body on the line!
I think the future of no. 7 is good with Lund/Rees although Lund didn't have his best game. How ironic that when he did that dangerous/late tackel (which prob did deserve a yellow) the person most offended was O'Driscoll who just happend to do them same thing to Morgan( Who subsequently had to be replaced) earlier in the game!!!
Ellis - is back to his old ways! Wilko - Struggled, but who wouldn't behing that pack. ROG may have had a better game but you can't re-write history based on 1 game. Johnny has still achieved more and should still be considered one of the Best. O'Gara will have to achieve more than one good game against England to be thought of in the same way. And for the record (to all the Irish fans that think I'm being biast) I think he is very capable of doing so!!!
Farrell - Needs more time to prove him self, but he doesn't look to be the answer at 12. Abbott is yet again being overlooked!
Tindell - again an ok performance but surley if we are going to compete with the best in the world we need a dynamic centre who can pick holes and run good lines not bulldoze into people( thats what the forwards are there to do!)! Give Tait a go and see what happens! We have nothing to loose now!
Lewsey - is a fullback, pure and simple!
Strettle - Looked bright and did little wrong and got an elbow to the face for his troubles!
Morgan - looked solid and sucure under high balls, did well until he went off.
As for the France game Ashton has to change things or we will suffer the same fate!

  • 413.
  • At 04:48 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:

I previously stated England would shit a chicken at Croke Park- The occasion proved to be too charged and always favoured the home side. Hard luck to the English. This is where the slate is wiped clean and preparation for the W C begins.
For our boys, to quote a famous British ex Premier- "Seldom in the face of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." Well done BOD and the boys!

P.S. France to be hit by a monsoon for the four weeks of the W C and Ireland to win a landslide final, literally!

  • 414.
  • At 04:51 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Houstie wrote:

Re 408 KJ Frazer

Yet again you misread the post KJ. I said that Ireland have the right to say that they can contend for the WC, not win it.

It seems that evryone on this post agrees that England were completely outclassed & outplayed. Yes I do think that they are a genuinely poor team. However, I think that France are an excellent team which Ireland came within 4 minutes of beating. Ireland competed with them all over the pitch. Ask any Frenchman & he will say that Ireland are practically on a par with the French.

With this in mind, why do you seem to think that the idea of Ireland making the final of the WC is ridiculous? Do you have any justification for your comments?

I'm positive that if the scoreline had been the other way round on Sat, you would be on here claiming that England can get the grand slam & go all the way in the WC.

You're the typically arrogant person who will agree that England were terrible but can't agree that any other team in Britain would be able to win the WC.

  • 415.
  • At 04:58 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • george wrote:

57 Andrew - Leicester fan perhaps!!!
As for Saturday-
Well done Ireland, you deserved it and simply wanted it more that was obvious to see.I don't think anyone could have beaten you! The fans were gracious and should be proud of themselves and their team.
When it comes to England what can you really say... the front row Freshwater - still not convinced by him. Chuter - Lineout is just not good enough and not any major impact anywhere else. Vickery - Doesn't look at his best at the moment, but who else is there! Deacon - what does he bring to the team! Grewcock - there really is nothing to say! What exactly did Palmer do last autumn that meant he didn't retain his place, not to mention the fact that he is on fire for Wasps, he also happens to be a lineout specialist which corrcet me if I am wrong is what we need! Corry - If the best thing we can say about our No. 8 is he caught the ball in the lineout then we are in trouble! he gives away penalties, slow getting to the breakdown and when we have the very rare situation of men over out wide he picks the ball up and runs 1/2 meter into a wall of shirts!!! Hurry up and get better Dan Ward Smith!
Worsely - Did nothing wrong and as usual put his body on the line!
I think the future of no. 7 is good with Lund/Rees although Lund didn't have his best game. How ironic that when he did that dangerous/late tackel (which prob did deserve a yellow) the person most offended was O'Driscoll who just happend to do them same thing to Morgan( Who subsequently had to be replaced) earlier in the game!!!
Ellis - is back to his old ways! Wilko - Struggled, but who wouldn't behing that pack. ROG may have had a better game but you can't re-write history based on 1 game. Johnny has still achieved more and should still be considered one of the Best. O'Gara will have to achieve more than one good game against England to be thought of in the same way. And for the record (to all the Irish fans that think I'm being biast) I think he is very capable of doing so!!!
Farrell - Needs more time to prove him self, but he doesn't look to be the answer at 12. Abbott is yet again being overlooked!
Tindell - again an ok performance but surley if we are going to compete with the best in the world we need a dynamic centre who can pick holes and run good lines not bulldoze into people( thats what the forwards are there to do!)! Give Tait a go and see what happens! We have nothing to loose now!
Lewsey - is a fullback, pure and simple!
Strettle - Looked bright and did little wrong and got an elbow to the face for his troubles!
Morgan - looked solid and sucure under high balls, did well until he went off.
As for the France game Ashton has to change things or we will suffer the same fate!

