On a scale of 1-10 how important are the Lions to you?

First topic message reminder :

I will take an interest. But it'll be below that of in order country (6ns), country (RWC), country (general internationals), club (European), club (domestic league).

Oi give it eight.

kingraf wrote:RugbyFan- Without any disrespect, NH teams dont seem to give a damn when they come down to the dirty South. Argentina are a challenge at home, in fact I think they could nick your full-strength team at home.

Not sure why you would say that. Woodward maintained his team's tour to NZ and Australia was a key component in building their confidence for the 2003 Cup.

Argentina could easily beat England. If we do lose, we may learn something valuable about certain people. If we win, however, it won't necessarily give us a better idea of how to rate players against each other.

I think that the nigh on impossible challeng of melding players from four teams to take on a well drilled International team is fascinating.
Would love to see the SH attempt a similar conglomeration to come up North.

RF- its more based on the fact that rugby matches the SH inbound tours are one-way traffic, results wise. I cant believe a motivated Ireland can lose 60-0 to NZ. Anywhere.

Taffin- it would be an interesting challenge, but it should be made easier by the fact that the team would basically be NZ, plus one bok and maybe two Wallabies.

if we beat new Zealand they would suddenly become very important.

Going to SA last time was a lifetime highlight. Mind you so was going to the 07 WC final (losing both as well)

0.5

It's the best thing ever.

Taffineastbourne wrote:I think that the nigh on impossible challeng of melding players from four teams to take on a well drilled International team is fascinating.
Would love to see the SH attempt a similar conglomeration to come up North.

The best of the big 3 plus Argentina vs one of the home nations?

Slaughter!

I couldnt hope to create a SH starting XV., not even backline, the talent is ridiculous. McCaw picks himself. But after that you could create five of six different sides and I think the result will be the same.

SH by Blowout..

1 -pinnacle of northern hemisphere, a unique and special challenge in taking the best of four sides in a short space of side and gelling them to win a series.

Jimpy wrote:

offload wrote:Jimpy - you're right about one thing, it is just an opinion, but don't confuse my opinion with sentimental attachment or a lack of pragamitsm.

And don't confuse mine with me somehow not being a 'real' rugby fan.

Get the point?

There is no confusion. You are little more than a wummer and probably play the same games on other sites and on forums discussing other sports

Just an opinion of course

I'm going to Australia this summer for the tour. It's costin me a fortune but it's a lifelong dream. I can't wait. The Lions for me is the biggest of all. I'm not saying i prefer the Lions over Ireland or Leinster,.. But i guess maybe i am!!

GT - your poll is completely farcical as obviously some posters have picked up that 1 is high while others assume the more common 1 being low - so basically two diametrically opposed opinions actually voting for the same thing!

The Lions are also really important to me, but not because I like them. They have long outlived their usefulness and worse are actually bad for NH rugby. Therefore they are important in that I want to see as few Irishmen tour as possible to lessen the negative impact on Ireland. OTOH I want to see the Lions win to undermine the cheap psychological edge the Lions generally give SH opposition.

The whole concept has become far too one-sided in the professional era, and whose main purpose is to boost the SH coffers, and that isn't important to me at all - so I'll go for whatever 10 means?

Jimpy wrote:

Notch wrote:I've given it 5/10.

Thing is though, thats me as a Lions fan. If you asked me to rate how much I was looking forward to the series as a rugby fan I'd say 10/10. I think it's brilliant.

They are not 'my' team in the same way Ulster or Ireland are, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying watching New Zealand or the RWC, or the Heineken Cup Finals or the Barbarians. In terms of love for the team, they're not that important to me.

In terms of love for the game I cannot wait for the Lions tour.

But the cunning author of the article has engineered it so 10 is the lowest score... see what he did there? ;-)

Yeah, but thats stupid so I'm deliberately ignoring it.

red_stag wrote:But that isn't what I use to judge entertainment Jimpy. The midweek games are much better in those nations, they are much more rugby orientated than Australia and they have a better history of facing the Lions.

