Is Gatland Anti-English?

First topic message reminder :

When the squad was first announced there were raised eyebrows.

But as the attrition rate continues on players, some of whom were controversial selections in the first place, are replaced by even more controversial and pointedly non-English replacements it is becoming harder and harder to justify this in anyway other than as a pure out and out anti-English bias.

Does Gatland resent English players? not trust them? not understand them? The way they demolished the Barbarians and then Argentina with reserve selections should be putting the fear of god throughout the world of rugby and I wonder whether this blind eye he is turning is entirely motivated out of desire for Lions success or is it just Ostrich behaviour from a guy who deep down after all, is purely a Kiwi?

The argument isn't fitness Ruby.

Neither Lydiate nor Corbisiero played much rugby this season due to injury. Gatland said he was selecting on form, and when the squad was selected neither had any form.

Gatland picked Lydiate over a number of players who had been in good form. He did not pick Corbisiero. Corbisiero has come in as two of the players selected on form have had to leave through injury.

Their selections are not the same. Trying to compare them is not comparing like for like. You only threw it in as you perceive fa0019's criticism of Lydiate's selection as being anti Welsh and sought to prove that by getting him to say that he though Corbs selection was ok, even though they are not the same thing.

The Telegraph

Queensland Reds v Lions 2013: five players who advanced their cause for Test selection
The British and Irish Lions prevailed against the Queensland Reds in Brisbane. But which players strengthened their case for inclusion in the Test team?

Beast: George North carried the ball 118 metres against the Reds Photo: GETTY IMAGES
By Nick Pearce
2:32PM BST 08 Jun 2013
41 Comments
1. George North

The giant 21 year-old wing is fast becoming the first name on the teamsheet following another eye-catching display in the Lions backline as a replacement for Manu Tuilagi.


Every carry, every bust, every linebreak was done with power and pace and the Reds defence found him incredibly difficult to live with. One run, that eventually led to Ben Youngs's try saw him slalom through the Reds defence on a 72-metre dash that had Lions supporters purring.

But it's his composure and very low error count that really mark him out as a Test starter. He thinks correctly under pressure and rarely makes the wrong decision.


2. Tom Youngs

Like North, Youngs was another player who hardly put a foot wrong in the Brisbane rain. The Lions line-out held up much better than their opponents' and the scrum was a constant source of joy for the tourists.

Time after time in the first half they won penalties at the scrum, with Youngs looking more than comfortable alongside his English colleagues Mako Vunipola and Matt Stevens.

He still has a way to go to see off the challenge of Rory Best and Richard Hibbard but his day's work means there are now fewer question marks against his name than before.

3. Paul O'Connell

When he arrived off the bench in the second half the Lions' breakdown offering was instantly more menacing. He threw himself into the collisions with significant success at a time when the Reds were hinting at a late comeback.

This display and his outing against the Barbarians makes him one of the few certain selections in the pack and if Sam Warburton fails to make his way into the starting line-up he could well end up captaining the Test side again.

4. Dan Lydiate

The Welsh flanker is a Warren Gatland favourite and has been given every possible chance to make up for his lack of rugby this year by getting game-time under his belt on tour.

He proved that decision was not just down to sentiment today by topping the tackle stats for both teams with 13. He was a busy boy, getting around the park and chopping down any Reds that came his way.

He offers far less with the ball in hand than his main rival for the Lions No 6 jersey, Tom Croft, and was not used as line-out option today, but if Gatland is after a tree-cutting six that he can rely on to try and shut down the Wallabies attack then he should turn to Lydiate.

5. Ben Youngs

He has a lot of work to do to oust Mike Phillips as starting scrum-half for the Tests but he showed today that he will fight for the jersey.

Took his try well, with a smart bit of scavenging at the base and a sharp finish. These were the actions of a player desperate to make an impact and the hope for Gatland must be that these two men keep raising the bar in terms of their performances in a way that Kyran Bracken and Matt Dawson used to do for England.

He was a constant threat around the fringes with his running game but also kicked with authority. On several occasions his box-kicks took the pressure of the Lions and heaped it back onto the Reds.

