Six Nations 2019: Ireland v England Rate the Match

Jonathan Sexton

Let us know what you thought of today’s match in Dublin.

What were the main talking points? Who played well?

Give the match a rating out of 10 and then share your thoughts in the comments below.

Rate the Match: Ireland v England

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

99 thoughts on “Six Nations 2019: Ireland v England Rate the Match

  1. What a test match, and what an incredible performance from England.

    Huge impact from the Vunipolas and Tuilagi, shows the carrying ability we’ve been missing without them, giving England a focal point every time.

    Awesome defence as well, did everything better than Ireland.

    1. Well Hutch, some stats I saw didn’t back up yr statement of ‘England doing everything better than Ireland’. However, stats don’t always tell the whole story.. & perhaps you had to rush yr story out. It’s only 1 game. A few bounces went England’s way to flatter them somewhat. Nevertheless, their away win suddenly punctures Ireland’s ‘best in the world’ status. Likely de-stressed more than a few English doom-mongers too. However, England still lack sufficient creativity in their back line & are too predictable in their ‘English’ way of playing’ to win a WC for me. The 6N? Maybe, but from the, frankly, error strewn rugby (e.g. Wales’ 9 to 1 v Fr in the 1st 1/2 alone!) I’ve seen so far, the bigger prize in Japan ain’t going to be a cakewalk for the NH. Tin hat firmly on for the ‘anti-English’ barrage.. or is it ‘Broadside’?! Not a bad pint, the latter, don’t you know?

      1. Now isn’t the time for this, it’s not about winning the World Cup.

        However, Ireland beat New Zealand, England beat Ireland away, therefore England are the number one team and NZ are third at best 🙂

        1. Well Hutch, when is the time for thinking RWC? Can yr NH mindset only hold 1 thought @ a time? I’d have thought that BOTH comps ought ought to be currently borne in mind, as the 6N might be an indicator as to how yr teams might fare in Japan. Anyway, didn’t you once tell me that you’re a Scot? So why so eager to side with yr team’s future 6N opponents? Not another Stephen Jones are you? Regards yr take on rankings, did you then wake up? A quick glance @ the actual WR rankings ought to quickly dispel yr fantasy on this matter of 1 swallow.

          1. It is your continuing narrative of ‘yeah but NZ are the best’ that is tiresome.

            The aftermath of a brilliant test match between Ireland and England is not the time to be analysing areas for improvement required to beat the All Blacks.

            And no I am not Scottish.

            1. Well Hutch, ditto. Do you ever try & view things from outside the tent? Look @ the easy 15 you earn by telling the converts what they want to ‘hear’. Surely you can’t deny that the general jingoism following this 1 win is not only laced with a generous dose of subjectivity, but it too is tedious, especially if you are unable to occasionally inject a slightly longer term, objective perspective? Have you forgotten England’s 6 losses & SA your so soon?It’s 1 win. Like in 2012 & look what happened to yr (not Scot’s apparently) Chariot thereafter. For the record the AB’s are the most successful team in sporting history, even if you prefer to see them fail. Sorry if this fact is tedious, but they didn’t build this on the odd away win & then go on like a nun’s knickers about it. That would indeed be.. you’ve got it! Until you beat them consistently & not just @ home, it may be wiser to keep a slightly more modest profile rather than give it so large! Also, BYW, as NZ did best England recently, they must surely, even by yr ‘reasoning ‘, have risen to No.1 again.. to match the actual WR rankings. Happy days.

                1. Some rhetorical ? of course Some Guy. What age are you new boy & can’t you spell? Better you communicate with other nodding dogs?

              1. wow Don who pissed in your pint?

                Perhaps just take a step back and re-watch the game. England were excellent in the contact area, showed creativity and played the best 80 mins of rugby they have in a long time.
                Sure it was only one game but playing like that away from home against a strong opposition needs to be applauded.
                Are we RWC contenders? Yes but only in the same way that any of the top 5 teams in the world are capable of lifting the Webb Ellis.
                You often talk about England not scoring enough tries, we scored 4. You say some of our tries were fortunate but they came from England building sustained pressure and forcing Ireland to play in the wrong areas.
                You say we should be building for the RWC we have beaten 3 of the top 5 in the last 3 months and only lost by 1 point to NZ due to a debatable ref call, there is an argument that this could be construed as peaking at the right time.
                The result was great but the performance was better, now we just need to build on it and keep the momentum going

                1. Leon. Yr lot blow too hard after 1 result, which funnily enough, is, er, tedious. Just re-read my other comments.. of rather don’t. Yr mind set is too rigid. Ironically, you & a few others here seem to seek my approval. Hence the vitriolic responses to my lack of supplication to the prevailing jongoism in my posts. Besides, if there’s NO substance in my comments, why don’t you simply ignore them? I’m not putting a gun to yr head ol’ bean.

