Micheal Lynagh... On the Ball As Usual

First topic message reminder :

Firstly all the talk is about how amazing the Aussie Super teams skill levels are and how they are all playing immensely... Despite the league format proving otherwise, and all teams similar standings to last seasons finish.

He loves to highlight how goo players like AAC, Folau, and JOC are, despite 2 having poor games this morning showing little going forward and totally outclassed by Inman and English.

Then we talk about the strengths of the Aus team... The back row

Then Cooper will definately be named in the Aus team, despite him being told he has to defend in the front line to prove himself for international rugby and him not doing so much at all! Lynagh is convinced Cooper and Beale should be named and assessed at the camp, how can Beale be assessed where he is now? And surely for all Coopers weaknesses what he brings to any team isn't up for debate, it's his attitude toward everything, and Deans relationship!

And lastly Lynagh scoffs at the perceived weakness of the Aus scrum and physicality, as they beat both Wales and England in the Autumn and their scrum was the better despite being weakened...

Oh Mr Lynagh you sure know how to make astute observations.

a lot of confidence behind the Lions but given the general form of these players and their countries down under I can't really see them as favourites.

Icu wrote:I would have to disagree about the Wallabies being (or close to being) in disarray. If there was any sort of discontentment in the Wallaby camp it would have somehow found its way out of the notoriously leaky ARU. The Cooper/Deans saga is largely being driven by the media and inflamed by one-eyed Queenslander's and their persecution complex. As for injuries, all bar Pocock and TPN will be fit for the 2nd test, if not the first. There is more than adequate cover for G Smith and Digby in the meantime. Barnes is back and playing well and MMM will return from injury soon. Nic White stepped up to Deans' challenge and had a good game against the Blues on Friday night and outplayed Piri Weepu i reckon. As for KB, his possible return for the Wallabies would increase team morale IMO, not lessen it. Last season was disarray, not so this time............yet.

Of course the Aussies are in disarray. A lot of their best players will be missing.

Pocock. Best player, injured
Cooper. Reasonably good, head case - dropped
JOC. Excellent, sternum injury
Ioane. Biggest try threat, injured
Beale. Second biggest try threat, another head case - in rehab
Smith. Old age injury

Most of Australia's best players are dropped, injured or in rehab. Is this what you call good preparation in Australia?

Well, it's not perfect but it's nothing to panic about... like you guys are.

GunsGerms wrote:

Icu wrote:I would have to disagree about the Wallabies being (or close to being) in disarray. If there was any sort of discontentment in the Wallaby camp it would have somehow found its way out of the notoriously leaky ARU. The Cooper/Deans saga is largely being driven by the media and inflamed by one-eyed Queenslander's and their persecution complex. As for injuries, all bar Pocock and TPN will be fit for the 2nd test, if not the first. There is more than adequate cover for G Smith and Digby in the meantime. Barnes is back and playing well and MMM will return from injury soon. Nic White stepped up to Deans' challenge and had a good game against the Blues on Friday night and outplayed Piri Weepu i reckon. As for KB, his possible return for the Wallabies would increase team morale IMO, not lessen it. Last season was disarray, not so this time............yet.

Of course the Aussies are in disarray. A lot of their best players will be missing.

Pocock. Best player, injured
Cooper. Reasonably good, head case - dropped
JOC. Excellent, sternum injury
Ioane. Biggest try threat, injured
Beale. Second biggest try threat, another head case - in rehab
Smith. Old age injury

Most of Australia's best players are dropped, injured or in rehab. Is this what you call good preparation in Australia?

I must have head my stuck somewhere dark over the past 2 years and not been paying attention. Cause i reckon;
Pocock: best player? Debatable. Hooper was just as effective, if not more so on the EOYT. More rounded player than Pocock. Moot point anyway. Genia is Australia's best player.
Cooper: (appears to be) a former headcase. More mature this year. Hasn't been dropped. Hasn't been in the Wallaby squad for a while. May be one of 6 players to be added on June 11. Can't wait to see how he goes for the Reds against the Lions.
JOC: Excellent? Yes, but not really as 10. The general consensus he is better on the wing or FB. Average pass. Average kicking game. Will do ok though, hopefully better. Available for the 1st test.
Digby: 2 tries in his last 13 tests hardly constitutes biggest try threat. A loss for sure but may play the 1st test anyway. More than adequately covered by Tomane, Folau and Cummins in that order. Unlike Digby, these guys can also pass and kick.
Beale: A fully fit KB would be a loss for any side. KB hasn't been at his best since 2010/11. Perhaps you have not been watching him? Still, a 80% firing KB is better than a lot of players. One of RD's favourites and will get a run if fit. However, both Barnes and Folau are far better under the high ball than KB. They can also tackle. Barnes also much better tactical kicker.
Smith: 32 is hardly old. There's a bloke called McCaw (who Smith had some epic battles with)who's that age and he still gets around alright. Smith is as tough as nails. Only out for a few weeks. Probably back for the 2nd test. Experience is a loss but covered adequately by Hooper/ Gill.