So one man's opinion in the Telegraph means what precisely Ruby?

Ozzy3213 wrote:So one man's opinion in the Telegraph means what precisely Ruby?

It means that it is good to have differing opinions; and that my friend is all they are. On this occasion I am happy to disagree with you. Gatland has numerous options in the back row and he will decide throughout the tour what his best back 3 will be. He can go for power and dynamism and vary it with an emphasis on either. What Lydiate provides him with; which no other back row player does is the ability to play 2 other back row players with more offensive qualities. It's a horses for courses policy and Gatland has many options to consider. I tend to trust the fact that he wants to win every game but I am still baffled by the Matt Stevens inclusion

What are you disagreeing with me about Ruby? You seem to be trying to persuade me that the Lydiate selection is a good one, but at no point have I said that it isn't. I rate him highly, he is a world class defensive 6. My point to you was that comparing him and Corbisiero now being part of the squad was not comparing like for like.

Putting after every message doesn't make your point more valid

fa0019 wrote:
Whilst I don't know the Argentinian players that well, the were a lot of caps out there and to beat them by 4 tries to nil is still impressive.

Those caps were mainly earned by semi retired Conteponi not spread around liberally amongst the team.

BamBam wrote:Putting after every message doesn't make your point more valid

Ruby is da man!

Metal Tiger wrote:Is GloriousEmpire the son of GreyGhost?

Blatent wales/england pot stirring was one of his hallmarks too.

First of all I won't get into the OP and other comments on this thread because it's all brown and goes down the hole in the bottom of the loo.

However, i would like to offer a point of order if I may?
Didn't dislike England? Unless he/she/it has an alter ego made up entirely of anti-matter...............

I don't really understand these apparent insults directed my way, but please can we keep it about the rugby?

Surely I'm not alone in thinking maybe a few too much leeway was given to Gatlands favourites from his adopted home? Guys we knew were returning from injury/struggling for form versus counterparts in England fit and in form who had just dispatched the All Blacks and were a few odd referees calls from Grandslam glory?

I can't help but feel the lions are not what they could be because guys like Morgan and Brown and Twelvetrees, Ashton and Robshaw are not in the side?

GloriousEmpire wrote:I don't really understand these apparent insults directed my way, but please can we keep it about the rugby?

Surely I'm not alone in thinking maybe a few too much leeway was given to Gatlands favourites from his adopted home? Guys we knew were returning from injury/struggling for form versus counterparts in England fit and in form who had just dispatched the All Blacks and were a few odd referees calls from Grandslam glory?

I can't help but feel the lions are not what they could be because guys like Morgan and Brown and Twelvetrees, Ashton and Robshaw are not in the side?

Utter rubbish, but cast your mind back to 2005

Yes 2005 when a national coach from
England made a bunch of parochial and nepotistic selections and ruined the tour? Exactly my point. Gatland has done a Woodward here.

The point about 2005 was NOT that the players were English but that they were selected based on reputation and not form - same thing here.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Yes 2005 when a national coach from
England made a bunch of parochial and nepotistic selections and ruined the tour? Exactly my point. Gatland has done a Woodward here.

The point about 2005 was NOT that the players were English but that they were selected based on reputation and not form - same thing here.

Hardly, we have not played a test match yet! To be fair I think the selections have been good and some players are being found out, including Welsh ones. However, I like many will support the Lions if there were 15 English playing. I can not believe this petty minded whinging is still going on three games into the tour, it is pathetic.

No of course Gatland is not anti-English. But when Gloriousstuckinthepast posts anything he expands the number who are getting that way. Typical post from a serial wum.

rainbow-warrior wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:Yes 2005 when a national coach from
England made a bunch of parochial and nepotistic selections and ruined the tour? Exactly my point. Gatland has done a Woodward here.

The point about 2005 was NOT that the players were English but that they were selected based on reputation and not form - same thing here.

Hardly, we have not played a test match yet! To be fair I think the selections have been good and some players are being found out, including Welsh ones. However, I like many will support the Lions if there were 15 English playing. I can not believe this petty minded whinging is still going on three games into the tour, it is pathetic.

