Proposed amendments to future lions touring schedules.

With the announcement that AUS will withhold their top 25 players for the duration of the dirt-tracker matches of the upcoming Lions series its clear the age of competitiveness at that level is at an end.
The last tour saw the dirt-trackers undefeated, with even the toughest challenges a one sided affair and this tour will be no different. Only the NZ Maori will ever provide a game where victory is uncertain.

The ARU made it clear that whilst they are withholding these 25 players from any Lions fixtures, some may be allowed to play in conflicting SR matches at the time. This gives out one signal.... “we are not withholding our players for fitness, training or conditioning purposes... rather it’s to withhold the lions from playing top class opposition and developing as a side”.

PDV said the very thing in his autobiography and stated it was a key aspect to victory amongst others.

Australia want to win the series, South Africa said the same in the last tour. There is no point arguing about the injustice of it all as it won’t make a difference and we will still be unprepared for it all come the 1st test in 2013 and beyond.

Therefore, since we won’t get top class opposition amongst the 3N domestic sides, lets tear up the tour and develop our own schedule. Perhaps we should conduct a tour more like the below.

Europe
Match 1 - Lions vs. Rabo Select (Murrayfield).
Match 2 - Lions vs. Premiership Select (Twickenham).
Match 3 – Lions vs. Barbarians (Aviva).
Match 4 – Lions vs. Italy/Argentina (Millennium)

Australia (example)

Match 5 – Lions vs. Super Rugby North Select (Reds & NSW)
Match 6 – Lions vs. Super Rugby South Select (Brumbies, Rebels & Force)

Match 7 - Test 1
Match 8 – Test 2
Match 9 – Australia A.
March 10 – Test 3.

The above would have a number of impacts.

Reduces the 8 week tour to 1 month which will help with player morale.
Gives more people in the UK the chance of seeing the lions live and generating home interest in the brand rather than having to spend £5-10K on a once in a lifetime tour.
Tour affordability increases for would-be fans from the home unions... 1 month and 6 matches is still a great trip but perhaps half the cost of the current ventures.
Provides the players and coaches 4 genuine competitive matches even before we set foot in the SH.
Adds at least 4 additional match day revenues to the coffers of the home unions.
The matches vs. the Rabo & Premiership select would give players not selected to prove the coaches wrong and put their hands up as ideal replacement.
The combining of the SR franchises will strengthen the sides choosing “the best from the rest”.

The 3N sides will not like the proposals as they will want all the matches at home to benefit from the revenue generated from the visiting fans.... however they cannot complain about this as the relationship should be a two-way street. They cannot demand all the revenue generated by the Lions tour and then create a one-sided event which only the touring fans will enjoy.

I understand it will kill the traditional tours for the fans... but in reality that died in 01. The SA 97 tour was the last real lions tour in terms of genuine dirt-tracker matches and what is most important is the tests, the lions as a competitive brand.

Many people in the SH like the Lions tours as in the end the Lions almost always lose, they prepare the hosting nation for a tough Rugby Championship (which as per the last 3 series, the hosts went on to win), it adds millions of $$$ to their coffers and gives them bragging rights over us for eternity (or at least 12 years).

But if we look at the team on paper we should be winning near all tours. On paper we should have won in 93, 01 and 09 but there are so many difficulties the team has to overcome that it’s become a near impossible task.

I am a big lions fan and managed to realise one of my rugby dreams by watching them on tour in 09 (albeit only by chance given I moved to SA). By re-addressing the situation as per above I think we will be able to tip the balance more onto a level playing field and probably lengthen the appeal of the lions as a concept which in the professional era has proved difficult.
Without that I fear that the continual series losses, the what-ifs and the lure of the RWC as the genuine goal for players will end what is still a glorious tradition in rugby and in any sport.

I'm bored of the Lions and they haven't been picked yet

NZ did it in a probables vs. possibles.. I wonder how much that would have on team unity however?