Only Pocock and TPN are definitely out for the series. No-one has been dropped, the injuries thus far are relatively minor and KB is in 'rehab' for having 1 beer when he was on an alcohol ban. The 'rehab' is more to do with responsibility, attitude and priorities than for any substance addiction. We are not in that much disarray that we'd be adding a recovering addict to the playing group - at least i think not. The squad have one more game to play then get to rest. They've been playing for 10 weeks against best players in NZ and SA so will only need a few minutes of game time to blow away the cobwebs. Unlike the Lions, they won't be getting touched up by the SXV sides no-one has been thrown out of the squad already for disciplinary reasons. Disarray? Wishful thinking on your part. Whatever helps i guess. Unless perhaps you have a direct line to the ARU and know something the rest of us don't?

Icu wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Icu wrote:I would have to disagree about the Wallabies being (or close to being) in disarray. If there was any sort of discontentment in the Wallaby camp it would have somehow found its way out of the notoriously leaky ARU. The Cooper/Deans saga is largely being driven by the media and inflamed by one-eyed Queenslander's and their persecution complex. As for injuries, all bar Pocock and TPN will be fit for the 2nd test, if not the first. There is more than adequate cover for G Smith and Digby in the meantime. Barnes is back and playing well and MMM will return from injury soon. Nic White stepped up to Deans' challenge and had a good game against the Blues on Friday night and outplayed Piri Weepu i reckon. As for KB, his possible return for the Wallabies would increase team morale IMO, not lessen it. Last season was disarray, not so this time............yet.

Of course the Aussies are in disarray. A lot of their best players will be missing.

Pocock. Best player, injured
Cooper. Reasonably good, head case - dropped
JOC. Excellent, sternum injury
Ioane. Biggest try threat, injured
Beale. Second biggest try threat, another head case - in rehab
Smith. Old age injury

Most of Australia's best players are dropped, injured or in rehab. Is this what you call good preparation in Australia?

I must have head my stuck somewhere dark over the past 2 years and not been paying attention. Cause i reckon;
Pocock: best player? Debatable. Hooper was just as effective, if not more so on the EOYT. More rounded player than Pocock. Moot point anyway. Genia is Australia's best player.
Cooper: (appears to be) a former headcase. More mature this year. Hasn't been dropped. Hasn't been in the Wallaby squad for a while. May be one of 6 players to be added on June 11. Can't wait to see how he goes for the Reds against the Lions.
JOC: Excellent? Yes, but not really as 10. The general consensus he is better on the wing or FB. Average pass. Average kicking game. Will do ok though, hopefully better. Available for the 1st test.
Digby: 2 tries in his last 13 tests hardly constitutes biggest try threat. A loss for sure but may play the 1st test anyway. More than adequately covered by Tomane, Folau and Cummins in that order. Unlike Digby, these guys can also pass and kick.
Beale: A fully fit KB would be a loss for any side. KB hasn't been at his best since 2010/11. Perhaps you have not been watching him? Still, a 80% firing KB is better than a lot of players. One of RD's favourites and will get a run if fit. However, both Barnes and Folau are far better under the high ball than KB. They can also tackle. Barnes also much better tactical kicker.
Smith: 32 is hardly old. There's a bloke called McCaw (who Smith had some epic battles with)who's that age and he still gets around alright. Smith is as tough as nails. Only out for a few weeks. Probably back for the 2nd test. Experience is a loss but covered adequately by Hooper/ Gill.

Only Pocock and TPN are definitely out for the series. No-one has been dropped, the injuries thus far are relatively minor and KB is in 'rehab' for having 1 beer when he was on an alcohol ban. The 'rehab' is more to do with responsibility, attitude and priorities than for any substance addiction. We are not in that much disarray that we'd be adding a recovering addict to the playing group - at least i think not. The squad have one more game to play then get to rest. They've been playing for 10 weeks against best players in NZ and SA so will only need a few minutes of game time to blow away the cobwebs. Unlike the Lions, they won't be getting touched up by the SXV sides no-one has been thrown out of the squad already for disciplinary reasons. Disarray? Wishful thinking on your part. Whatever helps i guess. Unless perhaps you have a direct line to the ARU and know something the rest of us don't?

Pocock in my view is one dimensional, he is a pilferer, Hooper is more than just a pilferer, he can carry ball, made some nice moves with his teammates on the run around with the Waratahs, he has lots more pace, and in defence he is good.

Icu wrote:
I must have head my stuck somewhere dark over the past 2 years and not been paying attention. Cause i reckon;
Pocock: best player? Debatable. Hooper was just as effective, if not more so on the EOYT. More rounded player than Pocock. Moot point anyway. Genia is Australia's best player.
Cooper: (appears to be) a former headcase. More mature this year. Hasn't been dropped. Hasn't been in the Wallaby squad for a while. May be one of 6 players to be added on June 11. Can't wait to see how he goes for the Reds against the Lions.
JOC: Excellent? Yes, but not really as 10. The general consensus he is better on the wing or FB. Average pass. Average kicking game. Will do ok though, hopefully better. Available for the 1st test.
Digby: 2 tries in his last 13 tests hardly constitutes biggest try threat. A loss for sure but may play the 1st test anyway. More than adequately covered by Tomane, Folau and Cummins in that order. Unlike Digby, these guys can also pass and kick.
Beale: A fully fit KB would be a loss for any side. KB hasn't been at his best since 2010/11. Perhaps you have not been watching him? Still, a 80% firing KB is better than a lot of players. One of RD's favourites and will get a run if fit. However, both Barnes and Folau are far better under the high ball than KB. They can also tackle. Barnes also much better tactical kicker.
Smith: 32 is hardly old. There's a bloke called McCaw (who Smith had some epic battles with)who's that age and he still gets around alright. Smith is as tough as nails. Only out for a few weeks. Probably back for the 2nd test. Experience is a loss but covered adequately by Hooper/ Gill.

