Irish eyes are smiling for a 2010 Six Nations victory
Columnist By Spiro Zavos, 4 Feb 2010 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- 2010 Six Nations, Declan Kidney, Eddie O'Sullivan, International Rugby, Ireland Rugby, Rugby Union
Related coverage
Wallabies v Ireland, Croke Park November 16, 2009. Wallabies drew with Ireland 20 all. Photo by Pothale
Irish rugby supporters are looking forward to the 2010 Six Nations tournament with such enthusiasm that we can bring out the cliche about ‘Irish eyes are smiling’ without too much chagrin. Their team is odds-on favourite to win. And rightly so.
Since the Second World War, Ireland has produced two Grand Slams sides – in 1948, with the immortal Jackie Kyle running things, and this current side, which won the 2009 tournament with a Grand Slam of victories and was then undefeated with victories against the Springboks and a draw against the Wallabies.
The rump of this team performed poorly in the 2007 Rugby World Cup.
The then coach Eddie O’Sullivan got the team’s preparation wrong and had to fall on his sword. The new coach Declan Kidney (an Irish name worthy of James Joyce’s imagination) has put the team back on track.
He has also introduced some young blood in the backs and given Ireland a game plan that has given width and pace to bolster the traditional body-heaving Irish forward game.
The only obvious weakness in the side is the scrum.
Ireland has been able to get away with a weak shove with some crafty play by its old-timers front row. Against a good scrumming side, though, they could find themselves in trouble.
Luckily for Ireland, the best scrumming side in Europe, Italy (when referees indulge that packs illegal boring-in tactics), is so bereft of attacking play that it can’t capitalise on its power up front.
Ireland play Italy at Croke Park to open the tournament and this match should, on paper at least, allow Ireland a tough but really un-losable start on its campaign to achieve back-to-back Grand Slams.
Reuters has listed Ireland as the favourites to win the tournament, followed by England, France, Wales, Scotland and Italy, in that order.
The second match of the opening round, therefore, between England and Wales at Twickenham, is a key contest. The team that wins stays alive for a tournament win. As England are hard to beat at Twickenham, and Wales are not a good away side, I’m going for England to win.
England, though, are rugby’s Great Pretenders.
They have something like three times the players of New Zealand or Australia. Twickenham is invariably packed for Test matches giving the RFU plenty of money. There are strong national and European competitions for its clubs.
By rights, England should win the Six Nations most years, and be unbeaten to boot.
Does anyone deny that the Springboks, with four Grand Slams out of nine attempts, or the All Blacks, with two Grand Slams in their last two attempts, would totally dominate the Six Nations if they were playing in it?
England’s problems, to my mind, concentrate on an adherence to a kicking game style that requires virtual total dominance in the forwards to succeed: poor selecting (Martin Johnson’s decision to include Steve Borthwick in the side – and make him captain! – is a classic example of this), and poor coaching standards, with Clive Woodward (virtually sacked for winning the 2003 RWC) being a notable exception.
England have won 44 per cent of their Tests in the last six years. A disgraceful record.
Wales have won 51 per cent, equally unimpressive.
They have had a Grand Slam won with magnificent panache some years ago. But the team did not progress from this. The Wallabies beat Wales relatively easily at Cardiff last season.
It is hard to see how this present generation of players or the coaching staff can revive the glory days.
But the place to start, if this to happen (which I very much doubt), is against the old enemy, England.
In the past, Scotland tended to be everyone’s favourite second side, especially in the days of Gavin Hastings, a rugby knight in shining armour if ever such a person existed.
But in recent years, Scotland has done many unsporting things that have tarnished the reputation of the side and its rugby union.
Some years ago, for instance, Scotland organised a ‘thin’ playing field at Glasgow in a Test against the Wallabies. In 2007, Scotland deceived the IRB and the All Blacks to play in jerseys that resembled the All Blacks’ away kit.
Scotland has been aggressively negative (along with the RFU) to changes intended to make rugby a more attractive and expansive spectacle. And so on and so on …
Scotland, though, defeated the Wallabies last season, which suggests that the national team is becoming competitive.