  • 416.
  • At 05:02 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Bill wrote:

kjfrazer,

if you didn't want to personally insult anyone why didn't you just leave the comment out?Surely that was a little mentally deficient in itself, or maybe you were just being the "bigger man"...

  • 417.
  • At 05:02 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Phil Gough wrote:

I think the critism towards Farrell is slightly over the top. I admit he had a poor game but by far not the worse player. He made mistakes due to the other players errors.

As for my Strettle, I've known for many years through school, when he played.. Give him half a chance and he will make any defence look amatuer. He got very few good balls on Saturday apart from the one from FARRELL which he went to score in the corner. A player for the future who I hope stays in the side. Well done Dave!

  • 418.
  • At 05:32 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • steve harding wrote:

well ireland i thought personally,were strong in every department.o,driscoll,srtinger and co.were having the time of their lives,and thier style for most of the game was dazzling.the rbs man of the match was fully deserved.may its because scotland were crap and made england look good (made even more so by the fact that italy stuffed them at murryfield)and we struggled against the italians and we got what we deserved at croke park.if we play that badly against france we kiss goodbye to any hopes of winning the six nations,or indeed the world cup!!!.has winning the world cup been a jinx or is it me?because we dont seem to have won a lot since then.

  • 419.
  • At 05:33 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • steve harding wrote:

well ireland i thought personally,were strong in every department.o,driscoll,srtinger and co.were having the time of their lives,and thier style for most of the game was dazzling.the rbs man of the match was fully deserved.may its because scotland were crap and made england look good (made even more so by the fact that italy stuffed them at murryfield)and we struggled against the italians and we got what we deserved at croke park.if we play that badly against france we kiss goodbye to any hopes of winning the six nations,or indeed the world cup!!!.has winning the world cup been a jinx or is it me?because we dont seem to have won a lot since then.

  • 420.
  • At 05:40 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • steve harding wrote:

well ireland i thought personally,were strong in every department.o,driscoll,srtinger and co.were having the time of their lives,and thier style for most of the game was dazzling.the rbs man of the match was fully deserved.may its because scotland were crap and made england look good (made even more so by the fact that italy stuffed them at murryfield)and we struggled against the italians and we got what we deserved at croke park.if we play that badly against france we kiss goodbye to any hopes of winning the six nations,or indeed the world cup!!!.has winning the world cup been a jinx or is it me?because we dont seem to have won a lot since then.

  • 421.
  • At 05:45 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • steve harding wrote:

well ireland i thought personally,were strong in every department.o,driscoll,srtinger and co.were having the time of their lives,and thier style for most of the game was dazzling.the rbs man of the match was fully deserved.may its because scotland were crap and made england look good (made even more so by the fact that italy stuffed them at murryfield)and we struggled against the italians and we got what we deserved at croke park.if we play that badly against france we kiss goodbye to any hopes of winning the six nations,or indeed the world cup!!!.has winning the world cup been a jinx or is it me?because we dont seem to have won a lot since then.

  • 422.
  • At 05:47 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • steve harding wrote:

well ireland i thought personally,were strong in every department.o,driscoll,srtinger and co.were having the time of their lives,and thier style for most of the game was dazzling.the rbs man of the match was fully deserved.may its because scotland were crap and made england look good (made even more so by the fact that italy stuffed them at murryfield)and we struggled against the italians and we got what we deserved at croke park.if we play that badly against france we kiss goodbye to any hopes of winning the six nations,or indeed the world cup!!!.has winning the world cup been a jinx or is it me?because we dont seem to have won a lot since then.

  • 423.
  • At 06:19 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Dave wrote:

kjfraser by your logic if NZ were to go and stuff a 'poor' team (though i don't personally believe England are as poor as they are being made out to be) and they then went on to claim they had a chance at the WC then these claims would be rubbish too! Please do not judge the Irish performance by the way England played but rather by the merit in the way the Irish played which i thought was first class (as NZ did when we played them in autumn)


the one thing im sure that everyone will agree on, be they irish or english or any other nationality is that you are talking rubbish and i think unfortunately giving the English a bad name in the minds of some people, where i know that the vast majority of English nation took the defeat graciously and applauded a very good Irish performance, which i commend them for. Englands time will come again i am sure of that, but for now its Ireland's turn to be optimistic so why not let the Irish have their glory. You have made your point loud and clear and evidently not many people share it so perhaps its time to stop it there?

