Lions team announced - AWJ captain & BOD dropped

First topic message reminder :

Given the whole Horwill incident that adds another interesting edge to Saturdays game!

Gatland names 10 Welshman in his starting XV.
And Richie Gray becomes this weeks token Scot...

1. Corbisiero,
2. Hibbard,
3. A Jones,
4. A W Jones (c),
5. Parling,
6. Lydiate,
7. O'Brien,
8. Faletau

9. Phillips
10. Sexton
11. North
12. Roberts
13. Davis
14. Bowe
15. Halfpenny

Bench - T Youngs, Vunipola, Cole, Gray, Tipuric, Murray, Farrell, Tuilagi.

SecretFly wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

BOD's not playing because he wasnt effective. Whoevers taking his place might not be either but at least Gatland giving the guys the chance to. BOD hasnt in two tests, so try someone else.

Did you see the games?  The whoever was beside him in both games.  He had his chance too.  The 'someone else' was tried and played worse than BOD..which must be saying something considering how terrible BOD was....

I give up on the curious logic used through the day.  

Yes you should, because youre now implying theyre both terrible..so why the fuss. I would want someone who is good...Gatland doesnt seem to have that option available to him.

SecretFly wrote:

The Saint wrote:The Irish have certainly overtaken the Scots in the Whinge Rankings. BOD's form this season doesn't even merit his selection tbh. Though I still would have paired him with Roberts and brought him off Tuilagi 50-60 minutes into the game.

Yeah, Saint.  Thanks for the quality Heads-up on BOD's season.  If you say it is't true.

He had a good game against a poorly selected/performing Wales. Remind us how both did thereafter?
And with regards to his club form, he was injured until the closing weeks of the season correct?

Taylorman wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

BOD's not playing because he wasnt effective. Whoevers taking his place might not be either but at least Gatland giving the guys the chance to. BOD hasnt in two tests, so try someone else.

Did you see the games?  The whoever was beside him in both games.  He had his chance too.  The 'someone else' was tried and played worse than BOD..which must be saying something considering how terrible BOD was....

I give up on the curious logic used through the day.  

Yes you should, because youre now implying theyre both terrible..so why the fuss. I would want someone who is good...Gatland doesnt seem to have that option available to him.

Eh, no.  I'm being sarcastic in saying BOD was considered 'terrible' (because people see him more clearly in a game) but you've blindly recommended the 'someone else' that you couldn't even name..to give him his chance.  He had his chance, he played in both tests and through the tests he played 'worse' than BOD.  If the definition of BOD in the two tests is 'bad' then Davies comes in lower than that.

If you're limited in your options, you pick the guy who performed best...well, unless you don't pick the better guy, as Gatland has done.

I must admit I'd prefer to see JD outside Roberts than BOD. He's a legend but he's not performed well all tour. We all know what JD can do outside Roberts as they know each other games so well.

Roberts & BOD may not have clicked straight away and that's not a luxury we can afford to have.

What Im actually saying is its much of a muchness. Youre splitting hairs over who is the least worsrt. No I couldnt name him thats true...largely because...its neither here nor there. Never seen so much outrage of the dropping of a player who is playing average to poorly at best. Some people want their cake and eat it too.

We'd have McCaw out of the side like a shot if he wasnt playing the best he can be. He knows it. Thats why he's gambled on taking a break to recharge, to justify his selection, to prove himself.

You guys want to just carry on picking players because you like them...geez

The Saint wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

The Saint wrote:The Irish have certainly overtaken the Scots in the Whinge Rankings. BOD's form this season doesn't even merit his selection tbh. Though I still would have paired him with Roberts and brought him off Tuilagi 50-60 minutes into the game.

Yeah, Saint.  Thanks for the quality Heads-up on BOD's season.  If you say it is't true.

He had a good game against a poorly selected/performing Wales. Remind us how both did thereafter?
And with regards to his club form, he was injured until the closing weeks of the season correct?

He had a good game against Wales. You call it Wales underperforming, I call it being beaten. And then I'll borrow your word for the rest of it. Ireland 'underperformed' after that (injuries aplenty, bad selections - B side by the end). See how two can do the 'underperforming' bit?

You didn't watch the end of the season because maybe you didn't have a part to play in it. Your guys were resting up and getting into Lions mode by then. Two titles for Leinster that O'Driscoll had a big part in and therefore more recent form than the players who haven't performed yet at test level. Third time lucky though perhaps.