The pack is big. There is some skill in the backs. The intention to play running rugby is there. The team lacks an organising first five-eighths, which makes it hard to understand why Chris Paterson hasn’t been given a long term appointment in the position.
Ian McGeechan, recently knighted for his contributions to rugby and an acknowledged great coach, made a similar comment in The Sunday Times (UK) recently.
The quality of rugby in the Six Nations is not as intense as in the Tri-Nations tournament.
But there is a magic about a tournament that started really in 1910 when France came into a British/Irish tournament. The French gave the new tournament its name, the Five Nations, and some of its most memorable moments.
Judging on the play in the various club championships going on in Europe over the last couple of months, the play this year will be intense (as usual), exciting, and will feature more ball-in-hand play than we could have expected earlier in the season.
The proper application of the tackle-ball laws and the offside laws involving chasers of kicks have opened up the game to allow (if teams can get their alignments rights) more counter-attacking play.
Finally, a note on the television coverage of this magnificent and historic rugby tournament. Setanta no longer carries Six Nations matches. The games are live on ESPN HD and on ESPN (508) on Sunday afternoon at 3pm, 5pm and 8pm.
So it’s ‘Cockles and Mussels, alive, alive O’; the plangent bagpipes; ‘Bread of Heaven’; ‘Swing low, sweet chariot’; ‘Allez les Bleus’ and ‘Azzuri! Azzuri!’
Bring it on.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
February 4th 2010 @ 9:32am
stuff happens said | February 4th 2010 @ 9:32am | Report comment
Good analysis Spiro and Glory Be, we’ll be able to watch 6N in Sydney.One of my biggest rugby frustrations in 40 odd years of Australia has been the lack of coverage for the 6N – so thank you ESPN!
Like Dublin Dave I think the 6N this year is unlikely to produce a Grand Slam. Ireland look the most complete side and as you say Declan Kidney ( you’re right what a great name) is the business.But I expect France to produce a couple of amazing performances.As for the others too many ifs & buts.You’re right about England and the side they’ve picked to play Wales looks pretty good to me but I think they’re a poorly coached team.
Big season for Wales and Gatland/Edwards – they appear to be sliding at the worst time – 18 months from the RWC.
February 4th 2010 @ 9:37am
Spiro Zavos said | February 4th 2010 @ 9:37am | Report comment
France as Winston Churchill might have said are an enigma, wrapped in a riddle and surrounded by a mystery. The team defies analysis. All you can say really that on their day they can, and do, beat any side in the world. And then go, as they did at Marseilles last season get absolutely thrashed by the All Blacks, who were unconvincing winners against England.
In my view they lack an organising five-eighths to give the side the consistency that good sides need. You could probably pick three fine sides out of the talent France has and the coach tends to pick the worst side available to him from this talent. Figure that out.
You could make a fearless prediction to say that France will win the tournament. You could be equally fearless that they will lose more matches than they win. But in all probability they will win one match they aren’t expected to win. This is what makes France so dangerous, and why Ireland as one of the roarers on this thread points out needs to concentrate hard on defeating them.
February 4th 2010 @ 9:52am
stuff happens said | February 4th 2010 @ 9:52am | Report comment
And I see they have Poitrenaud at full back who hasn’t played for France for some time.I thought he looked a class act when I last saw him.
February 4th 2010 @ 2:25pm
PastHisBest said | February 4th 2010 @ 2:25pm | Report comment
“In my view they lack an organising five-eighths…”
Although in France halfback is the role that does more of the organising – both in club and for country.
February 4th 2010 @ 11:48pm
Parisien said | February 4th 2010 @ 11:48pm | Report comment
I am very glad to see Ellisalde back in the squad. And Poitrenaud has been in great form lately. The French team is often able to pull out their best performance when they need it most, or their backs are against the wall. Looking forward to it all. Allez les bleus!
February 4th 2010 @ 7:51pm
Viscount Crouchback said | February 4th 2010 @ 7:51pm | Report comment
Quite right.
Given the outrageous talent France possesses, I was very disappointed by the French XV. Lievremont seems to go out of his way to be obtuse and perverse in his selections. Some say he favours players from smaller Top 14 clubs for political reasons.
