why did Gatland not bring Ryan Grant on?

Just trying to get my head around why Gatland didn't bring Grant on when Vunipola was clearly exhausted?

Cee You Next Tuesday

Because he's just not good enough.

He was carrying a slight knock and was on the bench as a last resort.

He's been Poopie in training.

Gatland hates the Scots.

Rowntree hates the Scots and Gatland is afraid of him.

The coaching team put money on there being no capped Scottish players by the end.

Take your pick, could be anything.

I think as gatland did not select him in the initial squad, and was forced to pick him, gatlands stubborn streak meant he would not bring him on

(See stubborn streak ref hook and peel)

McLachlan, Sole, Smith ...

Riskysports wrote:I think as gatland did not select him in the initial squad, and was forced to pick him, gatlands stubborn streak meant he would not bring him on

(See stubborn streak ref hook and peel)

Gatland didn't select Corbisiero in the initial squad and he started last week so that theory doesn't really hold water.

HammerofThunor wrote:Because he's just not good enough.

He was carrying a slight knock and was on the bench as a last resort.

He's been Poopie in training.

Gatland hates the Scots.

Rowntree hates the Scots and Gatland is afraid of him.

The coaching team put money on there being no capped Scottish players by the end.

Take your pick, could be anything.

 

Did seem a little odd at the time but this now makes a lot of sense to me.

I think it was outright stubbornness too. The Aussie media had raise questions about not starting him and the only reasonable explanation for not bringing him on was to show he knows best. I'd have had him on after 30 mins. Vunipola got better soon after that, but I think in general we didn't utilise the bench well and it was a poor bench to begin with. The Aussies were there for the taking too.

Mako made more tackles than anyone else (per ESPN) but did miss an additional 2. He made a big impact in the loose and had got over his scrum wobblings by half time and was on top of the Wallaby tighthead in the second half.

Maybe he didn't impress enough in the week.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Mako made more tackles than anyone else (per ESPN) but did miss an additional 2. He made a big impact in the loose and had got over his scrum wobblings by half time and was on top of the Wallaby tighthead in the second half.

Maybe he didn't impress enough in the week.

Yep, he had a great middle third after a poor opening third. He looked tired the final third though and it is rare that a prop is given 80 minutes when there is another on the bench ready to go.

Gatland's lack of attempt to even include the Scots in a pretend way is one reason the Lions have not won this series yet - it shows how divisive he can be even to his own squad.

Absolutely no reason to not bring on your prop at some point in such a big test match, especially one that will shore up the scrum just as well as Cole and Hibbard did.

Cuthbert wasn't used this week so I can just about excuse the lack of use of Maitland the week before. Were last week's props used?

Will he get cited, do we think?

Ozzy3213 wrote:

Riskysports wrote:I think as gatland did not select him in the initial squad, and was forced to pick him, gatlands stubborn streak meant he would not bring him on

(See stubborn streak ref hook and peel)

Gatland didn't select Corbisiero in the initial squad and he started last week so that theory doesn't really hold water.

Corbs was injured so is not quite the same - as it gave gatland a clause. Grant was one of the top performances in the 6 nation, not selection was a conscious choice, one that gatland will not admit was wrong by playing them

Probably the same reason that he didn't pick Toby,Ian,Manu etc.

patersonismyhero wrote:Gatland's lack of attempt to even include the Scots in a pretend way is one reason the Lions have not won this series yet - it shows how divisive he can be even to his own squad.

Oh good lord.

Some of the posts on here are just laughable lol

To be fair to Gats, on Grants original non selection, most people were outraged that Rory Best wasn't in the original squad and look how utter gash Best has been since called up.

I had no issue with Grant not getting on the original tour. However can't understand why he never came on today. Almost all teams empty their front row bench at the top level, especially when you have an international class prop on the bench.

I doubt him not coming lost the lions the game but we know for certain that keeping him off did not win us it.

Before I get a barrage of abuse from Non Scots posters, I not saying Gats is anti Scotland etc.

He should have brought Grant on. I think what maybe swayed his mind was Vunipola's loose play, but also that he emptied the bench last week and it didn't really work out at scrum time.

If I am honest, I was half expecting Matt Stevens to be the loosehead cover though (given his initial selection as able to play both sides), so at least Grant is there. I hope either Grant starts next week, or more so that Corbisero is fit, as I really want our set piece to rumble.