I thought the match went excellently and both sets of players and supporters responded with great sportsmanship (the occasional big hit is part n parcel of the game). I just ask that the Irish don't fall into the trap of thinking kjfraser is a prime example of a 'typical arrogant english' guy as he is in fact part of a minority. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the English surprise a few with a good performance in a couple of weeks against France regardless of the result

  • 424.
  • At 06:21 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Terry wrote:

Hello again, just got in and I am very surprised to see this thread still going.

I see Ol' kjfrazer is still spoutin' the usual ol' arrogant twaddle! If only the Irish teams great play was as consistent as his ability to say nothing in 500 words!

I read the Irish papers today and the overall view was that the talent in this Irish team is not in doubt. What is in doubt is consistency. The france experience compared to the humbling' of England a good example.

the good news is EOS has got that message loud and clear. We clearly are a world class team (just to annoy KJ) but consistency is what is required now heading into the WC.

  • 425.
  • At 06:33 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Patrick Read wrote:

I'm only 16 but it dosen't take a genius to realise that England's Pack were the faltering point rather than the centre partnership of Farrel/tindall.
The Irish Back row (and o'connel) were able to roam around the park at will, and therefore were able to produce quick efficient ball which the irish backs whipped up delightfully.
Corry and Worsley seemed to be the only England forwards attemting to hold the flood gates, but really it was a relentless irish tide which just drove the England pack off the ball. This resulted in wilko getting poor ball, Farrel being given little time if any, and Poor mike tindall was only allowed to be given one rampaging run due to the stranglehold on the english forwards.
And someone give Strettle a medal, i mean he had O gara pinning him in the corner, with horgan on his heals, but still managed to break away each time. For when he got dumped by o'driscoll i had deja vu of Matt Tait against Wales but if anything he came out with his reputation improved let alone maintained.
I really think the centre should be left alone, as this chopping and changing isn't doing anyone any good, for first we wanted spark and pace so we got Tait, then they wanted brawn and creativity so they got Farrel and now they want to change again! Please someone take the axe from Brian Ashton's hands regarding Farrel.

  • 426.
  • At 07:00 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • philip wrote:

i though dempsey was fantastic, the bbc's rating of only 6 out of 10 is crazy. he deserves more respect. his fielding was supurb, he's a good tackler and scores his fair share. and he's an offaly man too!!

  • 427.
  • At 08:01 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Dave wrote:

Sorry, correction to my previous comment (422) Ireland didnt play NZ in the autumn internationals actually it was before that at the end of the previous season...just before anyone else mentions that!

  • 428.
  • At 08:02 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • honestview wrote:

Can anyone tell me where to get a copy of the full bbc coverage of this match.

  • 429.
  • At 08:05 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Dave wrote:

Sorry, correction to my previous comment (422) Ireland didnt play NZ in the autumn internationals actually it was before that at the end of the previous season...just before anyone else mentions that!

  • 430.
  • At 08:20 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Terry wrote:

Aaaaw! can someone get kj back, he entertains us....or has he bottled!

  • 431.
  • At 08:44 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Tom B wrote:

It's true, ireland played well, but they were hardly incredible. d'arcy and o'driscoll were stifled and most of the points came as a result of poor forward work from the england pack. There needs to be a total forwards reshuffle, and more young guns should be considered. Also as to Farrell being the scapegoat is unfair. He had a good enough defensive game and was solid with ball in hand. But it is true that in attack he really lacks flair. He is too slow for a centre and in professional rugby size isn't enough to break a tackle. Tait ought to get a chance in the line up really if Ashton wants to get his youngsters to begin playing at the top of their game.
Peace out

  • 432.
  • At 10:50 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • frederic wrote:

ref 379:

The Lada is actually more reliable than the pair of them!!! LOL...

  • 433.
  • At 10:54 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • Simon wrote:

First chance I have had to read the blog since Saturday. Really glad that a good number of people have realised that the problem wasn't exclusively Farrell, but rather the English pack!!

Ireland were simply the better team on the day, particular their second and back row. The performance from Engalnd's front five was poor!

Farrell at points defended well, passed well and ran straight and true a couple of times. He needs to learn how to play internatinal rugby with his lack of pace and the six nations is the perfect place to do that.

Nobody really expected England to win in Ireland, so why all the fuss! England are on a learning curve, to the one important game this year, South Africa in the pools of the World Cup. Win that Game and we should have Wales in the Quarters, beat them and I think most people would accept England losing valiantly to France in the Semis.

  • 434.
  • At 11:55 PM on 26 Feb 2007,
  • FF wrote:

Can I play clairvoyant as well please?