February 5th 2010 @ 8:00am
Wavell Wakefield said | February 5th 2010 @ 8:00am | Report comment
I suspect that was initially the case, hence we saw the likes of Boyoud, Diarra, Brugnaut, Mela, but equally Lievremont picked out some gems: Parra, Barcella, Trinh-Duc (sort of), Ouedraogo, Picamoles etc. I recall the hilarious (and typically ignorant) comment from Stephen Jones when Ashton’s England beat France in France, during his last 6N, that France’s youngsters were useless. I’m still convinced that Lievremont is an imposter, however, but time will tell. Picking a squad that includes perennial buffoons Michalak and Poitrenaud certainly doesn’t bode well, and another 3rd place finish will not do.
I’m curious as to how France will play given the booming conservatism of Traille is absent, and Poitrenaud can’t match the kicking of Heymans or Medard. Two big centres doesn’t suggest that sleight of hand is on the cards, and the recent beat-em-up tactics up front won’t be enough to win an entire tournament, especially with the mighty Barcella absent, and the miniscule Domingo taking up his place. There are also still big question marks over Trinh-Duc. Who will propel that gargantuan pack forward? Hopefully not the useless Benjamin Boyet.
February 5th 2010 @ 3:44am
MattyP said | February 5th 2010 @ 3:44am | Report comment
“But in all probability they will win one match they aren’t expected to win. ” That’s my point Spiro – which games do you NOT expect them to win this year? You are crowning Ireland champs without explaining why they will overcome France in France. My expectation is that France wins that one – but that’s not your expecation, apparently?
February 4th 2010 @ 5:58pm
Gavin Fernie said | February 4th 2010 @ 5:58pm | Report comment
Always good to hear the uncluttered and sharp observations of Spiro. The paucity of expert and objective(as much as any of us frail humans can be) rugby journalists in the English speaking world is alarming. A few Brits, Spiro in Australia, one or two on New Zealand and one in South Africa. Not much when one thinks of the game as a whole. Is it my imagination, but cricket has far more real experts writing and commentating on the game than rugby can boast.
As for the 6N; A good tournament to watch, but Spiro is right; some of the games are at best lukewarm in intensity(real needle). As for England(rugby), they are pathetic! Year in and year out despite their massive player base, money galore, excellent local competitions, and all the incentive in the world to set an example; what do we get? More of the same obsession with so called forward power/domination; wings with muscles and no skill, an ancient(in rugby terms)Jonny, a captain who is not even worth his place in the team, and a once great player who appers as bewildered as coach and selector as a rabbit caught in the headlights. Roll on Ireland and hopefully a French team who decide to play to their capabilities. Here in South Africa, the charade goes on. Nine months before the RWC2011, our brains trust(an oxymoron if ever there was) chooses to send our players to the UK to play all 4 home unions and the Babaas. You have to admit we know how not to manage a squad. My long shot for the RWC2011 is still Australia under Dingo Deans.
February 4th 2010 @ 8:11pm
Viscount Crouchback said | February 4th 2010 @ 8:11pm | Report comment
It will also be interesting to see how the Irish adjust to the new tackle laws. Last year’s rules encouraged negative rugby, which suited the Irish perfectly. As the excellent Gerry Thornley of the Irish Times wrote this week, the Irish were the most negative – i.e. kicked the most and passed the least – team in last year’s tournament bar none. They also got away with murder at the breakdown. This year’s rules ought to encourage a quicker, cleaner game, so the Irish will have to come out to play.
I suspect that at least one team in this tournament – probably France – will make the Irish look very ordinary indeed, but Dublin Dave’s predictions don’t seem too far off the mark. The Irish have the confidence, cohesion and (most of all) the coaches to do very well again. That said, if those one point and two point victories of last year suddenly turn into one point and two point defeats, then they could easily end up “doing a Wales”.
February 4th 2010 @ 9:15pm
Pajovic said | February 4th 2010 @ 9:15pm | Report comment
The one point victory vs the English was due to a try scored in extra time when they were 8 points ahead. Against France they played attractive rugby.
