Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

'It's a word every coach would like to keep on using'

(Photo by David Fitzgerald/Sportsfile via Getty Images)

Rugby currently at the Aviva Stadium is like groundhog day. Moments frozen in time that you see over and over these past few months when reporting on the behind closed doors matches at the ground. Take the small ads peppered on the walls in the toilet facilities.

ADVERTISEMENT

They are adverts promoting tickets for a Leinster-Munster match that didn’t take place last April and for Irish passport renewals so that you can jet off on your holidays. Except you can’t. Government advice is for no non-essential travel to happen, while there is also no prospect any time soon of fans getting in to watch a Leinster-Munster match of any kind.   

The frozen in time observations aren’t limited to just there, though. It extends to matters on the pitch as well. The Andy Farrell tenure might be just six Ireland matches old but there is a groundhog routine about what has so far evolved. 

Take block one: following the stuttering getting-to-know-you maiden outing win over Scotland, Wales were brushed aside in Dublin only for the encouragement taken from that victory to get undermined by a bruising away defeat to England.

Block two of the Farrell era played out similarly last month, a handsome home win over Italy rendered irrelevant by the lacerations sustained in the road on Paris with Ireland way off the pace against France. 

Now we have kicked off block three in the same established way, Wales hammered 32-9 in the home Nations Cup opener, but the stalking fear is that the value of this latest Aviva Stadium success could be made redundant by another sobering away defeat, this time back over in England. 

The groundhog day cycle – encouraging home win devalued soon after by demoralising away loss – must be broken if Farrell really is to make progress nearing the end of his first year in charge.  

ADVERTISEMENT

Ireland at Twickenham has been a torrid misadventure lately. 57-15 was the damning count when Farrell last travelled there as defence coach to Joe Schmidt and while on paper last February’s 24-12 scoreline flattered Farrell, by then the promoted boss, an 80th-minute try massaged the result of a contest where Ireland were 17-0 down at the break and battered. 

The warning coming away from Friday night’s latest win over the Welsh was that Ireland can’t leave scores behind if they are to cause England a headache. Their 16-6 interval lead should have been far more lavish for a performance where possession and territory were so dominated. 

Farrell accepted as much, volunteering the need for Ireland to be more clinical if they are to stand a genuine chance at Twickenham. “First half possession and territory it wasn’t a fair reflection. After some real good direct attacks, our breakdown was pretty impressive but after linebreaks, we got a little bit cluttered. 

“I thought we could have converted a few more opportunities. We need to be more clinical when try-scoring opportunities are there to be taken. I reckon there were three or four left there.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Dominant isn’t a word usually in Ireland’s vocabulary. It was relevant versus the Welsh but repeating it with England in opposition is another thing entirely. “It’s a word every coach would like to keep on using… how do you get to be dominant? 

“Your set-piece has to be good and I thought first half you couldn’t ask for better. Our scrum was really abrasive and our defensive lineout was better as well… and again to be dominant you need a good defence and it was physical, we got off the line and we’re pleased. Any side that goes away from the Aviva without a try you have got to be pleased with that.”

The project player process, whereby foreigners can qualify for Ireland after 36 months residency, was very evident, South African Quinn Roux and New Zealander James Lowe providing the only tries.  Roux came in late for his first start in 21 months, Iain Henderson missing with an unspecified medical issue, while Jacob Stockdale was another late cry-off. Farrell hasn’t ruled either out of Twickenham involvement.

“They won’t be long term. Jacob flagged a sore calf during the week. We thought it would settle down and it did, but there was a scan Thursday and there was a little bit of something there. We think he could be available next week. Iain Henderson had a medical issue. Speaking to the medics we expect him to be okay next week.”

The main injury chat, though, in the lead-in to Autumn Nations Cup round two will be the state of Johnny Sexton’s hamstring. The skipper is giving himself every chance. “It doesn’t feel too serious. Just very frustrating. 

“I thought initially I was going to be able to run it off but unfortunately not. I will probably get a scan and see if there is any little damage done but I’m still hopeful for next week,” he said, adding how pleasing it was to see Ireland bouncing back from the loss in Paris. 

“We are very proud of ourselves with the result. Some aspects of our performance were outstanding but we can do better and need to be better going to Twickenham.”

They must be or the groundhog day-like cycle of a comfortable home win followed by poor away loss under Farrell won’t change.  

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

G
GrahamVF 36 minutes ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

"has SA actually EVER helped to develop another union to maturity like NZ has with Japan," yes - Argentina. You obviously don't know the history of Argentinian rugby. SA were touring there on long development tours in the 1950's

We continued the Junior Bok tours to the Argentine through to the early 70's

My coach at Grey High was Giepie Wentzel who toured Argentine as a fly half. He told me about how every Argentinian rugby club has pictures of Van Heerden and Danie Craven on prominent display. Yes we have developed a nation far more than NZ has done for Japan. And BTW Sa players were playing and coaching in Japan long before the Kiwis arrived. Fourie du Preez and many others were playing there 15 years ago.


"Isaac Van Heerden's reputation as an innovative coach had spread to Argentina, and he was invited to Buenos Aires to help the Pumas prepare for their first visit to South Africa in 1965.[1][2] Despite Argentina faring badly in this tour,[2] it was the start of a long and happy relationship between Van Heerden and the Pumas. Izak van Heerden took leave from his teaching post in Durban, relocated to Argentina, learnt fluent Spanish, and would revolutionise Argentine play in the late 1960s, laying the way open for great players such as Hugo Porta.[1][2] Van Heerden virtually invented the "tight loose" form of play, an area in which the Argentines would come to excel, and which would become a hallmark of their playing style. The Pumas repaid the initial debt, by beating the Junior Springboks at Ellis Park, and emerged as one of the better modern rugby nations, thanks largely to the talents of this Durban schoolmaster.[1]"


After the promise made by Junior Springbok manager JF Louw at the end of a 12-game tour to Argentina in 1959 – ‘I will do everything to ensure we invite you to tour our country’ – there were concerns about the strength of Argentinian rugby. South African Rugby Board president Danie Craven sent coach Izak van Heerden to help the Pumas prepare and they repaid the favour by beating the Junior Springboks at Ellis Park.

152 Go to comments
J
JW 7 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

152 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING 'Tom has the potential to be better than a British and Irish Lion' 'Tom has the potential to be better than a British and Irish Lion'
Search