Here my in trusion into the future of rugby as RWC goes:

Group A :
South Africa
England

Group B :
Australia
Wales

Group c:
New Zealand
Italy

Group D:
France
Argentina


QF1: Australia
QF2:New Zealand
QF3: South Africa
QF4: France

SF1: New Zealand
SF2: France

Final: France

3rd place: South Africa


Once again, as usual All the big name of SH and NH are at the end. That is logic as they are the stronger teams. However before all of you going crazy on me and my FUNNY AND SLIGHTLY ALTERNATIVE PREDICTIONS, I will put forward the following though as a question:

Will it be time to either handicap the "big nations of rugby" in order to give a chance to the lesser teams to catch up OR should we have a 6 to 8 Stronger sides WC and a "rest of the world" next to it?

I realised that I am posting a very pertinent point, but one thing I am not very happy about is the lack of support to the game of rugby from most of you people who perfers to slag each others about nationalities and this and that... It seems a bit like hanging around in the kindergarden.

Go to the East of Europe and see for yourself how though it is for some of the rugby league to get founding to promote the sport.

Leave in a country where you are told that a kid can play only football at school because they have no interest and/or founding to promote rugby.

All of the English windgers on this blog, you have a WC trophy to be proud of.

All the Irish, a team that will become world contender.

Some of my friend in Germany and Poland will love to have the chance of being taking seriously when they tell people that they follow and/or play Rugby and not football.

Stop guessing around who will win the RWC, we still have the 6 nations to finish first. And the league. And the H-cup.

When it comes to RWC, watch and enjoy the games and if your team win it - even better, irrelevant if NZ, AUS, SA, FRANCE, WALES, ENGLAND, IRELAND, ARG, ITALY or event an underdog @ 1000 to 1 at the bookies.

Enjoy the game...

  • 435.
  • At 09:27 AM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • Houstie wrote:

419, 420 & 421

Could you repeat that please Steve :-)

  • 436.
  • At 09:37 AM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • Jon wrote:

Horgan's elbow on Strettle was unnecessary, no question there. In fact, if noticed at the time, Horgan could well have been sin-binned. But Lund's tackle on Dempsey, regardless of how fast he apologised after, was reckless and extremely dangerous. There should be no grey area on this rule - tackle a guy in the air and you should be sin-binned at least. Any injury incurred from an elbow would be superficial at worst; driving your shoulder (just shoulder,no attempt to hold) through a guy's legs and sending him spinning when he's in mid-air could have far worse consequences.

Anyone disagree?

  • 437.
  • At 09:51 AM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • Jack Onory wrote:

Firstly lets not blame the backs they played as well as they could behind the poor forward platform, i admit some where better than others Strettle looked a good england prospect don't drop him for a has-been after one game. wilkinson yes, farrell yes (stop making him the scapegoat at least he set strettle up tindall did nout, he will prove you all wrong)tindall no, morgan no, lewsey yes (at fullback) as a forward myself it was the forwards performance which concerned me most lets now lose Corry...useless captain and now proven useless around the park

What interests me more is how the come the Saxons are doing so well and yet the step up seems to go so badly. Any thoughts??? Also I look forward to Chev walker and Karl Pyrce arriving although please do not rush them in give them time to become the true greats they can be...I know Chev is playing well in the Saxons but what is happening to Pyrce seems to have gone quite?????

  • 438.
  • At 10:21 AM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • Niall O'Kearney wrote:

Just one final observation, directed mainly at kjfrazer and other English posters on this thread...

It's not that we're crowing about Ireland's win on Saturday, it's the fact that a fair number of posts before the match, kj included, speculated on an English win, the Triple Crown, Grand Slam and even retaining the WC. All we're saying is 'get real'.

May I also point out that the manner in which Ireland lost to France is ENTIRELY different from the way in which England lost to Ireland. The former was a narrowly lost see-saw match which could have gone either way whilst the latter was a rout. Similarly - the former was between 2 class sides whilst the latter was between a class side and a side very much in the doldrums.

  • 439.
  • At 11:03 AM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • ireforWC07 wrote:

Chris at 192, how could you? EOS would be absolutely reaming if he read your comment. Not only did you figure out HOW to beat Ireland, but you also went and posted on the internet! Let鈥檚 just hope this gem of information doesn鈥檛 find its way onto our opponents鈥 drawing boards before the WC, the results could be disastrous for our campaign!

But anyway鈥

Being a referee yourself 鈥 and a good one no doubt, given you鈥檙e unbiased nature - I鈥檓 sure you appreciate that when you are on the pitch you don鈥檛 have the luxuries of slow-motion replays. If you analyse any match, scrutinizing every play from different angles, then of course you will find infringements, especially when you set out to categorically discredit the opposition.

One question before I go:

Being such a stickler for rules and fair play, were you squirming in your seat and calling for justice against England back in 2003 as you watched them make their own interpretation of the maul, using what referee Paddy O鈥橞rien described as 鈥渢ruck and trailer鈥 tactics?

