Dwyer's View

Ireland Win at Twickenham

Saturday, 27^th February, 2010.

by Bob Dwyer.

Ireland, in recent years, have been a more than handy side. A defeat, then, for England at Ireland’s hands, by the slender margin of four points – 16 to 20 – would not seem therefore to be the end of the world. At least not until one realizes that England enjoyed more than 60% of possession, were called on to make less than one-third the number of tackles compared with their opponents and yet could only cross for one try, whilst conceding three.

This was the England approach of old – and a very effective approach it had been also. Deny the opposition anything to live on; starve them into submission and storm through their weakened and weary defences. Nothing wrong with that at all, and it kept them in touch for a large part of the game at Twickenham on Saturday. The problem was that, for all of the advantages that they established, they could not, for the most part, breach the resolute Irish defence. Their sole try was well worked, but, in the final analysis, relied on a crash over by the young prop forward, Dan Cole, from close quarters. It required the assistance of the TMO and, in my humble opinion, was fortunate to be given.

 Ireland were worthy of the win, for all of the reasons given above and a few more. With a scarcity of possession, they crossed for three tries, all of which were scored by their wings. Tommy Bowe got two and Keith Earls the other.

They had pace and ambition and looked always for the “small window of opportunity”, which, when realized, can spell the difference at this highest of levels. For example, by my reckoning, England had three clear overlaps in the first nine minutes of the game, yet they failed to free the man on any of these occasions. This represents a definite lack of technique in the attacking aspects of the team game. On numerous occasions, an England player was able to make the half break, but was not able at all to achieve the off-load which would have represented just reward for their lead-up work. For the most part, the ball-carrier never even looked to be interested in finding a support player and indeed, under the circumstances, maybe support players simply give up trying to be in the right position. These little gems of play, seizing on the smallest of opportunities, are necessary components of a quality attack which asks difficult questions of a defence. “Tackling” is not nearly as difficult as “defending”. Ireland, as the stats showed, had to make a lot of tackles, but they didn’t have to do a lot of defending!

The weather can be a great leveler. The points differential on a wet day is invariably much smaller and maybe this helped England’s cause, but I formed a distinct impression that they, England, were moving forward in the standard of their performances. They certainly had ambition and effort. They were quite willing to spread the ball and Ireland’s early try came after England had attacked non-stop from the kick-off. The problem is that, in my view, “it doesn’t matter so much WHAT you do, but it matters terribly HOW you do it.” Whether you decide, on attack, to run or pass or kick, is not really vital. HOW you pass, run or kick (or chase, for that matter) is vital to the outcome. It appears to me that England have not addressed, or are not capable of addressing, the “HOW”.

One early half-break by Wilkinson was very well taken, but it cried out for a support player off his hip – not too difficult actually; he is only one pass away from the forward pack. There was no-one there, but Jonny didn’t even look! Maybe the two things go naturally together. Late in the game, with England desperate for a score and the scrum feed about 12-14 metres out from Ireland’s line, England’s openside wing was a full 30 metres behind the scrum-half. How can an attack go anywhere from this? What is it supposed to be – sprint practice? I had noted that I had not seen Wilkinson get a second touch in attack all day and then I realized that, from this formation, it would be an impossibility. How the team administration must be crying out for the reincarnation of Will Greenwood. He actually knew plenty about the HOW of centre three-quarter play!

So Ireland keep their hopes alive for the Championship, slim though they may be, given France’s position. They were well served, as usual, by a very hard working pack, led by the always excellent Jamie Heaslip. He formed a quality backrow with Ferris and Wallace and they were a significant factor in the win. I thought that Sexton was below his form of last season – maybe “second year” jitters - but their back three of Earls, Bowe and Murphy were a constant threat. O’Driscoll suffered a sickening blow, courtesy of Paul O’Connell’s knee, and it is to be hoped that he will be ok for the remainder of the championship. I’ll repeat my claim from a couple of weeks back, after Ireland’s game against France. Ireland would be better served with O’Driscoll and Earls in the centres, with Trimble and Bowe on the wings. Earls looks made for the outside centre role to me and it would bring excellent pace all round to the attack. It would be a brave defence that would “drift’ too early against BOD at inside centre!

The shining light for me, in the England squad, was Ben Foden. He had only about twenty minutes, but … he added URGENCY. This is a much needed quality in this England attack. When Foden had the ball it was “all hands to the pumps’ in the Irish camp. A quality attack must put the opposition defence on notice and, although I’ve seen very little of Foden before this, he certainly achieved that.

England with all the possession, but Ireland with three tries. That says it all really.

www.bobdwyerrugby.com

THE DEFINITIVE RUGBY COACHING WEBSITE.