Scotland and the Lions

Thinking about the Lions squad announcement at the end of this month, I was reading up on some Scottish Lions history. I didn't quite realise how bad Scotland's recent representation in the Lions had been...

2013 - ? (?) 6 Nations Result: 3rd

2009 - 2 (Murray, Hines) Blair & Ford after injuries occurred 6 Nations Result: 5th

2005 - 3 (Bulloch, Taylor and Cusiter) 6 Nations Result: 5th

2001 - 5 (Nicol, Smith, Bulloch, Murray and Taylor) 6 Nations Result: 3rd

1997 - 5 (Tait, Townsend, Smith, Weir and Wainwright) 5 Nations Result: 4th

The last time Scotland had some decent representation was back in 1993...

1993 - 8 (Hastings x2, Nicol, Burnell, Cronin, Milne, Reed, Wright) 5 Nations Result: 2nd

Looking back at the last 10 + years of Scottish rugby, in term of tries and wins, it has really been dreadful.

Statistics

This year Scotland scored 7 tries in the 6N, which is 2 tries off their high score of 9 tries in a 6N tournament. Italy's high score is 12 tries.

We also set a PB in terms of points scored in the tournament, with 98 points. That is the most points Scotland has ever scored in a 6N tournament, the lowest being 56 points in 2012 and 69 in 2008. The likes of Wales, England, Ireland and France have been consistently in double figures when it comes to tries.

So, going by recent history, the last time Scotland finished 3rd in the 6N they had 5 players selected for the Lions tour.

Scotland's Lions 2013

In 2009 6N, Scotland were poor with flickers of potential. This year they have shown some good signs of improvement and progress as well as some pretty talented new players. Will this mean Scotland shall have 5 players like in 2001? Or will they perhaps even have a few more? These are the most likely candidates in my view, in order of likeliness...

Gray, Hogg, Visser, Maitland, Brown, Ford, Laidlaw, Beattie, Murray, Scott, Grant... (I am sure many of you would debate this, but this is just what I think)

To me at least, the signs show that Scotland will have its best representation since 2001. Which I think would be fantastic for Scottish rugby. Come the Autumn internationals, we could have 5 or more Lions in the starting XV for Scotland. That would potentially give more confidence to Scotland's new and promising players such as Horne, Dunbar, Wilson, Reid, Swinson, MacInally etc, who will have enjoyed a tour to SA to play Itlay, SA and Samoa.

So how many Scots do you think will tour? What are your thoughts on Scotland and the Lions this year and in the past? Do you think Scotland will be looking at better representation in the future now we have a more promising team?

I'd take

Grant
Gray/Hines
Brown
Beattie
Laidlaw
Maitland
Hogg

I think the Scots have a good chance of solid representation this year. I'm also surprised at how patchy that history is! Nice research.

I reckon Hogg is a cert; I'd take Brown, Maitland, Gray, Scott and Beattie too. I'd love to see Laidlaw get the nod, excellent work behind a pack that was going backwards a fair amount of the time. Honestly though, a lot of Scottish players have a decent shout this year and I hope quite a few go. Their recent team performances deserve rewarding.

Cheers! Good old Wiki

Yeah it looks promising if you ask me

At this point in time the only guys I'd be fairly confident about would be Murray, Brown and Hogg.

Hogg because he's looked electric going forward plus he's versatile. Brown has been playing well for both Scotland and Sarries, I think his form merits inclusion. And Murray because three tight-heads will go and he's still a better player than Ross plus he's got Lions experience.

There are a number of guys who are in the mix for squad places though;

Grant for the third loose-head spot, I'd say his consistency could nudge him ahead of Vunipola
Ford is looking unlikely for squad but wouldn't be surprised if he was 4th choice hooker
Gray, Hamilton and possibly Hines are in the mix at lock, one will probably go
Beattie is up against Heaslip to back up Faletau, probably hasn't done quite enough to edge it.
Laidlaw as third scrum-half is against Care and Murray, tomorrow's HC quarter could be very important
Scott has an outside chance if they take 5 centres, I think Barritt would be ahead of him currently
Maitland and Visser both have a chance, I be surprised if neither went

I'd be disappointed with less than 6; Grant, Murray, Gray, Brown, Maitland & Hogg.

I expect Gray, Grant, Brown, Hogg and Laidlaw to go

Could easily see Maitland, Beattie, Murray, Hines, Visser go

Outside chances must include Rennie and Scott

is Gray going to be fit? I think Visser will miss out. Would love to see Rennie go, Maitland unikely but Hogg and Laidlaw certs. hines maybe but can't see a reason to take Grant, Brown yes but think he will miss out anyway.

Can you really count Andy Nicol as a Lion in 2001?

I think definite tourists are Murray, Gray, Hogg

Likely tourists are Grant, Brown, Laidlaw, Maitland

Possible tourists are Scott and Visser

Very good thread, Bsando you secret Aussie you...

I watch a lot of rugby (my wife would say too much) and the Lions selection process is fascinating because a large number of posters on these boards seem utterly unable (or unwilling) to be able to assess the merits and detriments of individual players on their own, as distinct from the performances of the teams for which they play.

This is particularly acute this year as (to use the example of this thread) Scotland was not particularly good or consistent as a team in the 6 Nations (for a number of reasons, poor tactics being not the least of our problems) but they have a number of potentially outstanding individuals in their midst. Combining these individuals from each team is what the Lions is all about and gives us as a collective our best chances of winning. As long as the Lions win, I genuine don't care about the nationality of its component players but similarly I don't want players travelling just because they have been playing for successful franchise or international teams.

There are lot of examples of poster decisions that seem to be difficult to justify. They apply to all teams and players in all positions. As this thread is about Scotland - I would refer to, for example people who suddenly seem to want Vunipola instead of Ryan Grant. Vunipola is a big lump with a big future but he got his backside handed to him by John Afoa yesterday - something which has never happened to Grant against NZ, Australia, Fiji, Samoa, Northampton or any Rabo side this season - and has only really started to put performances together in the latter part of the season.

Others are confident that they want Simon Zebo with his 20 Rabo tries and one Irish try in his 5 tests instead of Sean Maitland (Super 15 top scorer 2011, Super 15 single game try record holder, whose two try saving tackles on O'Driscoll won the match against Ireland in the 6N) or Tim Visser (53 Rabo tries, 6 Scotland tries in 10 tests). Clearly, there's more to it than just scoring tries, but this is potentially the best example of wildly uneven treatment being handed out to players. Most of those who claim that Tim Visser is apparently a defensive liability and shouldn't travel were in the previous stable shouting loudly that defense doesn't matter much to wingers and we should all just leave Shane Williams alone and focus on his remarkable try scoring record.

