Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Andy Farrell takes pot shot at ref: 'I don't know the rules any more regarding that'

By PA
Stuart McCloskey on the run /Getty Images

Andy Farrell admits Ireland’s laboured win over Georgia was unacceptable and accused his players of lacking belief. The Irish failed to assert their dominance over inferior opposition in Dublin as they ran out unconvincing 23-10 victors to secure second spot in Group A of the Autumn Nations Cup.

ADVERTISEMENT

Tries from Billy Burns and Hugo Keenan helped put the hosts 20-7 in front at the break but they were unable to add to that advantage during a dismal second half, which finished 3-3.

Asked to assess the performance, head coach Farrell said: “Not good enough, not good enough.

“Certainly in that second 40, it wasn’t the standard we expect of ourselves, especially playing at home.

Video Spacer

Which Welsh players will make the Lions?

Video Spacer

Which Welsh players will make the Lions?

“After a first 40 that was decent enough, flowing at times, still obviously things to fix at half-time.

“In the second half, I just thought we didn’t have any courage of our own conviction.

“Georgia thoroughly deserved to earn the right to slow our game down by being total menaces at the breakdown, and all credit to them for that.

“But that’s not good enough from us.”

Victory for Ireland ensures they will host Scotland in next weekend’s third-place play-off.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, the manner in which it was achieved is a far more pressing matter for Farrell, who had made nine changes to the team convincingly beaten by England last weekend.

Georgia had not registered a point in the competition before arriving at the Aviva Stadium but broke their duck in fine style with a superb solo score from Giorgi Kveseladze.

While he offered a frank assessment of the overall display, Farrell also questioned the decisions of referee Mathieu Raynal to not allow first-half tries for Stuart McCloskey and James Ryan.

McCloskey’s effort was chalked off after Jacob Stockdale’s pass was adjudged to have travelled forward, while the French official later ignored stand-in skipper Ryan’s claims he had grounded the ball.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Two tries, one from a forward pass – I don’t know the rules any more regarding that,” said Farrell.

“We had a touch judge who was telling us it is a try and then a referee that says it’s not.

“James Ryan is over the line just before half-time, he’s got the ball down, so he says.”

Fly-half Burns, making his first international start, was a bright spark on a gloomy afternoon and his 15 points helped ensure there would be no upset.

However, the England-born Ulster player was forced off with a groin issue early after the restart, severely disrupting the rhythm of the hosts.

Replacement number 10 Ross Byrne contributed the home side’s only points of the second period with a penalty.

In addition to Burns, Farrell revealed he had a series of injury concerns, with hooker Rob Herring picking up a rib problem, scrum-half Conor Murray sustaining a dead leg, flanker Will Connors being forced off for a head injury assessment and winger Keith Earls suffering a back spasm.

Georgia, who are scheduled to play Fiji next weekend in the wooden-spoon match, produced arguably the moment of the match courtesy of Kveseladze’s 17th-minute score.

The centre collected the ball in his own half following some slick passing, burst into Irish territory and then dummied his way past Stockdale and Burns to touch down beneath the posts.

Visiting head coach Levan Maisashvili was encouraged by his team’s performance but dismissed talk of them being included in the Six Nations as premature.

“I am proud for my team. The boys scored an excellent try,” he said.

“But we had a couple of opportunities and we missed them. We are a young team and we’re still growing and we try to be, step by step, better and better.

“Before (being considered for) the Six Nations, we need more time to play against such a high level.”

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 4 hours ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Like I've said before about your idea (actually it might have been something to do with mine, I can't remember), I like that teams will a small sustainable league focus can gain the reward of more consistent CC involvement. I'd really like the most consistent option available.


Thing is, I think rugby can do better than footballs version. I think for instance I wanted everyone in it to think they can win it, where you're talking about trying to make so the worst teams in it are not giving up when they are so far off the pace that we get really bad scorelines (when that and giving up to concentrate on the league is happening together). I know it's not realistic to think those same exact teams are going to be competitive with a different model but I am inclined to think more competitive teams make it in with another modem. It's a catch 22 of course, you want teams to fight to be there next year, but they don't want to be there next year when theres less interest in it because the results are less interesting than league ones. If you ensure the best 20 possible make it somehow (say currently) each year they quickly change focus when things aren't going well enough and again interest dies. Will you're approach gradually work overtime? With the approach of the French league were a top 6 mega rich Premier League type club system might develop, maybe it will? But what of a model like Englands were its fairly competitive top 8 but orders or performances can jump around quite easily one year to the next? If the England sides are strong comparatively to the rest do they still remain in EPCR despite not consistently dominating in their own league?


So I really like that you could have a way to remedy that, but personally I would want my model to not need that crutch. Some of this is the same problem that football has. I really like the landscape in both the URC and Prem, but Ireland with Leinster specifically, and France, are a problem IMO. In football this has turned CL pool stages in to simply cash cow fixtures for the also ran countries teams who just want to have a Real Madrid or ManC to lose to in their pool for that bumper revenue hit. It's always been a comp that had suffered for real interest until the knockouts as well (they might have changed it in recent years?).


You've got some great principles but I'm not sure it's going to deliver on that hard hitting impact right from the start without the best teams playing in it. I think you might need to think about the most minimal requirement/way/performance, a team needs to execute to stay in the Champions Cup as I was having some thougt about that earlier and had some theory I can't remember. First they could get entry by being a losing quarter finalist in the challenge, then putting all their eggs in the Champions pool play bucket in order to never finish last in their pool, all the while showing the same indifference to their league some show to EPCR rugby now, just to remain in champions. You extrapolate that out and is there ever likely to be more change to the champions cup that the bottom four sides rotate out each year for the 4 challenge teams? Are the leagues ever likely to have the sort of 'flux' required to see some variation? Even a good one like Englands.


I'd love to have a table at hand were you can see all the outcomes, and know how likely any of your top 12 teams are going break into Champions rubyg on th back it it are?

120 Go to comments
f
fl 7 hours ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Right, so even if they were the 4 worst teams in Champions Cup, you'd still have them back by default?"

I think (i) this would literally never happen, (ii) it technically couldn't quite happen, given at least 1 team would qualify via the challenge cup, so if the actual worst team in the CC qualified it would have to be because they did really well after being knocked down to the challenge cup.

But the 13th-15th teams could qualify and to be fair I didn't think about this as a possibility. I don't think a team should be able to qualify via the Champions Cup if they finish last in their group.


Overall though I like my idea best because my thinking is, each league should get a few qualification spots, and then the rest of the spots should go to the next best teams who have proven an ability to be competitive in the champions cup. The elite French clubs generally make up the bulk of the semi-final spots, but that doesn't (necessarily) mean that the 5th-8th best French clubs would be competitive in a slimmed down champions cup. The CC is always going to be really great competition from the semis onwards, but the issue is that there are some pretty poor showings in the earlier rounds. Reducing the number of teams would help a little bit, but we could improve things further by (i) ensuring that the on-paper "worst" teams in the competition have a track record of performing well in the CC, and (ii) by incentivising teams to prioritise the competition. Teams that have a chance to win the whole thing will always be incentivised to do that, but my system would incentivise teams with no chance of making the final to at least try to win a few group stage matches.


"I'm afraid to say"

Its christmas time; there's no need to be afraid!

120 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian? Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian?
Search