Ireland’s hopes ended by 23-20 loss to Scotland
By AP, 21 Mar 2010 AP is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Ireland, Rugby Union, Scotland, Six Nations
Ireland’s faint hopes of retaining the Six Nations rugby title evaporated with a 23-20 defeat to Scotland on Saturday.
Ireland needed to beat Scotland by a healthy margin at Croke Park to have any chance of overhauling France at the top of the standings but couldn’t convert large amounts of possession and territory into points.
Ireland fought back from 10-17 down to twice level but Dan Parks kicked his fifth penalty with two minutes left to give Scotland their first win in this season’s tournament.
Ireland outscored Scotland by two tries to one but two missed kicks by flyhalf Jonathan Sexton cost the home side the chance of winning the Triple Crown to put pressure on France.
© AP 2012Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- France turns to Parra and Trinh-Duc
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (7)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (202)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- Ireland, Rugby Union, Scotland, Six Nations
Ora said | March 21st 2010 @ 8:07am | Report comment
Noticeable more by ones absence hmmmmmm
Justin said | March 21st 2010 @ 8:11am | Report comment
Wow – Australia were absolutely slammed on here for losing to Scotland at Murrayfield.
I wonder of the Irish will cop much for losing at home to the same team?????
Ora said | March 21st 2010 @ 8:16am | Report comment
Yes funny that hence my comment above, one very vocal contributor who is missing
Pothale said | March 21st 2010 @ 9:01am | Report comment
You do enjoy your helpng of Schadenfreud, don’t you, Ora?
Eat up there and get your fill.
Ora said | March 21st 2010 @ 9:30am | Report comment
Oh you got me there big boy
Pothale said | March 21st 2010 @ 5:26pm | Report comment
Too easy and predictable. Did you watch the game?
Wavell Wakefield said | March 23rd 2010 @ 1:42am | Report comment
D’oh! But Australia is a SH SUPERPOWER!
Harry said | March 21st 2010 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Congrats to the Scots who have shown for the 2nd time this season that teams around about 10th in the world can knock over top 5 teams on their day.
Really its only New Zealand that have clear dominance over many countries – the only exceptions being SA (at the moment obviously) and France – for a brief while Australia had it over them (early 90′s and 99-02) but certainly not lately.
Pothale said | March 21st 2010 @ 9:04am | Report comment
Seconded, Harry. Full marks to Scotland, they deserved it on the day, and were the smarter team.
Congrats to France as well, easily worthy Slam wiiners.
We’ll just have to wait until next year.
Roll on the play-offs and the Heineken.
Viscount Crouchback said | March 21st 2010 @ 9:57am | Report comment
Excellent performance by Scotland. Their lineout is surely the surprise of the tournament. Who knew that Kellock was so good? I wonder if the key to confronting Ireland is simply to select one’s best willowy jumper – a Kellock or Kennedy or Croft – and try to stop their ball st source. Because when you stop the Irish lineout, you basically stop their whole game. They don’t have a scrum and their multi-phase attack is distinctly lame. Today was the same old story – every time they try to play an expansive game, their basic skills fall apart. It’s been a continual theme since WC2007.
I must say, though, the Six Nations as a tournament has been fairly uninspiring. No one in the southern hemisphere ought to be losing any sleep. If the IRB imposes the new ruck interpretations in June (as they surely will), then we are likely to see some northern bottoms spanked.
Wavell Wakefield said | March 22nd 2010 @ 8:11pm | Report comment
Is Kellock that good, VC? He had a very good game, and well done to him for that, but when has he ever done that before? I know that he is highly rated in Scotland, but his all-round game is so malnourished that I wonder if he was English would he be getting the same sort of criticisms that Borthwick faces?
Also, one has to remember that Kellock plays in the same pack as Murray. When you have a prop like Murray you could basically play whoever you want at lock because the scrum will always be beastly. It’s no coincidence that Moray Low struggled badly in the Autumn. To that extent I don’t think many teams could afford to play a real twiglet at 5 unless they have the bulk elsewhere.
The Irish attack surprised me. In the first ten minutes they found space and mismatches galore. I thought it was going to be a massacre. Ireland then seemed to crumble, especially Sexton. I wonder if the deterioration in back play was linked to his kicking?