I really like both Vunipola and Zebo but I simply don't understand on what basis their choices are justifiable in preference other than the fact they are playing for teams that have got to the Heineken quarters and are doing pretty well in their leagues.

I promise that I'm not wumming, it's just a strange time if you're a Scotland (and Glasgow) fan.

George. Gatland likes big wingers and along with North and Cuthbert, Visser provides the size, pace and power he wants. I don't think Zebo will go. Visser seems to have a rep for poor defense but if you look at the stats for the 6 nations most of Scotland's backs were worse culprits. Hogg, Scott, Laidlaw all being pretty poor. I think Hogg will travel, Laidlaw 50/50 and Scott no.

My expected Scotland representatives

Yes : Murray, Hogg, Brown, Visser

Maybe's: Maitland, Laidlaw, Grant, Beattie.

My scot guarentees are...

Brown, Murray, Hogg, and Laidlaw

Possibles...

Grant, Ford, Grey, Hines, Beattie, Visser, Maitland.

so I'd expect at least 4, maybe as many as 8 or 9.

only around for IMO will go.

George Carlin wrote:Very good thread, Bsando you secret Aussie you...

I watch a lot of rugby (my wife would say too much) and the Lions selection process is fascinating because a large number of posters on these boards seem utterly unable (or unwilling) to be able to assess the merits and detriments of individual players on their own, as distinct from the performances of the teams for which they play.

This is particularly acute this year as (to use the example of this thread) Scotland was not particularly good or consistent as a team in the 6 Nations (for a number of reasons, poor tactics being not the least of our problems) but they have a number of potentially outstanding individuals in their midst. Combining these individuals from each team is what the Lions is all about and gives us as a collective our best chances of winning. As long as the Lions win, I genuine don't care about the nationality of its component players but similarly I don't want players travelling just because they have been playing for successful franchise or international teams.

There are lot of examples of poster decisions that seem to be difficult to justify. They apply to all teams and players in all positions. As this thread is about Scotland - I would refer to, for example people who suddenly seem to want Vunipola instead of Ryan Grant. Vunipola is a big lump with a big future but he got his backside handed to him by John Afoa yesterday - something which has never happened to Grant against NZ, Australia, Fiji, Samoa, Northampton or any Rabo side this season - and has only really started to put performances together in the latter part of the season.

Others are confident that they want Simon Zebo with his 20 Rabo tries and one Irish try in his 5 tests instead of Sean Maitland (Super 15 top scorer 2011, Super 15 single game try record holder, whose two try saving tackles on O'Driscoll won the match against Ireland in the 6N) or Tim Visser (53 Rabo tries, 6 Scotland tries in 10 tests). Clearly, there's more to it than just scoring tries, but this is potentially the best example of wildly uneven treatment being handed out to players. Most of those who claim that Tim Visser is apparently a defensive liability and shouldn't travel were in the previous stable shouting loudly that defense doesn't matter much to wingers and we should all just leave Shane Williams alone and focus on his remarkable try scoring record.

I really like both Vunipola and Zebo but I simply don't understand on what basis their choices are justifiable in preference other than the fact they are playing for teams that have got to the Heineken quarters and are doing pretty well in their leagues.

I promise that I'm not wumming, it's just a strange time if you're a Scotland (and Glasgow) fan.

I've tried mentioning it before but its hard to do without always talking about yourself Most people just hear the accent and assume I'm Australian, no doubt you've all be imagining me with a broad Scottish accent. But enough abut me...

I totally agree with you GC. I'll admit my first comments regarding Lions a year or so ago were aimed at bigging up the Scots because I previously thought it sucked that so few Scots got picked. But I've learnt to be far more subjective and take the time to watch other peoples teams and players, many of whom are potential Lions. I have to say, if you don't do this, you're essentially making unfair assumptions about other peoples favourite players or teams which could be totally untrue.

I think an example of this in my case, is England. I always thought they played boring rugby and never really gave their players much time of day, but after watching more Aviva Premiership last few years I've noticed that although it is a league that epitomises NH rugby, there are some bloody talented players and some very exciting games.

I agree with you GC, that some people struggle to remove their own preferences of Lions choices. They read a book by its cover. I think Scotland is definitely a nation that has been read this way. People see our 6N record and other shortfalls and don't actually look at the individual players themselves. At the moment Scotland are getting much more positive attention due to a better 6N and a strong Glaswegian side, and maybe because of Edinburgh reaching Heineken cup semis last year too. Its great, but I just wonder how many Scots should have toured and haven't. Thom Evans missed out, so did Sean Lamont which to me seems insane. But hey ho, thats the way it is and hopefully Gatland will judge Scotland's players as individuals and the qualities they will bring to the Lions, rather than purely on results alone.

I think the majority of the Scotland squad have caught Gatland's attention, hopefully he'll pick some of them to tour

Hi all. I do think bsando has a very good point. We do all champion our own players more than others. Part of this is to hopefully get equal representation, but also because they're the players we see most often and are most familiar with. One example is Mike Phillps. Despised outside of Wales, marmite at best. But for a lot of welsh fans who've watched him a lot, he's been the difference, the stand out player in a lot of games. He's singlehandedly won us games with winning tries and fearless defence. Other nations perhaps miss some of these points as they have been less important to them. They perhaps watch less of the highlights programmes that review and point out the little extras that he does. I think we then get riled when he's slated as he's been one of the reasons for our (relative) success over the past few years - the heartbeat of the team if you will.

On the flipside for me is someone like Laidlaw. Championed by Scottish fans as a lions tourist and potential captain. I watch a lot of rugby, and I honestly mean no disrespect, but I don't really see him as a standout player. Apart from good kicking (like Halfpenny!). I just see a 'normal' player like any other scrum half. However, if I had a vested interest in the player, like him being in my national team or club side, then I'm sure I'd pick up on his qualities. A lot of fans can't all be wrong, after all! Call this ignorance or just unfamiliarity, whatever, but it is sort of a lack of exposure to his talents that means I will champion others, such as those I do know, over him. Similarly, I probably feel that this is what other nation's fans are doing/missing when they elevate their own above ours when we feel our player is the best: "Maybe the Scots/English/Irish don't know the player as they don't watch him as much as their own?" I hope I explained that well enough - hard to put into words.

So for me, familiarity with our own players and perhaps a lack of knowledge/experience of some others, makes a combined lions selection the argumental nightmare that it is!

If Scotland have more than four players in the squad I will be very surprised.Would any Scot get into the Welsh side?If you answer that question honestly and then factor in worthy English and Irish players anyone listing 11 possible Scottish tourists is on some seriously strong stuff!!!

