Discussion in 'European Champions & Challenge Cup' started by TRF_Olyy, Jan 15, 2015.
don't agree with any of that, sorry.
Lads - Just regards Farrell. He was excellent against us but having rewatched the game from an analytical view my points are:
1. It was hard not to be poor against us
2. Scaringly if our skillset was better on day the weakness in Sarries was still there
3. If there was pressure (that you would get in international test) then alot off Sarries players distribution skills would have suffered
Meh I won't comment again until I've rewatched if possible the game, but as Munstermuffin points out, he was facing a team who rolled over like an inebriated sloth. Bearing that fact in mind, the stats don't exactly cover him in glory....
No you're right it's all down to Munster being rubbish...
Well, it's a factor. You've got to question an out-half when he can't deliver a much needed bonus point in a game like that. When in complete control of another side it's the 10 in many cases that "decides by how much" and on Saturday an international class 10 really should have orchestrated four tries. It's a results business after all which is often forgotten in debates like this, obviously next week if Farrell delivers and Sarries win and/or get through there is no debate but if they lose and go out his failure on Saturday would indicate that he's not all that you're making him out to be.
what complete and utter rubbish.
I'm not making him out to be anything he isn't, i'm just pointing out that the majority of people in this thread seem to have no clue about the lad and are perhaps letting their hatred of him (and it clearly is that) cloud their judgement.
For someone who when backed into a corner starts to moan about being harassed, your're awfully combatative and dismissive of other peoples opinions. Some might even say you give it out and can't take it back.
And if you feel "hatred" is the right way to describe most peoples opinions of Farrell, you're seriously deluded. Above, I suggested that Farrell had a good game - BUT, that I still think his pass is poor and he doesn't have the dynamism required to run a line at the highest level..... I thought that was fairly reasonable, personally.
if you say so.
I just find it churlish that Saracens have put 33 points on Munster, scored two absolutely superb tries and all people can say is "yeah but". If that had been any other English team you'd all be swinging from the chandeliers about how great a spanking it was.
Saracens were exceptional in the first half, they don't have a team of show boaters and it's all about a collective effort and on Saturdayb you saw a team working together.
Farrell was a key cog in that as was others - BOD and LOL were both singing his praises, pointing out how he was stepping up. Murray Kinsella in the score flagged up his masked passing and Saracens general play as being good... but i guess they are wrong as well?
Sarries were good value on Saturday, should they have got the bonus point? Perhaps but you can't blame that all on Farrell. Hodgson was at 10 for the end fo the game and the captain was the person taking the decision to kick and rack up points.... yet somehow it's all down to OF?
And suddenly it becomes personal.
I never specified you so why make out i did? I said people, plural - there are some pretty uninformed opinions about the lads abilities, what is expected of a fly half in the modern game and Saracens performance in this thread.
You're entitled to your opinion of course, but you say he had a very good game and then proceed to slag the lad off.
I get it you don't like him but i think you're the criticisms you are leveling at him are inaccurate.
Hahaha, a goodNumber10 "argument" at it's finest!
well there wasn't much else to say fella.
Apparently Munster lost purely because they were gash, not because Sarries played well. One man alone should shoulder the blame for Sarries not getting the bonus point I mena it was Farrell who dropped the ball when Hargreaves charged for the line and so on....
This isn't how you convince people of your point.
I'm not trying to convince then I'm making an observation.
Aye, because that was my point! Did Sarries **** up not getting four tries? In mine and many more peoples opinions they did. Does an out-half have an influence on teams scoring tries? More than anyone else on the pitch. I never really focused on what Munster didn't do, more so on what Sarries didn't. In return you completely dismissed what I said due to you having a pre-determined agenda on what you want to get out of this thread. I suppose this is complete rubbish as well though, or bull****, or tripe, crap, waffle maybe?!
You clearly place the blame on Farrell in a game like that.
Okay, so your observation is that the idea that Munster's performance (or lack thereof) shouldn't have any bearing into how we judge Farrell or Saracens as a whole is "complete and utter rubbish" aye? Because that's an extremely naive view of the situation and one that I doubt Saracens will be taking. You've got to factor in oppositions performance, otherwise you'd be handing England starting spots out based on LV= Cup displays.
Munster were very poor on Saturday. Of course a large part of that is down to what Saracens did and of course Farrell deserves as much credit as the rest of the side did, but you've got to question all of the key decision makers on the Saracens side for not pushing on and looking to secure the bonus point against a shabby Munster outfit. That includes the coaches, the captain and the outhalf.
Saturday is the worst I've seen Munster perform in a European game in memory. Were Saracens good? Yes, or they wouldn't have put on the score they did. At the same time, idiotic penalties, literally not been able to string together more than two plays for a period of about 30 minutes, key men playing with zero urgency and intensity? These are not things influenced by Saracens' good performance.
If a team is playing like that, you certainly should turn the screw. I don't think anyone is singling out Farrell, or in any way saying he was poor, but he's the guy in question who's been cited as outstanding. He was good, but made to look great. 4 tries were certainly available when we were on the ropes. We fully deserved a hammering for that torrid display.
Read the last three pages henry, Tommi & cmac all singling out Farrell for individual criticism.
Well it's a natural response. As I mentioned, he's the 10 so he does have a larger role than the average player in directing how the team goes. He's also an England international in a key position who is under pressure for his position in a World Cup season. His performances are bound to come under more scrutiny.
Which is exactly what I said. Why is it Farrell's fault that sarries kicked the points? He's not their captain? Yet some how he gets the blame for sarries not going for it earlier.
Why is no one criticising Hodgson despite he being the finishing 10 when they were chasing the bonus point?
It's very rare in this age of analysis that teams don't come out and defend better in the second half so it's not that unusual to see a 10 running a tighter ship, especially as when sarries loosened up Munster scored.
Regardless, my main point is people clearly have an opinion of Farrell that they are unwilling to bend from, his passing is crap, his kicking is crap he's slow etc... None of which is particularly true if you actually watches him play I've the last two years.
If that had been any other fly half in England I guarantee that no one would be pacing the same blame on him.
Yet most of the criticisms levelled was not evident in the game, and when challenged it's about previous form (even though he's hardly paired this season).
Look, I don't expect people to age with me, and I absolutely disagree his performance was poor or that the criticism levelled at him is accurate.
People seem to have a genuine dislike of him because of his dad/annoyance at Lancaster/ their wet on for Ford.
Separate names with a comma.