Only Pocock and TPN are definitely out for the series. No-one has been dropped, the injuries thus far are relatively minor and KB is in 'rehab' for having 1 beer when he was on an alcohol ban. The 'rehab' is more to do with responsibility, attitude and priorities than for any substance addiction. We are not in that much disarray that we'd be adding a recovering addict to the playing group - at least i think not. The squad have one more game to play then get to rest. They've been playing for 10 weeks against best players in NZ and SA so will only need a few minutes of game time to blow away the cobwebs. Unlike the Lions, they won't be getting touched up by the SXV sides no-one has been thrown out of the squad already for disciplinary reasons. Disarray? Wishful thinking on your part. Whatever helps i guess. Unless perhaps you have a direct line to the ARU and know something the rest of us don't?

As it happens I do have sources in the ARU but have not been speaking to them and I form my own opinions based on what I read and see myself.

Think this Lions Tour should be renamed the Pilfering Excursion, with the number of considered pilfering specialists either touring or meeting the tourists.

Watch your handbags, Ladies!

I think the Lions are rightly favourites at this stage.I'll hold off making a prediction until I actually see them play a few times.

I was pretty gobsmacked to read that some people think there are 5 better outhalves in Oz and NZ than Sexton but then I remembered that you've been watching him play for Ireland under Kidney and I get where you're coming from.I expect those perceptions will change radically over the next year or so.

GunsGerms wrote:Most of Australia's best players are dropped, injured or in rehab. Is this what you call good preparation in Australia?

Yep, that's exactly what we call a good preparation.

Not sure what the Bookies are saying, but I don't see either team as favourites at this stage.

We don't even know who will be selected, not one ball has been kicked in anger.

You are getting opinions on team's chances from varied perspectives, some loyal to the Lions, other loyal to the Wallabies and some from neutrals.

We don't even know what game plans will be employed, we think we do, but we don't.

We are all basing our opinions mostly on assumptions and wishes.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:I think the Lions are rightly favourites at this stage.I'll hold off making a prediction until I actually see them play a few times.

I was pretty gobsmacked to read that some people think there are 5 better outhalves in Oz and NZ than Sexton but then I remembered that you've been watching him play for Ireland under Kidney and I get where you're coming from.I expect those perceptions will change radically over the next year or so.

Where did you read that? Thats hilarious.

Australia dont even have 1 out half that regularly plays test rugby.

Berrick Barnes has 50 caps for Australia but hasnt featured that much recently. Concussion, injury and other options mean he is more a bit part player over his career.

Cooper has played 1 test match in two years.

JOC the likely starter plays 10 sometimes for the Rebels but isnt really a 10.

Beale is a decent 10 but probably wont start at 10 and he is also a head case.

Giteau isnt an international anymore.

Brock James is the flakiest OH in the NH.

Christian Lealiifano is good but not really an OH and is uncapped too.

Bernard Foley looks quite good but is uncapped.



None of the above are in the same league as Sexton.

Full Credit wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Most of Australia's best players are dropped, injured or in rehab. Is this what you call good preparation in Australia?

Yep, that's exactly what we call a good preparation.

Nobody knows anything. There's all kinds of variables:

1. Will the Wallabies be undercooked having not played a competitive game for 3 weeks?
2. Will the Lions be suffering any major injuries by the first test? Odds on that they will.
3. Will Deans stick to picking his favourites like Palu, JOC at 10 and McCabe despite the fact that it could throw out his other selections and leave out some form players?
4. Will any newish Aussie caps like Falou and LLF have amazing debuts or fall to pieces?
5. Will Beale be back?
6. Will Smith be back for the final test?
7. Is the Aussie front row underhyped?
8. Is the Lions pack overhyped?
9. Will it be Wales v Wallabies?
10. Will we learn anything at all from the dirttracker games?

Who the feck knows, matron?

George Carlin wrote:

Full Credit wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Most of Australia's best players are dropped, injured or in rehab. Is this what you call good preparation in Australia?

Yep, that's exactly what we call a good preparation.

Nobody knows anything. There's all kinds of variables:

1. Will the Wallabies be undercooked having not played a competitive game for 3 weeks?
2. Will the Lions be suffering any major injuries by the first test? Odds on that they will.
3. Will Deans stick to picking his favourites like Palu, JOC at 10 and McCabe despite the fact that it could throw out his other selections and leave out some form players?
4. Will any newish Aussie caps like Falou and LLF have amazing debuts or fall to pieces?
5. Will Beale be back?
6. Will Smith be back for the final test?
7. Is the Aussie front row underhyped?
8. Is the Lions pack overhyped?
9. Will it be Wales v Wallabies?
10. Will we learn anything at all from the dirttracker games?