I agree that the 6N was uninspiring, but so was the 3N with SA, and then look how NZ progressed on their European tour. If Wales can improve (as their fans are so consistent in letting the world know that they have the potential to be wonderful) and so can England then next year’s fare should be better. Post-Lions 6Ns are always a little scrappy anyway.
Pothale said | March 21st 2010 @ 5:23pm | Report comment
Uninspiring. Make that crap. The June tours should be cancelled and everybody bar France sent back to Junior class. the rugby was inexcrable. The new interpretations were stupidly reinforced midway in the tournament resulting in pedantic old SH refs endlessly whistling their way through the games.
The level of ambition of some of the teams on field was awful. England were leaden plodders who still can’t find their way out of a paper bag. Only the Second Coming has had more fanfares in media. They embarrassed Norrthern rugby this season with their lack of progress.
Italy’s defence has improved apparently. Enough said.
Scotland’s players stayed on the pitch after the game celebrating their win and getting team pictures taken. They played well, except but for Dan Parks, they’d be nowhere. And some of the Scottish commentators seemed to have forgotten they were celebrating not getting the wooden spoon by coming second last.
Wales said they finished the tournament on a high through beating Italy 33-10. Dear Lord – what has Warren Gatland brought them to?
Sam said | March 21st 2010 @ 9:10pm | Report comment
Lets be honest. The best team won the competition. Did Ireland really deserve the triple crown? I wouldn’t be super negative, seems like everyone got what they deserved, more or less. The June internationals will be interesting, but I’m looking forward to them if only for the NZ Maori matches!
pothale said | March 22nd 2010 @ 2:10am | Report comment
Who’s not being honest, Sam? France were the deserved winners – no question. It’s the performance of the other teams that is up for debate.
Did Ireland really deserve the Triple Crown? Your use of the word ‘really’ implies that they didn’t; though I’m not sure deserve is the right word to use anyway.
On the basis of the game they played yesterday, they didn’t merit it. In advance of the game, I would have said they were odds on to win it. However, a couple of the players today admitted to being distracted by the occasion – last match at Croke Park, blah, blah – which is disgraceful. The whole Croke Park issue has been so overblown with not just media climbing all over it, but Kidney as well during the week in the lead-up to the match. I’m surprised because he is normally so taciturn and neutral about occasions that he doesn’t let external factors distract from the main objective.
Ireland have plenty of work to do before they head south. The Barbarians match in Thomond Park will at least give them time to re-gel before they meet with Australia and New Zealand and the Maori.
Wavell Wakefield said | March 21st 2010 @ 8:36pm | Report comment
‘England were leaden plodders who still can’t find their way out of a paper bag. Only the Second Coming has had more fanfares in media. They embarrassed Norrthern rugby this season with their lack of progress.’
You do tend to angle a bit of spite in the direction of England when your boys have had their noses bloodied, pothale. Not only that but yours is a vary shallow ‘analysis’. Personally, I think that the game against France offers grounds for positivity.
pothale said | March 21st 2010 @ 10:33pm | Report comment
Only cos I genuinely expected much more of them, WW. I think NH rugby benefits from a powerful England, more than it does from French ascendancy.
But a few days will no doubt temper my judgement.
Let me be clear, Ireland didn’t deserve to win yesterday, Scotland wanted it more.
I am surprised at the lack of commentary outside of Irish media on the manner and effect of the introduction of the new interpretations. Maybe – as VC stated some weeks ago – Ireland were the only team likely to suffer greatly at the new emphasis.
Certainly penalties have had a big impact on the outcome of some games this season. And many of those penalties are as a result of the new interpretations.
Of the France/England game, England should certainly take more from it. I thought we would see a swashbuckling France light up the stadium since they had already officially won the tournament before the match started. Huge credit to England for not letting them score – I’m trying to remember when was the last time France won a game on penalties only.
Wavell Wakefield said | March 21st 2010 @ 10:49pm | Report comment
‘England were leaden plodders who still can’t find their way out of a paper bag. Only the Second Coming has had more fanfares in media. They embarrassed Norrthern rugby this season with their lack of progress.’
