Australia vs British and Irish Lions - 22nd June : TEST 1 BUILDUP

First topic message reminder :

So, it's only a week to go before the first Lions test for 4 years.

Gatland has a host of injuries and a game against the Brumbies to manoeuvre while deciding the 23 players who will take to the pitch next Saturday.

Christian Wade and Brad Barritt have both been called up to cover for injury concerns over Jamie Roberts, Manu Tuilagi, Tommy Bowe and George North


My team for Saturday

1. Maku Vunipola
2. Tom Youngs
3. Adam Jones
4. Alun Wyn Jones
5. Paul O'Connell
6. Tom Croft
7. Sam Warburton
8. Toby Faletau
9. Mike Phillips
10. Jonathan Sexton
11. George North (Simon Zebo)
12. Jonathan Davies
13. Brian O'Driscoll
14. Alex Cuthbert
15. Leigh Halfpenny

16. Richard Hibbard
17. Alex Corbisiero
18. Dan Cole
19. Richie Gray
20. Justin Tipuric
21. Ben Youngs
22. Owen Farrell
23. Manu Tuilagi/Stuart Hogg


Thoughts?

In fact, look at the stats for every single game played today and tell me who is the top tackler in the back row? The 7.  In every single game.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't agree that when a 7 makes the most tackles in the game he is doing the job of a 6. That is a strange way of looking at it.  A lot of opensides are often the top tackler in the back row.  Why do you think Richie McCaw is known as "Captain Tackles"?  Chris Henry often makes the most tackles for Ulster and yet we applaud him as one of the best 7s in Ireland.

I haven't seen the game yet, but it sounds strange to criticise Warburton for making the most tackles.  Very strange.

Nobody is criticising him for tackling. I think everyone will agree he was good but imo he didn't play as well as some people are making out.

My comments are directed at the people who say "it would have been decent if he was a 6" or "playing the role of a 6".  It makes absolutely no sense as clearly this isn't how the game actually pans out.  Often the 7 makes the most tackles in the team, and to suggest it is the job of the blindside is just silly.

Just take a look at the tackle count stats if you want a shred of proof.

There was a third BOD penalty which led to the first try for holding on, but it was pretty much forced and not his fault.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:In fact, look at the stats for every single game played today and tell me who is the top tackler in the back row? The 7.  In every single game.

The perception, correct in some ways, is that your 6 is there to chop people down, and do a bit of carrying. That's a role associated with 6, a lot of their game is based on having a strong defensive presence. A 7 will tackle, as he is supposed to be close to the ball in attacke and defence, they can get credited for a "tackle" when they are second man in just finishing it off the tackle to get in on the ball.

FWIW thought Warburton had a pretty solid game but I don't think he is the true leader of this team.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't agree that when a 7 makes the most tackles in the game he is doing the job of a 6. That is a strange way of looking at it.  A lot of opensides are often the top tackler in the back row.  Why do you think Richie McCaw is known as "Captain Tackles"?  Chris Henry often makes the most tackles for Ulster and yet we applaud him as one of the best 7s in Ireland.

I haven't seen the game yet, but it sounds strange to criticise Warburton for making the most tackles.  Very strange.

No, some people are being critical of the idea that someone who made the most tackles played well. Backrow forwards should make the most tackles given they will be working and defending so much around the fringes of the breakdown. It's a given. That isn't enough to say that an individual made a good game. More than that pure stats say nothing. It is the quality of the tackles that is important. Is it a good tackle if Australia offload quickly? Do any of the tackles result in a turnover? I counted zero turnovers from Croft or Warburton. 1 from Heaslip, 2 from POC, 1 from Corbs. I'm sure there were others and I would have to go back and watch the match. Warburton simply did not do enough. Working hard and making a few tackles should be the absolute bare minimum any player, no matter the number on your shirt, should do.

Thomond wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:In fact, look at the stats for every single game played today and tell me who is the top tackler in the back row? The 7.  In every single game.

The perception, correct in some ways, is that your 6 is there to chop people down, and do a bit of carrying. That's a role associated with 6, a lot of their game is based on having a strong defensive presence. A 7 will tackle, as he is supposed to be close to the ball in attacke and defence, they can get credited for a "tackle" when they are second man in just finishing it off the tackle to get in on the ball.