Taylorman wrote:What Im actually saying is its much of a muchness. Youre splitting hairs over who is the least worsrt. No I couldnt name him thats true...largely because...its neither here nor there. Never seen so much outrage of the dropping of a player who is playing average to poorly at best. Some people want their cake and eat it too.

We'd have McCaw out of the side like a shot if he wasnt playing the best he can be. He knows it. Thats why he's gambled on taking a break to recharge, to justify his selection, to prove himself.

You guys want to just carry on picking players because you like them...geez

But that's because you'd have someone decent to replace him with.

SecretFly wrote:

The Saint wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

The Saint wrote:The Irish have certainly overtaken the Scots in the Whinge Rankings. BOD's form this season doesn't even merit his selection tbh. Though I still would have paired him with Roberts and brought him off Tuilagi 50-60 minutes into the game.

Yeah, Saint.  Thanks for the quality Heads-up on BOD's season.  If you say it is't true.

He had a good game against a poorly selected/performing Wales. Remind us how both did thereafter?
And with regards to his club form, he was injured until the closing weeks of the season correct?

He had a good game against Wales.  You call it Wales underperforming, I call it being beaten.  And then I'll borrow your word for the rest of it.  Ireland 'underperformed' after that (injuries aplenty, bad selections - B side by the end).  See how two can do the 'underperforming' bit?

You didn't watch the end of the season because maybe you didn't have a part to play in it.  Your guys were resting up and getting into Lions mode by then.  Two titles for Leinster that O'Driscoll had a big part in and therefore more recent form than the players who haven't performed yet at test level.  Third time lucky though perhaps.

That form from the AI's continued through to that first game. Even you can admit that is not the Wales of this era? Never seen such a lack of pride. The changes were made in the 2nd half of that game, and then for the rest of the tournament. The change was almost immediate, fact. Yes you're right Ireland had a heap of injuries too from then on, but the core of the team was still there, and they had every chance to beat Scotland and France which they failed to do.

I'm aware BOD was back in for the Pro12 play-offs, I was watching. I was actually asking you for some clarity because I wasn't sure how soon he was back. I can't even remember him featuring in the Amlin Cup final. So if this is true then clearly I made a good point in my original post that you quoted me on.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Taylorman wrote:What Im actually saying is its much of a muchness. Youre splitting hairs over who is the least worsrt. No I couldnt name him thats true...largely because...its neither here nor there. Never seen so much outrage of the dropping of a player who is playing average to poorly at best. Some people want their cake and eat it too.

We'd have McCaw out of the side like a shot if he wasnt playing the best he can be. He knows it. Thats why he's gambled on taking a break to recharge, to justify his selection, to prove himself.

You guys want to just carry on picking players because you like them...geez

But that's because you'd have someone decent to replace him with.

True...Sam Cane is every bit the player McCaw is. But good point.The outrage is still unjustified. Ok if he were playing well but he isnt a standout this series and often change is better than the same old thing. Gatland is trying to ignite change into this team and no matter who he tries, theyre not standing up...

Taylorman wrote:

We'd have McCaw out of the side like a shot if he wasnt playing the best he can be. He knows it. Thats why he's gambled on taking a break to recharge, to justify his selection, to prove himself.

You guys want to just carry on picking players because you like them...geez

McCaw plays for a Nation called New Zealand. The Lions isn't a Nation. You don't get the dynamics until you try it. Try it and then get back to me about split hairs. I can imagine the thunder as New Zealanders, Aussies, South Africans and Argentinians try to decide on the team to win a drawn three game series. Yes, it would be a most mannerly affair

The Saint wrote:

That form from the AI's continued through to that first game. Even you can admit that is not the Wales of this era? Never seen such a lack of pride. The changes were made in the 2nd half of that game, and then for the rest of the tournament. The change was almost immediate, fact. Yes you're right Ireland had a heap of injuries too from then on, but the core of the team was still there, and they had every chance to beat Scotland and France which they failed to do.

It's yesterdays news of course but I just find it so funny how people slide through logic so casually.  The changes in the second half was not a full 15 new players.  "The core of the team was still there".....  And argument you use to claim Welsh weakness is denied Ireland who you say had a core still there.  No, we had injuries that killed off any chance we might have had in a seasonally badly coached team anyway.  