Who the feck knows, matron?

He's back this weekend for the Galloping Greens... who are doing well in the Shute Shield this year.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/rugby/troubled-melbourne-rebels-star-kurtley-beale-to-turn-out-for-club-side-randwick-as-he-starts-bid-for-wallaby-selection/story-fni2g0wi-1226651657584

GunsGerms wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:I think the Lions are rightly favourites at this stage.I'll hold off making a prediction until I actually see them play a few times.

I was pretty gobsmacked to read that some people think there are 5 better outhalves in Oz and NZ than Sexton but then I remembered that you've been watching him play for Ireland under Kidney and I get where you're coming from.I expect those perceptions will change radically over the next year or so.

Where did you read that? Thats hilarious.

Australia dont even have 1 out half that regularly plays test rugby.

Berrick Barnes has 50 caps for Australia but hasnt featured that much recently. Concussion, injury and other options mean he is more a bit part player over his career.

Cooper has played 1 test match in two years.

JOC the likely starter plays 10 sometimes for the Rebels but isnt really a 10.

Beale is a decent 10 but probably wont start at 10 and he is also a head case.

Giteau isnt an international anymore.

Brock James is the flakiest OH in the NH.

Christian Lealiifano is good but not really an OH and is uncapped too.

Bernard Foley looks quite good but is uncapped.



None of the above are in the same league as Sexton.

It's back on the 1st page

Taylorman wrote: NZ probably have 3 better 10's than Sexton and Oz certainy have at least two. At the 3N level Sexton is ordinary at best as a 10 as are most 10's to come out of the NH over the last 10 years.

Yeah it seems odd to me but he probably doesn't see much of Leinster and even if he did wouldn't rate it as a high enough level.

He did see him in the 60-0 humping though. Was he injured that match or just overwhelmed by the ocassion?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:
It's back on the 1st page

Taylorman wrote: NZ probably have 3 better 10's than Sexton and Oz certainy have at least two. At the 3N level Sexton is ordinary at best as a 10 as are most 10's to come out of the NH over the last 10 years.

Yeah it seems odd to me but he probably doesn't see much of Leinster and even if he did wouldn't rate it as a high enough level.

Thats a typical Taylorman comment though. He doesnt really know much about NH rugby outside of English rugby so thats to be expected.

Linebreaker wrote:He did see him in the 60-0 humping though. Was he injured that match or just overwhelmed by the ocassion?

It's a fair comment Breaker. For balance though, it's just that Sexton had won three Heineken Cups, a celtic league championship and the Churchill Cup by the time he was 26. I'm not sure to whom he's being compared when he's described as being 'average'. From a NH perspective, that's pretty special. You won't find a French 10 with anything like that kind of record.

I think whoever made the Kidney comment with respect to Sexton hit the nail on the head. We've yet to see consistently what Sexton is capable of at test level. It doesn't really matter what he does at club level. That is a different world and needs to be judged on its own merits. Not downplaying his achievements. As GC said, those are impressive achievements. But when I look at carter I really don't take into account his achievements with the crusaders. Test rugby is the pinnacle of rugby. And frankly in terms of consistency there is no fly half in recent times that has performed consistently at test level and I include Carter in that, though injuries have not helped his cause.

All I'm saying if you judge a player in terms of test rugby as will be with the Lions series, super or HC form is irrelevant. Every fly half has had a mixed bag recently. Compare blindside flanker to fly half and the latter sees some names mentioned but none seems too convincing. So it doesn't matter where you rate Sexton. Fly half is a relative weakness for everyone.

Linebreaker wrote:He did see him in the 60-0 humping though. Was he injured that match or just overwhelmed by the ocassion?

I've already mentioned that he's only seen him playing for Ireland under Kidney and I'm confident that things will change massively in the next year.I don't think I need to explain how one game doesn't define a career but I expect you aren't looking for a reasoned debate here.

To be fair Sexton hasn't played consistently well against NZ ever. Even in the second test last year he lacked the control that was necessary to close out the game. As well as the Kidney factor he also had to contend with rog on the bench. That didn't help his confidence or his temperament.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I think whoever made the Kidney comment with respect to Sexton hit the nail on the head. We've yet to see consistently what Sexton is capable of at test level. It doesn't really matter what he does at club level. That is a different world and needs to be judged on its own merits. Not downplaying his achievements. As GC said, those are impressive achievements. But when I look at carter I really don't take into account his achievements with the crusaders. Test rugby is the pinnacle of rugby. And frankly in terms of consistency there is no fly half in recent times that has performed consistently at test level and I include Carter in that, though injuries have not helped his cause.

All I'm saying if you judge a player in terms of test rugby as will be with the Lions series, super or HC form is irrelevant. Every fly half has had a mixed bag recently. Compare blindside flanker to fly half and the latter sees some names mentioned but none seems too convincing. So it doesn't matter where you rate Sexton. Fly half is a relative weakness for everyone.