I don't think assisted tackles are counted to be honest. You can claim that is the case if you want, but the stats clearly suggest the 7 is usually the player making the most tackles.  Not that they are finishing off, but that they are making the tackle.  Of course they will tackle.  This isn't just the case this weekend, this is something I have observed to be true in many, many games.  The top tackler stats in the Super 15 tell the same story.

It entirely depends on the makeup of your back row (some games even have the 8 making the most tackles) but generally the stats say that the openside makes the most tackles in your average game.  9 times out of 10 the 6 is going to be the bigger, robust defender, but that doesn't mean he makes the most tackles.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't agree that when a 7 makes the most tackles in the game he is doing the job of a 6. That is a strange way of looking at it.  A lot of opensides are often the top tackler in the back row.  Why do you think Richie McCaw is known as "Captain Tackles"?  Chris Henry often makes the most tackles for Ulster and yet we applaud him as one of the best 7s in Ireland.

I haven't seen the game yet, but it sounds strange to criticise Warburton for making the most tackles.  Very strange.

No, some people are being critical of the idea that someone who made the most tackles played well.  Backrow forwards should make the most tackles given they will be working and defending so much around the fringes of the breakdown.  It's a given.  That isn't enough to say that an individual made a good game.  More than that pure stats say nothing.  It is the quality of the tackles that is important.  Is it a good tackle if Australia offload quickly?  Do any of the tackles result in a turnover?  I counted zero turnovers from Croft or Warburton.  1 from Heaslip, 2 from POC, 1 from Corbs.  I'm sure there were others and I would have to go back and watch the match.  Warburton simply did not do enough.  Working hard and making a few tackles should be the absolute bare minimum any player, no matter the number on your shirt, should do.  

My argument was against the claims that Warburton was doing the job of a 6 for making the most tackles.  Which is just bizarre to say the least and quite clearly isn't true.  You can say Croft wasn't doing his job or pulling his weight, and that Warburton had more to cover on his own, but that makes more sense than saying he was doing the job of a 6 for making the most tackles!  Especially when 7s usually do make more tackles than any other player.

I don't know whether Warburton had a good game or not because I didn't see the game.

Gretgael1 wrote:Chequeredjersey, I really think you need to look at the game if you think BOD gave away a ton of penalties and missed tackles. He gave away two dubious penalties and missed no tackles. I had to stop reading your review after that.

Cool, feel free to. 2 kickable penalties, which I agree I wouldn't have given but it was clear that Pollock was going to do so and continue doing so all match, was a lot for one player in the context of the match. I thought he missed a couple of tackles, evidently I was wrong, though I don't really believe the stats that say the Lions only missed 7 tackles all match! There's no need to get so defensive of your player, BOD played well but he should have learned from his first penalty that he wouldn't be allowed to play his game at the breakdown, he's an intelligent man. Looking at the highlights, I can't see any missed tackles by BOD, but not reading the rest of the report based on that is a tad odd, tbh, luckily I didn't really write the whole thing specifically for you. I don't see how anyone can write a perfectly accurate report on a game of rugby on one watch but I apologise for any errors I may have made.

Still think it's hard to argue that Australia didn't deserve to win that game and that there aren't a lot of things we need to work on for next week. However the issues at the breakdown will hopefully not be there with a different ref

You're not wrong, but I think the perception is that most 6s are there for their prowess at tackling/defence which in many cases is correct, all the backrow need to be good tacklers, and 7s tend to lead the way as they are the guys who are usually the fastest and who swarm the ball.

7s will be key to the breakdown more then tackling even though they tackle a lot, if you get me. I'm not explaining myself well here I don't think but it's a hard thing to explain I think, it's something that kind of manifests itself on the pitch, really, a 6 is seen as the defensive guy and plays a more defensive role then a 7 I think even though he doesn't always lead in tackling.

 (it sounds like I'm talking shoite and I probably am a bit, but I think some of it is true)

No I think I get what you are saying Thomond - I just think that the roles of the 6 or 7 entirely depend on the team, but often the openside is the top tackler in games.  Like you say though 9 times out of 10 a team will select the bigger defender at 6 and the quicker player at 7.