Could Maitland become yet another Kiwi to play for the Lions?

A year ago I would say Gray, Denton and Rennie as certs now I am not sure, probably Gray as a cert.

After this year Brown is not a 7 and there are too many very good 6's so no chance., Beattie may make it.

Ford, are there three hookers better, probably five between England, Wales and Ireland

Laidlaw, probably the worst scrum half in the 6N and no flyhalf.

Visser, Bowe and Zebbo are fit and North and Cuthbert are the other options, possible tourist

Hogg, he will go

Murry, possible to cover injuries.

For me Two certs and 3 possible.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Could Maitland become yet another Kiwi to play for the Lions?

I seriously hope not.We were really short of centres when the Lions sold their soul and picked Flutey.We have no shortage of wings.

Going on form this year:
Probable - Brown, Hogg, Beattie - these are good players in top form.
Possible - Visser, Laidlaw, Gray, Maitland, Grant, Scott

Brown should be in the test team and maybe captain - he is in the form of his life and the best around right now

Taffineastbourne wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Could Maitland become yet another Kiwi to play for the Lions?

I seriously hope not.We were really short of centres when the Lions sold their soul and picked Flutey.We have no shortage of wings.

I don't see it that way Taff. North? Cuthbert? Hmmm... not convinced either has been effective against Australia and have proven to be one dimensional finishers who are useful if the team is in ascendancy, but rarely game breakers. Ashton? Out of form. England's other wing is a work in progress and a weak spot. The Irish offerings are not up to scratch and that opens the door for a member of the Scottish contingent. Who would you pick on the right wing from this alleged plethora?

Griff wrote:Hi all. I do think bsando has a very good point. We do all champion our own players more than others. Part of this is to hopefully get equal representation, but also because they're the players we see most often and are most familiar with. One example is Mike Phillps. Despised outside of Wales, marmite at best. But for a lot of welsh fans who've watched him a lot, he's been the difference, the stand out player in a lot of games. He's singlehandedly won us games with winning tries and fearless defence. Other nations perhaps miss some of these points as they have been less important to them. They perhaps watch less of the highlights programmes that review and point out the little extras that he does. I think we then get riled when he's slated as he's been one of the reasons for our (relative) success over the past few years - the heartbeat of the team if you will.

On the flipside for me is someone like Laidlaw. Championed by Scottish fans as a lions tourist and potential captain. I watch a lot of rugby, and I honestly mean no disrespect, but I don't really see him as a standout player. Apart from good kicking (like Halfpenny!). I just see a 'normal' player like any other scrum half. However, if I had a vested interest in the player, like him being in my national team or club side, then I'm sure I'd pick up on his qualities. A lot of fans can't all be wrong, after all! Call this ignorance or just unfamiliarity, whatever, but it is sort of a lack of exposure to his talents that means I will champion others, such as those I do know, over him. Similarly, I probably feel that this is what other nation's fans are doing/missing when they elevate their own above ours when we feel our player is the best: "Maybe the Scots/English/Irish don't know the player as they don't watch him as much as their own?" I hope I explained that well enough - hard to put into words.

So for me, familiarity with our own players and perhaps a lack of knowledge/experience of some others, makes a combined lions selection the argumental nightmare that it is!

Very well said, Griff. If we can all keep your sentiments in mind over the next three months, we'll be doing well.

Mods, is there any way to sticky Griff's post in a prominent place?

Vunipola had a tough afternoon in the scrum for Sarries, could help Grant's case.

Brown had a good game for Sarries but O'Mahony was very impressive and could make a late charge, Robshaw had a poor game and Armitage impressed.

Beattie didn't have enough time and Heaslip's performance for Leinster might nudge it in his favour.

Murray probably had the better of Care but neither shone, Laidlaw possibly still in the hunt but he'll need a big performance for Edinburgh next week.

O'Connoll was outstanding and probably takes a tour spot for that performance, so the competition heats up in the boiler room with Hines doing well and Parling playing well for Leicester.

Out-wide no one made a great claim, both Zebo and Gilroy were lively but didn't have much to live on. Ashton scored for Sarries but I think he'll need to score a few more to convince Gatland he merits a place.

Taffineastbourne wrote:If Scotland have more than four players in the squad I will be very surprised.Would any Scot get into the Welsh side?If you answer that question honestly and then factor in worthy English and Irish players anyone listing 11 possible Scottish tourists is on some seriously strong stuff!!!

Taff - I actually think that the answer to that question is 'yes', but even asking it in the first place is missing the point.

I appreciate that it is a matter of opinion, but mine is that I don't think you can simply ignore the fact that since, say, 2005 (when Wales picked up the first of their recent 3 slams and so from which point we can assume that they were the best team in Europe) Wales record against Australia is played 14, won 2, drawn 1, lost 11. Let me caveat this a little for balance: (a) it is entirely possible that both (i) every other domestic team and (ii) a British Lions collective, would also have lost these games (meaning in real money that none of the domestic nations either individually or as a collective could have done any better than Wales did) and (b) the winning margin in the past 6 games against the Wallabies has been 8 points or less (so clearly there has been little separating the sides).

I don't think it can be ignored based on another point of view, which again I appreciate is also a matter of opinion - that being that if we select the best players from each of the home nations and match it with a game plan that suits these players - then we should beat the Wallabies in a test series. Not everyone will agree, but given the amount of NH talent on offer, that's what I think.

Wales' recent test record against the Wallabies is a concern for the reason mentioned by Scott Johnson (validly, I think) during a 6N interview - Wales have not done anything different tactically for a long time. They haven't needed to, because what they do at the moment works very well for them. Edwards' flood defence, coupled with a kevlar front row and using economical pods to transport the ball upfield has been the tactics for at least 5 years. It's been honed and one clear difference between Wales and England in the past 6N was the fact that the Welsh players understand each other and their roles very well. They are a settled unit, and it showed. There's just been one thing. That hasn't been enough to beat the Wallabies recently.

So I think that we need something different. This is particularly the reason why I hope for his sake Gatland manages to see more clearly than some of the rabidly nationalistic posters on these boards (not this thread, which has been exemplary) - he has no excuse. The main reason for me that he's the perfect coach for the Lions is that he has had more experience than any other modern coach in losing to Australia. And therefore what it will take to beat them. Andy Irvine is a smart man and he's all but said this in interviews.

It will take more than Wales to beat the Wallabies. Plain as the nose on Richard Cockerill.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Could Maitland become yet another Kiwi to play for the Lions?

I seriously hope not.We were really short of centres when the Lions sold their soul and picked Flutey.We have no shortage of wings.