                2. Normally I respect your counter point of view and think it is good to listen to a broader viewpoint from outside the bubble but on this you seem to have some sort of axe to grind.
                  Yes it is only one win but it was a good win, yes it is too early to start counting chickens but you need to celebrate success while it is happening and yes some fans get carried away but that doesn’t mean you need to slam every comment which suggest that this was a quality performance

      2. What are you talking about? Lacking creativity into back line? What were you watching? Nowel, Daly, Slade and May had Ireland scared all day. Manu kept um honest, the quick boys did the rest and scored 4 in Dublin.

        1. Bit defensive Adam. 1 was an intercept try & another was an Irish cock up by Stockdale. These things happen. Hence my comment about flattering England somewhat. Besides look @ all the match stats. They almost all backed Ireland. Judging by yr reaction, I must have touched upon a raw nerve of deep seated uncertainty?

          1. DP, the great O’Driscoll said in analysis that the score flattered Ireland not England. I will settle for that.

            1. SJ. Doubt that 1 loss for Ireland is the ‘hay maker’ you claim it to be. After all, as I’ve already stated elsewhere here, England have had a few losses themselves (9) after 17 consecutive wins. Were these too not ‘hay makers’ then? Also I think that you over reach yrself when you opine about NZ mind sets in rugby matters. You are not an EnZeder. Therefore you state from a position of distant presumption. That England beat Ireland & the latter prev beat NZ, doesn’t take into account that,1) NZ defeated England away recently & 2) that Ireland have an NZ coach. I think that you’ll find that they both learn/ed pretty quickly from (rare) defeats (e.g. NZ’s Ireland loss in Chicago).. & don’t take a yr to fix them.

            2. SJ. Just because BOD was lauded as a ‘great’ player, it doesn’t nec make him a great commentator does it? Former players can trot out as much tripe as anyone. Check the match stats. You might be surprised.

                1. SJ. You’re just being personal, subjective & inhabiting yr child ego state. I did watch the match. Not being English gives me a different perspective on same that’s all. IMHO, you & others, read too much into this 1 result. Sorry not to be the nodding dog in yr rear view.

              1. Love the way you manage to wind people up just by being contrary Don. Quite obvious you don’t mean half of it but just like getting a bite.

                1. Regds Andy. Someone has to try & enlighten some of the English. Rightly or wrongly, God has clearly chosen me for this task. I do happen to believe that a bit too much has been read into this 1 result, as per the Irish, NZ result, or JS being voted World Player o t Yr. The latter 2 results look a tad over stated now don’t you think? Whatever, understand that a few (er, make that a lot?) will take it that I’m just being contrary & just pissing on their parade. Of course there’s an element of that, but as I’ve stated elsewhere here, I also do think that England will now win the 6N, probably via a GS? Also, after some uncertainty over EJ’s erratic tenure over the past yr or so’s results, it’s likely no small relief for England supporters to have got this result. I get that. However, perhaps yrself & maybe 1 (or 2?) other/s don’t have such an insular view of rugger over hete; @ least as I perceive it. Even Hutch seems to want to bathe in this latest result, ignoring the wider need to see the 6N, or each result therein as, not an end it/them self/selves, but also as a step towards the gr8er goal of WC success. Maybe it’s an ‘old world’ (like Boris’ Insular Brexit’s J foreigner can whistle attitude) thing, compared to ‘new world”s less historical baggage & therefore more outward looking attitude, that I find somewhat frustrating. I mean the ‘new world’ has only won all but 1 WC & with less resources, so it has to be down to something other than ‘Swing Low, Rule Brit & playing in The English way’ methinks. Maybe you do get it, but some others sure don’t. Anyway, battery’s low, so catch you nxt time geezer.