I have to say I am not a fan of this solution - but equally I am unable to come up with my own solution to a genuine problem.

I still live in hope of being able to accompany part of the next lions tour. Travelling round the various rugby communities of NZ following a proper rugby tour has been a life long ambition. However professionalism has all but killed the "proper" rugby tour. One of the main draws of a Lions tour for me is the squad gelling together across a tour, with huge matches against the best provincial sides. Unexpected players get the chance to shine, the dirt-trackers lay down a marker by beating tough opposition etc.

Host Unions and tourist Boards love the cash generated by the Lions, but somehow it has to be fitted within the ever increasing schedules. Thus the Lions tour overlaps the SR season and we get the mismatches of professionals against semi-pros. You just have to look at the midweek matches on Englands tour to SA last summer to see where that is heading. This sort of tour then loses all appeal and gets condensed even more.

I can see the Lions fading into non-existence especially when you consider that the only decent tour in the pro age was the first - and in many ways that was an amateur tour populated by people being paid.

Australia does not have the rugby depth to host a Lions tour; SCW (and before him SGH to a lesser degree) did untold damage to the concept of the Lions and in 2009 we saw the start of the process to remove all good players from warm up games.

If the unions want the Lions to continue they need to make sure that it is treated properly. If they cannot do that the the Lions should be allowed to die with some grace and dignity.

LondonTiger

Thats my whole point. Without action like the above the Lions will surely die as a concept.
At the moment its grossly balanced towards host nations.

In the end I still think the Lions can survive as a test series... but as a dirt-tracker touring side I think its days are numbered... and if so how will the players get any sort of togetherness?

I can see the Lions Tour being reduced down about half a dozen games.

Probably going to end up as something like:

Lions v Barbarians
Mid Week Game
1st Test
Mid Week Game
2nd Test
3rd Test

There is massive interest in people flying out to Oz to see the Test games but in comparison there are much much less people willing to go see Lions v Waratahs or Lions v New South Wales/Queensland Select XV.

The lions get to pick the cream from four sides so it's not unrealistic for opposing teams to look for a leveller

Wendy of course - the big leveller though is that the get to play together week in and week out.

Thats the same way that we've seen Munster beat Australia and Leicester beat South Africa in last few years.

yet despite this the record is dismal and its not purely down to the SH being superior.

The lions on paper were superior to ther 93, 01 and 09 host nations. Yet they lost... and if you go through history that concept will come up again and again.

red_stag wrote:Wendy of course - the big leveller though is that the get to play together week in and week out.

Thats the same way that we've seen Munster beat Australia and Leicester beat South Africa in last few years.

Agree, and I think it's becoming increasingly important in the pro era when they can train together full time. The club sides beating midweek touring sides used to be a rarity, but in recent years you can add (I think) Ospreys beating Aus, Saracens beating South Africa and Leicester beating the Maori. And that's with the club sides often depleted by internationals being away.

The 3 stand out moments of the 97 tour:

3) Guscott's winning DG
2) Gibbs and Os Du Randt
1) Bentos try

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/fleetwood/videos/john-bentleys-great-1997-lions-try-3227.html

The saturday side had lost to Northern Transvaal. The midweek side were losing but this try turned things around.
without proper midweek fixtures we lose this kind of thing

LondonTiger wrote:The 3 stand out moments of the 97 tour:

3) Guscott's winning DG
2) Gibbs and Os Du Randt
1) Bentos try

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/fleetwood/videos/john-bentleys-great-1997-lions-try-3227.html

The saturday side had lost to Northern Transvaal. The midweek side were losing but this try turned things around.
without proper midweek fixtures we lose this kind of thing

I agree... but my argument is that those days are now gone. 97 was still professionalism in its infancy and many top players were present in that North Transvaal side. Won't happen again.

fa0019 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:The 3 stand out moments of the 97 tour:

3) Guscott's winning DG
2) Gibbs and Os Du Randt
1) Bentos try

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/fleetwood/videos/john-bentleys-great-1997-lions-try-3227.html

The saturday side had lost to Northern Transvaal. The midweek side were losing but this try turned things around.
without proper midweek fixtures we lose this kind of thing

I agree... but my argument is that those days are now gone. 97 was still professionalism in its infancy and many top players were present in that North Transvaal side. Won't happen again.