I don't see it that way Taff. North? Cuthbert? Hmmm... not convinced either has been effective against Australia and have proven to be one dimensional finishers who are useful if the team is in ascendancy, but rarely game breakers. Ashton? Out of form. England's other wing is a work in progress and a weak spot. The Irish offerings are not up to scratch and that opens the door for a member of the Scottish contingent. Who would you pick on the right wing from this alleged plethora?

Tommy Bowe and North would be my choices.

Bowe would be going on reputation not form and North has done little to impress this year above the other candidates.
Wings is a tricky choice from group of players all with slight question marks against them - except perhaps Cuthbert.

Agree that wing is slightly difficult - Bowe hasn't had much gametime, even if Ashton scores some more in the league there has to be question marks over his temperament as well as his defence and the person I really wanted to see in the England side this year (Wade) hasn't been given the chance.

I go back and forth on North/Cuthbert. North did score the winner against France and netted a brace against the Dragons but I don't think is playing as well as he did last year. Cuthbert seems to score more important tries in a Wales shirt and is in the right place at the right time against good opposition (England and Australia recently) but I am worried that for sheer agility he will get caught out.

That said, we need a big guy with good defence to mark Ioane. I think that one should make the test side, but not both. We need a rapier as well as a hammer.

Wade looks like he might be worth a punt.Dont know a lot about him but he looks sharpish and has an eye for a gap.Being an old fogey I am more inclined to British and Irish players being selected for the Lions rather than mercenaries.Scotland might be desperate but the Lions are not.

George Carlin wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:If Scotland have more than four players in the squad I will be very surprised.Would any Scot get into the Welsh side?If you answer that question honestly and then factor in worthy English and Irish players anyone listing 11 possible Scottish tourists is on some seriously strong stuff!!!

Taff - I actually think that the answer to that question is 'yes', but even asking it in the first place is missing the point.

I appreciate that it is a matter of opinion, but mine is that I don't think you can simply ignore the fact that since, say, 2005 (when Wales picked up the first of their recent 3 slams and so from which point we can assume that they were the best team in Europe) Wales record against Australia is played 14, won 2, drawn 1, lost 11. Let me caveat this a little for balance: (a) it is entirely possible that both (i) every other domestic team and (ii) a British Lions collective, would also have lost these games (meaning in real money that none of the domestic nations either individually or as a collective could have done any better than Wales did) and (b) the winning margin in the past 6 games against the Wallabies has been 8 points or less (so clearly there has been little separating the sides).

I don't think it can be ignored based on another point of view, which again I appreciate is also a matter of opinion - that being that if we select the best players from each of the home nations and match it with a game plan that suits these players - then we should beat the Wallabies in a test series. Not everyone will agree, but given the amount of NH talent on offer, that's what I think.

Wales' recent test record against the Wallabies is a concern for the reason mentioned by Scott Johnson (validly, I think) during a 6N interview - Wales have not done anything different tactically for a long time. They haven't needed to, because what they do at the moment works very well for them. Edwards' flood defence, coupled with a kevlar front row and using economical pods to transport the ball upfield has been the tactics for at least 5 years. It's been honed and one clear difference between Wales and England in the past 6N was the fact that the Welsh players understand each other and their roles very well. They are a settled unit, and it showed. There's just been one thing. That hasn't been enough to beat the Wallabies recently.

So I think that we need something different. This is particularly the reason why I hope for his sake Gatland manages to see more clearly than some of the rabidly nationalistic posters on these boards (not this thread, which has been exemplary) - he has no excuse. The main reason for me that he's the perfect coach for the Lions is that he has had more experience than any other modern coach in losing to Australia. And therefore what it will take to beat them. Andy Irvine is a smart man and he's all but said this in interviews.

It will take more than Wales to beat the Wallabies. Plain as the nose on Richard Cockerill.

George, I agree with you to a certain extent. However, and please don't think I'm trying to defend Wales with 'ifs' and 'buts', a few of Wales' recent losses to Australia were not due to the gameplan or tactics. 3 of the recent games were were winning until the last minute or so. So the gameplan/tactics were good enough to get us into that winning position, good enough to score more points that Australia coming into the final minutes. However, one game was then lost as someone pulled down a maul. That's not a poor gameplan. That's just a very naughty boy! The other was a breakaway try from the Wallabies try line. Again, the gameplan/tactics were spot on - leading in the last minute so keep them pinned back in their own 22. However, a bit of Aussie brilliance and a missed tackle (not in any coach's gamplan) and the game was lost. The other one was another penalty given away at the end, in a game where the penalties went back and forth like tennis for the whole game - like the recent Scotland v Wales game.

So, although it sounds like I'm making excuses for the losses, I'm actually excusing the gameplan. The gameplan was good enough to get us into winning positions with a minute or two to go. Individual errors or lack of skill subsequently lost the games, not the lack of appropriate gameplan or tactics. With better players at our disposal for the Lions then the gameplan could be enough to see the game through and not lose at the end. Although saying that I'm all for running rugby so would prefer to watch that if given the choice.

The other losses were down to the Aussies just being much better on the day, e.g. the world cup 3rd place play off. Not sure what to attribute those to!

George Carlin wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:If Scotland have more than four players in the squad I will be very surprised.Would any Scot get into the Welsh side?If you answer that question honestly and then factor in worthy English and Irish players anyone listing 11 possible Scottish tourists is on some seriously strong stuff!!!

Taff - I actually think that the answer to that question is 'yes', but even asking it in the first place is missing the point.

I appreciate that it is a matter of opinion, but mine is that I don't think you can simply ignore the fact that since, say, 2005 (when Wales picked up the first of their recent 3 slams and so from which point we can assume that they were the best team in Europe) Wales record against Australia is played 14, won 2, drawn 1, lost 11. Let me caveat this a little for balance: (a) it is entirely possible that both (i) every other domestic team and (ii) a British Lions collective, would also have lost these games (meaning in real money that none of the domestic nations either individually or as a collective could have done any better than Wales did) and (b) the winning margin in the past 6 games against the Wallabies has been 8 points or less (so clearly there has been little separating the sides).

I don't think it can be ignored based on another point of view, which again I appreciate is also a matter of opinion - that being that if we select the best players from each of the home nations and match it with a game plan that suits these players - then we should beat the Wallabies in a test series. Not everyone will agree, but given the amount of NH talent on offer, that's what I think.