I still can't wait to head to Oz this summer but really winning and losing isn't the benchmark.

One of my favourite days supporting Munster in the Heineken Cup was in a semi final defeat in 2004.

And I'm with baz...this is a lifetime dream. Two actually; to go on a Lions tour and see Australia.

Lions tours are amazing, and about to go on my 2nd tour:) Nothing old and outdated about them at all. They fill stadiums and bring big money to the SH. Wold have liked them to have gone to the PI to play a match over there.

Can't wait, nor can real rugby fans

I absolutely frickin love the whole Lions concept and have done since I was a kid.

I have been lucky enough to have gone to NZ and SA before and am now completing the trio this year and can't wait.

I know some query the concept of them in the pro era but the players themselves love it and love the idea of teaming up with players they normally batter every 6 Nations, some get along some don't but thats life.

You only have to look at all the debates on these boards about who will and won't go/play etc to see what an impact it has on the rugby mad community.

Long way they continue IMO.

bedfordwelsh wrote:I absolutely frickin love the whole Lions concept and have done since I was a kid.

I have been lucky enough to have gone to NZ and SA before and am now completing the trio this year and can't wait.

I know some query the concept of them in the pro era but the players love themselves love and love the idea of teaming up with players they normally batter every 6 Nations, some get along some don't but thats life.

You only have to look at all the debates on these boards about who will and won't go/play etc to see what an impact it has on the rugby mad community.

Long way they continue IMO.

Notch wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

Notch wrote:I've given it 5/10.

Thing is though, thats me as a Lions fan. If you asked me to rate how much I was looking forward to the series as a rugby fan I'd say 10/10. I think it's brilliant.

They are not 'my' team in the same way Ulster or Ireland are, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying watching New Zealand or the RWC, or the Heineken Cup Finals or the Barbarians. In terms of love for the team, they're not that important to me.

In terms of love for the game I cannot wait for the Lions tour.

But the cunning author of the article has engineered it so 10 is the lowest score... see what he did there? ;-)

Yeah, but thats stupid so I'm deliberately ignoring it.

On a scale of 1-10 how important are the Lions to you? (1 is high, 10 low)

The question put is simple, with allowance for vote cancelling.

Some posters are apparently simple as well.
It's an ordinal scale - like a league position.

greytiger wrote:

On a scale of 1-10 how important are the Lions to you? (1 is high, 10 low)

The question put is simple, with allowance for vote cancelling.

Some posters are apparently simple as well.
It's an ordinal scale - like a league position.

To be honest it is written there in plain English at the top of the thread (Just above the poll). If people do not read the question properly then I guess that is worrying.

Ireland 10
Lions 9
Leinster 8
CWC 7
Australia 6 (dual nationality)

Love the Lions. Long may it continue. Ireland rugby is the pinacle though.

Not arsed with the reverse voting system.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

greytiger wrote:

On a scale of 1-10 how important are the Lions to you? (1 is high, 10 low)

The question put is simple, with allowance for vote cancelling.

Some posters are apparently simple as well.
It's an ordinal scale - like a league position.

To be honest it is written their in plain English at the top of the thread (Just above the poll). If people do not read the question properly then I guess that is worrying.

THERE .... subtle differences can make reading difficult:)

dragonbreath wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

offload wrote:Jimpy - you're right about one thing, it is just an opinion, but don't confuse my opinion with sentimental attachment or a lack of pragamitsm.

And don't confuse mine with me somehow not being a 'real' rugby fan.

Get the point?

There is no confusion. You are little more than a wummer and probably play the same games on other sites and on forums discussing other sports

Just an opinion of course

And I expect you are simply... little, in other ways.

I'm hardly wumming, don't get all in a tizzy because I happen to have a minority opinion that you simply don't understand. Mind, you that wouldn't be difficult, Jaysus, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

greytiger wrote:

On a scale of 1-10 how important are the Lions to you? (1 is high, 10 low)

The question put is simple, with allowance for vote cancelling.