It's hard to argue that Gatland hasn't picked form players...! Who is a form player who has missed out?

offload wrote:No of course Gatland is not anti-English. But when Gloriousstuckinthepast posts anything he expands the number who are getting that way. Typical post from a serial wum.

shame that a post by a non-english poster is at risk of making you anti-english

LondonTiger wrote:

offload wrote:No of course Gatland is not anti-English. But when Gloriousstuckinthepast posts anything he expands the number who are getting that way. Typical post from a serial wum.

shame that a post by a non-english poster is at risk of making you anti-english

I was postulating how others might feel not revealing my own
I have one foot very firmly in the English camp

Another article

My my he does like to put the cat among the pigeons doesn't he? Quite a few fall for it too.

Prior to the lions squad selection, Gatland referred to the off field antics of the England players at the 2011 world cup. He must have thought that selecting Tom Woods or Chris Robshaw would have resulted in one too many hooray henry making the trip.

In contrast, both Warburton and Lydiate are humble and the ultimate professionals.

In terms of talent there probably isn't much in it to be honest.

Scrumdown wrote:Prior to the lions squad selection, Gatland referred to the off field antics of the England players at the 2011 world cup. He must have thought that selecting Tom Woods or Chris Robshaw would have resulted in one too many hooray henry making the trip.

In contrast, both Warburton and Lydiate are humble and the ultimate professionals.

In terms of talent there probably isn't much in it to be honest.

You've actually just picked out probably the two most humble, honest, hard-working and respectable English players Oh and it's Wood not Woods mate.

Thos post is about the bias of the fans and not the coaches or players who are far more balanced and sensible - As for welsh bias, I think we all know that's a bit of a Ben Herring. Bowe, POC and Croft are all players who have struggled with injuries and have been included. In all actuality, and let's face it, as a previous poster has already stated, "Ruby is Da man"; Gatland wants his best players available; eg. those that are the best when fully fit and hence the likes of POC, Croft, Bowe and Lydiate. I would have actually taken Nathan Hines instead of AWJ along with Tom Wood but Lancaster boshed a couple of his players Lions chances by playing them out of position. I also believe Foden should be there.

I agree with you Ruby (except for the "Ruby is da man" bit ). Gats has picked the best players to do the job - in his opinion.

It's always going to be controversial - same as it is with club fans wondering why their players don't get picked for the internationals.

There's a reason why some people are coaches and others aren't. Those who can't, discuss online.

Cyril - that's twice in a few weeks you've agreed with me - this is making me very uncomfortable you know

That's the idea. Mind games

It's the type of thing RubyShrink would have liked. I wonder what happened to him...

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:

There's a reason why some people are coaches and others aren't. Those who can't, discuss online.

...meaning some coaches should seriously think of joining the online community

I've joined the online community

Rubyguby the difference between Lydiate and the likes of Croft and POC is that Croft and POC have put in decent performances against decent opposition in top quality competitions before the Lions tour started.

Gatland has so far shown he shouldn't have picked Bowe and Lydiate. Put ahead reputation ahead of form in their case.

Tom Wood suffered because of being picked at no 8 for England.

Brown and Robshaw were unlucky to miss out instead of Lydiate.

I wouldn't say Gatland is anti English. He probably shouldn't have picked Stevens. The unlucky Englishman were Robshaw and Wood.

Some of Gatland's foolish decisions have been nothing to do with being anti English.

I do think he is pro Welsh though shown by his picking of Warburton as captain and picking Lydiate in the very competitive backrow position when he's not match fit, a bit one dimensional (it seems all he can do is tackle) and can only play 6.

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:Prior to the lions squad selection, Gatland referred to the off field antics of the England players at the 2011 world cup. He must have thought that selecting Tom Woods or Chris Robshaw would have resulted in one too many hooray henry making the trip.

In contrast, both Warburton and Lydiate are humble and the ultimate professionals.

In terms of talent there probably isn't much in it to be honest.

You've actually just picked out probably the two most humble, honest, hard-working and respectable English players Oh and it's Wood not Woods mate.