          2. My fellow Irishmen pay too much attention to stats. There is only stat for a team just looking 2nd best the whole game and losing badly at home – the scoreline. Less hustle, less grit, less belief, less ingenuity. And yes, less available first team players. That hit us hard in the backs department. At full strength and in form, we still might not have even won that, at home! England are back.

            1. Mitchell, stop sucking up to the English! 1 game & they’re ‘back’!? Christ they went 18, then lost 9, now they’ve won 1! Wasn’t everyone stating that they were ‘back’, during the 18, then the reverse during the 9 & now the same of the former after Sat’s 1 win? What will you & Uncle Tom Cobley & all state if England fall over one more time? Need to straighten yr head out or I’ll tell your PM on you fella!

          3. Of course Don!! those tries weren’t scored by Kiwis so how could they possibly have been worthy? Do you just cut and paste from thread to thread as you never say anything different or ‘creative.

            1. Srry Ray H, but unable to c&paste on my mobile. Can you please show me how? PS Aren’t you being even more defensive than me?

          4. An intercept try is lucky, but it was also a product of the pressure that England created – forcing Ireland to play from deep in their own half.

            The ‘Irish cock-up’ was … yes, a little fortunate, but also a product of a fine attacking kick and Nowell very deliberately chopping Stockdale’s arms away just at the moment he was trying to catch the bobbling ball. The product of pressure, skill, and luck.

            The first and third tries were quality… And if we are discounting tries, the final Irish try was a consolation, and the product of a dead match situation.

            And as for the match stats… Ireland had more time of possession, carries, more rucks, more meters, fewer tackles, fewer missed tackles. 10 carries and rucks between your own 22 and the 10 meter line are hardly game changing. I’d also point out that the NZ team frequently have fewer carries and rucks.

            The missed tackle stat is interesting, because it was a philosophical decision to impact the patterns of Ireland and disrupt the timings and their decisions.

            1. Mc Murph. Why are you comparing England with NZ in terms of possession? This was 1 game for England, so picking it in isolation is irrelevant. NZ frequently play away compared to England. Tediously, they’re more efficient with the possession, carries, rucks they have. And wasn’t the Irish ‘consolation try’ a product of England’s unprofessionlism in switching off? Should play for 80. It might matter next time. Good to get into good habits? Also, are you suggesting that England deliberately missed tackles for some nebulous philosophical impact reason? What the eff are you on about?! Are you mixed up about who you are & where you come from fella?

          1. Sorry Don, but not with you on this one. Ireland only got into the England 22 three times in the entire game, and the most telling stat was “dominating tackles” where England came out comfortably on top.

            1. No need to apologise Andy, but anyone can cherry pick the odd stat to back their view.. like you. 2 of England’s tries were I keep ‘hearing’ about the disallowed 1 v NZ. These things happen. Sometimes they go for you. The English ‘D’ rushed Ireland out of their game, sure, but without the intercept (you can’t plan these) & the Stockdale cock up, it was a different ball game. Not stating that Engand didn’t deserve to win it, just that it wasn’t without a slice of luck as well.

  2. The attitude and aggression were awesome.Hard to believe it was England but clearly mental preparation by coaches and Farrell’s leadership was absolutely spot on.Thought May was immense and selection of Daly was correct dispelling my doubts.We must now surely be serious rwc contenders.Am one very happy Englishman!

    1. Just on Farrell, If we are going to nitpick, he was wrong to go for both long range kicks with Daly on the field. Another case of ego trumping teamwork.
      The unbalanced bench almost caught us out when Maro got crocked. Next week we need a lock and someone other than Hughes as reps!
      Apart from that a job well done. Roll on Les Bleus !

      1. He didn’t have the range yet he nailed the second long range attempt? Daly has good range but can be inaccurate. It doesn’t show ego taking an attempt at goal when you’re the designated goal kicker… That’s Farrells job. You didn’t have to nitpick to begin with.
        On the bench – we did have a lock. Lawes came on for Kruis and England were unfortunate that Itoje picked up a knock after this sub was made.
        Not really sure what either of your points offer but there is just no pleasing some people.