I believe it could if it were limited to 1-2 midweek games. This Lions Tour play Western Force, Reds, Queenland/NSW, Brumbies, Waratahs and Rebels.

However if you had a warm up games against Argentina/Barbarians before the tour followed by a warm up game against the NZ Maori and one midweek game against a committed team I think that you could rekindle the magic.

Less is more.

The sad thing about the Bentos try is that Northern Transvaal/ the Bulls wouldnt have put out a full team capable of winning, so that try in the video against Transvaal wouldn't have had the same meaning today.

I can see a situation occuring similar to the original post, a couple of warmups at home, followed by a baba's game out there and a couple of midweek games.
The days of a proper tour are over, The Queensland's President's XV getting smashed doesnt help anyone. A shame, but the days of 2 months of drinking around a country with some rugby/fighting the locals thrown in has gone.

Stag

I agree in that we won't get any competition from playing the 2nd strings of the SR franchises and should rather play combined sides.

With 25 players gone (mainly from the Reds and Waratahs) it means we will only likely to get competitive games off the Rebels and the Force.... who are 2 of the 3 weakest sides in SR.

The Rebels match occurs inbetween the 1st and 2nd test so its a dead rubber and won't help the Lions prepare.

The match vs the Force is on the 5th June. They have a massive game on the 9th vs the Waratahs so they will in all probability rest most of their top players for that game which they will see as more important.

So the nightmare situation may very well occur... We will play the force on the 5th, the weakest AUS SR outfit who also lost to the Kings on the weekend and they will additionally play a mainly 2nd XV.

0-100 anyone? How much good will that do the Lions for their prep. Nothing.... perhaps even negatively.

How about warm up games versus each 6 nation side where the Lions don't include any members of the the 6 Nation side they are playing. Spice it up a bit and then finish off with games v Italy and France for measure

We'll have no fecker left to play

Lions is looking out of date as a concept now (I appreciate it's the 'pinnacle of a player's career' and chance for the fans to have 'the trip of a lifetime' blah de blah...)

I get the idea of a Celtic Lions, or a British Lions, or a 6N/NH Lions, but British & Irish seems to just deliberately exclude France and Italy.

I agree with some of the earlier points. If it remains in its current format then ditch the midweek, dirt-tracker games, just play four warm ups in Cardiff, Edinburgh, Dublin and 'HQ' and then the tests overseas.

As long as the Lions is profitable is will never be an out of date concept.

I thought the Lions were meant to be a touring side hence not play in the home countries?

red_stag wrote:As long as the Lions is profitable is will never be an out of date concept.

Good point - and I bet they'd make a ton more cash playing 4 warm up games in the UK, than playing in front of a crowd of 500 against Waratah 3rds.

whocares wrote:I thought the Lions were meant to be a touring side hence not play in the home countries?

Would the French pay good Euro to watch Lions v France in Paris?

The WRU made a massive deal about how they had to play an extra game in RWC years post RWC because they got no AI tour money.

My idea was to add 4 games in Europe which would sell out certainly (one in each unions stadium) to put money back in their coffers. Then they wouldn't compain so much about insurance costing of tours etc.

Rather the money in our pocket then in our rivals pocket so to speak.

Casartelli wrote:

red_stag wrote:As long as the Lions is profitable is will never be an out of date concept.

Good point - and I bet they'd make a ton more cash playing 4 warm up games in the UK, than playing in front of a crowd of 500 against Waratah 3rds.