Before england wales match wood suggested it would mean more to wales players to stop his england winning grand slam than wales winning grand slam themselves. Hardly the comments of a humble man. More like someone with a narcissistic personality disorder. It seems to be quite common amongst the english.

Wood is probably right though. The as long as we beat the English mantra is strong. Don't forget Wales couldn't win the slam so I am sure they were really happy to wreck England's slam hopes.

Of course a huge generalisation like a lot of English are narcissistic is fair game though.

Probably not anti-English. The main issue is that he's picked only on the basis of a couple of 6 Nations games (Stevens being the most obvious exception), so there are a a few Welsh players who have produced one great performance all year (Halfpenny being the most obvious exception - the only Welsh player to play well over the whole year), and have woeful club form.

Based on the last few 6N games:
Wade wasn't playing (OK - no Heineken Cup exposure); Wood was out of position; Morgan wasn't playing; Robshaw got outplayed once (it happens to everyone - even after you outplay McCaw); Corbisiero wasn't playing.

Funny thing is, Gatland's probably chosen some of the wrong English players. Stevens? Parling isn't as good as Launchbury and will struggle to get his place back from Atwood. Farrell won't be 10 for England if he doesn't improve his play making. I would argue Wood is better than Croft - though Croft is superb in some areas and could be picked for specific reasons. Hartley is probably going to be 3rd choice next season.

beshocked wrote:The as long as we beat the English mantra is strong.

Only to the mongs who decend on the stadium for a few games between feb and march think that way, it's as if it's some rare occurance but we've got a healthy record against england over the last couple of years. I'm more concerned with my region winning it's games and wales winning against ALL opposition, not just our neighbours.

Scrumdown wrote:

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:

Scrumdown wrote:Prior to the lions squad selection, Gatland referred to the off field antics of the England players at the 2011 world cup. He must have thought that selecting Tom Woods or Chris Robshaw would have resulted in one too many hooray henry making the trip.

In contrast, both Warburton and Lydiate are humble and the ultimate professionals.

In terms of talent there probably isn't much in it to be honest.

You've actually just picked out probably the two most humble, honest, hard-working and respectable English players Oh and it's Wood not Woods mate.

Before england wales match wood suggested it would mean more to wales players to stop his england winning grand slam than wales winning grand slam themselves. Hardly the comments of a humble man. More like someone with a narcissistic personality disorder. It seems to be quite common amongst the english.

Just as stereotyping seems common among people of other countries. Oh, hang on I'm acting as bad as you are

GloriousEmpire wrote: Surely I'm not alone in thinking maybe a few too much leeway was given to Gatlands favourites from his adopted home?

The coach can pick who he likes - the only vaguely controversial one was Lydiate who was the best player in the 2012 6N by a distance

GloriousEmpire wrote: Guys we knew were returning from injury/struggling for form versus counterparts in England fit and in form who had just dispatched the All Blacks and were a few odd referees calls from Grandslam glory?

'Dispatched' an off colour All Blacks.
30 - 3 is more than 'a few odd referees calls' - get into the real world

GloriousEmpire wrote: I can't help but feel the lions are not what they could be because guys like Morgan and Brown and Twelvetrees, Ashton and Robshaw are not in the side?

Morgan would have had to come under your 'returning from injury' category - I had him in my 37 but my opinion (like yours) doesn't count

Brown is simply not good enough at international level as a winger which is where he would have been considered and would be behind Halfpenny, Hogg, Kearney in the race for the 15 shirt.

Twelvetrees is unlucky - I would have liked to see him there but England don't play him enough so maybe considered too much of a gamble - also doesn't fit Gatland's liking for a big, crash ball 12.

Ashton - you cannot be serious - he has been crap at international level all season

Robshaw - not good enough at 7 - his competition was Tipuric who killed him when it mattered in a game billed by Gatland as 'as close to a final trial as you could get', and SOB who most people would pick ahead of him. I would also put Kelly Brown and Chris Henry ahead of him too. Warburton was always going with Gatland as coach (form is temporary, class is permanent) particularly after his last 2 performances in the 6N.


Of the ones you mentioned only Morgan would really stand a chance of getting near the starting 15 if he was there.