Sexton has played at out half in matches where Ireland have beaten every top team in world rugby except France and NZ. He does have two draws v France which is Ireland best result against Le Blues since '09. All matches have been close and he has started 4.

He also started in Ireland's closest match v NZ since the early 90's. All in all his record for Ireland is good.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:To be fair Sexton hasn't played consistently well against NZ ever. Even in the second test last year he lacked the control that was necessary to close out the game. As well as the Kidney factor he also had to contend with rog on the bench. That didn't help his confidence or his temperament.

For the last 20 or 25 minutes of that game RoG was at 10 and he moved to the centre (13 I think) where he played pretty well and made one or 2 linebreaks.I don't think RoG on the bench was as big a deal as it was made out to be,more likely he just went through a few ups and downs like any player who is growing accustomed to playing the game at the highest level.(I could be wrong here but that's just my take on it)

I'm not saying it isn't GG. But Id think you'd be the first to admit that he hasn't carried his Leinster form and played that consistently well with Ireland. There are all sorts of reasons for that but this year's 6n was a mixed bag. Lets not confuse Ireland's record with his. That first half against wales he was majestic. When did we see that type of play from him again. Obviously the team performance impacts his own performance and team tactics don't help his cause. But he lacks a consistent ability to impose himself on games at this moment.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I'm not saying it isn't GG. But Id think you'd be the first to admit that he hasn't carried his Leinster form and played that consistently well with Ireland. There are all sorts of reasons for that but this year's 6n was a mixed bag. Lets not confuse Ireland's record with his. That first half against wales he was majestic. When did we see that type of play from him again. Obviously the team performance impacts his own performance and team tactics don't help his cause. But he lacks a consistent ability to impose himself on games at this moment.

Yes he hasnt been as effective for Ireland but I believe that is because for the last 5 years or so Ireland have had an ultra conservative coach deviod of any creative intellect and invention. Kidney has his strengths but Im convinced that they dont compliment Sexton's and thus his international progression has been stunted. Furthermore, because of ROGs popularity in the Irish media sexton's every move is heavily scrutanised. This hasnt help either nor has rotation with ROG.

I do think that Schmidt will prove to be a much better coach and Sexton will benefit. My worry however is that because he is in France he wont have the same time afforded to him with Schmidt in training camps etc. as if he were in Ireland.

Brian O'Driscoll himself said in a recent Lions Q&A in the Lions site that Schmidt is the best coach he has ever had because he learns something new everyday from him. I've no doubt Sexton would echo this sentiment.

Let's hope that's the case. For his and Ireland's cause. Let's give Schmidt one or two seasons and then see if he can reach a higher level at test level.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Let's hope that's the case. For his and Ireland's cause. Let's give Schmidt one or two seasons and then see if he can reach a higher level at test level.

He will need time alright. It took him a while at Leinster to start winning again so I expect it will take at least a year with Ireland too.

He (Schmidt) needs lots of time to get his systems up and running that's for sure. It took him a few weeks to sort out Leinster and turn them into LeinsterSchmidt rather than LeinsterCheika. In truth, not a big difference actually and yes, they were already a successful brand.
But as regards Schmidt and Ireland and how much time he'll need. That's why this summer for Ireland is much more important than already established Irish players playing for the Lions. Let's see how Schmidt's very early influence feeds into the Irish sides playing this summer.

I do, however, often giggle at people who constantly want to see what Ireland International were doing in recent years as in someway suggesting Irish player's true worth, when they also witnessed Irish sides' records and playing ability in Europe (using less foreign big money man-power than most 'big' European sides) and just disregard that evidence as irrelevant.

No it isn't irrelevant, it's the same players under different coaching systems.

Sexton had a game and a half in this Six Nations. Beating Wales and coming off after 30 minutes against England in a wet, up-the-jumper game. I don't know where we were going to see anything else from him after that at International level apart from what's coming now with the Lions.

GunsGerms wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Let's hope that's the case. For his and Ireland's cause. Let's give Schmidt one or two seasons and then see if he can reach a higher level at test level.

He will need time alright. It took him a while at Leinster to start winning again so I expect it will take at least a year with Ireland too.

Hang on. The argument all along has been that we have the players and that it was the coaches fault. We now have the best coach in place, who was behind a successful province. It seems that people are making excuses already. I am certainly expecting more from the new messiah of Irish coaching.

GunsGerms wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Let's hope that's the case. For his and Ireland's cause. Let's give Schmidt one or two seasons and then see if he can reach a higher level at test level.

He will need time alright. It took him a while at Leinster to start winning again so I expect it will take at least a year with Ireland too.

I don't think it'l take anything like that amount of time.Leinster started winning as soon as we got our internationals back from their mandatory rest period,we were struggling with our squad players but then things took off.I expect that the more talented players at his disposal will pick up his systems quicker and a large proportion of leinster players will already be familiar with his ideas.I doubt he will try to replicate exactly what he has done at Leinster as I think he's a better coach than that.He will look and see that he has better options at wing and lock than he has had at Leinster and should be able to threaten teams in ways that Leinster couldn't.