The past is the past though. This is the present.  O'Driscoll would have held his own in the final test...and perhaps moreso.  The guys now chosen might do the same.  The truth is Gatland boosted his guy's confidence in picking him despite his efforts over the two tests, and he buried O'Driscoll's confidence and reputation, which is easier for him to do as he will have nothing to do with O'Driscoll after Saturday.  Their paths will never cross again as partners in one exploit.

SecretFly wrote:

The Saint wrote:

That form from the AI's continued through to that first game. Even you can admit that is not the Wales of this era? Never seen such a lack of pride. The changes were made in the 2nd half of that game, and then for the rest of the tournament. The change was almost immediate, fact. Yes you're right Ireland had a heap of injuries too from then on, but the core of the team was still there, and they had every chance to beat Scotland and France which they failed to do.

It's yesterdays news of course but I just find it so funny how people slide through logic so casually.  The changes in the second half was not a full 15 new players.  "The core of the team was still there".....  And argument you use to claim Welsh weakness is denied Ireland who you say had a core still there.  No, we had injuries that killed off any chance we might have had in a seasonally badly coached team anyway.  

The past is the past though.  This is the present.  O'Driscoll would have held his own in the final test...and perhaps moreso.  The guys now chosen might do the same.  The truth is Gatland boosted his guy's confidence in picking him despite his efforts over the two tests, and he buried O'Driscoll's confidence and reputation, which is easier for him to do as he will have nothing to do with O'Driscoll after Saturday.  Their paths will never cross again as partners in one exploit.  

But they were pretty critical changes in the back-row, the one that started was blown away, and at hooker I think. I can't remember it all too well, but Ireland pretty much had the same pack for most of the tournament. Not trying to take away that win from Ireland, the rugby they played in that game was outstanding. They built up such a great lead that they could afford to relax in the latter half of the game .

I agree BOD would have been good in the final test, I would have liked to have seen him play alongside Roberts again. Though he hasn't played well enough to keep his place (nor did JD2); and compared to guys like Lydiate who have come in as a favourite and actually played well all tour (though if you're Irish you won't agree because his name isn't Sean O'Brien).

It's interesting that no one is complaining about the dropping of the Irish captain from the squad. He has played well enough and Faletau hasn't been stellar yet in a toss up most sensible fans would agree that maybe Toby deserves a chance. The problem is that BOD has been superior to Davies and that is where the unfairness of Gatland's decision has sparked universal condemnation because it doesn't make sense.

The Saint wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

The Saint wrote:

That form from the AI's continued through to that first game. Even you can admit that is not the Wales of this era? Never seen such a lack of pride. The changes were made in the 2nd half of that game, and then for the rest of the tournament. The change was almost immediate, fact. Yes you're right Ireland had a heap of injuries too from then on, but the core of the team was still there, and they had every chance to beat Scotland and France which they failed to do.

It's yesterdays news of course but I just find it so funny how people slide through logic so casually.  The changes in the second half was not a full 15 new players.  "The core of the team was still there".....  And argument you use to claim Welsh weakness is denied Ireland who you say had a core still there.  No, we had injuries that killed off any chance we might have had in a seasonally badly coached team anyway.  

The past is the past though.  This is the present.  O'Driscoll would have held his own in the final test...and perhaps moreso.  The guys now chosen might do the same.  The truth is Gatland boosted his guy's confidence in picking him despite his efforts over the two tests, and he buried O'Driscoll's confidence and reputation, which is easier for him to do as he will have nothing to do with O'Driscoll after Saturday.  Their paths will never cross again as partners in one exploit.  

But they were pretty critical changes in the back-row, the one that started was blown away, and at hooker I think. I can't remember it all too well, but Ireland pretty much had the same pack for most of the tournament. Not trying to take away that win from Ireland, the rugby they played in that game was outstanding. They built up such a great lead that they could afford to relax in the latter half of the game .

I agree BOD would have been good in the final test, I would have liked to have seen him play alongside Roberts again. Though he hasn't played well enough to keep his place (nor did JD2); and compared to guys like Lydiate who have come in as a favourite and actually played well all tour (though if you're Irish you won't agree because his name isn't Sean O'Brien).