Time to take your ROSE tinted milk bottle bottomed spectacles off and be more objective (for the record my starting 15 has 7 Welsh, 1 English, 6 Irish and 1 Scot in it)

wanderingdragon

You do realise you're responding to

Oops!

Someone please explain this joke to me? I don't understand what this is about but it is spoiling a good thread

I wonder if the ghost just got content with finally retaining the World Cup... He left soon after the final no???

Either that or he copped it on the final whistle???? certainly added to his legend.

I myself wonder what happened to Alan the English AB supporter. He was a senior chap, think he was 70+... and whilst he was a tinted AB fan he could give a good account of past teams from the 50s onwards... Puts it into perspective when we have kids on here on maybe their 2nd lions tour memory wise stating that BOD is the greatest ever... It's ridiculous.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Someone please explain this joke to me? I don't understand what this is about but it is spoiling a good thread

It's too difficult to explain. Before your time. Just roll with it.

fa0019 wrote:I wonder if the ghost just got content with finally retaining the World Cup... He left soon after the final no???

Either that or he copped it on the final whistle???? certainly added to his legend.

I myself wonder what happened to Alan the English AB supporter. He was a senior chap, think he was 70+... and whilst he was a tinted AB fan he could give a good account of past teams from the 50s onwards... Puts it into perspective when we have kids on here on maybe their 2nd lions tour memory wise stating that BOD is the greatest ever... It's ridiculous.

Perspective is all you can use when trying to compare the folk memories of yesteryear's heroic amateur exploits (when ye old lads went hunting wildebeest before their games and played hard whilst still hungover from the night before - all that old schmaltz) and that of the professional era, where you have a brutal club season, followed by an intense European bout of even tougher rugby, followed by a bunch of tough internationals sprinkled throughout the year. I watched enough rugby in the 70s to know it wasn't all the old stories from old gents would have you believe.

Well if you look back to the late 80s early 90s yes it was still amateur but the skills levels were very high and whilst fitness and bulk hadn't yet occurred it could teach these players today a thing or two about the game.

Rugby had its finest years from 97-04, at least since the 70s. Many of the players were raised in the amateur era and were amateur players once... Yet they added professionalism to their superior skills and it lead to some great contests over the period.

I don't think it's that these players are disappearing its that size has become so important... Especially at youth level that coaches go to bulk every time... Good for them at the time but not for the game long term.

Do some of you think that Gatland picked the squad on his own....

This squad is the best available and so far its doing well. The big question will be answered in a few weeks time.

fa0019 wrote:...Rugby had its finest years from 97-04...

That is worth a new thread! Let's do it.

fa0019 wrote:Well if you look back to the late 80s early 90s yes it was still amateur but the skills levels were very high and whilst fitness and bulk hadn't yet occurred it could teach these players today a thing or two about the game.

Rugby had its finest years from 97-04, at least since the 70s. Many of the players were raised in the amateur era and were amateur players once... Yet they added professionalism to their superior skills and it lead to some great contests over the period.

I don't think it's that these players are disappearing its that size has become so important... Especially at youth level that coaches go to bulk every time... Good for them at the time but not for the game long term.

But then Nations that don't have enough of the bulk have to rely on what they have; and that sometimes means smaller yet more skillful. But smaller and skillful still has a tougher time proving itself in the modern game when these players are getting hit at speed by the ever increasing bulk.

But in general, apart from when people stop to reflect on the topic (like you've done here) they don't tend to care that smaller might be more skillful. They just bluntly ask the smaller but skillful guys to prove it.
And when those smaller, more skillful guys can't prove it as often as the less bulky guys could do it back in the day, there's not a lot of people around these parts who often sympathise.

Example BOD...small by any standards in modern rugby terms. He's taken an ocean of hits from massive men in his time (much more abuse over a longer period than many of ye old smaller greats in their 'great' classic games) and still manages to be there 14 years after he began, still manages touches of magic, still stands up for brains in a world of tall and meaty brawn. And here you are saying he ain't all that.