Risca Rev wrote:He should have brought Grant on. I think what maybe swayed his mind was Vunipola's loose play, but also that he emptied the bench last week and it didn't really work out at scrum time.

If I am honest, I was half expecting Matt Stevens to be the loosehead cover though (given his initial selection as able to play both sides), so at least Grant is there. I hope either Grant starts next week, or more so that Corbisero is fit, as I really want our set piece to rumble.

Stevens selection has been weird. He should be nowhere near the squad on TH play alone. Gats mentioned his ability to cover LH. But with 2 replacements props on the bench, that is not really a big deal these days.

Also he can't rate Stevens too highly at LH as he has called in 3 different LHs to cover injuries!

Either Gatland's stubborness or Grant was carrying an injury after midweek. One of his thighs was heavily strapped. It didnt lose us the game but having a more consistent scrum would have helped the backs get some pattern on their plays.

Certainly if Corbisiero is fit he will start and Grant will be displaced from the bench.
Vinupolo did get better after about 30 minutes but actually think he got lucky on occasion with the ref. The penalty that got us three points he was definitely driving inwards and not straight.
Having said that the Aussies also got a lucky pen from a scrum. However he looked out on his feet after 60 and Grant would have added good impact at that stage.
With Poitre reffing next week we dont want any illegal work in the front row as he ,like most French refs, has a good nose for scrum infringements and is happy to let the dominant scrum be dominant. If Corbisiero isnt fit then the same scenario will play out next week, Vinupolo plays 80 regardless of his conditon and Grant warms his bum on the bench.

ChequeredJersey wrote:Will he get cited, do we think?

To me it just looked like he raised his shoulder defensively and instinctively because someone was about to run full pelt into him. In real time it looked like nothing and in slow mo it looked slightly bad but everything does in slow mo. He prob get cited and the panel will say no problem, which I think would be the right call.
Apart from a couple of scrums(most were good) and a terrible pass, I thought he had a v good game. I thought he would have been subbed off in last 20 though as he looked pretty tired.

Dorothy_Mantooth wrote:

Risca Rev wrote:He should have brought Grant on. I think what maybe swayed his mind was Vunipola's loose play, but also that he emptied the bench last week and it didn't really work out at scrum time.

If I am honest, I was half expecting Matt Stevens to be the loosehead cover though (given his initial selection as able to play both sides), so at least Grant is there. I hope either Grant starts next week, or more so that Corbisero is fit, as I really want our set piece to rumble.

Stevens selection has been weird. He should be nowhere near the squad on TH play alone. Gats mentioned his ability to cover LH. But with 2 replacements props on the bench, that is not really a big deal these days.

Also he can't rate Stevens too highly at LH as he has called in 3 different LHs to cover injuries!

I get that aye, it was just what I was half expecting to happen

Warren FatMan, December 2012: "representation for the Scots is challenging." - at least he's been good to his word on something

Noone wants tokenism, but Grant not getting on today was BS of the highest order. Especially with Mako blowing out his erse in the final quarter

formerly known as Sam wrote:Mako made more tackles than anyone else (per ESPN) but did miss an additional 2. He made a big impact in the loose and had got over his scrum wobblings by half time and was on top of the Wallaby tighthead in the second half.

Maybe he didn't impress enough in the week.

According to the stats you are using he also gave away by far the most penalties.

I'm going to say this once, just to get it off my chest:

I really DO want to support the Lions. I've got the shirt, I've watched every Saturday match and followed the mid-week matches surreptitiously on Twitter whilst at work. However, do the Lions really represent me?

I don't require Scots to be on the pitch to feel represented, but I do require the team to embody the ethos that we are all one and the same, and equally worthy. I'm sorry to say that Gatland's actions during this tour, and today in particular, show that he doesn't subscribe to the Lions creed. I had no problem supporting the Lions four years ago when barely any Scots were picked. They weren't good enough. Put another way, I didn't feel that their not being picked was any slight against me. There were simply better players available in those positions.

Let's say, theoretically, that I was on the Lions bench for the second test, and because of my nationality the Lions coach refused to bring me on, denying me the greatest honour of my career. Is that acceptable? Why should I, as a supporter, feel in any way represented by this team?