Not a hope. It costs thousands to go and watch them play in the southern hemisphere. A lot more money being made now then having a few games in the UK. People would not have same interest in Lions playing Scotland as Lions v Natal or Lions v Waikato.

red_stag

Difference is... currently the money is generated in the host countries... and none of it gets back to ourselves.
Any money generated at home however will stay at home.

I was at the Lions Argentina match in 05 in Cardiff. It was near a sell out if I recall. The interest would be massive IMO.

red_stag wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

red_stag wrote:As long as the Lions is profitable is will never be an out of date concept.

Good point - and I bet they'd make a ton more cash playing 4 warm up games in the UK, than playing in front of a crowd of 500 against Waratah 3rds.

Not a hope. It costs thousands to go and watch them play in the southern hemisphere. A lot more money being made now then having a few games in the UK. People would not have same interest in Lions playing Scotland as Lions v Natal or Lions v Waikato.

Some quick web based research indicates attendances were between 20,000 and 35,000 at the midweek/provincial games in South Africa in 2009. For a full financial analysis one would need to know how those attendance revenues were divvied up, but I reckon there'd be bigger crowds than that in the home nations capitals - with all the money staying here.

The provincial games in SA weren't that much more expensive then standard games.

I went to the dirttracker matches against WP and also the Emerging Springboks match in Cape Town and both cost r90 a ticket... about £8. Although I bet people who bought tickets in the UK for these matches were charged a shed load more.

Compare that to the price of a ticket for a lions match in the UK... what £50+?

Casartelli wrote:

whocares wrote:I thought the Lions were meant to be a touring side hence not play in the home countries?

Would the French pay good Euro to watch Lions v France in Paris?

I would certainly go and see that - cannot be worst than usual borefest that has become the T14 final. not sure how it would get promoted here as a large majority of the french rugby follower probably ignore the very existence of the Lions. maybe rename it as "rosbif select XV" to make it more appealing

If they reinstated the "Power of 4" anthem they'd be guaranteed sellouts in the UK and Ireland.

Music lovers would flock.

fa0019 wrote:LondonTiger

Thats my whole point. Without action like the above the Lions will surely die as a concept.
At the moment its grossly balanced towards host nations.

In the end I still think the Lions can survive as a test series... but as a dirt-tracker touring side I think its days are numbered... and if so how will the players get any sort of togetherness?

fa I like the idea of altering the Lions schedule but your solution encounters two problems. One that the team suffer from a lack of acclimatisation (particularly important in SA) and two, perhaps the most salient point it doesn't solve your primary complaint ie: that the Lions face the best opposition they can in preparation for a SH test.

If your complaint regards the removal of 25 test players from the provincial sides, how are the Lions to get a better test against AP and Rabo sides having removed around 40 test players from those competitions? Further, whilst a Barbarians side has an appeal they are often worse from a defensive and organisational perspective than the provincial sides which you deride.

Likewise with an Italian test we're already having rather wild claims about Wales v England being a Grand Slam decider. The calibre of the Italian team is respectable but hardly comparative to a seasoned Super 15 side with possibly some bright young stars.

About the only tests the Lions would possibly benefit from pre-tour would be an Argentinian one and a French one barring that I don't see that your solution would solve the problem you identify.

As an aside I would say that frankly I don't have an issue with the withdrawal of test players by countries. Yes it would be nice to have the 25 top rated players there but by no means essential I feel. Further, a Lions tour is about doing the 'impossible' succeeding against the odds. The Lions have a myriad of other issues to address if one wanted them to be on a 'level playing field' as such.

Chjw131

Do you not think a premiership select would be competitive without the top ENG players?
Would this non Lions tour side not be competitive???

Tonga'uiha
Brits
Mujati
Hargreaves
Borthwick
Mafi
Burger
Easter
Claassens
Evans
Strettle
Turner-Hall
Lowe
Hamilton
Murphy

I think the Lions would be very lucky to beat this lot.