Thomond wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:In fact, look at the stats for every single game played today and tell me who is the top tackler in the back row? The 7.  In every single game.

The perception, correct in some ways, is that your 6 is there to chop people down, and do a bit of carrying. That's a role associated with 6, a lot of their game is based on having a strong defensive presence. A 7 will tackle, as he is supposed to be close to the ball in attacke and defence, they can get credited for a "tackle" when they are second man in just finishing it off the tackle to get in on the ball.

There is no such thing as a 6 or a 7 anymore. They are flankers but they are interchangable. It doesn't matter which one does which job as long as your backrow does a bit of everything well across it. The obsession with a "true 7" and a chopper 6 is maddening. Don't put 3 identical players at 6,7 and 8 like we did against Wales but not every back row has to fit to an exact configuration. I say this as someone who has played almost all of my rugby in the backrow at 6 or sometimes 7

Rory_Gallagher wrote:No I think I get what you are saying Thomond - I just think that the roles of the 6 or 7 entirely depend on the team, but often the openside is the top tackler in games.  Like you say though 9 times out of 10 a team will select the bigger defender at 6 and the quicker player at 7.

You got there first

Whatever way you look at it guys, you need a balanced backrow with different skill sets.  Maybe it is far too simplistic to say that the blindisde does the tackling and the openside the turnovers.  But having a 6 and 7 with the same skill set doesn't make sense.  Today I don't think a backrow of Croft and Warburton made sense for a variety of reason mainly the fact that we relied on other forwards at the breakdown as neither Croft nor Warburton are strong there.  Bare in mind that Warburton averaged 0.2 turnovers a game in the 6N (might have been autumn series actually).  He is by no means a ground hog and Croft is an unorthodox 6 who for me only really excels in the lineout and when he gets into space.

For the second test I would really like to see Tipuric and O'Brien brought in to play alongside Heaslip as its a more balanced backrow with O'Brien there for the tight play, carrying and tackling and Tipuric for the breakdown and link play.

I think that's true for many teams CJ, Ireland would probably be the best example of that going back over the last ten years we have never had the traditional backrow shape, but we've always had balance as we have had guys who can excell in pretty much every department, there are still some teams using the old school methodolgoy, but the traditional ideology is changing in what is only a good thing as it leads to more rounded and skilled players.


I will say that the Wels/Gatland style still has the old school view on the backrow though, their players tend to have specific roles and they fulfill them well most of the time.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Gretgael1 wrote:Chequeredjersey, I really think you need to look at the game if you think BOD gave away a ton of penalties and missed tackles. He gave away two dubious penalties and missed no tackles. I had to stop reading your review after that.

Cool, feel free to. 2 kickable penalties, which I agree I wouldn't have given but it was clear that Pollock was going to do so and continue doing so all match, was a lot for one player in the context of the match. I thought he missed a couple of tackles, evidently I was wrong, though I don't really believe the stats that say the Lions only missed 7 tackles all match! There's no need to get so defensive of your player, BOD played well but he should have learned from his first penalty that he wouldn't be allowed to play his game at the breakdown, he's an intelligent man. Looking at the highlights, I can't see any missed tackles by BOD, but not reading the rest of the report based on that is a tad odd, tbh, luckily I didn't really write the whole thing specifically for you. I don't see how anyone can write a perfectly accurate report on a game of rugby on one watch but I apologise for any errors I may have made.

Still think it's hard to argue that Australia didn't deserve to win that game and that there aren't a lot of things we need to work on for next week. However the issues at the breakdown will hopefully not be there with a different ref

Is this utterly nonsensical on the BOD front. He gave away penalties early in the match, whether you agree with the interpretation of the referee (which I don't). But you play the referee. He didn't do it in the second half, in fact did he give away any penalties in the final 60 minutes of the game for that specific offence? No. THAT is the sign of intelligence and learning to play the referee. It is the players who give away penalties well into the match for the same offence that deserve the most criticism.

I thought Croft was OK today but I think (and I can't believe I'm saying this...) that I'd play Lydiate (or maybe SOB) next week primarily to shut down Genia. He cannot be given any space or time. Notice Mowen's main job today was shutting down Phillips

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Gretgael1 wrote:Chequeredjersey, I really think you need to look at the game if you think BOD gave away a ton of penalties and missed tackles. He gave away two dubious penalties and missed no tackles. I had to stop reading your review after that.