Keep your token positive comments to yourself, your post was loaded with bitterness.

  • 440.
  • At 11:23 AM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • AW wrote:

Getting real would definitely be a good thing, England got well and truly stuffed by Ireland, but hey, weren't Ireland supposed to win the grand slam this year. The real wake up call will be when the All Blacks make a bloody smear of any one of the 6 nations in the World Cup.

  • 441.
  • At 12:16 PM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • Andrew Allman wrote:

I have been reading postings and like many Englishmen am in despair re result. This must be the worst result since Will Carling was Captain. To lose by this many points in a 6 nations game is unacceptable. I despair of the RFU and what has become of England post clive Woodward.

Rather then questionning the team I believe the following need to be addressed:
- why were we still arguing about rest days in between games during the competition
- why were we so undercooked compared to the Irish
- what is stopping the players who do well for England for the Saxons and clubs in the Heineken step up to England
- why have we not produced a World Class Player since before RWC 2003
- why are we blooding raw young talent in championship matches, Sir Clive would not have done this
- why are our key players seemingly less fit than other countries

I believe that the game on Saturday should be used as a warning to look at the stucture of our game in a very serious way.

I suggest as a starter:
- Reduce the number of premiership teams to reduce fixture congestion
- Contract elite players to RFU and allow limited number of games per year
- abolish end of season play offs to reduce fixtures
- Prioritise England training and games v Club
- Use Heineken Cup as a stepping stone to International level like the irish do
- Limit number of foreign players in Premiership
- Build academy in New Zealand like Cricket to raise game of young elite players

Glad to have got that off my chest and will now get my prayer mat out for French.

  • 442.
  • At 12:36 PM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • walkingonthespot wrote:

As an Irishman, I think this tournament (so far) has been this perfect preparation for this year's world cup.

Over the last few years we have built a team which has proven that it is capable (in italics) of beating the best teams in the world England 04, running NZ close twice last year, SA and Aus in the autumn.

I believe the loss to the French to be a blessing in disguise. The pain of that loss will hammer home the importance of finishing off games as per NZ last year.

We can win the world cup. Not will.

  • 443.
  • At 01:10 PM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • Cormac wrote:

I'm just wondering who had possession for the missing minutes in the first and second halves?

Was this a case of mass hypnosis? I didn't notice anyone on the pitch, other than the officials and the players.

  • 444.
  • At 01:22 PM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • Philbert wrote:

I want you to cast your minds back to the RWC in 2003 and consider team England as it was back then. This is not to bask in glory past but to look at the make up of the English team.

A great philosopher once wrote that to win a RWC you need 3 times 5: you need 5 players that will walk into a world XV, you need another 5 that are serious contenders for the same world XV and another 5 that are there or thereabouts.

England had that in 2003, and more! And what's more those players were at the top of their game, playing regularly together and had been playing together for some time: experiencing the highs and lows.

Now the present world XV team is, obviously, a matter for debate! However, and I may be lynched by my English brethren here, I don鈥檛 think that there would currently be an Englishman on the team sheet.

Furthermore, how many Irishmen would be in that XV? Certainly there are a few candidates: BOD and O鈥機onnell, but look further into the team and what becomes apparent is that the relationships between the Irish players are far more important than the actual players. What showed against France was that take away a few key players and you start to lose those relationships, that understanding.

Ireland are in a similar position to England 4 years ago and, with a fair wind, have a good shot at the RWC title. I only hope that they can learn from the English example and make the right preparations now for the inevitable exit of players following the tournament and begin the 鈥渞e鈥-building process proactively!!

  • 445.
  • At 04:09 PM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:


Irish players that have the potential and form to be in a World XV-
Gordon D`Arcy, BOD, Paul O`Connell, David Wallace and Ronan O Gara.
I add O`Gara here because he is widely viewed as second only to D Carter. I believe he is potentilly a better all-round player. I have great respect for Jono but take him from behind what was one of the greatest ever packs in world rugby (England 03) and well, you get last saturday.
Geordan Murphy is another with the potential to make it, but he is`nt getting the games.
England can talk about reshuffling their backs all they want but obviously its finding some young dynamic forwards thats they`re main concern. The English clubs have much to answer for the rapid decline of the national team. What`s the point playing all these league games without proper rest? It`s all about the money I`m afraid!

  • 446.
  • At 04:25 PM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • wrote:

PS- in regards to the great N Zealand stuffing us at the W C- we were 8 minutes from defeating them in the summer in Auckland and drew with them two years before, also in New Zealand. There will be little expectation of us beating them at the WC, lets keep it that way.