Well at least that's a more understanding post, Saint.  I give you credit for that.  Not much of it around as people decide to batten down the hatches rather than simply saying "we know how you feel, we'd kinda react similar if it was an Irish coach giving all his own players the benefit of the doubt"

As for O'Brien.  I've said it already much earlier.  I haven't been impressed with him this tour.  He's been trying too hard and making costly errors in the process.  Maybe he'll come good, maybe not.  I would have had him on the bench at best.  Bowe hasn't performed better than Cuthbert this tour and I'd have Cuthbert or a less 'big', more edgy player to balance out North.  Maybe Zebo or even Wade to make the Aussie's think of the tighter wing game.  

So no, BOD is not a case of pick him because he's Irish.  It's pick him because he deserved it.  It's up to others to diagree with that, it's up to me to fully, totally believe it.

It does make sense. We will revert to total Gatlandball. There is no plan B and there never was. O'Driscoll isn't a smash merchant. He excels in teams that go around the opposition. Gatland wants to go through them, and therefore O'Driscoll isn't required. It's as simple as that. The pack aren't getting quick enough ball for the likes of O'Driscoll to make use of anyway. It's probably best now in Gat's mind, to pick the big Welsh guys and start trying to go through them. What a poor use of the talent we have available though.

Delighted for O'Brien by the way. He's better at 6 though.

Of all the fans and players etc it is Gatland who will be judged the harshest. As a welsh player and fan of many years I know what it is like to suffer as some are at the moment. However, Gatland deserves to be judged after Saturday and not before although I know many will disagree with that statement

SecretFly wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

We'd have McCaw out of the side like a shot if he wasnt playing the best he can be. He knows it. Thats why he's gambled on taking a break to recharge, to justify his selection, to prove himself.

You guys want to just carry on picking players because you like them...geez

McCaw plays for a Nation called New Zealand.  The Lions isn't a Nation.  You don't get the dynamics until you try it.  Try it and then get back to me about split hairs.  I can imagine the thunder as New Zealanders, Aussies, South Africans and Argentinians try to decide on the team to win a drawn three game series.  Yes, it would be a most mannerly affair  

Good point. Very good one actually. Its as though the Lions tours serve to perpetually have the four nations at each others throats during and between each series so by its nature is built on a foundation of negativity- unfairness in selection/ bias etc. And I'm afraid it shows in the results, particularly when someone like Gatland has the wrath of 4 different big brothers (well...two and a bit big brothers and a little brother perhaps) on his back every time he names a side- with probably no side in history ever having been 100% supported on the day of selection.

Probably explains why SHers on these boards are more supportive of eachother generally. You've now given me my number one reason NOT to support a combined SH side...instead of encouraging unity it would actually do the opposite...

We could do it:
South African Tight forwards,
New Zealand loose forwards,
Australian backs apart fom Carter at 10.

See simple, we can do anything.

don't start Laurie...and what about benji?

Taylorman, I wasn't a fan of giving Gatland the job from the start. It's made it more divisive among fans (hopefully not the team). He's the current Welsh coach. Coaches always have their favourites that they know well. And it was never going to go down well with fans when he selected a Welsh player over someone from another nation. He now has, what, 10 Welsh players starting?

It's similar to the reason why they have a ref from a different nationality when two test teams play. He could be completely fair. But the fact that he's from one nations would leave him wide open to accusations of bias if he makes mistakes or even if his nation deservedly wins.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
We could do it:
South African Tight forwards,
New Zealand loose forwards,
Australian backs apart fom Carter at 10.

 See simple, we can do anything.

That's how it starts I'm afraid. It seems good on paper and then !!!!!!!

Taylorman wrote:

Probably explains why SHers on these boards are more supportive of eachother generally. You've now given me my number one reason NOT to support a combined SH side...instead of encouraging unity it would actually do the opposite...

Yeah, The Lions is the model of disunity. You can't put four male tigers into the one cage and expect love-making

We are enemies (and hot ones) for the three years in between the Lions years... and bigger ones during the tour itself!.... Some of it fun, some of it pretend drama, some of it emotional and some of it deathly serious divisions of opinions.

SH do have to keep remembering that these Lions contributors are only going through a truce every four years.... they're always edgy, seldom fully unified. We do it, we grit our teeth as we smile neighbourly and are relieved when it's all over.

Taylorman wrote:don't start Laurie...and what about benji?