Cool, feel free to. 2 kickable penalties, which I agree I wouldn't have given but it was clear that Pollock was going to do so and continue doing so all match, was a lot for one player in the context of the match. I thought he missed a couple of tackles, evidently I was wrong, though I don't really believe the stats that say the Lions only missed 7 tackles all match! There's no need to get so defensive of your player, BOD played well but he should have learned from his first penalty that he wouldn't be allowed to play his game at the breakdown, he's an intelligent man. Looking at the highlights, I can't see any missed tackles by BOD, but not reading the rest of the report based on that is a tad odd, tbh, luckily I didn't really write the whole thing specifically for you. I don't see how anyone can write a perfectly accurate report on a game of rugby on one watch but I apologise for any errors I may have made.

Still think it's hard to argue that Australia didn't deserve to win that game and that there aren't a lot of things we need to work on for next week. However the issues at the breakdown will hopefully not be there with a different ref

Is this utterly nonsensical on the BOD front.  He gave away penalties early in the match, whether you agree with the interpretation of the referee (which I don't).  But you play the referee.  He didn't do it in the second half, in fact did he give away any penalties in the final 60 minutes of the game for that specific offence?  No.  THAT is the sign of intelligence and learning to play the referee.  It is the players who give away penalties well into the match for the same offence that deserve the most criticism.  

Fine, I'm sorry for my comments, it's very true that BOD played the ref much better in the 2nd half. It's also very typical on this forum to focus on one comment in a whole group of them and obsess over it particularly if it's one of your "own" players playing. I retract my analysis of BOD, can you just forget I wrote it?

I'd also like to add, because I haven't said it yet, that it was a thoroughly entertaining match and I'm happy to have seen it, good luck to the injured players and commiserations to the Aussies and congratulations to the Lions

In reference to the penalties CJ mentions, Pollock was spot on. The first he clearly isn't supporting his own weight as his forearms are on the floor as he leans over the tackled player. He's not competing for the ball at that point he's sealing off and then pulls his weight up and grabs at the ball. Penalty all day long, Best got pinged in the 6N for doing exactly the same thing. The second he dives off his feet clear penalty.

BOD and Davies were both quiet. It's a partnership that doesn't work with both players prefering to run in the outside channel than play inside. Expect Manu or Roberts to return for the second test in place of Davies (which is harsh).

I thought our flankers played pretty well. Hooper and Gill made little impact at the breakdown and when we conceded turnovers it was mainly through isolated players stemming from poor decision making in attack. Remove the clueless Phillips and that would help. Warburton was busy in and around the breakdown, Croft ghosted all over the pitch and made a couple of nice tackles but always seemed to be in shot at every breakdown, no flash stuff from them but lots of hard work.

End of the day we conceded two tries the first of which stemmed from a poor attacking decision and an isolated player then a sublime break with lazy cover defence (Mr Phillips). The second a counter attack from a poor box kick les to the defence bunching around the breakdown allowing them to go wide. That's poor defensive organisation. A lot of the penalties conceded stemmed from players trying to hard for the turnovers rather than trusting the defence. Practice the systems and with a little more cohesion in defence and attack those silly errors will be less prevalent.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Folau looking a real find. One year or two before he takes the big money in France?

He'll stick around till the next World Cup then do a SBW back to League I reckon

Loads of great chat here lads, and glad we came away with a win that I really didn't think we deserved, interesting that we didn't "dominate them up front".

One thing I would like to say amidst all the good, very good and ok performances:

Philips was awful.
He really killed so much of our momentum. How many times did he slow the ball down when we needed to get it out quick, he took the ball on himself so often when he should not have. He really killed a lot of our attacks. His box kicks were too long and when he came off Youngs made a noticeable difference. Philips is a class act but I believe his style (and that of Conor Murray) is of very little use against Australia and this game just showed me that. He had good clean ball a lot of the time and the set piece was good when he was on, apart from one break, his running game was disastrous and his distribution is so clearly sub-standard when you take out his threat around the fringes.

For me Ben Youngs simple must start.