You do tend to angle a bit of spite in the direction of England when your boys have had their noses bloodied, pothale. Not only that but yours is a vary shallow ‘analysis’. Personally, I think that the game against France offers grounds for positivity
pothale said | March 21st 2010 @ 10:55pm | Report comment
Only cos I genuinely expected much more of them, WW. I think NH rugby benefits from a powerful England, more than it does from French ascendancy.
But a few days will no doubt temper my judgement.
Let me be clear, Ireland didn’t deserve to win yesterday, Scotland wanted it more.
I am surprised at the lack of commentary outside of Irish media on the manner and effect of the introduction of the new interpretations. Maybe – as VC stated some weeks ago – Ireland were the only team likely to suffer greatly at the new emphasis.
Certainly penalties have had a big impact on the outcome of some games this season. And many of those penalties are as a result of the new interpretations.
Of the France/England game, England should certainly take more from it. I thought we would see a swashbuckling France light up the stadium since they had already officially won the tournament before the match started. Huge credit to England for not letting them score – I’m trying to remember when was the last time France won a game on penalties only.
Wavell Wakefield said | March 21st 2010 @ 11:05pm | Report comment
But what did you really expect from a side missing some key players and with an entirely new backline? I expected three wins and no more. I see it this way, pothale: the English had no lineout due to the absence of Croft and Borthwick and the scrummage was refereed the way Lawrence refereed the 1st Lions test. Effectively, England had no real platform and yet their backs looked far more threatening. And let’s not forget that this was a scratch backline. I firmly believe that the inclusion of Sheridan, Shaw and Croft would have altered the forward battle, which in turn would have affected the play of the backs.
France offered nothing, as they have done apart from 50 minutes against Italy. That isn’t bias on my part, simply an observation, and the same observation I made about SA in the most recent 3N. That style of rugby will not work indefinitely, and I think that is why there is a sour taste in the mouth of the average punter, just as our 3N brethren seemed slightly turned off by what they saw in the 3N with SA.
England now know that if they want to run the ball they have to start Flood, and that Tindall is a necessity. Foden looked sprightly and extremely secure under the high ball, and the back three complimented each other. That is something to build on, as is the fact that the side never conceded more than 20 points. The only side in the 6N to do so, I believe (off the top of my head). If the set piece can be improved and the backline plays more together then things might be on the up.
pothale said | March 21st 2010 @ 11:44pm | Report comment
Fair comment on England.
See – I’m changing my acid view already……
Wavell Wakefield said | March 22nd 2010 @ 12:31am | Report comment
Don’t be fazed by ol’ Will Self here, pothale. If you think England are a disgrace, then fair enough. You wouldn’t be the first to say so, nor the last. The way I see it is this – who has world class talent? Ireland, Wales and France. Not England. Has England looked badly beaten in any game over the past season? Not once. Is the English team inexperienced? Yes. Are there signs of improvement? Yes and no. I’m not dancing on the street, but I don’t think there’s any reason to be too upset either. I’d be more concerned were the side merely trying to slug it out up front and drop the occasional goal or garryowen – as we are seeing with France. IMO it is easier to tighten up certain aspects of forward play rather than introduce a free-flowing brand.
This summer is a big summer for all NH teams, as far as I’m concerned: France will meet a SH replica, and so it will be a battle of the pack and the boot. For a side looking at the result over performance France must win. England will head to NZ and Australia hoping to consolidate the set piece, develop depth and improve the execution of their running game. England don’t have any real pressure on them to win the tests. And Ireland… well, that’s your territory.
Parisien said | March 21st 2010 @ 10:19pm | Report comment
Its funny what a difference winning or losing makes to one’s outlook.
I thoroughly enjoyed the tournament this year and agree with Sam that everyone got what they deserved. The Scots could have beaten Wales and England so will be thrilled with beating Ireland at Croke Park and showing a bit more than just brave defence. The Irish will be disappointed, they’ve dropped down from last years highs. Talented bunch but too many mistakes and can’t tie the ends together. I suspect they are reaching the end of their cycle. I feel sorry for the Welsh : produced some positve moments and tried to play, despite all the injuries, but still all over the place and lacking cohesion. The English produced their best match at the end I felt but it still wasn’t enough against a French team scared to win. I’ll be quite happy for the English to stay with Johnson and continue developing as they are: very slowly. The French were deserved Gland slam winners, with a very strong pack, good backs, plenty of depth, and finally Lievremont has got a squad of players together that can grind out consecutive victories. The best in Europe and shaping nicely for 2011.
