Hey all, another Paddy in giving his 2 cents!
It may be worth following up on what munstergreen said. We do certainly have issues with the media, but in many respects they just reflect the country too. Rugby is our 4th most popular sport and while there are a lot of people who love the game and are relatively knowledgeable about it there are also a whole heap of people who only watch the internationals. So they might see a sum total of about 6 or 7 games a year generally. The level of interest isn't that high from large portions of the population, and so the level of knowledge isn't either. Also, you get your impressions of the fans themselves from the Internet and the Internet is the home of outrage, hyperbole and polarisation!
All that said I do think Peyper is a poor referee, and he wasn't at all helped by his TMO. I have't watched it back yet but I'm sure both sides will have a list of grievances with the officials. At the end of the day NZ brought a level of intensity from the very start that was incredibly impressive. Ireland managed to live with it for the most part, but to win games you have to do more than that. We never really settled into the game in the first half. Losing Stander from the back row meant SOB had to play 80, which he maybe wasn't quite ready for. Then losing our 10 and 12 hurt too. Jackson is a good player, but he's no Sexton. And his form at the moment is a bit below what we'd expect from him. Ringrose is an outside centre who has only ever played against Canada and was forced to play inside centre against you guys. He can be good with that little bit of extra space but he was limited at 12.
In the second half the defensive effort from NZ was exceptional, but in the first half I do think there was a period during the Smith sin binning where Peyper could have been more forceful. Read was pinged at a scrum by the posts for breaking his bind and going after the ball while the Irish scrum was going forward. It was a gamble from him that paid off. He could have seen yellow under a different ref but obviously he felt better to risk the 3 than the 7 (something pretty much every pro team will do). Peyper let him away with it, but what really annoyed me was that Ireland did too. We had you guys under pressure in your 22 and you had conceded a good few penalties. We should have been going for the jugular there. Instead we went for 3 points, which still left us 2 scores behind. For me that's where the game was won and lost. In Chicago we made you pay for the 1 yellow you got. In Dublin we didn't. You guys were happy to concede 3 pointers in your 22 because you were scoring 7 pointers yourselves. That's not a moan or a complaint, it's a norm in pro rugby. It was up to us to punish you and we didn't.
Our execution at times let us down (Jacksons kick to Smith directly leading into the 3rd try for example), but you don't beat NZ by staying in touch with them. You beat them by getting out in front and staying there. We saw in 2013 how that very nearly worked for us and we saw in Chicago that it did work for us. Moving away from that attitude made it impossible for us to get back into it. We tried manfully, and I'm actually pretty happy with how our pack performed, but 25 mins in, after that scrum, we showed our hand. And that was that we weren't going to be ruthless enough.
Congrats on the win and apologies for the whinging and moaning. NZ deserved that win and Ireland didn't.