Kidney has been widely reported as being pro ‘expansive rugby’. he won the grand Slam last year without his full blueprint being implemented. I expect them to throw it around a bit more and players will have more chance to express themselves, futher throwing off the remaining EOS shackles that remain. They are solid in the breakdown, which will promote quick ball, and their line out is superb. The scrum needs serious decelopment. but their is time to try out new things. ireland really do need to go for a higher risk strategy if they want to keep ahead of the crowd. Like Thornley says, last year, in a tournament notable for a lack of mauls, Ireland mauled far more than any other team, and of seven maul turnovers, six were achieved by Ireland.
VC states that ‘The Irish have the confidence, cohesion and (most of all) the coaches to do very well again’. They also have the players, (many world class). In a variety of positions that can deliver the goods when required.
February 4th 2010 @ 10:19pm
Viscount Crouchback said | February 4th 2010 @ 10:19pm | Report comment
The point is that Ireland didn’t bulldoze their way to a Slam; they enjoyed a lot of luck. The players themselves have acknowledged that fact. Ireland are a decent outfit but are not enormously superior to the other teams in the tournament. Talent-wise, the French (and perhaps even the Welsh) have better players.
Kidney might claim to favour expansive rugby, but his track record suggests otherwise. His Munster teams played safety-first, boring (but effective) rugby. Ireland have good enough backs to play more exciting rugby, as we’ll hopefully see this spring. Rob Kearney, in particular, ought to be let off the leash as he was for the Lions. I worry, though, that Kidney will encourage a tedious, pick-and-go-for-a-yard approach now that the attacking team can keep the ball more easily. That’s the method that worked so well for Munster, but it’s awful to watch.
Ultimately, though, I think the Irish will have to play more rugby because I don’t believe their tight five is still capable of scrapping its way to tight victories. Hayes and the two O’Cs look very, very leggy and increasingly under-powered. I suspect that the coaches know this already, and are one step ahead.
February 4th 2010 @ 11:35pm
pothale said | February 4th 2010 @ 11:35pm | Report comment
That’s fair comment VC. You do have to take account of the likely mindset of the players/coaches as the tournament progressed. The expansive play narrowed down as the Holy Grail came nearer.
Ireland’s best game last year was the opener against France. Free running game, Kearney shifting gear from the rear, Bowe and Fitzgerald threatening, and three tries to boot all in open play, including the stunning opening team effort that was finished off by Heaslip. The Italian game was slightly more muted, but that’s what you get when you play the Italians. Then they went into lockdown mode. England were not in expansive mode, but generous with penalties. It was a gritty, highly intense game – a style engendered by both sides. Unfortunately, O’Gara wasn’t on form or the margin would have been a lot more. Scotland have a bit of the bogey for Ireland, particularly in Murrayfield. Until Stringer made his break for Heaslip to score, they were struggling to dominate. And we know how the Welsh match went. But by that stage, it was win by any means necessary. Except surprisingly, after O’Driscoll scored, Ireland decided to become adventurous resulting in O’Gara’s chip kick for Bowe to take and score.
For all that, the only game, where I think Ireland benefited from luck was in the last match, where Jones’ penalty kick missed.
Having said all that, they’re still going to drop a game this time around.
February 5th 2010 @ 11:18pm
Viscount Crouchback said | February 5th 2010 @ 11:18pm | Report comment
Keith Wood has written a fascinating article about the Irish psyche in today’s Telegraph. Well worth a read.
P.S. Not so much a new tackle law as a return to the old law that the tackler must roll away before he can compete for the ball. It will make it harder to snaffle turnovers a la Brussow. Some Aussie coaches seem to think it will make the game more like it was in 1997, i.e. lengthy phases of possession. Teams might favour more backrow bashers and fewer jackals. This seems to be Ewan Mackenzie’s thinking – hence Horwill playing 6 for the Reds. It might also re-emphasise the importance of winning first phase possession at the set piece, since once teams get hold of the ball, they keep it.
February 6th 2010 @ 12:07am
pothale said | February 6th 2010 @ 12:07am | Report comment
“Are we now at the point where we have to forego our nature, just a little bit, to push on to greater success? Can we give our opposition the respect they deserve on the field without pandering to convention beforehand? I wonder whether the constant talking-up of the opposition’s chances have a viral effect on Irish confidence or is it necessary, to drive for further glory?” Keith Wood.
Interesting article, VC – one of the better ones from Mr. Wood.