        1. My point ,Jake, is twofold. Eddie picked an unbalanced mix of second and back rowers, his subbing of kruis was exyremely early and two minutes later, Itoje had to go off injured. That meant we had Hughes as cover for lock and flanker/8. If you don’t think that was a massive gamble/ error of judgement then we’ll just have to differ. Has Ireland not had a slightly off day, it could have cost us dear.
          On Farrell, he may be designated GK but he’s also captain and that requires he use his better judgement now and again. He failed with the first kick btw, and Daly has a huge boot but to my mind, Faz still has a “me first ” attitude that clouds aforesaid judgement . As for never being pleased, i’m delighted we stuck it to Ireland and that we are on course for a potential slam. Ok,Love? (Don’t start sweating, It’s a Yorkshire idiom).

          1. Interestingly, S Duncan has made the same point about Faz and got two thumbs up! You can’t please everyone , eh?

                1. not at all Acee. Just think its amusing Duncan makes 4 points and you pick at one that suits your argument. Comment below was the main response…unless you changed your mind Love?

            1. Acee, unless you tow the line you’ll get flack I’m afraid. It’s predictable. The subjectivity, the personal comments. The children are in the candy shop & nothin’s going to stop them from gorging themselves. So insular, so jingoistic, so delusional. But hey, don’t worry, after this 1 win, England only have to turn up to win the WC don’t you know.. now that they’ve knocked Ireland off this particular perch that is! Chin, chin.

          2. You have no idea how Kruis was doing in terms of fatigue. He might have been fading quickly. England also wanted to maintain the intensity so wanted fresh legs in lawes. Ireland subbed toner at a similar time too… Was that too early?
            The bench had the start 2 props, 1 hooker, 1 lock, 1 back row and 3 backs. What is the best cover combination for the bench if not one lock and one back row? Would be interested to know who you would include and still have the personnel to carry out the game plan.
            Nevertheless with your powers of hindsight maybe you could do a job for England? Injuries happen and teams have to react and adapt. Curry and Wilson can both line out jump so, along with Lawes, they have cover there. I’m not a fan of Hughes but he was clearly included to allow for a big ball carrier to be brought on late in the game.
            Luckily Farrell has more mental fortitude than you. If he let a missed penalty phase him he wouldn’t make a very good 10. There have been other times when Farrell has conceded kicking duties to Daly, so your argument doesn’t really stack up. Farrell has the range inside the half so backed himself, and rightly so.

      2. The bench wasn’t unbalanced. Lawes had already come on for Kruis when Itoje got injured, so Hughes was the only option.

        1. Yes it was. Bloody hell. It was made worse by the early replacing of Kruis. Hughes ain’t no lock and, had we had a subsequent back or second row injury or sending off, nowell was next on the rank! Wonder what the reaction would have been if Lancaster had picked that bench?

            1. No, I said what I would have done on another page two days ago! Bloody hell, I’ve got an opinion, just like everyone else. If you don’t agree, fine but let’s not turn into little keyboard warrior toss pots ,eh?

              1. Acee couldn’t agree more. Having a number 8 on the bench made the side unbalanced and on a different day could have cost us.
                When Hughes came on the back five went lock, flanker, number eight, number eight, flanker
                If Ireland had been more effective or the front row hadn’t been so brilliant at getting to breakdowns every where on the pitch we could ave been in trouble. Hughes and Vunipola together does not make for a very mobile back row
                I like to think that Jones was forced into by the absence of Shields and Clifford, but you never know with him!

                1. We already had No.8 cover in Wilson i would have had a Flanker on the bench but still wouldn’t have helped much when Itoje got injured

                2. But we had Lawes who in theory covers 6 as well. Ultimately, you have two spots and need to cover three positions. So somebody needs to be able to do three roles. I agree someone like Clifford would cover 8 and 6/7 but given the Itoje injury and Kruis substitution, you’d still have someone out of position.
                  I also agree that having Hughes and Billy in the back row is unbalanced but I suspect EJ had planned to replace Billy with Hughes. I also believe that losing a big carrier without replacement could have been worse than playing your 8 at lock.
                  Loads of way to play it but I don’t think it was definitely a bad selection call

        1. H’quin , then I suggest England organise a quick NZ tour prior to the WC as per Lancaster. And of course you’re conveniently forgetting the 6 losses in a row, the SA tour & that the NZ game was @ home. I’ve heard it all before. You ‘talk’ yrself up too soon, too often & also by too many. Might be wiser to keep yr powder dry fella. Doubt that you will though.