As desperate as we are for a number 10 up this way I just cant see it happening, how he could ever throw away his opportunity at Channel 9 for the slight chance of an olympic gold in a couple of years time just doesnt stack. plus we could never match the money hes on now.

Taylorman wrote:What Im actually saying is its much of a muchness. Youre splitting hairs over who is the least worsrt. No I couldnt name him thats true...largely because...its neither here nor there. Never seen so much outrage of the dropping of a player who is playing average to poorly at best. Some people want their cake and eat it too.

We'd have McCaw out of the side like a shot if he wasnt playing the best he can be. He knows it. Thats why he's gambled on taking a break to recharge, to justify his selection, to prove himself.

You guys want to just carry on picking players because you like them...geez

This quote in a nutshell explains why NZ (and SH sides) are consistently the best in the world and us in the north are constantly second best

Taylorman wrote:What Im actually saying is its much of a muchness. Youre splitting hairs over who is the least worsrt. No I couldnt name him thats true...largely because...its neither here nor there. Never seen so much outrage of the dropping of a player who is playing average to poorly at best. Some people want their cake and eat it too.

We'd have McCaw out of the side like a shot if he wasnt playing the best he can be. He knows it. Thats why he's gambled on taking a break to recharge, to justify his selection, to prove himself.

You guys want to just carry on picking players because you like them...geez

Seem to remember plenty of Kiwi posters saying some players were in the ABs on reputation rather than form around 2007. McCaw wasn't immune to that criticism either when he had his foot problem.

Gatland isn't picking players on either reputation or form, but seemingly the amount of notoriety he will achieve.

The Great Aukster wrote:
Seem to remember plenty of Kiwi posters saying some players were in the ABs on reputation rather than form around 2007. McCaw wasn't immune to that criticism either when he had his foot problem.

Gatland isn't picking players on either reputation or form, but seemingly the amount of notoriety he will achieve.

Its hard to know what Gatland is up to. It would appear that he is picking players that he knows well rather than players that might be slightly better or more suitable. AWJ as captain for example. However, in his defense when he won his first grand slam he picked almost 15 Ospreys players. So he does seem to like playing players that are familiar.

We all know Wales are the best team in the NH right now, I dont dispute that but I do think Davies is very lucky to start as he has been all over the place in the test matches. His running lines have been very bad and he also missed the crucial tackle on AAC which may prove to be decisive.

Mike Philips has been very disapointing too which I must say I did not expect. Finally obviously Roberts slotting straight back into the team would suggest that Gatland will not be changing tactics. I really want Wales (the Lions) to win but the game will not be anywhere as interesting as if there was a mix of nationalities as there should be. I am one of the biggest supporters of the Lions on these boards but I will probably only get to see the second half because of my sons swimming lessons and for once I dont mind at all.

On a positive note congrats to Bowe, Sexton, O'Brien, Parling and Corbs on making their Wales debuts on Saturday.

GunsGerms wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:
Seem to remember plenty of Kiwi posters saying some players were in the ABs on reputation rather than form around 2007. McCaw wasn't immune to that criticism either when he had his foot problem.

Gatland isn't picking players on either reputation or form, but seemingly the amount of notoriety he will achieve.

Its hard to know what Gatland is up to. It would appear that he is picking players that he knows well rather than players that might be slightly better or more suitable. AWJ as captain for example. However, in his defense when he won his first grand slam he picked almost 15 Ospreys players. So he does seem to like playing players that are familiar.

We all know Wales are the best team in the NH right now, I dont dispute that but I do think Davies is very lucky to start as he has been all over the place in the test matches. His running lines have been very bad and he also missed the crucial tackle on AAC which may prove to be decisive.

Mike Philips has been very disapointing too which I must say I did not expect. Finally obviously Roberts slotting straight back into the team would suggest that Gatland will not be changing tactics. I really want Wales (the Lions) to win but the game will not be anywhere as interesting as if there was a mix of nationalities as there should be. I am one of the biggest supporters of the Lions on these boards but I will probably only get to see the second half because of my sons swimming lessons and for once I dont mind at all.

Familiar with each other in the Ospreys case. Not with him. He didn't know them from Adam at the time. So it's a different argument from the one people are using here - he's familiar more with the Welsh as he knows them better.

If the Lions revert to picking on a quota basis I will turn my back.If we do not pick the best players then what is the point?