  • 447.
  • At 07:11 PM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • wizlon wrote:

Ashfel needs to get a clue to be honest, yes the forwards arnt the best and were dominated by the irish on saturday, which was the main reason ireland won, because they got great possesion of the base and with backs like darcy o'driscoll and o'gara you know they will use them well. But what you said about WIlkinson could not be more wrong he was starved of good possesion all game with the irish pack driving england back all the time, he has only played a few games of rugby in the past years and is basically starting again as an international player, but when possesion was given to wilkinson he used it well puttin his backs into space. Also the problem with using youngsters in the pack is that there will be no experience and when going head to head with the Irish scrum they would be torn to peices, because they have not picked up the tricks of the trade yet, you need to bring them in over a long period of time, one by one, and england have not been able to do this because we won the world cup in 03 which meant many of our experienced forwards left at once leaving huge gaps in our pack. to be honest i think that england were very poor on saturday aswell but you can see that we are slowly getting better and england need time to get firing on all cylinders again, and when Jonny is playing as good as he used to i think England we be about there aswell, it may take a long time but at least its started.

  • 448.
  • At 10:30 PM on 27 Feb 2007,
  • gar wrote:

interesting that the only thing the begrudgers (a minority) can say is

"Oh yeah? well...well... other teams 'll beat you!"

brilliant

  • 449.
  • At 02:04 AM on 28 Feb 2007,
  • JUBJUB wrote:

Of course there is going to be euphoria when beating england so convincingly. True, the game against france was the big one of this tournament and we LOST (as has been annoyingly stated ad nauseum by some of the embittered contributors).

The real reason for euphoria and hype around this Irish team is that we are up there with France. Anybody who says that Ireland wont be competitive against France in Sept. is deluded. Now if we are willing to say Ireland have the potential to beat france (which based on the last performance they do) then there is a clear path to the semi-final of the rugby world cup. This coupled with the gaining stamina of Irish rugby at club level is reason for celebration.

My point is that nobody is dismissing france as overhyped and arrogant if they say they are in contention for the WC. So why begrudge the one team in the NH that have the potential to beat France?

  • 450.
  • At 03:51 AM on 28 Feb 2007,
  • Dubain wrote:

Re: AW and 440

weren't Ireland supposed to win the Grand Slam this year?!?!? Please point out one Irish player or member of the management team who calimed or said that prior to or during the tournament. That would have been tantamount to PR suicide (something akin to Sir Clive's (who else!!!) PR set-up (alistair Campbell) with the Lions) and considering our record Vs France we were never in a position to say so. You know as well as I do that it was the media (on both sides of the Irish Sea) who hyped it all up and who claimed that. The Irish set-up have never claimed this (although they might have quietly believed it) and in fact you will notice how EOS is much quieter this year in his predictions and assumptions than in previous years - he has learned from experience. Obviously we aspire to be the best we possibly can and win as many matches as we can, but please get one thing straight - we are not a cocky bunch who profess to being world beaters especially before we paly them!!

And Ireland for the RWC - I'm afraid I don't think so. Would love to see it, but we're not there yet. Current form is good (and going into a tournament you go on current form and not what you did 2/3/4 years previous) - you are only as good as your last result, irrespective of who it was against.

  • 451.
  • At 11:01 AM on 28 Feb 2007,
  • Adrian Stemp wrote:

My concern is that in all of england's 6 nations games I dont remember seeing any forward interpassing whatsoever. I mean isnt that a trademark of the 15 man-rugby that a team needs to win a world cup these days? but dont worry because we have mastered mauling!!!!

I would be happier being a welsh rugby fan going into the world cup and thats not just me being cynical. i genuinely think the welsh on their day have a more exciting team.

I'm sure the england pack can show better than they did against ireland but lets be honest they are not going to turn into leamy, wallace, o'callahan overnight...shame

positives are that olly barkley is showing some international potential, if JW can remain fit and get stronger -he is still an awesome asset. Strettle looks to have the right attitude - how we need some flair and vision somewhere becos it certianly isnt in the back row or in the centres. Josh Lewsey has also been consistently quality.

good to get it off the chest

  • 452.
  • At 12:03 PM on 28 Feb 2007,
  • Rourke Mac Monagle wrote:

Gordan D'Arcy was outstanding his defence was right out of the top draw.His attacking was brilliant he is having a fantastic season in 2007 and will cause serious,problems for Ireland's oppontents in the world cup.If Ireland were to win the World Cup it would mean something special to the people of this country.Our key players are peaking at the moment at that it peferct in a world cup year.We have a though enough group but I think this is a golden era for Irish Rugby.We have support.We are serious World Cup contenders,but can't get carrierd away with ourselfs. We have an outstanding pack,and our backs are simply world class.The likes of Brian O'Driscoll.Paul O'Connell, David Wallace,Donncha O'Callaghan,Ronan O'Gara and Gordan D'Arcy are our key players and their are more, but couldn't be nameing the whole team.Ireland have a great cance to do it and its not impossible..