Wales' recent test record against the Wallabies is a concern for the reason mentioned by Scott Johnson (validly, I think) during a 6N interview - Wales have not done anything different tactically for a long time. They haven't needed to, because what they do at the moment works very well for them. Edwards' flood defence, coupled with a kevlar front row and using economical pods to transport the ball upfield has been the tactics for at least 5 years. It's been honed and one clear difference between Wales and England in the past 6N was the fact that the Welsh players understand each other and their roles very well. They are a settled unit, and it showed. There's just been one thing. That hasn't been enough to beat the Wallabies recently.

So I think that we need something different. This is particularly the reason why I hope for his sake Gatland manages to see more clearly than some of the rabidly nationalistic posters on these boards (not this thread, which has been exemplary) - he has no excuse. The main reason for me that he's the perfect coach for the Lions is that he has had more experience than any other modern coach in losing to Australia. And therefore what it will take to beat them. Andy Irvine is a smart man and he's all but said this in interviews.

It will take more than Wales to beat the Wallabies. Plain as the nose on Richard Cockerill.

At no point have I said that no other country's players should be considered.This thread is specifically about the Scots and the Lions.Which Scottish player would oust the current Welsh incumbent?I seriously cannot see one.
Wales margins of defeat against Oz indicate to me that there is no major gulf between the two countries and leading Australia going into the final 2/3 minutes in a couple of games does not demonstrate to me that Wales were not competitive.
If you do not expect the bulk of players to be Welsh prepare for a bit of a shock.Over the last 5 years including this season Wales have been clearly the best British and Ireland international side.
Looking at the Scotland record over the same period and comparing the number of Scottish players chosen in the recent polls for each position has me thinking that there must have been major match fixing to have denied such outstanding Scottish players at least one 6N's Championship or Grand Slam

Is Vunipola really being touted for the Lions?

I think he's going to be good, but i think theres more established players at the moment. Lets not forget this is the Lions...is not a place for "potential"...we pick the best on form players. If we can get Corbs fit he is amongst the best in the world and he should travel...but leave Vunipola with England for their summer tour.

Heally, Jenkins and hopefully a fit Corbs would be a frightening proposition at LH. But as Corbs is likely to be injured...id probably give Grant his chance.

I think a few Scots could go this trip...and rightly so.

a fair few on here just remember the things they want to it seems

a few myths to dispell

Visser, defensivly, had a decent 6Ns. He obviously worked on this area and improved greatly. To omit Visser from the Lions due people saying is is the weakest defensive winger is nothing short of silly.
There are far worse wingers out there than him.

And what is with the Matt Scott bashing? away and check the stats from the 6Ns. Statistically, he was the best performing 12 in the championship.

I dont know why people always focus on the one or two wee tings that go against a player. Will Carling, who by the way I dont particularly rate, will always be remembered for being ran over by Lomu rather than the years of consitantly good performances.

Wales margins of defeat against Oz indicate to me that there is no major gulf between the two countries and leading Australia going into the final 2/3 minutes in a couple of games does not demonstrate to me that Wales were not competitive.

Taff i actually disagree...the fact your close , but unable to close the game out suggests a mental flaw. Scotland have beaten Australia twice now recently (i may be wrong). Wales have been in many positions to beat Australia but have always managed to grasp defeat from the Jaws of victory. I have no issues with a large Welsh contingent...it makes sense at the moment...but we need a little variation in gameplay AND that vital mental readiness, from some players who have already beaten Aus.

I like how people are knocking the idea of Maitland going on tour, but they're more than happy to see Visser going (who doesn't even have a British relative), or Brad Baritt, the South African-born England centre. At the end of the day the country you represent is more-or-less your choice, dependent on circumstance. Admittedly Maitland is controversial in the sense he got to play for Scotland so quickly, but he at least has Scottish relatives!

I was born in England, but my parents are Scottish. I'd choose to represent Scotland over England if I was good enough and as far as I'm aware Maitland's pretty level headed about the whole thing, and seems like a great bloke from what we've heard of him from the Scotland camp, and I'd be as happy to see him in a Lions jersey as I am to see him in a Scotland one.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Wales margins of defeat against Oz indicate to me that there is no major gulf between the two countries and leading Australia going into the final 2/3 minutes in a couple of games does not demonstrate to me that Wales were not competitive.

Taff i actually disagree...the fact your close , but unable to close the game out suggests a mental flaw. Scotland have beaten Australia twice now recently (i may be wrong). Wales have been in many positions to beat Australia but have always managed to grasp defeat from the Jaws of victory. I have no issues with a large Welsh contingent...it makes sense at the moment...but we need a little variation in gameplay AND that vital mental readiness, from some players who have already beaten Aus.

The Lions have a very limited timeframe to develop a style of play.The bulk of players will be Welsh and it makes sense to me given the preparation time available to base the tactics on the Welsh Way.Better to have 4/5 players from other countries adopt this approach rather than getting 15 players learn a new approach.
The most recent Scottish victory over Oz was played in monsoon conditions and it is unrealistic to expect similar climatic conditions!

NeilyBroon wrote:I like how people are knocking the idea of Maitland going on tour, but they're more than happy to see Visser going (who doesn't even have a British relative), or Brad Baritt, the South African-born England centre. At the end of the day the country you represent is more-or-less your choice, dependent on circumstance. Admittedly Maitland is controversial in the sense he got to play for Scotland so quickly, but he at least has Scottish relatives!

I was born in England, but my parents are Scottish. I'd choose to represent Scotland over England if I was good enough and as far as I'm aware Maitland's pretty level headed about the whole thing, and seems like a great bloke from what we've heard of him from the Scotland camp, and I'd be as happy to see him in a Lions jersey as I am to see him in a Scotland one.

Totally agree on that point - he has a Scottish parent - so how much more qualified do you want

Which Scottish player would get in the welsh team? A few. Hogg , Brown, Scott. maybe Gray as well.

However thats not the question - the question is how many Scots will / should be in the lions. Hogg must go - So will 1/2p Gatland will then get to see both and will make a choice based on form and tactics. Same with many matchups and in some of them the Scot will get the nod. It will be a travesty if Brown does not play.

So - half a dozen scots on the tour party, a couple in the team sounds about right to me. I would expect wales to have a bigger representation than that. However if Gatland simply attempts Wales+ tactically then the lions will lose. He can do better than that with the players available.

Taffineastbourne wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Wales margins of defeat against Oz indicate to me that there is no major gulf between the two countries and leading Australia going into the final 2/3 minutes in a couple of games does not demonstrate to me that Wales were not competitive.

Taff i actually disagree...the fact your close , but unable to close the game out suggests a mental flaw. Scotland have beaten Australia twice now recently (i may be wrong). Wales have been in many positions to beat Australia but have always managed to grasp defeat from the Jaws of victory. I have no issues with a large Welsh contingent...it makes sense at the moment...but we need a little variation in gameplay AND that vital mental readiness, from some players who have already beaten Aus.