Wow this thread went way off topic

Michael Lynagh is always having a dig at Sexton and Schmidt. That's my attempted link anyway

Just keep going with it asoreleftshoulder...

Club rugby is not test rugby Secret. Test rugby is the pinnacle. If a player doesn't perform at test level then it doesn't matter if he plays well at club level. The players may be similar but the pace and pressure are not.

I forgot Sexton was injured for the 6N. I've tried my best to erase the memory of the Scotland and Italy game out of respect for my Irish mate here.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Just keep going with it asoreleftshoulder...

Club rugby is not test rugby Secret. Test rugby is the pinnacle. If a player doesn't perform at test level then it doesn't matter if he plays well at club level. The players may be similar but the pace and pressure are not.

I forgot Sexton was injured for the 6N. I've tried my best to erase the memory of the Scotland and Italy game out of respect for my Irish mate here.

Only in some cases,the latter stages of the HC are definitely of a higher standard than some of the dross that is served up in the 6N.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Just keep going with it asoreleftshoulder...

Club rugby is not test rugby Secret. Test rugby is the pinnacle. If a player doesn't perform at test level then it doesn't matter if he plays well at club level. The players may be similar but the pace and pressure are not.

I forgot Sexton was injured for the 6N. I've tried my best to erase the memory of the Scotland and Italy game out of respect for my Irish mate here.

Sorry, kia. Test rugby might be the pinnacle but it's also certainly one of the most overly abused clichés too in rugby.

Gatland isn't taking 10 Irish players (with the addition of Best) because of their performances in the Six Nations. That's 10 Irish Internationals, same as England's tally who came 2nd in Six Nations and beat New Zealand, and Gatland isn't taking them because they fell to England, Scotland and Italy.
He's taking them because he knows them, and he knows their worth as individual players. He knows their qualities and he knows what they are capable of with correct preparation and coaching (like the Welsh guys seem to grow above their Regional standards when availing of the same benefits).

Gatland knows the Irish players, and he knows they have more than enough ability to meet Australia at test level. No, International doesn't bluntly classify your ability or else nobody would care about a guy like Parisse and far less than ten 'club class' Irish players would be travelling to Oz.

He's not taking Wade who looked pretty useful at club level. He's taking Croft and Lydiate who haven't been playing club or test rugby because he knows what they can do at test level. The same applies to Ireland this year. If he picked only on club form there wouldn't be any Wales players or close to it. Those Irish players picked have been picked on test reputation just like players like Dagg, Carter and Nonu make the NZ team based on their test reputation rather than super form.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:He's not taking Wade who looked pretty useful at club level. He's taking Croft and Lydiate who haven't been playing club or test rugby because he knows what they can do at test level. The same applies to Ireland this year. If he picked only on club form there wouldn't be any Wales players or close to it. Those Irish players picked have been picked on test reputation just like players like Dagg, Carter and Nonu make the NZ team based on their test reputation rather than super form.

There you go... you're now agreeing with me, kia. Are the Irish players going to Australia on International 'test' reputation (thereby proving my point that International is certainly their ability) or is he taking them because of 'club' form in recent months/weeks - and just risking his reputation on 'club' class players?

The Irish players are 'test' level players who happen to have suffered a period of below par inconsistent International performances under a particular coaching unit.

Except for one or two they will be at best be warming the bench..

I'm not agreeing with you in case it wasn't obvious. Gatland is taking those players because he knows in the past they have performed at TEST level just like Croft and Lydiate.

That has a nice ring to it, DOD. The English and Welsh 'test' guys lose the 'test' series and the Irish bag carriers do the winning during the mid-week games.

This tour is win win no matter what happens. That's the way I like my dice to roll

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I'm not agreeing with you in case it wasn't obvious. Gatland is taking those players because he knows in the past they have performed at TEST level just like Croft and Lydiate.

.

Ok, you're disagreeing with me, kia...in a very agreeable way.

GunsGerms wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:
It's back on the 1st page

Taylorman wrote: NZ probably have 3 better 10's than Sexton and Oz certainy have at least two. At the 3N level Sexton is ordinary at best as a 10 as are most 10's to come out of the NH over the last 10 years.

Yeah it seems odd to me but he probably doesn't see much of Leinster and even if he did wouldn't rate it as a high enough level.

Thats a typical Taylorman comment though. He doesnt really know much about NH rugby outside of English rugby so thats to be expected.

Geez I dunno where the supposed English rugby knowledge keeps coming from. And my comment is no worse than Bluesmans- 'Sexton would easily shunt DC to 12 if they were in the same team' What sort of knowedge about rugby do you think thats is Guns?

And amongst DC and Cruden yes I believe we have better 10's than Sexton- the third and perhaps debatable one is Beauden Barrett who after only one season shows more potential than Sexton does at the age of...what is he? 27-28 now, after years of scrapping with ROG (one of the worst 10's ever to play NZ over such a long period) for the top position for Ireland?

I don't make flippant comments and if I see a genuine NH prospect then I acknowledge it. Sexton on the world stage is average when at their best- behind Carter, Cruden, Cooper and probably Barnes and M Steyn, though thats probably debatable. I agree.

