Priestland set to tour with Lions?

First topic message reminder :

Sorry no link as story is behind a paywall, but in The Times today they state that Rhys Priestland is currently Gatland's preferred choice to tour Australia as backup to Sexton, instead of either Dan Biggar or Owen Farrell. It goes on to suggest that Farrell needs a MoTM display tomorrow to secure his place ahead of the Scarlets player.

It is obvious that Gatland likes Priestland as a player - and certainly seems to favour him over Biggar - but bearing in mind his form pre-achilles injury and limited time back for Scarlets would this be wise?

For me I have no real preference between Biggar and Farrell - but feel both should be well ahead of Priestland.

It seems odd that some folk would rather select someone who has played International Rugby and proved themselves lacking over someone who gives every indication of having a glittering future.Taking conservatism to new levels!

Taffineastbourne wrote:It seems odd that some folk would rather select someone who has played International Rugby and proved themselves lacking over someone who gives every indication of having a glittering future.Taking conservatism to new levels!

I would like to see players not given international exposure by their nations equal opportunity to make the squad. We would be missing out on some great players if we didnt.

Though that said, David Flatmans call for Wilson of Bath to be third choice Tighthead, in The Independent is frankly ridiculous.

Flatman was a tighthead though right? That was his bread and butter so he should know what makes a good one and what doesn't?

Props can get a unfair/generous reputation for being bad/good depending on the other players in their front five.

Beast is probably an average scrummager at best... probably helped having Bismarck next to him and Bakkies behind in the last lions tour... but Beast got the rewards.

That said, nothing I've seen of Wilson would warrant selection. Its his old club mate anyhow.

Beast cops a lot of Criticism for his scrumming,

what a lot of people don't realsise is that he was a flanker and converted to prop.

He is still young for a prop and learning, initially he was criticised for scrumming in a lot, but that doesn't happen all that often anymore.

Biltong wrote:Beast cops a lot of Criticism for his scrumming,

what a lot of people don't realsise is that he was a flanker and converted to prop.

He is still young for a prop and learning, initially he was criticised for scrumming in a lot, but that doesn't happen all that often anymore.

Agreed BB. He's not bad but how he tore into Vickery 4 years ago pushed him to the Carl Hayman's reputation whereas at the time in terms of scrumtime he was probably at best 3rd best tighthead in SA, he's improved mind.... I recall a couple of months later watching the Cheetahs smash him to bits in the CC SF... more so then the boks did the Lions in the 1st test.

FA, he plays loose head.

The same goes for Coenie Oosthuizen, they are trying to convert him into a tight head because we don't have any.

He is not a tight head and has struggled the whole saeson at tight head. The past two game she was put at loosehead and he is much better there.

Returning to the OP it would certainly be a very controversial selection, as would the inclusion of Lydiate, lesser so to a degree...!

But no one has considered the point that Gatland might be right to call up such players who have recently played little rugby.

He ha made these calls before and they have inevitably gone very well for him. He knows how to get the best out of players.

I think there is an overemphasis on the scrum in the NH. I think it is an important part of the game and don't want it to be seem as a mere restart but give me a mobile, tackling, carrying prop like Beast over a Sheridan anyday. With the overall size of the Bok pack they will pretty much always have parity with the oposition and on occaison dominate.

Also if Vickery had taken Beast apart as Beast had done to him I presume comentators would've put it down to the older more experienced player using his streetwise skills to good effect over the rookie.

Corbisiero is spoken up by England fans but you'll struggle to find a more illegal scrummager. Watch the Boks last game against Eng for proof.

123456789 wrote:If he is it will make a mockery of the Lions, Gatland will show that he's just another Woodward, Priestland has never, ever been a good player

That's where I stopped reading your post. Disagree with his selection if you want, but lying doesn't do your argument any favours.

Indeed luckless -last year Preistland looked the real deal.

Priestland of this decade = Charlie Hodgson of the last decade.

Good skills, good player... when it comes to the crunch though you can't rely on him.

That's nonsense, fa0019. Unless when you say 'the crunch', you're omitting World Cup games and last season's Six Nations. He didn't have a great game at Twickenham, granted, but in the France game - which was a fairly big deal - his kicking out of hand was superb.

Charlie Hodgson had great games too... remember him destroying the boks in 04.. the recently crowned 3N champs? Yet overall he was dangerous to field for England.

You can't have a player who is sometimes hot sometimes cold. You need consistency from your 10.. that and real steel confidence wise.

No player is consistently good. Not one.

Priestland's dip in form was painful to watch, but was it his fault that he continued to be selected?

You can't blame the coaches for playing him... was he fit? its not like he didn't have the platform either with a solid pack all year.

Form does come and go.... but his didn't just go down... it dragged the rest of the teams down with it.
Until he can prove himself to be able to handle the big occasion again then he can't be trusted in such a big tour.

He's the strings puller, the man who runs the game...esp. with Phillips at 9 and Roberts at 12. You can't have your 10 being unsure, not confident.

fa0019 wrote:Form does come and go.... but his didn't just go down... it dragged the rest of the teams down with it.