LondonTiger wrote:The 3 stand out moments of the 97 tour:

3) Guscott's winning DG
2) Gibbs and Os Du Randt
1) Bentos try

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/fleetwood/videos/john-bentleys-great-1997-lions-try-3227.html

The saturday side had lost to Northern Transvaal. The midweek side were losing but this try turned things around.
without proper midweek fixtures we lose this kind of thing

I think Dawsons try was the stand out moment. You know when he threw the dummy, scored and then celebrated like a football player.

GunsGerms wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:The 3 stand out moments of the 97 tour:

3) Guscott's winning DG
2) Gibbs and Os Du Randt
1) Bentos try

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/fleetwood/videos/john-bentleys-great-1997-lions-try-3227.html

The saturday side had lost to Northern Transvaal. The midweek side were losing but this try turned things around.
without proper midweek fixtures we lose this kind of thing

I think Dawsons try was the stand out moment. You know when he threw the dummy, scored and then celebrated like a football player.

Probably the one moment I've ever seen Joost outdone. Sublime

fa0019 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:The 3 stand out moments of the 97 tour:

3) Guscott's winning DG
2) Gibbs and Os Du Randt
1) Bentos try

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/fleetwood/videos/john-bentleys-great-1997-lions-try-3227.html

The saturday side had lost to Northern Transvaal. The midweek side were losing but this try turned things around.
without proper midweek fixtures we lose this kind of thing

I think Dawsons try was the stand out moment. You know when he threw the dummy, scored and then celebrated like a football player.

Probably the one moment I've ever seen Joost outdone. Sublime

Yep. Joost is probably the best and most exciting player I have even had the privilage to see live. Incredible talent.

He must have been riled by that try. Someone doing a Joost... on Joost. I bet that took a long long time to get over.

The Lions was and is ,and always has been a sum of its parts,4Countries against one Country does`nt work.Especially if the Coach is picked from one of the 4 Countries.
THE first totally successful Lions side was 1971,the All Blacks were starting for them a relative decline.BUT the key factor was the Coach Carwyn James
was an independent Coach.1974 too was in against a Bok side in decline the charm of tours was.
Seeing your local side try to beat a touring side that ended with amateurism and RWCs[mores the pity.
I`m sure a SH side would like to tour the UK every 3 years[non RWC year] and play old style tours.Instead of the current July/Ai`s variety with club games included.
IF the required price was right,mid field game giving fringe players a chance to shine.

emack2

A bit one sided to say the boks were in decline in 74????

76 - Beat NZ 3-1.
75 - Beat FR 2-0.
74 - Beat FR 2-0.
74 - Lost 0-3 to the Lions.
71 - Beat AU 3-0.
70 - Beat NZ 3-1.

The French with Wales the dominant side of the 5N championship. Thats Hardly a side in decline. From what I've been told of the 74 series (I admit I wasn't around at the time) the Lions taught the boks a stiff lesson and developed a strategy which had a lasting effect on the boks.

The 1 amendment I would make is that we insist on having a British and Irish coaching team

fa I'm not saying that side wouldn't pose some sort of competition with the Lions it would. But by arguing the case you defeat your own point. Ie: if that Prem side you feel could beat the Lions with all the relevant internationals removed then why not a provincial SH side? There are plenty of top quality non current internationals playing in S15. Many would argue of a higher general calibre than most NH leagues.

What one has to compare is a side like that with a side like the one that could be selected by the provincial sides.

Chjw131

Well I did suggest we still play collective sides in the original post... i.e. the best of the rest rather than sole franchises (the SR North and SR South idea).

Great post fa0019!

The essence of what you say is correct, but the opposition would be weak. Scratch sides (like the Lions) aren't as competitive as settled teams, so the composite teams proposed would be worth considerably less than the sum of their parts.

Ruby Guby's idea of playing the four B&I nations is a good compromise, except the Lions should have all their players available which would weaken the home sides, and there is no acclimatisation.

