2018 NatWest Six Nations: Round 1 - France v Ireland

[Which Tyler]

I think (as happened in 1st half) the doctor on side ordered it even though French doctor was saying it was his knee. So the final call rests with the doctor viewing from side

Not quite.
Final call rests with the player, his team-mate, and ref, the TJ, the team Doc and the independent Doc all simultaneously.
If any of the above call an HIA on a player, then an HIA happens.
Equally, if any of the above say that the player lost consciousness, then an HIA doesn't happen in the first place.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

But against big teams we tend to not score many tries. Our stats and style shows that. Excluding NZ game. Nothing wrong with it as I said its delivering the results but no need saying something is there when it's not. Schmidt has always preferred defensive safety over creativeness in the centres for Ireland.

On Guscott comment. He's not only 1 to make similar comments and I get you don't agree but well fact is every 15 is expected to be top class in air. Especially at this level. Like Kearney dropped 1 or 2 yesterday too. And I'm sure any other 15 would have too. But using something that is an expected anyway doesn't really cut it and well as I said majority seem to think along same lines yesterday and just think it a bit bias but it your opinion and won't make this all about RK as everyone can make up their own minds.

On the try yes there was system errors but it doesn't hide Kearney got caught rotten in decision making and Stockdale even more so in defensive positioning and tackle attempt.
No one is denying Murray gave poor slow ball or centres had off days. Yes I agree also it was a bad game but it does seem to be same talking points after each game and for once I think there is definitely 1 or 2 personnel changes. Where I don't know but well definitely somewhere.

Italy is a game where there no win scenario. We run in 100 tries and it will be sure it's Italy. We play badly and pressure builds. So be smart use it to adapt and adjust and well the big test is the final 3 games where each week the test will get harder

If you go back 18 months we have failed to score in three games, yesterday, v NZ in their disgraceful "let's cause brain damage game" and the very bad game against Wales. That's one bad loss, one decent performance where we'd have had a very good chance of winning with a competent ref and a win. Two games with only one try with two wins and then at least three tries in the remaining 12 games including one loss, those games included NZ, Aus, Argentina, Scotland and South Africa, last Autumn we scored as many against the Pumas as England and more than anyone did v SA with the exception of NZ. It really doesn't read to me that there's a problem, maybe one against France but they always raise their game for us too, we're the scalp they want in Europe after England.

On Kearney I don't think many do share that opinion, The Irish Times gave him a 7 as did Balls.ie and Joe.ie, RTE, the Indo and Ultimate Rugby gave him a 6 with the 42 giving him a 5 and largely being attacked for it in their comments. It wasn't a perfect performance which is all Kearney can do to avoid being attacked by some people these days but I don't think any Irish alternative could have done better. Your assumption that I meant his ability under the high ball when I mentioned that he's the best in the world in some aspects shows why people think he's so limited, it's bad knowledge of Fullback play. Kearney's main strength isn't his fielding anymore, I'd rate Folau and Fall as better than him there, his positioning and organisation however are unparalleled. I've been saying it for more than a year now that a team can't use tactical kicking to win the territory battle against us and he is always in the right position to cover a linebreak too. That's why its no surprise that the French had to drag him out into the line to score and why I think the main problem there was Stockdale not chasing, if Kearney had been able to stay back he wouldn't have shown Thomas the inside if Stockdale had gone up and made the same communication error with Aki he did. It also discounts his kicking game, and his running game which has been effective this season. He's not at the same level as Hogg, Williams, Folau or Ben Smith but neither is anyone else in the country it is so far down the list of where we need or can change that its ridiculous the amount of coverage it gets.

We don't know what Italy will be like, they could turn up today and challenge England in which case a full team must be played, if we can afford to experiment I'd be looking at Carbery, Porter, Scannell and Larmour on the wing before chopping and changing 15, if anything I'd play Conway there who doesn't offer much that Kearney doesn't while not being as good.

 

[TommiG88]

From my times in Paris the Metro is best one in world in my view. So can get tanked in better spot and get Metro to stadium. When we were there in January though few of us went to a cafe on the Saturday evening and a Pint Of Beer was €7.50 & a Pint Of Coke €9.00. Ha ha that is f'd up

Decision made, the missus will be drinking beer.