    2. H’quin. After 1 game you’re stating that England must be WC contenders? Well, they might or might not be. But haven’t we been there before when England won 17 on the trot? Then they lost 6 in a row, a SA series & @ home to NZ. Personally, I expect England to go on to win THIS 6N now, with only a pretty patchy Wales as a possible sticking point. However, you’re setting yrself (& England) up for another fall aren’t you? Wisdom may come with age?

    3. Thought Daly got away with it because the Irish half backs kicked badly and did not test him under the high ball. He still managed to drop one and avoid getting under a couple of others . Played OK going forward but judgement reserved until he copes with an aerial barrage.

  3. A tremendous performance by England. Arguably the best under Eddie Jones and certainly the best for quite some time.
    That was a big statement and sets us up very nicely for this 6N’s.
    Much to enjoy about the way we got control, squeezed the Irish, took our chances and the quality of individual performances.
    John Mitchell wasnt a universally welcomed appointment, but the way we defended today was very impressive.

  4. Cracking performance by England in the Dublin hot house against the form team in world rugby. Challenge now is to keep this momentum going for the rest of the tournament. Four more big games to come and without jumping the gun on the significance of the ‘blues’ at home, we will need to consolidate this in Cardiff.

    If we can do this I would be optimistic for RWC 19 principally because sustaining momentum over 9 months is much easier than it is over 2-3 years.

    The world order hasn’t spun on it’s axis but that was a serious haymaker to Ireland’s confidence. We beat them well – not just at their own game but also with our own. Just in the same way that if NZ meet Ireland at the RWC, Ireland will know that should they meet England, this defeat is the most recent of their meetings. (unless we play them in the summer warm ups…?)

    So many positives and so many big individual performances. Many people, myself included, have been waiting since RWC 15 to see Slade and Tuilagi in harness since and I really hope injuries are kind and we now get to see them evolve.

    Can’t wait to get to Twickenham next week for the French, if they can bring their first half performance against Wales for 80 mins, we are in for an extremely tough afternoon.

  5. Brilliant performance by England! Ireland looked slow and ponderous by comparison.Only downer is the injury to Maro but Launchbury can come into the squad.
    Big defeat at home for Ireland.

    1. Bolter. Where’s he from do you suppose? Nevertheless, England’s ‘D’ kept Ireland out. Stats showed that they made many more tackles than Ireland. Indeed, most other stats also favoured Ireland.

        1. Dear oh dear, Some Guy. Can you post a single blog that’s NOT subjective? Although yr comment on a particular part of my anatomy is flattering, how on earth do you know about my size?! Big worrying. Have to draw my curtains more carefully in future! In response to yr eloquent comment on the 1 stat that mattered, well you’re right of course, it did matter. My point, which you seem unable to grasp, is that it’s 1 game & not definitive of the future. So you might wish to care about that. Especially as England & EJ have been here before, in the not so distant. Or have had yr memory banks been erased? It ‘s called foresight & I’m NOT as drunk on the euphoric aftermath of 1 match as you seem to be. And BTW, yr ‘we hammered them’ comment is disingenuous. You weren’t on the pitch to the best of my knowledge. Have a nice 1.

      1. Stats lie
        England played the conditions well and chose to play without the ball with tactical kicks in behind to keep pushing Ireland back into their own half and turning the screw when it counts

        1. here’s a stat that i’ve been waiting a long time to see
          IRE ENG
          136 / 138 (98%) Rucks Won 82 / 82 (100%)
          3 / 4 (75%) Mauls Won 4 / 4 (100%)

            1. in some ways yes, in that it doesn’t tell the whole story but it is not often you will see a team go an entire game without losing one ruck or maul against a team like Ireland who thrive on turnovers and hence target the breakdown

              1. Leon, I’ve given yr ‘slam’ comment above a thumbs up, but responded to this post as I couldn’t to yr aforementioned former one. I just find the general euphoria over 1 win staggering. I really do. I understand yr comments about balance & celebration. They make sense to me. However, the general reaction seemed to be verging on hysteria of almost Diana like proportions. Also smacked of arrogance. Hence my reaction. Mind you, if you view some of the subjective, personal vitriol fired @ me, my responses are surely saint like in comparison don’t you think? It’s just isn’t cricket!