Personally I'd prefer an Americas tour with Tests against USA, Canada, and two v Argentina. There is a lot of travelling involved but there would be full committment from the opposition and it would spread the brand to the USA and also manage to give Argentina recognition who currently miss out on the Lions. At least they're in the SH so some acclimatisation would happen.

Should have said relative decline in fact 1965 Bok side was better than the 1970 one.A reliable goal kicker the AB`s would have won both that and 1971
1966 Lions was better than the 1971 side.Boks 1976 a political referee robbed the AB`s sharing the series.When the Ref says "Sorry lads,you`re going home I have to live here" what does it tell you?
Also compare AB and Bok results 1950-69.and 1970-80 fact was the NH coaching had overtaken the SH.
According to Chris Laidlaw the AB`s in 1970 were going to walk it due to there success rate 1966-9.The Boks played 10 man Rugby,solid pack,defence,goal kicking.They had 12 matches to work out any AB trick plays and counter them and they did.
Lions because they were an amalgam of 4 teams also in non -pro period met a week before sailing.
To put that into perspective in 1956 for the Bok tour it was almost on a war footing.Every match was aimed at wearing a touring side down and "spotting" a of key players common.
Colin Meads had his arm deliberately broken by an aimed kick that is fact.Because he had a reputation as a hard even dirty player no one cared he was playing almost one armed versus Lions 1971.
In my mind 1955 Lions were THE Greatest Lions playing a very strong Bok side.BUT for injuries and a reliable goal kicker 1959 would have been won .Arguably 1949 with a reliable AB goal kicker the series would have been halved..
Tours were a thing of attrition the Test side being softened up by the provinces. None more so than 2009 when ALL Bok players were hidden.
Single sides touring over the same period would probably have been as successful as the Lions.

A few thoughts on this

Firstly, I don't agree with home matches, certainly not an excess of them - it worked first time because of the novelty factor, but 4 matches at home every year would just leave people bored of it and kill the mystique. Who would tour to follow a team you can easily see at home? And playing the home nations is probably worse, it would inspire a mood of "my country is better than the others", hardly helpful. The odd one off against France, Baa-baas or similar might be ok.

I'm a bit surprised by the withholding of top player - I would have thought that top teams would relish the opportunity to get one over the Lions, and after all, the SH teams are the ones that lose revenue if the non-Test games die.

One option in the absence of tough provincial opposition is to look for other invited teams, for example the RGs, PIs etc. You could get creative, e.g. IRB XV from the minor nations. But these would have to take place in the destination country, and mixed up with true local opposition, so as to preserve the feeling of a tour.

From the touring party's point of view, they need to ensure the Lions is, and feels neutral. Henry and Woodward both struggled to make neutral selections, and neither of their tours did well. The head coach should be a "neutral", in the sense of having no recent involvement with a national team. Making sure all four countries feature well is important and worth putting out a slightly weaker team (on paper) for.

Out of interest, now that the RGs are in the RC, I wonder if the Lions will ever tour there. Obvious issues atm are Falklands and lack of quality local opposition. But it would be a wonderful country to tour, and from a playing perspective has that intimidating quality that SA and NZ both have and Australia probably doesn't. Could see it happening eventually, but probably not in the next 20 years.

4 week tours are about right, assuming we need to guard against player burn out.

Tue / Sat
Club / Club
Club / Test
Club / Test
Club / Test

simple and easy

The Lions have toured Argentina three times already. Don't see any reason they wouldnt do it again.

I don't agree with your view that the dirt trackers' opposition weakens the Lions test side. How many of the Lions test squad actually play in the mid-week games? If the Lions don't why would the SH nations put in their test players?

The Lions are up against the wall because they're a scratch side without the familiar combinations of their opposition. By all means have your test squad play NH opposition of some substance before they embark on their tour and try out different players there. But just because your mid-week side doesn't face quality opposition does this mean that your Lions test squad are truly hampered in their preparation as the overwhelming majority are not playing those games anyway.