Other than that:

1) Great defense (most of the time)
2) I liked the backrow balance (get rid of Lydiate)
3) The starting front row: 
4) Sexton is looking classy (get him the ball more - aka: play B.Youngs)
5) Well done Lions lineout

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't agree that when a 7 makes the most tackles in the game he is doing the job of a 6. That is a strange way of looking at it. A lot of opensides are often the top tackler in the back row. Why do you think Richie McCaw is known as "Captain Tackles"? Chris Henry often makes the most tackles for Ulster and yet we applaud him as one of the best 7s in Ireland.

I haven't seen the game yet, but it sounds strange to criticise Warburton for making the most tackles. Very strange.

Well said, if the other side is constantly going blind you expect the 6 or 8 to make the most tackles.

It is interesting some on here are picking stats POC was better than AWJ, he played 80mins not 50 mins, they both had good games, another BOD made more tackles than JD2, he only ran 6 metres against JDs 22, again both had good games (may not have linked that great) and then Heaslip had a great game, did he? he carried 13m for a number 8!

I think Croft will be dropped for the next game, the Lions need a tight back row all doing the work not out wide taking the space of the wings, he screwed a good chance of a try hanging on to the ball.

glamorganalun wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't agree that when a 7 makes the most tackles in the game he is doing the job of a 6. That is a strange way of looking at it.  A lot of opensides are often the top tackler in the back row.  Why do you think Richie McCaw is known as "Captain Tackles"?  Chris Henry often makes the most tackles for Ulster and yet we applaud him as one of the best 7s in Ireland.

I haven't seen the game yet, but it sounds strange to criticise Warburton for making the most tackles.  Very strange.

Well said, if the other side is constantly going blind you expect the 6 or 8 to make the most tackles.

It is interesting some on here are picking stats POC was better than AWJ, he played 80mins not 50 mins, they both had good games, another BOD made more tackles than JD2, he only ran 6 metres against JDs 22, again both had good games (may not have linked that great) and then Heaslip had a great game, did he? he carried 13m for a number 8!

I think Croft will be dropped for the next game, the Lions need a tight back row all doing the work not out wide taking the space of the wings, he screwed a good chance of a try hanging on to the ball.

I'm dubious about ESPN's stats anyway, mate, think they may change a bit later today. We can't have only missed 7 tackles.

Interesting that POC and AWJ were used considerably less than Heaslip and Croft in the lineout.

4 takes for the locks
8 takes for the backrow (warbs didn't take any)

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Interesting that POC and AWJ were used considerably less than Heaslip and Croft in the lineout.

4 takes for the locks
8 takes for the backrow (warbs didn't take any)

Youngs and Croft will be used to playing together for England and Tigers. Makes sense that Youngs would throw to him a lot, at least

ChequeredJersey wrote:I thought Croft was OK today but I think (and I can't believe I'm saying this...) that I'd play Lydiate (or maybe SOB) next week primarily to shut down Genia. He cannot be given any space or time. Notice Mowen's main job today was shutting down Phillips

Yes...!

We need to restrict not just Genia, who was superb, but their ball carriers were turning slow ball into front foot ball and changing the impetus.

I said the said Croft would be an issue after last weeks game.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Gretgael1 wrote:Chequeredjersey, I really think you need to look at the game if you think BOD gave away a ton of penalties and missed tackles. He gave away two dubious penalties and missed no tackles. I had to stop reading your review after that.

Cool, feel free to. 2 kickable penalties, which I agree I wouldn't have given but it was clear that Pollock was going to do so and continue doing so all match, was a lot for one player in the context of the match. I thought he missed a couple of tackles, evidently I was wrong, though I don't really believe the stats that say the Lions only missed 7 tackles all match! There's no need to get so defensive of your player, BOD played well but he should have learned from his first penalty that he wouldn't be allowed to play his game at the breakdown, he's an intelligent man. Looking at the highlights, I can't see any missed tackles by BOD, but not reading the rest of the report based on that is a tad odd, tbh, luckily I didn't really write the whole thing specifically for you. I don't see how anyone can write a perfectly accurate report on a game of rugby on one watch but I apologise for any errors I may have made.