        2. Well Leon, you may need to inform Pablito of this opinion of yr’s. That Ireland had 60% possession for instance, is a fact. That they weren’t, on this occasion, able to make better use of it, is another fact. That England also won 18 (not 17, I think) on the trot, then lost 9 in nr succession are also facts. Whilst stats don’t always tell the whole story & can be manipulated or cherry picked, they don’t just ‘lie’. To state this is simplistic.

          1. Don,
            You are, of course, absolutely correct that Ireland had 60% possession. But TOP is one of the least meaningful statistics. It has very literal correlation to team performance and wins.

            To quote the Saracens analytics team…
            ” The less you play in your own half and the more you play in the opposition half, the more likely you are to be successful.

            … the more you play in your own half, the more likely you are to be turned over. And the more you are turned over nearer your try line, the more you are likely to concede.”

            Ireland had possession, but a lot of that possession was in their own half. In that position, unable to make line-breaks due to the line speed, this possession resulted in a whole pile of rucks, a whole pile of carries, and not a lot else.

            The stats favoured Ireland in TOP, carries, maters and rucks. But not in turnovers – which is one of the key indicators. Or in gainline success. Or in tackles for a loss. Or in line breaks. Or in kicks into the opposition 22.

            Statistics don’t lie, but using TOP as your top line of what ‘favours’ a team is unlikely to give you much truth.

            1. McMurphy. Saracens also buy their way to success. Spot the non internationals. Ok, do they have some academies in too. Basically, they beat people up front, overpower with better, or more more expensive, players, drawing the opposition into the ruck & then play it wide when they have the numbers. Someone else here, tediously (tch,tch), stated that NZ often have less territory, possession & play from deep too. Ireland weren’t as efficient this time up. Reckon they won’t be nxt time?

      2. Don I don’t think.Mitchell has just improved our defence. He was forwards coach for a while under Woodward and I don’t see it as coincidence.that we are suddenly playing so much better at the rucks. Don’t think we lost a single attacking ruck which is a big turnaround from last 6 nations!!
        It does help.that we are fielding a balanced back row mind you!

  6. Although very happy with the performance and win, there were a few things that I felt need to be worked on:
    1. Morgan should replace Hughes. No impact and consistently underwhelms.
    2. Still feel Daly needs to improve at 15 quickly, at times his communication and ability under high ball caused us problems.
    3. Farrell ego may cost us points in future, he needs to cede to Daly’s boot if it’s a 50:50.
    4. I see Kruis as 4th lock now, totally agreed with the early change for Lawes and he had much more impact. I think Launch must replace him in the squad next week.

    1. Think Launch will replace Itoje.
      Can’t entirely agree on Kruis. Horses for courses – Kruis is quick up and good in the air at the lineout. He is very good at disruption. The pick was partly targeting the strength of Ireland’s attacking and defensive lineout. Also, he was a deserving Lion in Australia,, and is getting back to his best (IMO).
      To be fair Lawes is pretty good in the air too.

      Wonder if the George, Itoje, Kruis axis had any influence on selection. Was this about familiar jumpers to improve the safety of our ball?

  7. Top class test match. High intensity rugby from both sides, little to choose between the teams to be honest, England were about a foot quicker…and that’s all it takes.

    Even better Don Pe_is is being roundly ignored. I think you can take your tin hat and ….off.

    Great day for North Hems rugby..,,

    1. Burt, you flatter me. With your personal, puerile penile comment, I didn’t realise that I bothered you so much. And wanna bet that I don’t draw some more fire before the nxt match? Besides, you almost all preach to the converted, as far as I can thus far tell, Stu Duncan apart that is. He @ least maintains a modicum of objectivity amongst all the mutual back slapping euphoria. Must remember to give him a thumbs up sir?

  8. Excellent display from england. Carrying ability esa superb with the vunipolas and Tuilagi, with some bone cruncing tackles too. Excelent also from george (better than hartley by far). I see more launchnury as starter than kruis (only pro is lineout ability) and lawes is a great impact player. Hughes should be dropped from england and good displays from 6 and 7 in tackles and breakdown Work. Slade seems to be more adjusted to test level and farrel is just such a great player, despite hes errors he is crucial. May now a complete World class winger, not just a finisher with great speed.