Am curious – when was this new tackle law or old law reintroduced? Is this the same as the thing that SANZAR have been getting in a lather about, or something different?
February 5th 2010 @ 9:42am
pothale said | February 5th 2010 @ 9:42am | Report comment
I meant to ask VC – what new tackle laws?
February 4th 2010 @ 10:14pm
Dublin Dave said | February 4th 2010 @ 10:14pm | Report comment
I must acknowledge an error of fact in my previous post. I said that Ireland are as likely to win away to France as they are to win away in Australia because in either case, it is a feat they have only achieved three times since the war.
In fact, Ireland have won four times in France over that period. In 1948 (Grand Slam year), 1952, 1972 and 2000. It is still the second most likely fixture in the Five/Six Nations to result in a home win. Only Scottish wins at Twickenham are more unlikely, historically speaking.
The wins in 1948 and 1952 were by the team which contained such legendary players as Jack Kyle, Karl Mullen, Jim McCarthy and Bill McKay, all of whom played in both matches. That was during Ireland’s first golden age.
The 1972 victory was during the great “what might have been” season which was unfinished owing to the Troubles in northern Ireland. On that team were Mike Gibson, Willie John McBride, Ray McLoughlin, Fergus Slattery and Kevin Flynn.
The win in 2000 (which I attended in person) marked the first great performance in the international arena of the young Brian O’Driscoll who scored a hat trick. Also on that team were Keith Wood, Dennis Hickie (whose uncle had played in 1972) Mick Galwey, Peter Clohessy and John Hayes.
O’Driscoll and Hayes are both survivors from that game who will in all probability be playing on Valentine’s Weekend this year. Peter Stringer is another survivor from that game still on the fringes of the team who might yet make an appearance.
It still remains a huge challenge for Ireland. If they can win that one, a Grand Slam is a possibility. But I think the bookies are right to be skeptical.
The beauty about the 6N though, is that it is so unpredictable. Every year there is at least one result which breaks the bookies’ hearts while stirring everybody else’s. France have in the past found Murrayfield a bogey ground and I fancy Scotland this year might just cause them to remember that. I think they will beat England at St Denis but Wales in Cardiff can be a tough nut to crack too.
A final clarification on “pointless Italy.” That is merely a cold-headed assessment of their chances of winning a match this year. I think it is absolutely right that they are now in the championship and their results, sporadic though they have been, justify their presence. I hope I live long enough to see them win their first championship. It took France nearly 50 years to win their first, for all that they missed out on about 20 of those years thanks to a combination of world wars and an unfortunate flirtation with professionalism at a time when the rest of the world wasn’t ready for it.
So I might just make it if Italy work to a similar schedule.
February 5th 2010 @ 1:28am
Ian Noble said | February 5th 2010 @ 1:28am | Report comment
Spiro
The 6Ns in the UK is on FTA ( BBC) viewing audiences will probably be circa 5/7M. Setanta (UK) no longer exists it collapsed through problems over it’s EPL contracts, ESPN has moved in as the new kid on the block and has renegotiated Setanta UK rights presumably including international rights to the 6Ns. Incidently ESPN have also the rights to top 14 in France and as from next season a tranche of games in the GP.
As Dublin Dave has said the 6Ns is so unpredictable but what you guys down under don’t realise is the festival nature of the tournament. The passion of the fans and the annual renewal of old rivalries. Italy may be the weakest nation but their anthem is the best and the singing by the their players is the most passionate. So many things to look forward to and the rugby well that is the by product and it takes it’s place in the order of things.
Gavin Fernie
Sorry but your posting is somewhat il informed, the main issue for England is their front five and whether in particular, Payne and Borthwick are up to scratch. The days of England relying solely on their pack are long gone and the inclusion of Tait at 13, hopefully for a decent run, means there is serious speed in the backs. Don’t forget it was the combination of Tait and Cueto who nearly turned RWC 2007 final, but for some Aussie ref who couldn’t speak French and make himself understood by the French producer.
February 5th 2010 @ 3:21am
Rugby Fan said | February 5th 2010 @ 3:21am | Report comment
I particularly enjoy the 6N after a Lions tour because I’ve got to know the players from other home nations much better. Of course, there is so much more information around these days but nothing quite matches the change in perspective you feel when you watch a player turning out for a team you support.