Wavell Wakefield said | March 21st 2010 @ 10:56pm | Report comment
‘The English produced their best match at the end I felt but it still wasn’t enough against a French team scared to win. I’ll be quite happy for the English to stay with Johnson and continue developing as they are: very slowly.’
That’s ironic considering it took three seasons for Lievremont to fashion anything resembling consistency. I think had the rain not come down that England would have fashioned a big score. As it is they had three clear cut upportunities and France had none. They spent very little time in the English 22, and as we saw in the earlier matches the backs do not seem comfortable with each other at all. They simply did not threaten once apart from a single Marty break. Aside from the Italy game this French team has relied on the pack and kicking, and as SA have shown us, that is a dangerous existence. This side has performed nowhere near the quality we saw during the test versus SA, and were I French I’d be a little anxious. Tactically the England coaches were spot on: there was always had players deep for the French kicks, and the French midfield was rendered invisible. Playing like they did last night will not be enough for a WC challenge.
Colin N said | March 22nd 2010 @ 12:59am | Report comment
“The best in Europe and shaping nicely for 2011.”
If that’s how France play under pressure then they won’t challenge in the world cup. The problem is that they play a kicking game, but they don’t have a kicking fly-half, nor do they have a kicking back-three in general (hence how England were able to counter-attack regularly).
This is also when you take into account that France dominated the set piece and had an edge in the contact area.
It’s also hard to know where England are at the moment. England were the better side last night, not aided by the referee, but can they now build on this?
England have a problem with the back five. With the absence of Borthwick, England got quicker ball at the breakdown, but suffered in the lineout and I’m not convinced by the back-row. Although I’m a big fan, Easter seems like a declining force, Moody did well last night, but I would like to see Armitage, and can Croft or Haskell put in consistent performances?
Wavell Wakefield said | March 22nd 2010 @ 1:14am | Report comment
I thought Easter was fierce last night, Colin, but then wet weather probably suits his pace. I thought Worsley was pretty sluggish, as he was on the Lions tour, and Moody, despite putting in the occasional big shift, is just not a 7. Shaw was putting himself about before he went off, but Deacon simply isn’t in his mould. The sooner Lawes develops the better. I’m glad he’s getting a game at 4 today.
Colin N said | March 22nd 2010 @ 2:30am | Report comment
“The sooner Lawes develops the better. I’m glad he’s getting a game at 4 today.”
Have you been watching it? It’s been a super game – 20-14 to Northampton at half-time.
I agree about Deacon, he’s very sluggish, but I thought Palmer had an excellent game last night.
Wavell Wakefield said | March 22nd 2010 @ 2:59am | Report comment
It has been a good game, and a lovely day for it too.
Deacon does a job, but he doesn’t have the athleticism of Lawes or Shaw. I thought Palmer was sound, but I think he’s a bit catchweight still. Pierre and Nallet are rugged old carthorses and Palmer isn’t a dominant force.
Parisien said | March 22nd 2010 @ 4:27am | Report comment
I’m not saying France doesn’t have room for improvement. They weren’t great last night (but still won), but Colin, for you to say that England were the better side last night!? They had a good first 15 minutes and last 15 minutes, but it looked to me like France dominated or at least controlled the match the rest of the time, and were clearly deserved winners, even if it was without panache.
Colin N said | March 22nd 2010 @ 4:55am | Report comment
England were the better side. You could quantify ‘better’ in various different ways, but England were more threatening throughout the game, dominated pretty much the whole of the second-half, by countering and keeping ball in hand, and I can’t remember France ever getting near the England 22 in the last 40. I think the only time they perhaps did was off Foden’s quick throw which resulted in a scrum.
France only controlled play for the last 20 of the first-half, whereby the rain – as pointed out – ironically forced England into errors. This was the time when France dominated the set piece and took advantage of it.