    From ireland nothing special. Dissapointed from ryan at contact, best at lineout and not good overall from omahony (still god) and stander. Murray and sexton seemed to lost control. Henshaw out of position, they really missed kearney. Good aki and ringrose. Good impact from obrien and van der flier best irish on the field. Great match overall.

  9. So proud of that performance from England, so intense and they looked so hungry to prove a point. Ireland didn’t play bad at all IMO, they were just smashed back and bullied. Yes England capitalised on some uncommon mistakes by Ireland, but these mistakes were the cause of the intense pressure from the boys in white. God knows what EJ has been saying to them the past 2 weeks but it was like the Ireland team had slept with every wife of the England team and posted the photos on social media! I just hope they also gave the England lads blunt knives at the dinner after the match! Oh if Don P is out there…..England proved they can win AWAY……

    If they bring that intensity to the French next week it will be a horrid afternoon for Le Bleus!

    1. Unfortunately D’maul, I am still out, well, here. Bout time though isn’t it? Did I comment on England’s ability about winning away? Doesn’t seem like me. Perhaps you mistook me for AlexD? In any event, it’s 1 game. Already stated that England probably only have the erratic Wales to negotiate for a potential GS.. haven’t they? The WC will have a tweaked Irish tiger’s tail to possibly be contended with. Then there may be another team, away this time, to deal with again too.

            1. SG. You asked what I (anyone?) thought of it. I thought, as it’s a Negro spiritual, the clear implication is, what’s it got to do with England, or rugby, for that matter? Do you know? I don’t.

  10. Didn’t expect that! One good game doesn’t make us world beaters, but to win in Ireland against such a successful and settled side is a great step forward. Maybe EJ does have a plan!

  11. This is the difference that having your best players fit makes. The Vunipolas, Tuilagi and Nowell all back and hungry for the ball.

    I’m still not convinced that Healy touched the ball down either, really looked like Mako had his hand under the ball?

    Great performance all round and hope Itoje’s injury is not as bad as it looked.

    1. Agree with that Healy comment. The ball seemed to be ‘floating’ and not in contact with the ground. Oh well, not that it really matters now.

  12. That was a prime example of a team coming out the blocks with a firm game plan. You don’t have to play all the rugby to win a match, just exploit the opportunities you earn from an aggressive defence.
    Ireland were not allowed to gain any momentum.
    Pick of the back row for me was Curry. From the first contact he exemplified the English approach.
    We need to go on now and wrap up this tournament, in order to go into the WC as Northern Hemisphere favourites, just like we did in 2003.
    We just can’t afford to drop a game.

  13. As a Wales supporter I was dismayed & extremely worried by this pereformance, if England can bring that level of intensity to every match I cannot see them losing any matches, To get BP win in Dublin is quite outstanding, I don’t know if Ireland believed their ( & the media ) hype too much & thought they had it won before kick-off but they couldn’t match England if any facet of the game & quite honestly the score flattered Ireland tbh !.
    Not looking forward to Cardff quite as much, but, you never know ….

  14. I gave an 8 as England switched off for the Ireland try late.

    Farrell may have of got the second kick at range but both should’ve been taken by Daly but I have to laugh at a previous comment about his kicking being ‘irratic’, at that range I cannot remeber the last time he missed!

    Garces had a good game, couldn’t give the Vunipola try

  15. Well, I have been playing, coaching, refereeing and coaching the game for over 60 years, but I certainly did not see that coming. Sometimes you just have to admit that you have got things wrong. I thought the front row would struggle in the tight and that we would get put on the back foot by the Irish loose forwards, but having a few genuine ball carriers to get us over the gain line made,a huge difference. Tuilagi looks to be getting back to form and has more to give, and Slade at last looked of genuine international quality. Still think Young s is not getting the ball away quickly enough and Daly is dodgy under the high ball, but at last we have a balanced back row and a centre partnership. Great to see Murray, Sexton and O’Mahoney whinging at the ref because they were coming off second best. That is the worst I have seen Sexton play and he was clearly under-cooked. Hope we don’t come unstuck in Cardiff. A lot more optimistic about the WC than I was, particularly as the NZ aura of invincibility has now been punctured and there are at least three sides who will fancy their chances. Don P is making a lot of noise which suggests a certain amount of anxiety! One step at a time though. France are by no means a pushover.