  • 453.
  • At 12:03 PM on 28 Feb 2007,
  • terry Doyle wrote:

a question to all the begrudgers.

Based on Irelands performance against England then, If Ireland were to play France today would they have 'a reasonable chance of winning?

Please note 'reasonable chance Of' winning not a certainty of winning.

If your answer is yes then Ireland are one of the teams likely to do well in WC, If they beat France they qualify top of the group (yes! the argies might put up a fight but they have not got what it takes to beat Ireland or France on our and their current form)

Ireland have the ability to beat every team in the world with the possible exception of NZ ...and we'll give that a fair bash! The problem is not talent..its consistency.

EOS knows this now..and according to does 'in the know' this is his focus now

as far as 'poor opponents' is concerned you cannot disprove Irelands ability by suggesting that opposition was poor. This clearly does not stand up as any form of decent argument. Ireland, like everyone else can only play what is in front of them and in Englands case we beat 'em. This is not a reflection of Irelands skill, more o reflection of England's lack of skill.

Now, will England beat France and do Ireland a favour at 'Twickers'. I apply the same logic and say yes this is possible. Is it likely? if I judge them on ther performance against Ireland then ..no. But the are wounded and have a point to prove and that type of attitude works well in rugby.

So come on England..do us a favour! and who knows what will hapen to Les Bleu in the last match of the six nations

  • 454.
  • At 12:14 PM on 28 Feb 2007,
  • Ronan Murphy wrote:

Surely now the English will wake up and see what a truly poor league the Guinness Premiership is.
It is competitive and physical, but it is of poor quality and makes ordinary players look like gods.

  • 455.
  • At 12:17 PM on 28 Feb 2007,
  • terry doyle wrote:

To 450

You are only as good as your last result? Have you looked at Irelands record over their last six matches

played 5 lost 1

we beat Australia, South Africa, Pacific Islands, Wales, England.

we lost to france by 3 points.

If we are only as good as our last game? Beating the current world champions 43- 13 is not a bad result

Please see my other post regarding poor opposition but do not use that as an argument as, like Strettle, it does not stand up

  • 456.
  • At 12:44 PM on 28 Feb 2007,
  • terry Doyle wrote:

why are my comments not being added??

  • 457.
  • At 02:06 PM on 28 Feb 2007,
  • doyler wrote:

i have just spent an hour browsing through the comments. and i'm sorry, but two people are maikignme wince.

kjfrazer and chris!
kj: in post 399you equate jumping up and down with arrogance. no, it is just joy! and as regards going on about relative population (post 340) sizes you should remember that with a population of 4000000 rugby is the 4th sport here!

chris: so, we failed to show up against france? losing in the last minute is 'failing to show up'? i look forward to the england france game! did you see the reaction on the french faces? they knew they were lucky. especially when you look at the refs interpretation of 'advantage'!

  • 458.
  • At 05:40 PM on 01 Mar 2007,
  • Ray in Connaught wrote:

Dear oh dear. Poor "weathers" above (comment # 171) sounds like his proud English heart is in the right place - but his knowledge of geography is a bit, em, how do I put this? - well draw your own conclusions from his quote:

"Ireland have the best rugby players in Britain".

Now let's get the old atlas out. OK, here's Europe. Northwest a bit, just off France, there's a big island, seems to be called Britain or Great Britain. What's that there to its west? Another substantial island, though not quite as big. Hmmm...that must be called Little Britain then? Ah no, silly, that's a TV comedy show. Well stone the crows! Who'd a thunk it? This other island is called something completely different! It says here that it's called Ireland!

But wouldn't that mean that Ireland have the best rugby players in Ireland?!

  • 459.
  • At 04:51 PM on 02 Mar 2007,
  • Ray in Connaught wrote:

And now, geography lesson over, and on to the rugby. I have literally read through all 458 previous posts above (whew!) and some marvellous debates and insights have emerged.

It is a pity that many posters seem to have jumped straight in with their own comments, without reading previous posts. To take one annoying example, witness those who still maintained that O'Driscoll's tackle on Morgan was a foul when (a) it had already been pointed out that the ref was right beside it and took no notice of it, merely giving Morgan the free kick for the mark, (b) someone had gone to the trouble of freeze-framing the video and reporting here, conclusively and once and for all, that Morgan had ended his aerial jump and touched back down when O'Driscoll tackled him. No "aerial take-out" foul. But too many bloggers couldn't be arsed reading this. Grrr! Learn some blogging etiquette!