 

[munstermuffin]

Not quite.
Final call rests with the player, his team-mate, and ref, the TJ, the team Doc and the independent Doc all simultaneously.
If any of the above call an HIA on a player, then an HIA happens.
Equally, if any of the above say that the player lost consciousness, then an HIA doesn't happen in the first place.

Yesterdy In 1st half it was 100% clear they were all stating his knee and independent doc still said it was HIA

 

[Which Tyler]

Yesterdy In 1st half it was 100% clear they were all stating his knee and independent doc still said it was HIA

I know.
This doesn't mean that the independent Doc has the final say though.
Everyone with a say has the final say. As soon as anyone with a say calls for an HIA, then an HIA happens. 1 person calling for an HIA trumps a dozen people thinking it's unecessary.

Although I did quote the wrong post from you, sorry about that...

 

[munstermuffin]

If you go back 18 months we have failed to score in three games, yesterday, v NZ in their disgraceful "let's cause brain damage game" and the very bad game against Wales. That's one bad loss, one decent performance where we'd have had a very good chance of winning with a competent ref and a win. Two games with only one try with two wins and then at least three tries in the remaining 12 games including one loss, those games included NZ, Aus, Argentina, Scotland and South Africa, last Autumn we scored as many against the Pumas as England and more than anyone did v SA with the exception of NZ. It really doesn't read to me that there's a problem, maybe one against France but they always raise their game for us too, we're the scalp they want in Europe after England.

On Kearney I don't think many do share that opinion, The Irish Times gave him a 7 as did Balls.ie and Joe.ie, RTE, the Indo and Ultimate Rugby gave him a 6 with the 42 giving him a 5 and largely being attacked for it in their comments. It wasn't a perfect performance which is all Kearney can do to avoid being attacked by some people these days but I don't think any Irish alternative could have done better. Your assumption that I meant his ability under the high ball when I mentioned that he's the best in the world in some aspects shows why people think he's so limited, it's bad knowledge of Fullback play. Kearney's main strength isn't his fielding anymore, I'd rate Folau and Fall as better than him there, his positioning and organisation however are unparalleled. I've been saying it for more than a year now that a team can't use tactical kicking to win the territory battle against us and he is always in the right position to cover a linebreak too. That's why its no surprise that the French had to drag him out into the line to score and why I think the main problem there was Stockdale not chasing, if Kearney had been able to stay back he wouldn't have shown Thomas the inside if Stockdale had gone up and made the same communication error with Aki he did. It also discounts his kicking game, and his running game which has been effective this season. He's not at the same level as Hogg, Williams, Folau or Ben Smith but neither is anyone else in the country it is so far down the list of where we need or can change that its ridiculous the amount of coverage it gets.

We don't know what Italy will be like, they could turn up today and challenge England in which case a full team must be played, if we can afford to experiment I'd be looking at Carbery, Porter, Scannell and Larmour on the wing before chopping and changing 15, if anything I'd play Conway there who doesn't offer much that Kearney doesn't while not being as good.

On Rob Kearney bit I will just leave it as everyone has their opinion. Just I saw enough of the same talk to suggest it is more than 1 off journalist but everyone is entitled to their opinion. But my view is fact it is a talking point not just here but around various places continuously suggest there is a debatable point. Just I don't think Kearney is as top class as you suggest and there a bit of bias but again everyone has their own opinion.

On gameplan I'm not saying we don't score just the plan we play is conservative and hey it works. Again if you think differently that fair enough it only opinions as I said it's a result business and in a year' time it will say we won yesterday not how bad we were.

On the try again I think you are doing best to make Kearney faultless for try. But I think Murray has some blame Kearney a bigger share and Stockdale a bigger share again.
No point trying to sugar coat it by passing blame. Just my opinion and again like I don't rate RK as highly as you and don't think he's world class. Again just my opinion but he was partly to blame. Not solely though as I have pointed out. Again I suppose it comes down to what each person rates in a 15. Like in Conway I think he's a much better attacking player than RK in today' game and offers more offensively when joining the game. I also think Zebo is better as he joins as an option even as 1st receiver but that is just my opinion.

