Brain power, not raw power, will be required for Farrell’s Ireland to adapt

THIS weekend didn’t teach us anything remarkably novel about a sport that has been in existence for over a century, although it did reveal much about the accelerating decline of the human race. From the horrendous abuse of individuals online to derogatory comments from some paid to offer their professional opinions, one often struggles to understand the mentality of those who permanently teeter upon a grenade pin of self-righteous condemnation.

Ireland lost a rugby match; they have literally lost hundreds of them down the years; they have won hundreds of them too; such is the sporting life.

There is no longer a gauge to measure the temperature of the frenzy; it is either too hot or too cold; nor can one moderate its flow – it gushes in a torrent which at times is too overwhelming too bear.

Conservative

The expectations, of even the conservative variety, were that Ireland would win their three home games this season and perhaps challenge for a Six Nations title.

A bonus-point win against Grand Slam champions Wales confirmed that this scenario would indeed occur; but only after a week of intense hand-wringing across the seven days that separated the opening two games.

The elasticity of emotion will lurch once more as the country totters from Twickenham towards the expected trouncing of hapless Italy.

From there, Ireland have a sporting chance of winning in round five against a side who have been given cheap head starts in their main two challenges thus far.

Yet if Ireland offer another slipshod, sleepy-eyed defensive effort in Paris, then the game will be up before it begins. But what game are Ireland playing? And who should be playing it?

Much of the narrative has focused on the fact that England are just a bigger and heavier team than Ireland.

This might explain two successive reverses but, if this is the case, how then does one explain 2018?

And how is it possible to delineate a decisive power shift when the Irish team that were posted on duty at 3pm last Sunday weighed on average at least a kilogramme heavier than the opposition?

Ireland are not alone in this hemisphere in deeming themselves physically inferior and they have not been alone in searching for the best way to offset the deficiency; yet far too often, the price of seeking a sustainable manner of playing has been sacrificed upon the altar of immediate success.

Just as Declan Kidney turned away from expansion in order to deliver a Slam, so too did Joe Schmidt abandon his core principles in order to repeat the feat.

Sure, the country got drunk on success but the fare was often unwatchable; and its legacy was in evidence in a poor contest in London. Average kicks once wrought return but now less so. Powerful carriers in the backs and the forwards who know no other way when halted, unable or unsure to risk the uplifting or unusual in attack.

Ireland, so used to having the right people in the right places at the right time, could once bore opponents to death with their rugby. But it was winning rugby. And that was all that mattered.

No more than Gatland’s Wales or Jones’ England, the bigger picture clouded subtle nuances; we remember here plaintively wondering whether Ireland, for one example, might indulge another playmaker outside Johnny Sexton (below) but a nation indulging in the instant demand for success dared not listen.

Of course, the ultimate irony of Ireland’s contemporary approach was that, even though they often weighed in as the heavier fighter in the contest, they still attempted to deploy a plan which often bordered on the sado-masochistic.

Legacy

Last Sunday was the enduring legacy of an international side who have simply forgotten how to play.

England are not necessarily the template; aside from their gifted 14 points, much of their play was uninspiring but their coach’s pedigree might offer a hint for Ireland, should they wish to take it.

When Eddie Jones coached Japan, he focused on how they could ensure his side were fitter than any other side and so manage to manoeuvre the ball away from the superior strengths of their opponents.

That is the key to this game, after all; if it were not, William Webb Ellis would have chosen to run head first into his school canteen wall. Ireland will change players, for sure, but have they the will to change their play? More to the point, will the great and the grand of the expectant public have the patience to wait while they do so?