If Messrs Gatland and Rowntree don't think that Ryan Grant is good enough to bring on because he is Scottish (and I'm struggling for another explanation), then they are, in effect, saying that I'm not good enough.

I won't support a team or coach that perpetuates that idea.

If Gatland was anti Scottish or didn't rate Grant then he wouldn't have called him up in the first place. He could have gone for someone like Paul James. But he didn't.

Griff, apparently he wanted to call Paul James but he's lost his phone number

https://twitter.com/ryangrant85/status/351067040624291840

Pretty disappointing night all round really ..

I think I must have a bit of dust in my eye.

Griff wrote:If Gatland was anti Scottish or didn't rate Grant then he wouldn't have called him up in the first place. He could have gone for someone like Paul James. But he didn't.

He didn't

He ignored one of the outstanding lh in the 6 nations for,genkins who was injured and out of form

Then selected a player injured for a long time just coming back


THEN he was forced to select him after the next injury

Gatland has shown he has no tactics and is a completely stubborn selector

(Which is what a lot of us stated from the start)

Absolutely no idea why he didn't hook Mako after 50 or 60. He must just not rate Grant at all.

It's not just Gatland that has ruined this tour ( in addition to the other cretins responsible for team selection and tactics), its also 90% of posters on this board, the BBC comments section, Facebook 606 etc etc. Shoot me down in flames but a little bit of me quite enjoyed the result today....more for the fact that no Scots players were involved in that utter tripe served up.

It's not the Lions anymore. It's just an excuse for each nation involved to slag each others players off and provide ridiculously biased views on why more of their own nations players should be picked.

I feel for Grant massively.

He's had a great season and has been one of Scotland best performers over the last 12 months.

Has faced up against the best scrummaging packs in World in that time (SA, NZ, Fra, Ita, Wal, Eng, Ire, Aus) and never been a concern.

Has a great work-rate in the loose (5th top tackler 6N) and is a willing ball carrier, plus was voted into Rabo XV for the season.

Gatland and Rowntree may rate Healy, Jenkins, Vunipola and Corbiserio ahead of him but not to bring a fresh pair of legs on for the final quarter when your prop is obviously running out of gas is just bizarre.

Seeing as they obviously don't rate him enough for 1 minute of Test rugby, and will go for Evans ahead of Gray if they decide to change lock, plus the other two are totally out the running, it really leaves a bitter after taste in the mouth.

(also feel for Dan Cole and Adam Jones, wouldn't fancy being those two come spring next year)

I think most people could accept keeping the original choice on if he was playing superbly. But Vunipola was absolutely shattered, he looked like he had cramp and could barely get back to his feet after one tackle. Even if it was only for a couple of minutes, it could (I don't think it did in the end) have made a difference.

I think Lydiate was shattered at the end too - not too surprising given his lack of game time recently, his match on Tuesday and the work he'd got through earlier in the match. Think he might have been taken off if Warburton hadn't got injured.

Gatland said Lydiate would've been subbed aye.

Rugby Fan wrote:https://twitter.com/ryangrant85/status/351067040624291840

Pretty disappointing night all round really ..

I think I must have a bit of dust in my eye.

Wow. He is clearly pi**ed about not being subbed on. Wonder if he had some angry words with coaches?

well if he confronted Gatland about not getting on he'll have no chance next week.

fair enough IMO. If i was still playing and bench warming for my local team and the loosie on the pitch was getting his Poopie pushed in like Vinapola was yesterday I would be calling my coach all kinds if stuff.

Made worse when you see how knacked Vinapola was in the last quarter. As a player I would find it really hard not to speak my mind.

yeah true. Well I suppose Lions fans will be hoping for Corbisero to be back next week so at least two looseheads will be used. PLus he looked good in first test, outstanding performance.

If you don't think your sub is good enough to replace a knackered player, then I guess he shouldn't be on the bench, for the sake of the team being able to perform a full 80 minutes.

I do think Grant should have come on. Pack selection and substitutes just did not work out. Scrum was not solid, lineout was a shambles and the ball carrying pretty average.

That we only lost by a point just shows how beatable these Aussies are.

Yeah they were totally beatable yesterday. Very strange tactics from Deans, I thought JOC was awful, worse than the first game. But he did one good delayed pass to allow AAC to score, so can't complain really. But I'm very worries for the last test now.. Lions can definitely win it.