Taylorman wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:
It's back on the 1st page

Taylorman wrote: NZ probably have 3 better 10's than Sexton and Oz certainy have at least two. At the 3N level Sexton is ordinary at best as a 10 as are most 10's to come out of the NH over the last 10 years.

Yeah it seems odd to me but he probably doesn't see much of Leinster and even if he did wouldn't rate it as a high enough level.

Thats a typical Taylorman comment though. He doesnt really know much about NH rugby outside of English rugby so thats to be expected.

Geez I dunno where the supposed English rugby knowledge keeps coming from. And my comment is no worse than Bluesmans- 'Sexton would easily shunt DC to 12 if they were in the same team' What sort of knowedge about rugby do you think thats is Guns?

And amongst DC and Cruden yes I believe we have better 10's than Sexton- the third and perhaps debatable one is Beauden Barrett who after only one season shows more potential than Sexton does at the age of...what is he? 27-28 now, after years of scrapping with ROG (one of the worst 10's ever to play NZ over such a long period) for the top position for Ireland?

I don't make flippant comments and if I see a genuine NH prospect then I acknowledge it. Sexton on the world stage is average when at their best- behind Carter, Cruden, Cooper and probably Barnes and M Steyn, though thats probably debatable. I agree.

He's not really behind ny of those but Carter,you won't agree but Cooper is hugely overrated and Cruden is very good but not at the very top level yet.It's all opinions really but I really don't see how you can rate Cooper especially so highly,he can't tackle and folds when put under pressure as Ireland showed at the WC,he's been lucky enough to play outside one of the best scrumhalfs in the world and that has made him look better than he is.

Schmidt has been quoted as saying he likes players who make the guys around them look good,that's what he thinks shows true class and Genia has it,Cooper doesn't imo.

Good to see the battle lines drawn, SH finding comfort in putting aside traditional rivalries to present a united front against the inevitable Lions onslaught. Suggesting that the best of the NH getting pipped by Oz last year is somehow indicative of how this tour will go is totally naive though, they are facing not Wales but the best players of a generation from the North.
There is definite disquiet in camp, if not disarray, and whatever the press and fans say, Australian infighting means that the best of their players will likely not play. Australia's backs play with an audacity that is unique in world rugby but in this Lions squad they may meet an immovable object.

SecretFly wrote:That has a nice ring to it, DOD. The English and Welsh 'test' guys lose the 'test' series and the Irish bag carriers do the winning during the mid-week games.

This tour is win win no matter what happens. That's the way I like my dice to roll

There is one test series on this summer in NZ and one circus across the Tasman Sea.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:
It's back on the 1st page

Taylorman wrote: NZ probably have 3 better 10's than Sexton and Oz certainy have at least two. At the 3N level Sexton is ordinary at best as a 10 as are most 10's to come out of the NH over the last 10 years.

Yeah it seems odd to me but he probably doesn't see much of Leinster and even if he did wouldn't rate it as a high enough level.

Thats a typical Taylorman comment though. He doesnt really know much about NH rugby outside of English rugby so thats to be expected.

Geez I dunno where the supposed English rugby knowledge keeps coming from. And my comment is no worse than Bluesmans- 'Sexton would easily shunt DC to 12 if they were in the same team' What sort of knowedge about rugby do you think thats is Guns?

And amongst DC and Cruden yes I believe we have better 10's than Sexton- the third and perhaps debatable one is Beauden Barrett who after only one season shows more potential than Sexton does at the age of...what is he? 27-28 now, after years of scrapping with ROG (one of the worst 10's ever to play NZ over such a long period) for the top position for Ireland?

I don't make flippant comments and if I see a genuine NH prospect then I acknowledge it. Sexton on the world stage is average when at their best- behind Carter, Cruden, Cooper and probably Barnes and M Steyn, though thats probably debatable. I agree.

He's not really behind ny of those but Carter,you won't agree but Cooper is hugely overrated and Cruden is very good but not at the very top level yet.It's all opinions really but I really don't see how you can rate Cooper especially so highly,he can't tackle and folds when put under pressure as Ireland showed at the WC,he's been lucky enough to play outside one of the best scrumhalfs in the world and that has made him look better than he is.

Schmidt has been quoted as saying he likes players who make the guys around them look good,that's what he thinks shows true class and Genia has it,Cooper doesn't imo.

Yes its all opinion and in mine Cooper has caused more havoc in test matches and admittedly lately in sxv matches against our sides than Sexton could ever hope to. He is a player that has caused our side huge concern on occasion and for me that is how I judge a player. Sexton is never singled out by the AB camp as a player to worry about.

Cooper has at times made top sides look stupid. Yes he has had his bad days and that goes with his style and confidence but for me his best is streets ahead of Sexton and therefore more of a concern for any upcoming test match.

With Sexton the Ozzies know exactly what he will and can do. There will be no surprises. With Cooper you NHers have no idea what Cooper will do if and when he plays and you will be 'relying' on the jekyl cooper to front, rather than the Hyde. Then like many a team, you could all end up looking plain stupid dismissing him as a 10. We don't make mistakes like that.