Just on the 42.ie too. They not really getting hammered for giving Kearney a 5. Had a look and it marginally agreeing more than disagreeing but also the same 3 or 4 arguing it.

 

[munstermuffin]

I know.
This doesn't mean that the independent Doc has the final say though.
Everyone with a say has the final say. As soon as anyone with a say calls for an HIA, then an HIA happens. 1 person calling for an HIA trumps a dozen people thinking it's unecessary.

Although I did quote the wrong post from you, sorry about that...

Fair enough I don't know the finer details but would've thought the French Dr couldn't alone demand a HIA as that in a way leaves it open to abuse

 

[die_mole]

I think it was more the French took advantage of the mix up between Nige and independent doctor.

Very interesting too was for the last pen Machenaud could not kick it as Barnes noted. If a player returns covering HIA he can't kick but if the neutral doctor rules the player fails a HIA then he can kick

i believe that was a trial from a few years ago and isn't applicable anymore

if the player fails the HIA, since Machenaud was already tactically substituted he would have had to leave the field and france would have played with 14

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

On Rob Kearney bit I will just leave it as everyone has their opinion. Just I saw enough of the same talk to suggest it is more than 1 off journalist but everyone is entitled to their opinion. But my view is fact it is a talking point not just here but around various places continuously suggest there is a debatable point. Just I don't think Kearney is as top class as you suggest and there a bit of bias but again everyone has their own opinion.

On gameplan I'm not saying we don't score just the plan we play is conservative and hey it works. Again if you think differently that fair enough it only opinions as I said it's a result business and in a year' time it will say we won yesterday not how bad we were.

On the try again I think you are doing best to make Kearney faultless for try. But I think Murray has some blame Kearney a bigger share and Stockdale a bigger share again.
No point trying to sugar coat it by passing blame. Just my opinion and again like I don't rate RK as highly as you and don't think he's world class. Again just my opinion but he was partly to blame. Not solely though as I have pointed out. Again I suppose it comes down to what each person rates in a 15. Like in Conway I think he's a much better attacking player than RK in today' game and offers more offensively when joining the game. I also think Zebo is better as he joins as an option even as 1st receiver but that is just my opinion.

I'd agree on the try, Stockdale, Kearney, Murray then Bundee, my point is more that had Kearney been in the 15 position and Stockdale the wing it wouldn't have happened and its really not something to question Kearney's place on his team. It also speaks volumes that the only things his detractors come out with is that he's not top class or that he's past it or that he's not mercurial like Larmour, TOH or Carbery, they're really just baseless criticisms, I'd entertain real examples of individual flaws but there doesn't appear to be any.

Conservative or smart? We're winning games scoring plenty and winning while not scoring over a streak of 8 games there's nothing endemic in being a little blunt yesterday. In a game of tight margins missed penalties and dodgy reffing calls were a far bigger determining factor in my opinion.

 

[Which Tyler]

Fair enough I don't know the finer details but would've thought the French Dr couldn't alone demand a HIA as that in a way leaves it open to abuse

Of course it's open to abuse, it's not supposed to prevent that sort of abuse. The point of independence, is to stop the George North et al situations, where a player is clearly unconscious, and clearly should be taken off, having already failed the HIA, but is left on, or examined and returned. There is no way to prevent a player faking a headache, or faking a balance disturbance, or some other player that they think s/he took a knock.

I should also add that, on reflection, I think the ref can deny an HIA, s/he is the final arbiter of fact after all. Which means that Nige could actually reverse his decision (but not the Dr's - though he technically could deny it).
They will never, ever do so, no matter how sceptical they are though. Worst case scenario, they deny an HIA for a player, who goes and dies from second impact syndrome 10 minutes later.
Theref over-rules the medical expert, and that decision results in death. Is that a risk you'd want a ref to take?

 

[munstermuffin]

I'd agree on the try, Stockdale, Kearney, Murray then Bundee, my point is more that had Kearney been in the 15 position and Stockdale the wing it wouldn't have happened and its really not something to question Kearney's place on his team. It also speaks volumes that the only things his detractors come out with is that he's not top class or that he's past it or that he's not mercurial like Larmour, TOH or Carbery, they're really just baseless criticisms, I'd entertain real examples of individual flaws but there doesn't appear to be any.