Still think it's hard to argue that Australia didn't deserve to win that game and that there aren't a lot of things we need to work on for next week. However the issues at the breakdown will hopefully not be there with a different ref

Is this utterly nonsensical on the BOD front.  He gave away penalties early in the match, whether you agree with the interpretation of the referee (which I don't).  But you play the referee.  He didn't do it in the second half, in fact did he give away any penalties in the final 60 minutes of the game for that specific offence?  No.  THAT is the sign of intelligence and learning to play the referee.  It is the players who give away penalties well into the match for the same offence that deserve the most criticism.  

Yeah, so why don't you criticise the Irish player who gave away the last penalty then? Oh yes I forgot, he's Irish, not Welsh. Therefore, bereft of any criticism from a one-eyed bandit.
You still haven't told us how POC and BOD were the true leaders today compared to Warburton who was absolutely rubbish despite being asked about it.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

glamorganalun wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't agree that when a 7 makes the most tackles in the game he is doing the job of a 6. That is a strange way of looking at it.  A lot of opensides are often the top tackler in the back row.  Why do you think Richie McCaw is known as "Captain Tackles"?  Chris Henry often makes the most tackles for Ulster and yet we applaud him as one of the best 7s in Ireland.

I haven't seen the game yet, but it sounds strange to criticise Warburton for making the most tackles.  Very strange.

Well said, if the other side is constantly going blind you expect the 6 or 8 to make the most tackles.

It is interesting some on here are picking stats POC was better than AWJ, he played 80mins not 50 mins, they both had good games, another BOD made more tackles than JD2, he only ran 6 metres against JDs 22, again both had good games (may not have linked that great) and then Heaslip had a great game, did he? he carried 13m for a number 8!

I think Croft will be dropped for the next game, the Lions need a tight back row all doing the work not out wide taking the space of the wings, he screwed a good chance of a try hanging on to the ball.

I'm dubious about ESPN's stats anyway, mate, think they may change a bit later today. We can't have only missed 7 tackles.

Yep, CJ that often happens with the ESPN stats.  They are revised a second time and updated.

maestegmafia wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I thought Croft was OK today but I think (and I can't believe I'm saying this...) that I'd play Lydiate (or maybe SOB) next week primarily to shut down Genia. He cannot be given any space or time. Notice Mowen's main job today was shutting down Phillips

Yes...!

We need to restrict not just Genia, who was superb, but their ball carriers were turning slow ball into front foot ball and changing the impetus.

I said the said Croft would be an issue after last weeks game.

Phillips didn't do much would you change him as well?

ChequeredJersey wrote:

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Interesting that POC and AWJ were used considerably less than Heaslip and Croft in the lineout.

4 takes for the locks
8 takes for the backrow (warbs didn't take any)

Youngs and Croft will be used to playing together for England and Tigers. Makes sense that Youngs would throw to him a lot, at least

POC is calling the lineout. Heaslip had the same number of takes as Croft.

Val wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I thought Croft was OK today but I think (and I can't believe I'm saying this...) that I'd play Lydiate (or maybe SOB) next week primarily to shut down Genia. He cannot be given any space or time. Notice Mowen's main job today was shutting down Phillips

[color]


Yes...!

We need to restrict not just Genia, who was superb, but their ball carriers were turning slow ball into front foot ball and changing the impetus.

I said the said Croft would be an issue after last weeks game.
[/color]

Phillips didn't do much would you change him as well?

JESUS YES. 

He was the worst Lions IMO that started today.

Sin é wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Interesting that POC and AWJ were used considerably less than Heaslip and Croft in the lineout.

4 takes for the locks
8 takes for the backrow (warbs didn't take any)

Youngs and Croft will be used to playing together for England and Tigers. Makes sense that Youngs would throw to him a lot, at least

POC is calling the lineout. Heaslip had the same number of takes as Croft.

The line out functioned well - I'd be reluctant to change it

maestegmafia wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I thought Croft was OK today but I think (and I can't believe I'm saying this...) that I'd play Lydiate (or maybe SOB) next week primarily to shut down Genia. He cannot be given any space or time. Notice Mowen's main job today was shutting down Phillips

Yes...!

We need to restrict not just Genia, who was superb, but their ball carriers were turning slow ball into front foot ball and changing the impetus.

I said the said Croft would be an issue after last weeks game.