The Lions have a very limited timeframe to develop a style of play.The bulk of players will be Welsh and it makes sense to me given the preparation time available to base the tactics on the Welsh Way.Better to have 4/5 players from other countries adopt this approach rather than getting 15 players learn a new approach.
The most recent Scottish victory over Oz was played in monsoon conditions and it is unrealistic to expect similar climatic conditions!

Given that both teams had to play in these conditions, I'm not sure quite how this dimishes the fact that it was a victory, Taff. Or indeed the victory the year before that. I am sure that if Wales had won back to back against Australia in recent times, the manner of the victory wouldn't matter a jot for the purposes of procaiming wins in the press or on these boards.

I don't think that anyone is suggesting the touring party won't be mostly Welsh. I'm just saying that it has been proven time and time again that it seems Wales do not beat Australia, whereas as I've already said above (I'm assuming that you read it, but that might have been over-optimistic) a team of all the home nations' talent really ought to be able to.

From a Scottish point of view I’d be content with 4 tourists, disappointed with less and pretty happy with more. With regards to which 4 well that has been well debated, but I think Hogg should be on the plane and Richie Gray too if he can recover in time and prove his fitness. Kelly Brown would do a good job but has ridiculously strong competition, and Visser or Maitland have a chance. I think the likes of Laidlaw, Matt Scott and Ford will be relying on injuries, with Ford the most likely backup option for his experience.

Where I would be disappointed is if an on form and consistent Scottish player is not picked over someone who is either out of form and only picked on reputation, or not up to full match fitness.

Case in point is Lydiate going over Kelly Brown – we could argue for weeks on who is the ‘better’ player if both are on form and fully fit, but the simple fact is Brown had a strong 6N and is a key player in a successful Saracens team going for HK and AP glory, whereas Lydiate has been injured for over a year and will only have a few Rabbo games with the Dragons under his belt.

Now this is just been used as an example and it’s probably not worth arguing the specifics of the players mentioned, but you get the gist.

There is massive competition for the Lions and the fact that we are able to have such a debate about who should tour suggests there are no clear options from a Scottish point of view, but I definitely think we have better players now than the last 2 lions tours.

For what it’s worth, I think Murray, Gray (fitness dependent), Brown and Hogg will be picked, with Grant, Visser and Beattie a maybe and Laidlaw and Ford on the reserve list.

George Carlin wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Wales margins of defeat against Oz indicate to me that there is no major gulf between the two countries and leading Australia going into the final 2/3 minutes in a couple of games does not demonstrate to me that Wales were not competitive.

Taff i actually disagree...the fact your close , but unable to close the game out suggests a mental flaw. Scotland have beaten Australia twice now recently (i may be wrong). Wales have been in many positions to beat Australia but have always managed to grasp defeat from the Jaws of victory. I have no issues with a large Welsh contingent...it makes sense at the moment...but we need a little variation in gameplay AND that vital mental readiness, from some players who have already beaten Aus.

The Lions have a very limited timeframe to develop a style of play.The bulk of players will be Welsh and it makes sense to me given the preparation time available to base the tactics on the Welsh Way.Better to have 4/5 players from other countries adopt this approach rather than getting 15 players learn a new approach.
The most recent Scottish victory over Oz was played in monsoon conditions and it is unrealistic to expect similar climatic conditions!

Given that both teams had to play in these conditions, I'm not sure quite how this dimishes the fact that it was a victory, Taff. Or indeed the victory the year before that. I am sure that if Wales had won back to back against Australia in recent times, the manner of the victory wouldn't matter a jot for the purposes of procaiming wins in the press or on these boards.

I don't think that anyone is suggesting the touring party won't be mostly Welsh. I'm just saying that it has been proven time and time again that it seems Wales do not beat Australia, whereas as I've already said above (I'm assuming that you read it, but that might have been over-optimistic) a team of all the home nations' talent really ought to be able to.

Judge not that ye be not judged.
It may come as a bit of a surprise but Scotland has slightly damper conditions than Australia and consequently the Scots are more used to playing in these conditions.You might also be aware that absolutely foul weather conditions assists less skilful players as the major strength of Australian back play was neutralised.
Please don't try and spoil this thread with childish snideyness there's a good chap.

RDW_Scotland wrote:From a Scottish point of view I’d be content with 4 tourists, disappointed with less and pretty happy with more. With regards to which 4 well that has been well debated, but I think Hogg should be on the plane and Richie Gray too if he can recover in time and prove his fitness. Kelly Brown would do a good job but has ridiculously strong competition, and Visser or Maitland have a chance. I think the likes of Laidlaw, Matt Scott and Ford will be relying on injuries, with Ford the most likely backup option for his experience.

Where I would be disappointed is if an on form and consistent Scottish player is not picked over someone who is either out of form and only picked on reputation, or not up to full match fitness.

Case in point is Lydiate going over Kelly Brown – we could argue for weeks on who is the ‘better’ player if both are on form and fully fit, but the simple fact is Brown had a strong 6N and is a key player in a successful Saracens team going for HK and AP glory, whereas Lydiate has been injured for over a year and will only have a few Rabbo games with the Dragons under his belt.

Now this is just been used as an example and it’s probably not worth arguing the specifics of the players mentioned, but you get the gist.

There is massive competition for the Lions and the fact that we are able to have such a debate about who should tour suggests there are no clear options from a Scottish point of view, but I definitely think we have better players now than the last 2 lions tours.

For what it’s worth, I think Murray, Gray (fitness dependent), Brown and Hogg will be picked, with Grant, Visser and Beattie a maybe and Laidlaw and Ford on the reserve list.

Agree 100%, I can't see how anyone justifies selecting Lydiate right now, and TBH even if he explodes back in the Rabo it would be too late IMHO. Similarly with the likes of Corbisiero, and dare I say it POC (although he must be considered for what he brings off the pitch)

For the record I would take Hogg, Visser, Laidlaw, Brown, Grey, and Murray, with Ford, Scott and Maitland on the reserve list, maybe even Beattie too!

I can't see us having that many representatives on the tour. It's not that I don't think we deserve to have a few players involved, I just think our reputation for propping up the 6 nations will play against us.

I think Hogg will travel (as will 1/2p before anyone has a pop at me over it), if Gray can get fit in time then I suspect he'll travel as well. After that I think we'll struggle. In my opinion Brown should be on the plane, but competition for his position is massive and I suspect he'll be overlooked in favour of someone more fashionable.