    1. Anxious if they’d lost 9 in quick succession Andy.. & if they were ranked @ No.4 is it? Oddly, for having their bubble burst (when was that BTW? 1 loss v Ire? Happened before, prior to the last 2 WC’s!), they’re only (still) ranked @.. where is it now? As for ‘noise’, have you heard the cacophony after ONE win from the Englanders here? Louder than Concorde landing on me eardrums! Ho hum.

      1. Wasn’t specifically referring to the England-Ireland game Don, but looking at the progress that several NH teams have made in the past couple of years plus several very close results, allied to the fact that the last Lions series was drawn and there were a lot of NH players involved in that, I think there are several teams who now take the field against NZ with the players believing they can win rather than expecting to get dominated. NZ were streets ahead three years ago but now they are not perceived as invincible which makes for exciting and interesting rugby. And as the old saw has it, “You are only as good as your last game”

        1. Andy, most games of catch up you refer to are (the Oz tour apart) @ home & so you have an advantage. The Lions won 1 test by 3 v 14. NZ motored them in the 1st & butchered a couple in the last (Savea), not incl the ref’s blatant contravention of a pen which would likely have won the series, in which case we wouldn’t even be ‘discussing’ this. Suspect Lions played better than either of us expected , but they were hardly dominant. England lost in SA, 9 in all.. & after 18 wins? NZ also nilled them after 35 mins. To prove yr theory though is simple. The HN simply need drop a line line to Hansen & arrange a quick warm up series down under prior to the WC. Have a golden op then to prove yr contention don’t you think?

  16. As an England fan that was a very enjoyable watch. Been very amused by what feels like trolling from Don. There are some interesting points.
    Firstly, let’s not get ahead of ourselves. As a few have acknowledged, England now need to back this up. Playing at that level for the rest of the tournament should see some solid wins at Twickenham, and give us a real chance in Cardiff. But, post 2012 ABs win, England did not maintain the level. So, plenty of eggs, but no chickens yet.

    Secondly, watching the game (I have watched it twice now) England looked on top pretty much all the way through. All the commentators agreed with this view. Yet, as Don says, the stats paint an amusingly contrasting picture. Probably a case of lies, damn, lies and statistics. But penalty counts is one that does still need to improve.

    And finally, not claiming any original thought here but Ireland have been slow starters the last few years. I don’t think we would have had this result in round 4 or 5. Still might have got the win, but it would have been a lot closer. The first two tries Ireland will see as a bit soft.

    So, roll on France and another big performance. I wonder which France team turn up H1 or H2…

    1. As a Welsh immigrant who follows the English game religiously and supports Wales to the hilt I have to say the game was terrific. I have been happy that EJ was slow to involve Daly, and particularly Slade for so long. Similarly the new young props and exciting back row prospects. He still has favourites who are past their best involved in the squad and others who he continues to dismiss. I would love to see how a 9, 10, 12 and 13 of Robson, Cipriani, Slade and Daly would perform. Only against any team but Wales though! (I think throwing in fanciful comments like this is better than indulging in the mutual trolling that happens too often here). Looking forward to the game in Wales, hoping that at least one wheel falls off your chariot….

      1. It is great to see Slade have a really good performance for England. I think he is a fantastic player, but would admit that he has not shown much special for England up to now.
        I am not sure how a Slade-Daly midfield would go. Are they too similar? I also prefer Slade at 13, but with the flexibility to come in as first or second receiver.

        Can’t help but feel for Robson. He deserves a shot based on how he has been playing. Can’t fault Eddie for sticking with Young’s on Saturday as everything was going so well. But there was one point when the camera went to Robson and his expression was … well, 1000 words and all that.

        Hope he gets a good run against France.

        1. I’m a Robson supporter, and one of EJ’s biggest faults has not been developing SH depth and experience, but Saturday probably wasn’t the day to do it, as right up to the end, that was a ferocious Irish team. Hopefully next game…

Comments are closed.