I don't think Croft was an issue as such, he played well, but Genia IS good enough that we have to specifically target him.

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:

Val wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:I thought Croft was OK today but I think (and I can't believe I'm saying this...) that I'd play Lydiate (or maybe SOB) next week primarily to shut down Genia. He cannot be given any space or time. Notice Mowen's main job today was shutting down Phillips

Yes...!

We need to restrict not just Genia, who was superb, but their ball carriers were turning slow ball into front foot ball and changing the impetus.

I said the said Croft would be an issue after last weeks game.

Phillips didn't do much would you change him as well?

JESUS YES. 

He was the worst Lions IMO that started today.

Clearly - but would maes change him?

ChequeredJersey wrote:

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Interesting that POC and AWJ were used considerably less than Heaslip and Croft in the lineout.

4 takes for the locks
8 takes for the backrow (warbs didn't take any)

Youngs and Croft will be used to playing together for England and Tigers. Makes sense that Youngs would throw to him a lot, at least

More that Gatland wanted safe ball early I think.
The first 3 of 4 lineouts were to light (therefore quick to get into the air) backrows at the front of the lineout. Then there were a few 5 man ones as well.

Just thought it strange that it didn't balance out more later

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

glamorganalun wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't agree that when a 7 makes the most tackles in the game he is doing the job of a 6. That is a strange way of looking at it.  A lot of opensides are often the top tackler in the back row.  Why do you think Richie McCaw is known as "Captain Tackles"?  Chris Henry often makes the most tackles for Ulster and yet we applaud him as one of the best 7s in Ireland.

I haven't seen the game yet, but it sounds strange to criticise Warburton for making the most tackles.  Very strange.

Well said, if the other side is constantly going blind you expect the 6 or 8 to make the most tackles.

It is interesting some on here are picking stats POC was better than AWJ, he played 80mins not 50 mins, they both had good games, another BOD made more tackles than JD2, he only ran 6 metres against JDs 22, again both had good games (may not have linked that great) and then Heaslip had a great game, did he? he carried 13m for a number 8!

I think Croft will be dropped for the next game, the Lions need a tight back row all doing the work not out wide taking the space of the wings, he screwed a good chance of a try hanging on to the ball.

I'm dubious about ESPN's stats anyway, mate, think they may change a bit later today. We can't have only missed 7 tackles.

Yep, CJ that often happens with the ESPN stats.  They are revised a second time and updated.

B&I Lions Official stats (from their website for each game).

http://www.lionsrugby.com/2013tour/12243.php

http://www.lionsrugby.com/2013tour/match_centre_2013.php?section=playstatsaway&fixid=169134

Sin é wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Interesting that POC and AWJ were used considerably less than Heaslip and Croft in the lineout.

4 takes for the locks
8 takes for the backrow (warbs didn't take any)

Youngs and Croft will be used to playing together for England and Tigers. Makes sense that Youngs would throw to him a lot, at least

POC is calling the lineout. Heaslip had the same number of takes as Croft.

True, just saying it would make sense that they'd use Croft a lot as an option. If I were POC, who is very canny, I'd call it to Croft a lot. It's an excellent lineout-pack. Just wished we'd pressurised their lineout a tad more

The Toms, Youngs and Croft have probably only played about 10 matches together - so not all that experienced together.

Sin é wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

glamorganalun wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't agree that when a 7 makes the most tackles in the game he is doing the job of a 6. That is a strange way of looking at it.  A lot of opensides are often the top tackler in the back row.  Why do you think Richie McCaw is known as "Captain Tackles"?  Chris Henry often makes the most tackles for Ulster and yet we applaud him as one of the best 7s in Ireland.

I haven't seen the game yet, but it sounds strange to criticise Warburton for making the most tackles.  Very strange.

Well said, if the other side is constantly going blind you expect the 6 or 8 to make the most tackles.

It is interesting some on here are picking stats POC was better than AWJ, he played 80mins not 50 mins, they both had good games, another BOD made more tackles than JD2, he only ran 6 metres against JDs 22, again both had good games (may not have linked that great) and then Heaslip had a great game, did he? he carried 13m for a number 8!

I think Croft will be dropped for the next game, the Lions need a tight back row all doing the work not out wide taking the space of the wings, he screwed a good chance of a try hanging on to the ball.