I think the “lesser” games may be more so for the neutral supporter. With the exception of newcomers Italy, all teams have shown the ability to bring a championship contender down to earth by raising their game for an encounter which has a history to it. That’s often where Grand Slams are lost, rather than in the apparent big clashes where players are more motivated and focused.
That’s one of the reasons I would doubt Spiro’s assertion that either SA or NZ would dominate the 6N if they were playing in it. Both are excellent teams with fine rugby cultures and would be clear championship contenders, probably even favourites, every year, if we take for granted all the practical considerations are assumed away.
You get one chance every year to play the opposition. It can do funny things to a player’s game when he realizes that the campaign is slipping away with only 20 minutes to go in a match you are supposed to win. You can’t make amends against the same team later in the season, it’s all on the line in the game you are playing now. That’s a situation NZ has faced in the World Cup and the team hasn’t always risen to the challenge. The home-and-away format adds to that unpredictability because most players will be in stadiums they don’t see very often. It’s easy to tell your team to go out and silence the crowd but a difficult proposition when the home crowd do get behind their team and the clock is ticking down.
That’s not to denigrate the Tri-Nations in any way. It’s a competition which puts three of the best rugby teams – often the top three in the world – against each other. There have been some fantastic matches in that tournament with a high standard of play. It is a different beast, however, so we ought to be careful about assuming that results there would transfer easily across to the 6N.
On another matter, I don’t understand why a large playing base or a wealthy national union should automatically translate to success on the pitch as Spiro argues it should do for England. I think it denigrates our game to think that those ought to be key, influential factors. Brazil is hardly the richest footballing nation but no-ones thinks they should always be knocked over by wealthier European teams. Australia is a prime example of a country which demonstrates sporting prowess across a range of sports without the funding or player base on offer in other countries. Surely in sport we can praise the importance of qualities like the will to win, and push for excellence, rather than reducing everything to a numbers game. Some of this can be coached but we give coaches too much credit if we assume they can work their magic in any circumstances.
We should perhaps be a little careful when we read what Spiro writes about the English team because he went on record in one of his books – which I thought was a great read about the game – predicting that no England team would ever win the World Cup. I regard his prediction that SA and NZ would dominate the 6N competition in the same light.
February 5th 2010 @ 7:44am
Wavell Wakefield said | February 5th 2010 @ 7:44am | Report comment
England have won the most Grand Slams (12). Methinks Spiro does not know his European rugby.
February 5th 2010 @ 9:44am
pothale said | February 5th 2010 @ 9:44am | Report comment
Course he does. He’s playing to the choir and plucking their chords.
just need to stop singing along.
February 5th 2010 @ 9:56am
pothale said | February 5th 2010 @ 9:56am | Report comment
Now O’Callaghan has dropped out along with Ferris and O’Driscoll is nursing an injury.
Elissalde has just dropped out, to add to Barcella and others for France.
Rees has now joined Jenkins in the injury list for the Welsh front row.
Was it something in the water this week?
England? millions of players. They’re definitely going to win it.
February 5th 2010 @ 3:28pm
BigAl said | February 5th 2010 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
Thanks for the heads-up on ESPN, Spiro, although it came too late. I had just renewed my Setanta subscription unaware they would not show the 6 Nations.
These are not good times for rugby’s television audience. The Super 14 is available only on Fox Sports. Pay-TV take-up in Australia is stuck on about 30 per cent i.e. seven in every 10 Australian homes do not have subscription television,
The 6 Nations will be shown live on ESPN’s HD channel, 201, with replays on 508. A great many Foxtel subscribers do not have access to channel 201. Until a month ago, I was in that position. The apartment complex I was living in was not wired up for IQ boxes and it never will be. I can get 201 now and will sit up to watch the England-Wales match, but it’s sad that rugby has moved from mainstream to niche in just a few years.
France will win the 6 Nations. Bet on it.
February 5th 2010 @ 9:59pm
pothale said | February 5th 2010 @ 9:59pm | Report comment
“but it’s sad that rugby has moved from mainstream to niche in just a few years.”
In Australia only.