Arguments could be made for: Grant, Murray, Brown, Beattie, Scott, Visser, Maitland. but because they're playing (internationally) for a team perceived as being not all that good (check out a large number of the comments from the folk on this forum for proof of that) I reckon they'll be left at home/South Africa.

I beleive players should be selected on individual merit, but its far easier to look good in a team doing well than it is to look good in a team that's struggling.

TJ wrote:Which Scottish player would get in the welsh team? A few. Hogg , Brown, Scott. maybe Gray as well.

However thats not the question - the question is how many Scots will / should be in the lions. Hogg must go - So will 1/2p Gatland will then get to see both and will make a choice based on form and tactics. Same with many matchups and in some of them the Scot will get the nod. It will be a travesty if Brown does not play.

So - half a dozen scots on the tour party, a couple in the team sounds about right to me. I would expect wales to have a bigger representation than that. However if Gatland simply attempts Wales+ tactically then the lions will lose. He can do better than that with the players available.

Gray?on this year's form?That would be like a Welshman espousing Charteris on his World Cup form.
Hogg,Grant,Brown and A N Other will travel.

thebluesmancometh wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:From a Scottish point of view I’d be content with 4 tourists, disappointed with less and pretty happy with more. With regards to which 4 well that has been well debated, but I think Hogg should be on the plane and Richie Gray too if he can recover in time and prove his fitness. Kelly Brown would do a good job but has ridiculously strong competition, and Visser or Maitland have a chance. I think the likes of Laidlaw, Matt Scott and Ford will be relying on injuries, with Ford the most likely backup option for his experience.

Where I would be disappointed is if an on form and consistent Scottish player is not picked over someone who is either out of form and only picked on reputation, or not up to full match fitness.

Case in point is Lydiate going over Kelly Brown – we could argue for weeks on who is the ‘better’ player if both are on form and fully fit, but the simple fact is Brown had a strong 6N and is a key player in a successful Saracens team going for HK and AP glory, whereas Lydiate has been injured for over a year and will only have a few Rabbo games with the Dragons under his belt.

Now this is just been used as an example and it’s probably not worth arguing the specifics of the players mentioned, but you get the gist.

There is massive competition for the Lions and the fact that we are able to have such a debate about who should tour suggests there are no clear options from a Scottish point of view, but I definitely think we have better players now than the last 2 lions tours.

For what it’s worth, I think Murray, Gray (fitness dependent), Brown and Hogg will be picked, with Grant, Visser and Beattie a maybe and Laidlaw and Ford on the reserve list.

Agree 100%, I can't see how anyone justifies selecting Lydiate right now, and TBH even if he explodes back in the Rabo it would be too late IMHO. Similarly with the likes of Corbisiero, and dare I say it POC (although he must be considered for what he brings off the pitch)

For the record I would take Hogg, Visser, Laidlaw, Brown, Grey, and Murray, with Ford, Scott and Maitland on the reserve list, maybe even Beattie too!

Distorted double standards or what?Lydiate should not be considered as he has been injured yet Gray who shown no form recently and is injured should travel!

Taff - I am fascinated. You've taken a pop at three different posters on this thread now (to say nothing of "mercenaries", whatever they may be) who have expressed an opinion contrary to your own so I'd like to understand which of the following two positions is the accurate one:

Either (a) you don't realise that your posts tend to be unpleasant, condescending, ill-informed, graceless snots of vitriol or (b) you do realise that they are but choose to post them anyway.

Which is it?

Neily / Risky

It's interesting how one or two players get tarred with the brush of 'foreign mercenary' while others with similar qualifications are just waved through.

Now, I did have a bit of an issue with Flutey as a Lion, but then I had the same issue with him playing for England - he had no connection to the country beyond coming here to play professional rugby, and I think the residence period for qualification is too short in those circumstances. I'd similarly not want Waldrom to make the Lions on the strength of one grandparent that he didn't even know was English-born until he looked into it (fortunately, as Lancaster seems to not rate him, his chance of going have disappeared).

By comparison, Maitland is as well qualified as the likes of Catt or Matt Stevens, and I think his playing for Scotland is reasonable (and I certainly don't blame Scotland for picking him at the first opportunity). And once eligible for one of the home nations, he's also eligible for the Lions. Whether he ends up getting selected is just down to Gatland and co - there is certainly an opportunity for him to go as very few wingers really made a strong case for their inclusion this season (and one or two made a strong case for their exclusion from the Lions, didn't you Mr Ashton?).

As for Scottish players that should travel:
Hogg - The most electric runner in the 6Ns. Has to be given some opportunity to play in the Tests, whether off the bench or by fiddling the back 3 to allow both him and 1/2p to start.

Beattie - Not a vintage 6Ns for no 8s, but Beattie probably did enough to get ahead of an out of form Heaslip as back up to Faletau.

Gray (if fit) - Potentially THE outstanding lock of the home nations. Big, powerful and athletic, could be absolutely devastating in fast ground conditions.

Murray - Probably 3rd choice TH behind Jones and Cole

Grant - Probably 3rd choice LH behind Jenkins and Healy (but well ahead of Vunipola, who simply isn't ready yet).

Possibles:
Laidlaw - His versatility and kicking ability could make him a squad member, but I'm yet to be convinced he's really outstanding at either 9 or 10. Maybe will show better behind a stronger pack

Scott - Offers something different at 12 from the bosh and bash of Roberts or the defensive solidity of Barritt. I'd like to see him or 12trees in the squad for their combination of carrying and handling skills.

Brown - In a very competetive position, you could probably make a case for about 6 players taking the jersey, and Brown would definitely be on the list. Depends a bit on what type of player Gats wants there - Brown is probably one of the strongest all-rounders as a genuine 6, but you can make a case for playing a big 7 at 6 (Warbs, Robshaw), a power carrier (SOB), a chopper (Lydiate) or an open-field athlete (Croft).

Maitland / Visser - As aluded to above, I don't think many wingers have cemented their place, so either or both could make it.

Taffineastbourne wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:From a Scottish point of view I’d be content with 4 tourists, disappointed with less and pretty happy with more. With regards to which 4 well that has been well debated, but I think Hogg should be on the plane and Richie Gray too if he can recover in time and prove his fitness. Kelly Brown would do a good job but has ridiculously strong competition, and Visser or Maitland have a chance. I think the likes of Laidlaw, Matt Scott and Ford will be relying on injuries, with Ford the most likely backup option for his experience.

Where I would be disappointed is if an on form and consistent Scottish player is not picked over someone who is either out of form and only picked on reputation, or not up to full match fitness.

Case in point is Lydiate going over Kelly Brown – we could argue for weeks on who is the ‘better’ player if both are on form and fully fit, but the simple fact is Brown had a strong 6N and is a key player in a successful Saracens team going for HK and AP glory, whereas Lydiate has been injured for over a year and will only have a few Rabbo games with the Dragons under his belt.