Some posters are apparently simple as well.
It's an ordinal scale - like a league position.

To be honest it is written their in plain English at the top of the thread (Just above the poll). If people do not read the question properly then I guess that is worrying.

THERE .... subtle differences can make reading difficult:)

Oh 'eck, I can't believe I left such a school boy error in, what was basically, a pendant post.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

greytiger wrote:

On a scale of 1-10 how important are the Lions to you? (1 is high, 10 low)

The question put is simple, with allowance for vote cancelling.

Some posters are apparently simple as well.
It's an ordinal scale - like a league position.

To be honest it is written their in plain English at the top of the thread (Just above the poll). If people do not read the question properly then I guess that is worrying.

THERE .... subtle differences can make reading difficult:)

Oh 'eck, I can't believe I left such a school boy error in, what was basically, a pendant post.

I know, but let's be honest, if one is being critical of another's post it's best to get one's own correct. You don't feel quite a "Richard Cranium" then:)

greytiger wrote:

Notch wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

Notch wrote:I've given it 5/10.

Thing is though, thats me as a Lions fan. If you asked me to rate how much I was looking forward to the series as a rugby fan I'd say 10/10. I think it's brilliant.

They are not 'my' team in the same way Ulster or Ireland are, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying watching New Zealand or the RWC, or the Heineken Cup Finals or the Barbarians. In terms of love for the team, they're not that important to me.

In terms of love for the game I cannot wait for the Lions tour.

But the cunning author of the article has engineered it so 10 is the lowest score... see what he did there? ;-)

Yeah, but thats stupid so I'm deliberately ignoring it.

On a scale of 1-10 how important are the Lions to you? (1 is high, 10 low)

The question put is simple, with allowance for vote cancelling.

Some posters are apparently simple as well.
It's an ordinal scale - like a league position.

Ordinal scales work well for leagues, they do not work well for measureing one's opinions, feelings or experiences. Its rather basic Human Factors i'm afraid.

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

greytiger wrote:

On a scale of 1-10 how important are the Lions to you? (1 is high, 10 low)

The question put is simple, with allowance for vote cancelling.

Some posters are apparently simple as well.
It's an ordinal scale - like a league position.

To be honest it is written their in plain English at the top of the thread (Just above the poll). If people do not read the question properly then I guess that is worrying.

THERE .... subtle differences can make reading difficult:)

Oh 'eck, I can't believe I left such a school boy error in, what was basically, a pendant post.

I know, but let's be honest, if one is being critical of another's post it's best to get one's own correct. You don't feel quite a "Richard Cranium" then:)

I believe the phenomenon is known as Muphry's law.

Jimpy wrote:

greytiger wrote:

Notch wrote:

Jimpy wrote:

Notch wrote:I've given it 5/10.

Thing is though, thats me as a Lions fan. If you asked me to rate how much I was looking forward to the series as a rugby fan I'd say 10/10. I think it's brilliant.

They are not 'my' team in the same way Ulster or Ireland are, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying watching New Zealand or the RWC, or the Heineken Cup Finals or the Barbarians. In terms of love for the team, they're not that important to me.

In terms of love for the game I cannot wait for the Lions tour.

But the cunning author of the article has engineered it so 10 is the lowest score... see what he did there? ;-)

Yeah, but thats stupid so I'm deliberately ignoring it.

On a scale of 1-10 how important are the Lions to you? (1 is high, 10 low)

The question put is simple, with allowance for vote cancelling.

Some posters are apparently simple as well.
It's an ordinal scale - like a league position.

Ordinal scales work well for leagues, they do not work well for measureing one's opinions, feelings or experiences. Its rather basic Human Factors i'm afraid.