Taylorman wrote:

I don't make flippant comments and if I see a genuine NH prospect then I acknowledge it. Sexton on the world stage is average when at their best- behind Carter, Cruden, Cooper and probably Barnes and M Steyn, though thats probably debatable. I agree.

There is absolutely no way Cooper is a better player than Sexton. Not in a million years. Also really not sure how anyone can rate Steyn and Barnes above Sexton. yes they are both good players but the jury really is out as to whether either have anywhere near the same skillsets as Sexton. Barnes has had such a fragmented career through concussion, injury and being dropped and Steyn offers little other than a kicking theat.

The Beauden Barrett comment better than Sexton is laughable. He has only a few test caps most of them off the bench. I would love to know how you conclude that a guy with 9 test points to his name is a better player than Sexton.

GunsGerms wrote:

There is absolutely no way Cooper is a better player than Sexton. Not in a million years.

We'll just have to see won't we. My reason for raisng these points is between you and Bluesman Guns you are utterly convinced Oz are in as much if not more disarray than last year (where despite that Wales, the 6N champs- managed to lose 3-0) and that this Lions team is somehow a strong one.

Yet you combine the Welsh best with mostly Irish and English players, who also lost their series without winning a match last year and where all 3 sides went on to play a very disappointing 6N (remove the first round and the last match and it was as droll as you will ever find in test rugby- all sides falling over eachother getting seasick from the side to side motion) and largely losing AI's.

Yet you think the Ozzies are in disarray? What is it that NH rugby has ACTUALLY DONE in the last 12 months to suggest it has a good side, besides mostly losing to SH sides and eachother?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:
It's back on the 1st page

Taylorman wrote: NZ probably have 3 better 10's than Sexton and Oz certainy have at least two. At the 3N level Sexton is ordinary at best as a 10 as are most 10's to come out of the NH over the last 10 years.

Yeah it seems odd to me but he probably doesn't see much of Leinster and even if he did wouldn't rate it as a high enough level.

Thats a typical Taylorman comment though. He doesnt really know much about NH rugby outside of English rugby so thats to be expected.

Geez I dunno where the supposed English rugby knowledge keeps coming from. And my comment is no worse than Bluesmans- 'Sexton would easily shunt DC to 12 if they were in the same team' What sort of knowedge about rugby do you think thats is Guns?

And amongst DC and Cruden yes I believe we have better 10's than Sexton- the third and perhaps debatable one is Beauden Barrett who after only one season shows more potential than Sexton does at the age of...what is he? 27-28 now, after years of scrapping with ROG (one of the worst 10's ever to play NZ over such a long period) for the top position for Ireland?

I don't make flippant comments and if I see a genuine NH prospect then I acknowledge it. Sexton on the world stage is average when at their best- behind Carter, Cruden, Cooper and probably Barnes and M Steyn, though thats probably debatable. I agree.

He's not really behind ny of those but Carter,you won't agree but Cooper is hugely overrated and Cruden is very good but not at the very top level yet.It's all opinions really but I really don't see how you can rate Cooper especially so highly,he can't tackle and folds when put under pressure as Ireland showed at the WC,he's been lucky enough to play outside one of the best scrumhalfs in the world and that has made him look better than he is.

Schmidt has been quoted as saying he likes players who make the guys around them look good,that's what he thinks shows true class and Genia has it,Cooper doesn't imo.

Well he obviously tackled a lot better than Sexton did last year in the embarrassing 60-0 massacre. Your man is a complete turnstile... however, I don't expect you to offer an explanation for this gaping hole in his 'skill set' or add to the debate.

The lucky 5-point win (happens about once every 10 years) still didn't help Ireland finish above the Wallabies - who once again swept Wales (Ireland's stumbling block yet again) aside with relative ease. That Group match was obviously your World Cup Final.

You guys really know how to set the bar high!

To answer your last question in three words, Taylor: nothing much really.

Anyway, back on topic. Michael Lynagh is probably spot on as usual.

Collecting that pop-up pass at Landsdowne Rd in the '91 Semi Final... and the shocking silence that followed as the Wallabies went on to win our first World Cup.

Something most of you 'knowledgeable' posters (blinkered more like!) can only dream about.
(I won't post it up again. You all know the one)

Yeah I'll drop it now as well...I think youve got to have a ground based on results before you can expand the theory to the stars...the cumulative effect of the four countries on the Lions isnt as great as it should be- Youre taking the best 15 from the best 60 available using starter mentality only. That means 1 from four 10's, one from four 9's, two of 8 locks etc.

The resultant side should be far superior than any one yet history shows the Lions arent that successful at playing together.

Yes the Ozzies have got to click very quickly together but at least most played together the pevious year/s, under the same or similar coach, kicker, captain (injuries aside), gameplay, combinations and grounds kind of thing.

The Lions are completely new in that respect.

Its one sides ability to organise versus another, no doubt the wallabies have the edge in terms o f familiarity calls etc, but the Lions have the pride of the pride, this is their f**king Everest remember. Not saying it means less to Ozzies but I think the one off nature of the tour for both sides means the organisational advantage Oz have is diminished.