Why should the onus be on the home team to provide the Lions with opposition? Doesn't happen in the June or November tests or World Cups. What's stopping the Lions from organising their own games if they feel they're getting nothing of value in their warm-up matches?

Kia

The first 6 odd matches are dirt-tracker matches in any tour. Outside of the 05 Argentina test there have been no additional warm up matches for the lions in 30+ years.

Teams take time to gel and when selection is tricky we need to find which players are actually in form and which aren't.

I'll give you a good example. That of Shane Byrne and Lee Mears, two recent hookers selected in the 05 1st test and in the 09 1st test respectively.

Both neither star players and their selection would have certainly been a surprise at the beginning of the tour. However when they faced sub-test opposition at the beginning of the tour they played well and scrummaging was relatively easy for the lions.

Their better preceived lineout throwing and ball carrying were a decider in them being chosen over stronger scrummagers and tight play experts such as Thompson and Rees... esp given that in the games prior to the tests scrum time was relatively straightforward.

What happened.... the step up to test match rugby was too great and they were both grossly found out. It certainly cost the lions in points in both matches (perhaps not the result mind)... but thats just one positional example.

Coaches need to see their players in test match environments to see who can make it and who doesn't.

There isn't one of us on here that will carry the flame for some "great" club player who continues to shine in the domestic leagues but near always fails at test level... be it Robbie Freund, Alex Brew, Danny Cipriani, Charlie Hodgson, Keith Earls, Quade Cooper, Pierre Spies etc.

In terms of why should the home teams play their best opposition. Tradition and honour springs to mind.... but then again its a professional game and I don't blame the 3N sides for acting in such a way..... we'd do it.

Hence why I and a few others have argued in this post that perhaps its time for us to cut the series down and organise games prior to the tour to increase match intensity and test match preparation.

I know where you're coming from but that's why selections should be made on test form in the 6N and have your main squad already decided on. Frankly the fringe players for the Lions are their biggest liability. They can often poison the environment because they pack a sad they don't get selected and they hamper combinations even further because they make playing around with selections more likely.

Just take your core 22 squad and have injury cover to call upon from elsewhere. I really don't see much point in the mid-week games anyway. Nobody takes a blind bit of notice of them. I don't think you'll find any objections from the SH teams to lessening the squad and matches. We're only interested in the tests.

Its certainly true that the bigger the squad the more likely their will be squabbles amongst rivals, there will be a lot of egos in a test squad of 38 and a overall tour party of well over 50.

These days there are less games and larger squads meaning opportunities will be scarce and if players are not on instant form they will be quickly sidelined. Look at Shane Williams for example... just wasn't clicking at the beginning of the last tour... perhaps from lack of opportunities as much as anything else and it cost him his test place which went first to Monye and then to Fitzgerald (neither or which were really worthy of the spot).

Whereas in the past it was you vs. 1 other guy or maybe 2 at best... its now 4 or 5. Some guys may not get starts until game 3 or 4 and that will make guys very nervy.

Perhaps we should lower the squad down to about 30 like world cup squads???

I think that would do wonders. Let's face it, you're not going to use anywhere near those 50 players for the test matches. The more you have, the more it dilutes the experience.

Pick the bare bones and I'd have only more players in the specialist positions like hooker, prop, lock, flyhalf and halfback. Make the players feel that they're the ones there to get the job done rather than have this army of players who won't ever fire their weapon in anger so to speak. Ditch the freeloaders and get your selections right in the first place. If you've got all these willy-nilly matches and players catch your eye, of course there's the temptation to pick them. But don't bring them in the first place. Harsh but I think you'll find you'll solve a lot of problems.

It would seem the SH teams don't care about the non-test games, and worse want to disadvantage the Lions through them by not fielding competitive teams. This shows no respect for the tradition of the Lion's tours that emanated to help those very same beleaguered SH sides.

If the SH Unions have no sense of their own traditions or appreciate the NH sacrifice, it really is time to stop this quadrennial set back to NH rugby.