Well the Lions come well down my list of importance in rugby interests Jimp. (stupid boy)

Rainbow - to be honest I was being a bit of a "Richard Cranium" anyway, so I guess that would just be karma.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Rainbow - to be honest I was being a bit of a "Richard Cranium" anyway, so I guess that would just be karma.

For me its above everything, my favourite part of rugby

I'm about a 5 - National team first, then the regions - Given that the welsh representation might be decent this year I might get up to a 6

What about the Baa baas?

Lions tours don't do anything for me and are so far behind country-province-club that they barely register.

A makey-up team that only seem to exist to line the coffers of Oz, SA, NZ every few years. Like the Barbarians they're a relic of a bygone age when Lions players on tour thought it was great gas to trash hotel rooms and generally act like drunken eejits and give moral support to SA during the apartheid years.

It really sticks in my craw when I hear former and current Irish players talk about the Lions being the pinnacle of achievement for them - if playing in the green shirt isn't the pinnacle for any Irish player then there's something badly wrong. Does POC put the red Lions shirt ahead of the red Munster shirt or the green of Ireland - does he hell? Do the Munster or Leinster players that have tasted HC success believe the Lions are a higher achievement - jeez I hope not!

And finally no doubt some players from all four countries will come back crocked and not fito to start next season. If Healy, Sexton, O'Brien or any Irish players picked for the Lions end up crocked then I for one will be mightily p1ssed off

RubyGuby wrote:I'm about a 5 - National team first, then the regions - Given that the welsh representation might be decent this year I might get up to a 6

What if we made the Lions play in red shirts ?

I'm torn. I really love watching all the games.

On the other hand Ireland are my first priority and the Lions can have a negative impact in terms of injuries and exhaustion. And it deprives Ireland of a proper full strength tour to help our development. Maybe very few Irish will go this year, which will be a blessing for our new coach.

Anyone know how important the Lions are for our unions in financial terms?

Anyway I gave it a 7. Not hugely important to me but boosted the mark because of great entertainment value.

Feckless they are probally best for scotland , then ireland then wales then england..

Because we probally split the revenue.

I am only guessing by the way. But i would bet on it being that way.. The team that clearly finacially wins out would be the opposition

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Oh 'eck, I can't believe I left such a school boy error in, what was basically, a pendant post.

Don't you mean... a pedant post? Although to be pedantic... it should be 'pedantic'

I wonder do any of the Ulster lads think of the Lions as their first team behind Ireland given their unique dual nationality.

....only joking.

Oh Germs, don't go there Ma8.

GunsGerms wrote:I wonder do any of the Ulster lads think of the Lions as their first team behind Ireland given their unique dual nationality.

....only joking.

Nah man! What you've missed out on is Ireland is already a dual nationality team.

Actually a triple nationality team, counting Richardt Strauss!

Notch wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:I wonder do any of the Ulster lads think of the Lions as their first team behind Ireland given their unique dual nationality.

....only joking.

Nah man! What you've missed out on is Ireland is already a dual nationality team.

Ha maybe I need Rodders around for an Ulsterman to take the bait. SUFTUM

Absolutely

The only Lions tours I took any interest in was 1989 and 1997. Since 1997 every series was on Sky Sports and my parents never wanted to pay the money every month.
As a result I lost touch and interest in them.

The Lions are important from a rugby point of view, all of the 4 Home Union make a profit from the Lions, over £1 million each last time, it's very unusual for a Union to be in profit as a result of a summer tour.
While it's a fantastic earner for the players as well. Their not going anywhere.

The lions vs baa baas match could be an incredible opportunity to see the best of north vs south.

maestegmafia wrote:The lions vs baa baas match could be an incredible opportunity to see the best of north vs south.

The Lions can neither be classed as the "best of north", nor even the best of Europe. Given the amount of debate on here about the players, it will be arguable whether whatever selection is even the best of the four nations.

However the Lions is all about marketing so I expect they will be promoted as the "best of north", as it has a better ring than the "best political compromise in Gatland's eyes".