I'm dubious about ESPN's stats anyway, mate, think they may change a bit later today. We can't have only missed 7 tackles.

Yep, CJ that often happens with the ESPN stats.  They are revised a second time and updated.

B&I Lions Official stats (from their website for each game).

http://www.lionsrugby.com/2013tour/12243.php

http://www.lionsrugby.com/2013tour/match_centre_2013.php?section=playstatsaway&fixid=169134

Thanks, didn't know about that. If it says we only missed 7 tackles, fair enough. Seemed like a lot more given the nature of their breaks

If you fail to touch the man, liek Phillips with Genia it does not count as a missed tackle.

LondonTiger wrote:If you fail to touch the man, liek Phillips with Genia it does not count as a missed tackle.

That is ludicrous

Aye, CJ. But so is the hysteria on here with everyone looking to slag off a player or two it seems.

God help the internet if we had lost, it would have exploded.

Worst thing was Philips didn't "run" after Genia after the dummy, he "jogged". Not impressed

theslosty wrote:There was a third BOD penalty which led to the first try for holding on, but it was pretty much forced and not his fault.

According to the Official Lions stats, BOD gave away two penalties.

The Saint wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Gretgael1 wrote:Chequeredjersey, I really think you need to look at the game if you think BOD gave away a ton of penalties and missed tackles. He gave away two dubious penalties and missed no tackles. I had to stop reading your review after that.

Cool, feel free to. 2 kickable penalties, which I agree I wouldn't have given but it was clear that Pollock was going to do so and continue doing so all match, was a lot for one player in the context of the match. I thought he missed a couple of tackles, evidently I was wrong, though I don't really believe the stats that say the Lions only missed 7 tackles all match! There's no need to get so defensive of your player, BOD played well but he should have learned from his first penalty that he wouldn't be allowed to play his game at the breakdown, he's an intelligent man. Looking at the highlights, I can't see any missed tackles by BOD, but not reading the rest of the report based on that is a tad odd, tbh, luckily I didn't really write the whole thing specifically for you. I don't see how anyone can write a perfectly accurate report on a game of rugby on one watch but I apologise for any errors I may have made.

Still think it's hard to argue that Australia didn't deserve to win that game and that there aren't a lot of things we need to work on for next week. However the issues at the breakdown will hopefully not be there with a different ref

Is this utterly nonsensical on the BOD front.  He gave away penalties early in the match, whether you agree with the interpretation of the referee (which I don't).  But you play the referee.  He didn't do it in the second half, in fact did he give away any penalties in the final 60 minutes of the game for that specific offence?  No.  THAT is the sign of intelligence and learning to play the referee.  It is the players who give away penalties well into the match for the same offence that deserve the most criticism.  

Yeah, so why don't you criticise the Irish player who gave away the last penalty then? Oh yes I forgot, he's Irish, not Welsh. Therefore, bereft of any criticism from a one-eyed bandit.
You still haven't told us how POC and BOD were the true leaders today compared to Warburton who was absolutely rubbish despite being asked about it.

Ahm, the last penalty was given against Dan Cole in the scrum.  Who by the was very disappointing with his scrummaging when he came on.  Aside from the last penalty he got out done in the scrum by the Aus loosehead when we had a 5m scrum in their 22 near the end.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Sin é wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

pete (buachaill on eirne) wrote:Interesting that POC and AWJ were used considerably less than Heaslip and Croft in the lineout.

4 takes for the locks
8 takes for the backrow (warbs didn't take any)

Youngs and Croft will be used to playing together for England and Tigers. Makes sense that Youngs would throw to him a lot, at least

POC is calling the lineout. Heaslip had the same number of takes as Croft.

True, just saying it would make sense that they'd use Croft a lot as an option. If I were POC, who is very canny, I'd call it to Croft a lot. It's an excellent lineout-pack. Just wished we'd pressurised their lineout a tad more

The lineout has been terrible when POC is not playing, which would suggest that its not an excellent lineout-pack and the only reason its good now is because he knows what he is doing.

Last penalty might have been given against Vunipola actually, it was given for the front row going down either way.

The penalty Beale missed on 73 minutes was also given against Vunipola.