Remind me how heavy those defeats to the Wallabies were. If he dragged the team's form down, he didn't pull very hard.

Let's also remember that even if Priestland tours, Sexton is still almost certain to be the Test outside half.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Form does come and go.... but his didn't just go down... it dragged the rest of the teams down with it.

Remind me how heavy those defeats to the Wallabies were. If he dragged the team's form down, he didn't pull very hard.

If you had another guy playing say Biggar (if he was fit) I think you would have won at least 1 match.

Its not about the skills he has.

Would you be happy to see him in a Wales jersey going forward as starting 10?

You certainly can blame the coaches for playing a player who had clearly lost his form. Dreadful selection.

I would be very surprised if Preistland tours tho

If he was in form, fa0019, absolutely.

nathan wrote:

t1000advancedprototype wrote:Biggar
Sexton
Hook

In that order

I'd still have Sexton as a starter, still unsure on if Hook should travel. Watched him play the other night and he wasn't brilliant. Bigger, again still unsure about.

a
I'd go with T1000, Biggar's on a roll, since the chargedown Sextons just coming back from injury. Anyway there's a lot of tour games to sort the Test starter. Couldn't be the Rugby correspondent on R4 Today. Seemed to think it was Wilco or Farrell. Talk about out of touch Englnd centric

The issue here is..... what 10 out there has the Potential and Ability to get a Lions backline moving?. Priestland is the only halfback who really has that natural ability to construct controlled attacking opportunities. The way he played after been informed only what 20 mins that he was making his debut in the "world cup friendly double header" against England at Twickers was nothing short of awesome and he followed that up with a whole trance of very impressive performances. Wilkinson Farrell Biggar havent that natural side to their play or even the ability to play that way. However its two things.... its much to late in the day to assess his form/fitness as he what played 1/2 a game and hence you cannae assess his confidence. Too much of risk I'm afraid... shame that tho

I agree that an inform Preistland would be a real asset - however we don't have one. as for getting the back line moving? Sexton is not bad at all, Flood has his moments as well. Rhubarb Jackson?

Flood in my opinion is no where near Lions quality, I feel England should move beyond him if they want to be serious about RWC2015

The weakest position for the Lions, if Sexton gets injured.....

deffo Jackson he certainly can get a game moving forward but frustratingly inconsistent seen him have a superb game and the next week dire, and yes Sexton can to an extent but we are assuming he is going as first choice anyway

FFS - I was only joking about Rhubarb!

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:No player is consistently good. Not one.

Priestland's dip in form was painful to watch, but was it his fault that he continued to be selected?

Dan Biggar is...

Yes of course, silly me. He had a stormer against Ireland the other month and he really shone when we drew with Fiji a season or two ago.

Huh? Priest was quoted as saying he was under coach's orders to kick deep for position in the Aus games which he did do relentlessly predictably getting their back line moving alright

I can't see Gatland picking Preistland, no game time since the AI's and he was rubbish and not much better (if he was) in the Aust tour and the previous 6N. I don't rate Sexton he also blows hot and cold, I have not been a big fan of Dan Biggar but at least he is solid but I suspect he will not be picked. If two FH's are going I suspect it will be Sexton and Flood and Hook will go as the untility player.

I wouldn't take Toby Flood.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I wouldn't take Toby Flood.

Neither would I, though he is more likely to get the back moving than some other options.

That's true.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:That's true.

Of course it may not always be moving in the right direction.

LondonTiger wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:That's true.

Of course it may not always be moving in the right direction.

Ha, ha - at least it wouldn't be boring.

Gatland will feel some pressure to have a decent number of English in the squad, if only to ensure media interest back home. He might also be tempted to give SL a poke in the eye by picking players who are out of favour or unavailable. Flood would manage that, Twelvetrees too, but Wilkinson would be even better.

Unless Wilkinson has told Gatland that if Toulon get to the HC final then he doesnt want the media attention to divert the very important first week of coaching policy & team building.... then Wilkinson will be ahead of Flood. I cant see more than two 10s going hence Toby been selected to accompany Sexton ahead of Farrell Wilko Biggar Laidlaw is pretty unlikely.

flyhalffactory wrote:Unless Wilkinson has told Gatland that if Toulon get to the HC final then he doesnt want the media attention to divert the very important first week of coaching policy & team building.... then Wilkinson will be ahead of Flood. I cant see more than two 10s going hence Toby been selected to accompany Sexton ahead of Farrell Wilko Biggar Laidlaw is pretty unlikely.

I think almost all of us agree.

Well that was a waste of a few pages.............. bin them.

Good news Preistland is not going, or is he, only two flyhalves in the squad!! I would not put it past Gatland to call Preistland up in a few weeks time, most Welsh suporters know Gatland has blue eyed boys in his team they come straight in from long term injuries e.g., Lydiate, Roberts, Jenkins, Warburton, AWJ!!

Alun, let's say Priestland has a stormer against Treviso on Friday to seal the Scarlets' place in the playoffs; let's say he continues to play well and guides the Scarlets to the Pro12 final. What would you say then if he was called up?