Now this is just been used as an example and it’s probably not worth arguing the specifics of the players mentioned, but you get the gist.

There is massive competition for the Lions and the fact that we are able to have such a debate about who should tour suggests there are no clear options from a Scottish point of view, but I definitely think we have better players now than the last 2 lions tours.

For what it’s worth, I think Murray, Gray (fitness dependent), Brown and Hogg will be picked, with Grant, Visser and Beattie a maybe and Laidlaw and Ford on the reserve list.

Agree 100%, I can't see how anyone justifies selecting Lydiate right now, and TBH even if he explodes back in the Rabo it would be too late IMHO. Similarly with the likes of Corbisiero, and dare I say it POC (although he must be considered for what he brings off the pitch)

For the record I would take Hogg, Visser, Laidlaw, Brown, Grey, and Murray, with Ford, Scott and Maitland on the reserve list, maybe even Beattie too!

Distorted double standards or what?Lydiate should not be considered as he has been injured yet Gray who shown no form recently and is injured should travel!

You have missed the bit where I said Gray travelling is dependent on him recovering in time then? There is a big difference - Gray has played all season, every Autumn test and all but the last game and a half of the 6N. Lydiate hasn't played for over a year

I'd fully accept if Gray didn't get selected because he was deemed not to have recovered in time, but you really can't compare the two.

George Carlin wrote:Taff - I am fascinated. You've taken a pop at three different posters on this thread now (to say nothing of "mercenaries", whatever they may be) who have expressed an opinion contrary to your own so I'd like to understand which of the following two positions is the accurate one:

Either (a) you don't realise that your posts tend to be unpleasant, condescending, ill-informed, graceless snots of vitriol or (b) you do realise that they are but choose to post them anyway.

Which is it?

George,if you feel that having a discussion is having a pop Lord help us.I find your post offensive in the extreme.This is a forum for people to express their opinions.If you do not like this why do you visit?

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:From a Scottish point of view I’d be content with 4 tourists, disappointed with less and pretty happy with more. With regards to which 4 well that has been well debated, but I think Hogg should be on the plane and Richie Gray too if he can recover in time and prove his fitness. Kelly Brown would do a good job but has ridiculously strong competition, and Visser or Maitland have a chance. I think the likes of Laidlaw, Matt Scott and Ford will be relying on injuries, with Ford the most likely backup option for his experience.

Where I would be disappointed is if an on form and consistent Scottish player is not picked over someone who is either out of form and only picked on reputation, or not up to full match fitness.

Case in point is Lydiate going over Kelly Brown – we could argue for weeks on who is the ‘better’ player if both are on form and fully fit, but the simple fact is Brown had a strong 6N and is a key player in a successful Saracens team going for HK and AP glory, whereas Lydiate has been injured for over a year and will only have a few Rabbo games with the Dragons under his belt.

Now this is just been used as an example and it’s probably not worth arguing the specifics of the players mentioned, but you get the gist.

There is massive competition for the Lions and the fact that we are able to have such a debate about who should tour suggests there are no clear options from a Scottish point of view, but I definitely think we have better players now than the last 2 lions tours.

For what it’s worth, I think Murray, Gray (fitness dependent), Brown and Hogg will be picked, with Grant, Visser and Beattie a maybe and Laidlaw and Ford on the reserve list.

Agree 100%, I can't see how anyone justifies selecting Lydiate right now, and TBH even if he explodes back in the Rabo it would be too late IMHO. Similarly with the likes of Corbisiero, and dare I say it POC (although he must be considered for what he brings off the pitch)

For the record I would take Hogg, Visser, Laidlaw, Brown, Grey, and Murray, with Ford, Scott and Maitland on the reserve list, maybe even Beattie too!

Distorted double standards or what?Lydiate should not be considered as he has been injured yet Gray who shown no form recently and is injured should travel!

You have missed the bit where I said Gray travelling is dependent on him recovering in time then? There is a big difference - Gray has played all season, every Autumn test and all but the last game and a half of the 6N. Lydiate hasn't played for over a year

I'd fully accept if Gray didn't get selected because he was deemed not to have recovered in time, but you really can't compare the two.

Whilst Gray has played,has he played well?I do not think so.He is a shadow of the player that he was.I would not take Lydiate on the lions as I would not take Gray.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:From a Scottish point of view I’d be content with 4 tourists, disappointed with less and pretty happy with more. With regards to which 4 well that has been well debated, but I think Hogg should be on the plane and Richie Gray too if he can recover in time and prove his fitness. Kelly Brown would do a good job but has ridiculously strong competition, and Visser or Maitland have a chance. I think the likes of Laidlaw, Matt Scott and Ford will be relying on injuries, with Ford the most likely backup option for his experience.

Where I would be disappointed is if an on form and consistent Scottish player is not picked over someone who is either out of form and only picked on reputation, or not up to full match fitness.

Case in point is Lydiate going over Kelly Brown – we could argue for weeks on who is the ‘better’ player if both are on form and fully fit, but the simple fact is Brown had a strong 6N and is a key player in a successful Saracens team going for HK and AP glory, whereas Lydiate has been injured for over a year and will only have a few Rabbo games with the Dragons under his belt.

Now this is just been used as an example and it’s probably not worth arguing the specifics of the players mentioned, but you get the gist.

There is massive competition for the Lions and the fact that we are able to have such a debate about who should tour suggests there are no clear options from a Scottish point of view, but I definitely think we have better players now than the last 2 lions tours.

For what it’s worth, I think Murray, Gray (fitness dependent), Brown and Hogg will be picked, with Grant, Visser and Beattie a maybe and Laidlaw and Ford on the reserve list.

Agree 100%, I can't see how anyone justifies selecting Lydiate right now, and TBH even if he explodes back in the Rabo it would be too late IMHO. Similarly with the likes of Corbisiero, and dare I say it POC (although he must be considered for what he brings off the pitch)

For the record I would take Hogg, Visser, Laidlaw, Brown, Grey, and Murray, with Ford, Scott and Maitland on the reserve list, maybe even Beattie too!

Distorted double standards or what?Lydiate should not be considered as he has been injured yet Gray who shown no form recently and is injured should travel!

You have missed the bit where I said Gray travelling is dependent on him recovering in time then? There is a big difference - Gray has played all season, every Autumn test and all but the last game and a half of the 6N. Lydiate hasn't played for over a year

I'd fully accept if Gray didn't get selected because he was deemed not to have recovered in time, but you really can't compare the two.

RDW as you missed the bit about recent form