All Blacks v Ireland II
-
@Billy-Tell said in Ireland II:
Dare I ask what we do if we lose....
Would need a big rethink of selection and tactics IMO.
I think we'll win - for starters we are not going to gift (I hope) Ireland territory and possession again by having no functioning lineout and charity levels of indiscipline. If Ireland have to work for their points rather than being handed them on a platter, it should be much more interesting. At the end of the day, we played like rubbish and still got 29 points, and I don't see Ireland putting 40 points past us again (and if they do, then we have big problems).
I think that is the thing , to beat this current Allblacks team you are going to have to score a shit load of points . Because we usually score plenty . The days of Nh teams thinking they can take us through slotting penalties and defending are over and I think they all know it now. They put 40 on us last time ,
Have they got that in them again ? -
Looking more likely Whitelock is ok for this week, or Romano too I guess, as Fifita has been sent back to NZ (apologies if already mentioned)
-
In a surprise move, Schmidt may start a good few of Match Squad 2 (for Canada game) for the test against New Zealand to widen the test experience of the entire series squad. Match Squad 1 will then play against Australia who are banking on facing a NZ-battered Ireland team to continue their hopes of achieving a clean sweep in their November tour.
-
@Pot-Hale said in Ireland II:
In a surprise move, Schmidt may start a good few of Match Squad 2 (for Canada game) for the test against New Zealand to widen the test experience of the entire series squad. Match Squad 1 will then play against Australia who are banking on facing a NZ-battered Ireland team to continue their hopes of achieving a clean sweep in their November tour.
I'd be surprised. Doubt the Irish fans would be too happy about a less than full strength side being sent out to face NZ. From the Canada game you can make starting arguments for bealham, Healy, dillane, obrien, omahony. None of the backs strike me as first XV material with the possible exception of Earls.
I think Australia will rotate against France anyway.
-
-
Ireland are a very good side,
But if they win or push us to the limit in this one , they are even better than I thought ,
Not intended as arrogance but no one has pushed us for a while once we are in that backs to the wall situation ,
Cant wait
-
-
@SammyC said in Ireland II:
@Hooroo said in Ireland II:
I swear, if the AB's are paying anything over $1:50 head to head, I will smack it. I just can't see us losing this at all
that will never happen, without checking TAB i reckon we wont be any more than $1.20
Pussies!
-
@Hooroo said in Ireland II:
@SammyC said in Ireland II:
@Hooroo said in Ireland II:
I swear, if the AB's are paying anything over $1:50 head to head, I will smack it. I just can't see us losing this at all
that will never happen, without checking TAB i reckon we wont be any more than $1.20
Pussies!
Agreed!
-
@Billy-Tell said in Ireland II:
Dare I ask what we do if we lose....
Not enough Hurricanes would be one view. Extra emphasis on the one....
-
@SammyC said in Ireland II:
@Hooroo said in Ireland II:
@SammyC said in Ireland II:
@Hooroo said in Ireland II:
I swear, if the AB's are paying anything over $1:50 head to head, I will smack it. I just can't see us losing this at all
that will never happen, without checking TAB i reckon we wont be any more than $1.20
Pussies!
Agreed!
$1:16!! Far out! I forget we can get odds earluy in the week. Used to horses.
-
@dogmeat said in Ireland II:
Having a full width field will alter the dynamics of the game.
Still gotta give Ireland a starters chance though with the monkey off their back.
(AB's by >30
)Soldier Field - 95m x 66m
Lansdowne - 100m x 68m -
@Pot-Hale said in Ireland II:
@dogmeat said in Ireland II:
Having a full width field will alter the dynamics of the game.
Still gotta give Ireland a starters chance though with the monkey off their back.
(AB's by >30
)Soldier Field - 95m x 66m
Lansdowne - 100m x 68mIs land at a premium? World Rugby states that top international games should be played on a field as close to maximum dimension as possible yet Ireland's premier venue is at the minimum.
-
(Credit to @RoninWC as I have used his post for a cut and paste
My team selection
W. Crockett
D. Coles
O. Franks
B. Retallick
S. Whitelock
J. Kaino
S. Cane
K Read
A. Smith
A. Cruden
J. Savea
A. Lienart-Brown
M. Fekitoa
I. Dagg
B. Smith
ReservesC. Taylor
J. Moody
C. Faumuina
L. Squire
A. Savea
T. Perenara
B. BarrettNot entirely sure on Squire or a specialist lock reserve
-
@Crucial said in Ireland II:
@Pot-Hale said in Ireland II:
@dogmeat said in Ireland II:
Having a full width field will alter the dynamics of the game.
Still gotta give Ireland a starters chance though with the monkey off their back.
(AB's by >30
)Soldier Field - 95m x 66m
Lansdowne - 100m x 68mIs land at a premium? World Rugby states that top international games should be played on a field as close to maximum dimension as possible yet Ireland's premier venue is at the minimum.
Regulations stipulate a maximum size apparently - no more than 100m x 70m. Lansdowne is a restricted urban site but the playing field - excl in goal areas is stated as 105m oddly. So is Twickenham I think but it is 70m wide. There is no minimum stated apparently.
-
From the Laws of Rugby
1.2 Required dimensions for the playing enclosure
(a) Dimensions. The field of play does not exceed 100 metres in length. Each in-goal does not exceed 22 metres in length. The playing area does not exceed 70 metres in width.
(b)
The length and breadth of the playing area are to be as near as possible to the dimensions indicated. All the areas are rectangular.
(c)
The distance from the goal line to the dead ball line will preferably be not less than 10 metres.
(d)
In respect of:
(i) Matches between the senior national representative team or the next senior national representative team of a Union against the senior or next senior national representative team of another Union; and
(ii) International seven-a-side matches;
the dimensions should be as close to the maximum sizes as possible, and not less than 94 metres in length for the field of play, 68 metres in width, and with a minimum in-goal length of 6 metres. Unions wishing to vary minimum or maximum dimensions should apply for dispensation to World Rugby. -
@Crucial said in Ireland II:
@Pot-Hale said in Ireland II:
@dogmeat said in Ireland II:
Having a full width field will alter the dynamics of the game.
Still gotta give Ireland a starters chance though with the monkey off their back.
(AB's by >30
)Soldier Field - 95m x 66m
Lansdowne - 100m x 68mIs land at a premium? World Rugby states that top international games should be played on a field as close to maximum dimension as possible yet Ireland's premier venue is at the minimum.
World rugby state a max/min length of 100m/96m and a max/min width of 70m/68m
So it's OK then or can we (England) claim all our recent losses over there as wins now?
-
-
@Kruse said in Ireland II:
@Crucial
So - was there "dispensation"?
Or - does Soldier's Field not count... the now-double-asterisked Streak continues!I'd be pretty sure you'd find out that Soldiers Field gained dispensation as part of 'promoting the game'
Landsdowne is within the dimensions but at the minimum when WR states 'should be as close as possible to maximum' .I am simply curious as to why Ireland's major rugby ground cannot get 'close to maximum'.
Anyway, it bit them in the bum when Cruden took his (second attempt) conversion. Just think, he could have been at a wider angle.