Wavell Wakefield said | March 22nd 2010 @ 5:49am | Report comment
France dominated 50 minutes of the match! Did you just watch the highlights, or have you not ever played the game? Honestly, are you not a big rugby fan? France only played with panache versus Italy (for 40 minutes), or did I miss something in every single 6N game I saw France play?
http://www.scrum.com/sixnations/rugby/match/94957.html
Parisien said | March 21st 2010 @ 11:16pm | Report comment
Pothale: I think France haven’t been swashbuckling for a while, although they certainly dazzled against Italy, but last night was always going to be about grinding out a victory due to the rain, fear of an opponent who beat them well last year, England playing better than expected, the tension of the moment, fear/nervousness at seeking the Grand Slam, among other reasons. Winning against England with penalties was both ironic and satisfying given how England has often won in this manner.
France has achieved some pretty good victories these last nine months over New Zealand in New Zealand, South Africa, Ireland the previous 6N champions, England, the old foe… only Australia is missing from their trophies.
I think the group will take a lot of confidence from this after all the chopping and changing and mixed results of Lievremont’s first two years at the helm, and will continue to grow. They’ve also developed good depth in all positions: Barcella, Picamoles, Clerc, Heymans and other key players were all missing last night. It augurs well for the future. French supporters are smiling…
Parisien said | March 21st 2010 @ 11:20pm | Report comment
And English supporters are hurting.
Wavell Wakefield said | March 21st 2010 @ 11:23pm | Report comment
That’s probably hard to gauge from France. Actually the general response seems to be very positive. Most supporters feel that a limited side won, and that their side played the better rugby, which isn’t generally something an English fan would be able to say. From here on in England can only go up whereas France can only go down. Will that pressure lead France to be even more conservative and narrow, or will it allow them to try and embrace more positive tactics? We will find out this summer.
pothale said | March 21st 2010 @ 11:47pm | Report comment
And so endeth this 6 Nations.
Go in peace to love and serve the oval ball.
Wavell Wakefield said | March 22nd 2010 @ 12:32am | Report comment
I’m quite pleased it’s over to be honest. The whole thing was a bit too drawn out and the rugby was hit and miss. Now onto the HC. Good times.
el_Pajovic said | March 22nd 2010 @ 2:00am | Report comment
Ireland are pretty much where I though. SA,NZ,Fra on one level, Aus, Ire on another. Notwithstanding this, horrible display, Sexton needs to sort himself out, front row were a disgrace, but maybe the kick in the arse the Irish needed…..As food for thought goes, this is a banquet. Not enough has been made of the French debacle, so maybe now they will focus on their front row. Court and Buckley need game time. I suggest they leave Hayes behind for the summer tour to have a breather and then assess their options at 1 and 3.
Looking forward to some real club rugby with the HC back on. I understand that the stricter interpretation at the breakdown won’t be in force for the HC? Why is this?
pothale said | March 22nd 2010 @ 2:01am | Report comment
Hmmmm…. news today that does not augur well for Leinster. Both O’Driscoll (6 weeks) and Darcy(unspecified) are likely to be out.
Berne and McFadden are not going to be good enough for taking on Clermont.
el_Pajovic said | March 22nd 2010 @ 2:07am | Report comment
Drico is out for 6 weeks. D’Arcy’s groin strain, this coupled with Fitzgeralds absence makes it look a little unobtainable. Sextons form with the boot won’t help either….
pothale said | March 22nd 2010 @ 7:13am | Report comment
Drico?
You’re not Ross O’Carroll-Kelly in disguise, are you, Pajovic?
These bloody interpretations are driving me insane. I cannot fathom why they would not continue with them across the leagues and the H Cup.
I’ve never seen such an inept introduction of a basic set of reffing changes – as predicted months ago would happen. If this was a business, Paddy O’Brien would have been fired by now. They flag them in plenty of time for the S14, (or plan them together with SANZAR according to various media reports) and give the teams time to practise before the season starts. Then they bring them in mid-competition into NH during test matches with no warning or preparation time. Sheer stupidity.
But now that it’s done, they must stick with them, and stop getting only SH refs to enforce them cos a) they’re too whistle happy, and too eager to show off their new toys and b) they’ll continue to be this way, until NH refs start doing it.