So in your world Jonathon Davies, Geoff Parling and Dan Lydiate are amongst the best players.

Interesting.

Griff wrote:

Familiar with each other in the Ospreys case.  Not with him.  He didn't know them from Adam at the time.  So it's a different argument from the one people are using here - he's familiar more with the Welsh as he knows them better.

Griff, familiar with eachother was the conclusion I was making to try to make to make sense of Gatlands selections.

One thing that hasnt had much mention is that a few years ago I dont think too many people would have thought that a Dragons player would have featured in all the Lions test matches. Fair deuce Lydiate.

Ok having taken a few deep breaths I still think this is a terrible call by Gatland. O'Driscoll has been trying to carry Davies for 2 tests but Davies has repeadedly picked the wrong lines in attack and been caught out in defence.

For those who've argued that Davies has been out of position I'd say rewatch the games, O'Driscoll has been frequently playing inside Davies and much of Davies botch ups have come at outside centre.

Its clear that Gatland had his test team picked and always planned to go with the big men hitting it up off Phillips and that BOD and others never really fitted this system.

That said O'Driscoll hasn't quite hit the form off '09 but then this side has not impressed generally, bar against weak opposition.

Ignoring the past I think BOD has been one of the better players albeit a couple of mistakes in the second test. He's looked sharp in the warm ups and defensively has made more tackles than the rest of the backline put together.

It's a travesty that Gatland has gone out of his way to humilate such a great player, deliberately misleading everyone, including O'Driscoll himself, into thinking he would captain the final test and then dropping him in the manner he did.

Gats is the coach though so its his call. BOD has another year to run for Ireland so hopefully he can still go out on a high.

Win lose or Draw this tour has undid much of the great work Geech did in 09 to show that the traditions of the Lions still have a place in the professional era.

As with '05 the test team has been picked from the outset, the opposition have been poor and the coaches have failed to put together cohesive units and attacking patterns.

This tour has been a wasted opportunity to add something positive to the lions legacy against a fairly average Australian side.

A narrow 2-1 victory by any means possible isn't really a great return and thats the best case at this stage.

The Lions have never been picked on a quota basis, but they have never been picked on merit either. The team is the selection of the coach, with all the personal bias and prejudice that might entail.

They are the best players I suppose- though I'm still not sure what Parling offers in calling the lineouts AWJ can't or around the park Gray doesn't- in that they are the best players to implement Gatlands game plan.

Therein lies the problem.

1) Gatlands game plan is so close to his Welsh gameplan it gives his favourites a clear advantage in selection, which would be fine if...
2) Gatlands gameplan is a recipe for shoite negative rugby which even then might be tolerable if...
3) Gatland gameplan has failed to beat Australia nearly 100% of the time. It's something that they are used to coping with and overcoming. Our best hope is that we have slightly more depth as this is a Lions tour.

Whats good about any of this? Sleepwalking into another defeat. Either we bosh them into submission- or we lose. Australia are organized, tenacious, resillient and skillful- but eminently beatable for a well-drilled team. However all evidence points to the Lions throwing this test series down the drain and then when you have guys like O'Driscoll who have the ability to inspire the men around them and turn games around left out for guys who are going to execute Gatlandball robotically and bring nowhere near the same amount of leadership to the table... is it any wonder people are so peed off?

GunsGerms wrote:

in his defense when he won his first grand slam he picked almost 15 Ospreys players. So he does seem to like playing players that are familiar.

I know where you're coming from on that one Guns. But maybe Gatland should have turned down the role of Lions coach then, because tending to play the players that are familiar (with each other) is really the exact antithesis of what Lions rugby is. And I'd guess the Lions require a coach who can make oil and water mix.

The Great Aukster wrote:The Lions have never been picked on a quota basis, but they have never been picked on merit either. The team is the selection of the coach, with all the personal bias and prejudice that might entail.

I beg to differ.Look back to some selections in the past in the good Old amateur days.Captaincy seemed pretty rotational for starters.Cambell-Lamerton's selection is a prime example.

SecretFly wrote:And I'd guess the Lions require a coach who can make oil and water mix.

Thats it. Gatlands selection here is an admission of failure. Failure to build new and better combinations throughout the tour so he's had to fall back on combinations from 'Team Wales'. He has done poorly on this tour.