So you see, you're bemoaning the new bulky, less skilled rugby world and yet you still castigate a player who survives in this new world of bulk - because you don't think he's achieved enough in it?

http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/rugby-union/8766467/gatland-clarifies-'spy'-comments

Gatland on the spying allegations. Pretty funny clip. He is a funny man.

That's what Gatland is... a great character of the game. I've always liked him.... his edginess and even his famous foot-in-mouth .... just as I like the old, craggy, frowning grouch himself, Graham Henry. Rugby needs these guys as much as it needs great players.

Fly

I admit I've said and still believe that come the lions BOD hasn't really achieved much yet (2013 pending)... Now that's partly due to difficult circumstances given he was taken out mafia style in 05 but then again he got his chance in 01 due to injuries with greenwood and Catt so he has had fortune as well as difficulties.

Dallaglio was injured for 2 full tours when he should have got 6 caps and cemented his status as a great lion.... Bt all we got was one tour.

You can say the same about rugby losing jiffy for the 89 and 93 tours. A fit wilkinson in 05 and 09.. At least had he not suffered 3 years out of the game which changed his style significantly for the worse.

But we can't change history because of what might have been.

dan Carter has never taken a RWC by storm but that doesn't mean he's not been the best 10 over the last decade. Same with BOD, within a handful of the best players over the last decade.

Lets be honest who isn't

However the form of 36, Wade and Morgan against Argentina makes it difficult to argue that they wouldn't have make very interesting options for the Lions.

You say this is a reserve side but I bet it is more like the side many English supporters would like to see selected anyway. The fact that Lancaster has not to date is no fault but his own. If he has the courage to go with the new blood in 2014 it will be a very interesting challenge for the

fa0019 wrote:Fly

I admit I've said and still believe that come the lions BOD hasn't really achieved much yet (2013 pending)... Now that's partly due to difficult circumstances given he was taken out mafia style in 05 but then again he got his chance in 01 due to injuries with greenwood and Catt so he has had fortune as well as difficulties.

Dallaglio was injured for 2 full tours when he should have got 6 caps and cemented his status as a great lion.... Bt all we got was one tour.

You can say the same about rugby losing jiffy for the 89 and 93 tours. A fit wilkinson in 05 and 09.. At least had he not suffered 3 years out of the game which changed his style significantly for the worse.

But we can't change history because of what might have been.

dan Carter has never taken a RWC by storm but that doesn't mean he's not been the best 10 over the last decade. Same with BOD, within a handful of the best players over the last decade.

Yes quite right. I wonder just how much even bigger his career would have been but for the deliberate premeditated crippling perpetrated by the all blacks and their management on BOD in 2005. I wonder if without that spell out of the game through injury and its lasting effect on the great man if we would be talking about World Cup winning centre Brian Odriscoll. I think we probably may have been.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Fly

I admit I've said and still believe that come the lions BOD hasn't really achieved much yet (2013 pending)... Now that's partly due to difficult circumstances given he was taken out mafia style in 05 but then again he got his chance in 01 due to injuries with greenwood and Catt so he has had fortune as well as difficulties.

Dallaglio was injured for 2 full tours when he should have got 6 caps and cemented his status as a great lion.... Bt all we got was one tour.

You can say the same about rugby losing jiffy for the 89 and 93 tours. A fit wilkinson in 05 and 09.. At least had he not suffered 3 years out of the game which changed his style significantly for the worse.

But we can't change history because of what might have been.

dan Carter has never taken a RWC by storm but that doesn't mean he's not been the best 10 over the last decade. Same with BOD, within a handful of the best players over the last decade.

Yes quite right. I wonder just how much even bigger his career would have been but for the deliberate premeditated crippling perpetrated by the all blacks and their management on BOD in 2005. I wonder if without that spell out of the game through injury and its lasting effect on the great man if we would be talking about World Cup winning centre Brian Odriscoll. I think we probably may have been.

Are you seriously suggesting that had Brian O'Driscoll not been injured in 2005, Ireland would have won either the 2007 or 2011 world cups? Winning a world cup is not about one player and certainly not a centre. I do not think even Ireland's greatest admirers would suggest that they have been remotely near world cup winning form.

Just watched the clip. Gatland was superb at the end