On the subject of ROG - can I counter all the "he's one-dimensional, just kicks everything" criticisms, with this point. What ROG does on the field represents not so much what he CAN do, but what tactically he has been TOLD to do by EOS. Ireland have built a game-plan based on field position dominance, and the most effective way to achieve that is for ROG to kick to the corners and turn defenders. Is this plan successful? Damn right it is! Coupled with a good lineout unit which wins or disrupts a fair percentage of the opposition's throws, it demoralises the opposition who constantly find themselves trudging back towards or into their own 22, knowing that any slip-up will hand position back to Ireland just yards from the try line.

The second most important feature in the Irish game plan (since 2006) is the offload. We used be the worst, but we are now one of the best sides for ball-handling skills and offloading in the tackle. And _every_ man on the team has learnt to do this, and knows how to run in support and when to expect to receive an offload. In the 2nd half, why was Horgan facing backwards as he was tackled in the last yards to the English try line? Why, it was in order to offload to O'Driscoll, who sneaked in at the corner, and was just held up over the line by Tindall (about the only good thing Tindall did all match). In contrast, I hardly saw a single offload from England in the whole game - Andy Farrell excepted (which makes it all the more silly that he is being singled out for criticism). Pace and offloading have become perhaps the two biggest "X factors" in world rugby since the 2003 RWC. Ireland have injected both factors into their game; NZ and France have them aplenty; Wales have also learnt this new reality; but England seem to have neither factor. Or at least, England are not picking the players or coaching the plays to adopt either factor.

You don't need 8 hulking bosh forwards anymore; you need a few lighter, mobile forwards with pumping legs and great hands (like Wallace and Leamy). Wallace in particular is Ireland's little bit of something extra, as he can play just like a centre. In the Autumn he finished off a fantastic backline move against SA (or was it Aus? can't remember), arcing round the last defender and touching down almost under the posts. Any old-school forward would have just flopped over the line in the corner, but Wallace had the pace and agility and furthermore the intelligence and confidence to round his man and keep going towards the posts, in order to make the conversion kick trivial.

Anyway, so far, only the French had the tactical nous to both figure out how to counter this Irish game plan and to implement an effective counter strategy. Of course they were also able to exploit the absence of BOD in the centre, and what I feel was a bad Irish coaching decision to deal with his absence. Before the France game I was desperately worried at EOS's decision to play Horgan (a natural winger) at centre, and Trimble (a natural centre) on the wing. Seemed crazy to me. I'm not saying that's the only reason we lost, but it can't have helped.

But one thing was obvious from Saturday, England had learned nothing from watching the Ireland-France video of a fortnight previously. That, too, was astonishing.

On Stringer vs. Boss - I'm not convinced that Boss' snipes really achieve anything. And like Ellis, he steps before passing - Stringer doesn't, he just whips the pass out with no delay. Which is precisely the service that a dynamic backline needs. That makes Stringer the preferable scrum-half. That said, I'm glad that we are now in a position that we are arguing over two alternatives for the starting no. 9 - this time a year ago we were fretting about no cover for Stringer if he got injured.

My last point in a meandering post...has anyone else in these forums noticed the strong correlation between quality of argument/discussion and accuracy of spelling & grammar? Regardless of the nationality of the contributor, if it's spelt like a drunken text-message and punctuated like James Joyce' Ulysses, you can guarantee that the content is pretty pathetic.

P.S. thanks to the 99% of England fans who have been so fair and complimentary to Ireland.

  • 460.
  • At 05:20 PM on 03 Mar 2007,
  • wrote:

O'Gara said he wanted to be number two in the world (behind Carter obviously). I think he made his point against England!

  • 461.
  • At 10:16 AM on 08 Mar 2007,
  • alex fury wrote:

Im sorry but i can not agree with the unfair rating of stringer. Why is it that the pack dominated? Because of this man! When he plays he drives his pack on and organises his backs. His defence round the fringes is second to none (hence the name terrior) and his fast ball ruck after ruck is amazing. As a foward i know how much of a difference it makes to play infront of a leading scrumhalf and stinger is one of the best examples of this in world rugby (along with troncon) whilst retaining the finnest of passes.
Hayes contiuously plays a blinder. In rucks opposition teams shudder when they see his immense fame charging towards them. His ability to do this took the england backrow out of the game.

  • 462.
  • At 05:21 PM on 28 Mar 2007,
  • kim stevens wrote:

Jonny Wilkinsons a great player, great potential and really knows the real game of rugby!
deserves more than a 5!!
go jonnY!

Post a comment

Please note Name and E-mail are required.

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the author has approved them. Please note that submitting a comment is not the same as making a formal complaint - see this page for more details.

Required
Required (not displayed)
 
    

The 91热爆 is not responsible for the content of external internet sites