It's going to be fascinating reading some player autobiographies after this tour. I think some could really put the boot in.

Can anyone see how the team for Saturday would be worse by the Inclusion of BOD or Gray?

The one guy who has really been repeatedly fecked over on this tour is Stuart Hogg. I can't imagine he's a happy bunny being brought on tour to play most of his rugby out of position.

to be fair Notch none of the Scots guys have been treated well.

Grant in the 2nd test.
Gray doing everything a Lock can be asked of and still benched for the 3rd test..
Maitland, hasn't had a poor game yet unused in the 1st test.
Hogg, told to improvise at 10 whilst a clearly injured Kearney played no rugby for the 1st 2 thirds of the tour.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Can anyone see how the team for Saturday would be worse by the Inclusion of BOD or Gray?

No-one is going to be able to give you a straight answer to that question, because it wouldn't be. Not at all.

Shouldn't those who appointed Gatland be taking some of the stick he's getting? His gameplan's been the same for years, as has his stubbornness. They knew - or should have known - what they were getting with him.

The Scots have been treated terribly.

In fact given Evans dire form Jim Hamilton can count himself unlucky, same with Hines.

Grant should have played last week too.

The fact that Gats preferred Croft at second row ahead of Gray says it all really.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Shouldn't those who appointed Gatland be taking some of the stick he's getting? His gameplan's been the same for years, as has his stubbornness. They knew  - or should have known - what they were getting with him.

Must of us fans did!


I hope for the next tour a coach is selected to lead the Lions who isn't employed by one of the home nations.
I put forward Richard Cockerill, he is a level headed chap that would get the job done  

rodders wrote:The Scots have been treated terribly.

In fact given Evans dire form Jim Hamilton can count himself unlucky, same with Hines.

Grant should have played last week too.

The fact that Gats preferred Croft at second row ahead of Gray says it all really.

meh the English and Irish are supporting this claim so people don't just tar us with the whinging brush.

I am going to scream and scream and stamp my foot until I am sick!
Can Mr Radge explain to an old duffer why reposting the same thing over and over and over and over again is moving things on?
Nobody was in any doubt from your first gripey post.Does constant repetition strengthen or weaken your argument?
One thing for sure it is blwydi boring!

rodders wrote:Ok having taken a few deep breaths I still think this is a terrible call by Gatland. O'Driscoll has been trying to carry Davies for 2 tests but Davies has repeadedly picked the wrong lines in attack and been caught out in defence.

For those who've argued that Davies has been out of position I'd say rewatch the games, O'Driscoll has been frequently playing inside Davies and much of Davies botch ups have come at outside centre.

Its clear that Gatland had his test team picked and always planned to go with the big men hitting it up off Phillips and that BOD and others never really fitted this system.

That said O'Driscoll hasn't quite hit the form off '09 but then this side has not impressed generally, bar against weak opposition.

Ignoring the past I think BOD has been one of the better players albeit a couple of mistakes in the second test. He's looked sharp in the warm ups and defensively has made more tackles than the rest of the backline put together.

It's a travesty that Gatland has gone out of his way to humilate such a great player, deliberately misleading everyone, including O'Driscoll himself, into thinking he would captain the final test and then dropping him in the manner he did.

Gats is the coach though so its his call. BOD has another year to run for Ireland so hopefully he can still go out on a high.

Win lose or Draw this tour has undid much of the great work Geech did in 09 to show that the traditions of the Lions still have a place in the professional era.

As with '05 the test team has been picked from the outset, the opposition have been poor and the coaches have failed to put together cohesive units and attacking patterns.

This tour has been a wasted opportunity to add something positive to the lions legacy against a fairly average Australian side.

A narrow 2-1 victory by any means possible isn't really a great return and thats the best case at this stage.

Spot on, 100%. Davies should have been dropped not Drico. Davies and Drico have been swapping position a lot, yet it is Davies that always seems to be out of synch and weaker in defense. Strange call.

Taffineastbourne wrote:I am going to scream and scream and stamp my foot until I am sick!
Can Mr Radge explain to an old duffer why reposting the same thing over and over and over and over again is moving things on?
Nobody was in any doubt from your first gripey post.Does constant repetition strengthen or weaken your argument?
One thing for sure it is blwydi boring!

Shhhhhh Adults are talking.

It's a forum. We are discussing things.