Conservative or smart? We're winning games scoring plenty and winning while not scoring over a streak of 8 games there's nothing endemic in being a little blunt yesterday. In a game of tight margins missed penalties and dodgy reffing calls were a far bigger determining factor in my opinion.

But the point you missing is nobody questioned his selection based on it.
I think my views are constructive in that Zebo offers more attacking as does the rest. Like anyone who is questioning RK spot I think has been constructive so wouldn't agree with what you are saying. It's like you say he's good at reading defence et . I wouldn't agree with that necessarily but it's still a valid opinion. Like Kearney has poor tackle stats so some use that as a reason to slate defence.
As I said I think your opinion is based with bias which is understandable. I probably have same issue with others but everyone has their own opinion. And well I just saying it is becoming a debatable point every game now right or wrong.

On gameplan I'd disagree in saying we don't look like a fluid attacking team that will score heaps of tries against good teams. But we are very good a grinding teams down and forcing them to self destruct while we keep ticking the score over. And as I said it works as we get results. And I think Schmidt' selections highlight that. E.g. Payne at 13. RK at 15. Even DK on wing before. He wants a solid bread and butter scheme of do basics follow the script.

 

[munstermuffin]

Of course it's open to abuse, it's not supposed to prevent that sort of abuse. The point of independence, is to stop the George North et al situations, where a player is clearly unconscious, and clearly should be taken off, having already failed the HIA, but is left on, or examined and returned. There is no way to prevent a player faking a headache, or faking a balance disturbance, or some other player that they think s/he took a knock.

I should also add that, on reflection, I think the ref can deny an HIA, s/he is the final arbiter of fact after all. Which means that Nige could actually reverse his decision (but not the Dr's - though he technically could deny it).
They will never, ever do so, no matter how sceptical they are though. Worst case scenario, they deny an HIA for a player, who goes and dies from second impact syndrome 10 minutes later.
Theref over-rules the medical expert, and that decision results in death. Is that a risk you'd want a ref to take?

True but it is a bit flawed

 

[munstermuffin]

i believe that was a trial from a few years ago and isn't applicable anymore

if the player fails the HIA, since Machenaud was already tactically substituted he would have had to leave the field and france would have played with 14

Yes but also while on Field Machenaud could not kick a pen etc

 

[die_mole]

Yes but also while on Field Machenaud could not kick a pen etc

i know that was the case a few years ago... was this wayne or stuart who said this?

 

[Which Tyler]

True but it is a bit flawed

Yep, but how do you improve it?
I guess you also ask if there is anything in rugby that isn't flawed, and that can't be gamed? It's hardly as if cheating is a new thing, nor cheating involving fake injuries

 

[munstermuffin]

i know that was the case a few years ago... was this wayne or stuart who said this?

Wayne yesterday before the pen that was missed on 76th min

 

[munstermuffin]

Yep, but how do you improve it?
I guess you also ask if there is anything in rugby that isn't flawed, and that can't be gamed? It's hardly as if cheating is a new thing, nor cheating involving fake injuries

True but this was supposed to be a solution that covered the cheating bit

 

[Which Tyler]

True but this was supposed to be a solution that covered the cheating bit

I disagree.
It was supposed to be a solution to the problem that existed before.

The problem was people playing rugby whilst concussed. This was to address a problem that happened every other weekend and garnered horrendous press 2-3 times per year; not a problem that happened once in 4 years and gathered a few raised eyebrows (now twice in 5 years).

 

[munstermuffin]

I disagree.
It was supposed to be a solution to the problem that existed before.

The problem was people playing rugby whilst concussed. This was to address a problem that happened every other weekend and garnered horrendous press 2-3 times per year; not a problem that happened once in 4 years and gathered a few raised eyebrows (now twice in 5 years).

True I agree it fixed that problem but also to stop cheating. It does address the more serious issue for sure

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

It's a bit ******* and infuriating in the moment but it's better than any alternative. We either have it as it is prone to being taken advantage of or have 10 min delays to games for HIA's. Fines or docked log and world ranking points are the only thing that can be used as a deterrent.