The reason BOD was dropped

Many people are saying hes played poorly, hes paid the price for lack of attacking impetus, hes no longer a force to be reckoned with etc etc

I dont think this is true. Firstly, he hasnt been "poor". But neither has his form merited him undroppable. Hes been excellent in defence and in attack hes been fairly ananamymous. But this is the case with the Lions in general. Some are making him out as the scapegoat. I cant agree. The Lions lack of attacking success starts far earlier than BOD. The pack have not enjoyed nearly the kind of dominance expected. Ball has been slow. The set peice has creaked. The distribution to Sexton is poor. In short, there is no platform or go forward which largely lies with the pack and hasnt been helped by Philips in particular who was poor in the first test. Few Lions have stood out as performing particularly well. Gatlands gameplan wasnt hard to spot and relied on smashing the Aussies with a pack and set peice that was expected to dominate. It hasnt happened at the whole team has been misfiring as a result. BOD hasnt played amazingly, but his function has been largely a defensive one thanks to the way the games have panned out. Hes performed that well.

Next, it is probably incorrectly assumed that BOD was a shoe in for Gatland anyway. His position in the team selected itself thanks to injury concerns and now that there is full compliment of centres available hes been left out. I think people are wrongly assuming its because hes played poorly. He maybe was never an automatic to begin with and Gatland might well have favoured his Welsh pairing with whom he is more familiar with anyway. Now that the pressure is really on, Gatland has retreated back into what he is most familiar with. Trying to overpower the Aussies with a Welsh oriented Lions squad. My concern is it conservative and history suggests both that it hasnt worked in the past and that the Aussies are familiar with it now.

Its difficut to be ambitious on a Lions tour with limited game time and the natural tendancy is to stick with what you know. History suggests a tightish game that Australia will win. BOD is most likely just a casualty of Gatlands overall strategy rather than a player dropped for being poor or past it. To be honest, the Lions play and set up is in its coaches image and Gatland is persisting with the same kind of approach he has thrown at the Aussies time and time again. Other than the Warratahs game, the Lions have been largely unimpressive and their gameplan has failed this far but thanks to fortunate circumstances in the first test where they nicked a win, and a quality goalkicker they are still in the series.

Just a note to posters that there is a cap to the number of new posts on the same topic...1 million.

With 'BOD' we are now 3 off it...so get in quick!

The post isnt neccessarily just on BOD, its about the Lions in general.

To be honest, the only thing seperating Gatland from fielding 12/13 Welshmen is the alienation it would cause to the brand. But if Warburton was fit then he would start and I think Gatland would happily have Cuthbert instead of Bowe. I think BOD is just a by product of this rather than being poor.

Taylorman wrote:Just a note to posters that there is a cap to the number of new posts on the same topic...1 million.

With 'BOD' we are now 3 off it...so get in quick!

I heard there were 1,000,000 protesters at Parliament Square in London demanding the head of Gatland is cut of at Tyburn hill.  For crimes against god, no less.  Does that count?

In Dublin they are drinking Jameson's and Guiness and are a bit more mellow.  Only want him to watch 1000 episodes in a row of ballykissangel, but with no bio-breaks.

Is it Because he is not welsh. by any chance?  

Winchester, I'm glad your mouse has become a grandmother!!

Good post. BOD has little wrong and plenty right in this series, but Gatland has decided to raise the stakes and roll the dice. It's going to be pure Gatball,  and  physicality is prerequisite. BOD is a great tackler, but still the least physical of the 4 centres in the squad.

Note that James Hook, the most talent ball-player available to Wales, hasn't started an international  match for Wales since the World Cup, not even during our long losing streak last summer and autumn. He's even less of a Gatballer than BOD.

The biggest surprise to me is that WG has kept Parling, presumably hoping for a solid lineout.

Some are arguing that BOD should have been on the bench. That doesn't work because he covers too few positions, whereas Tuilagi can play wing too.

And of course if Gatball is the game, Tuilagi is your man.

Judgement day is around the corner  - for the Lions and for Gatland's reputation.

It is quite amazing to see how posters have reversed their opinions on BOD so drastically.

When BOD was selected for the squad many posters were enraged. Saying he wasn't fit enough, he was too old, lost his game etc etc etc...!

He has produced one or two great performances in the warm ups, but hasn't been his greatest in the tests. His omission is not so much a surprise, even less of a surprise is that the story is being used to beat the lions before they start...!

Not only do the Lions have to beat the Wallabies in a sell out Sydney stadium but they have to win over 75% of their own supporters over something 75% wanted originally when the squad was announced...!

Is gatland the first coach to drop O'Driscoll?

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Is gatland the first coach to drop O'Driscoll?

First coach in fifteen years apparently.

maestegmafia wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Is gatland the first coach to drop O'Driscoll?

First coach in fifteen years apparently.

Well if thats the case then I bet he sweated on that decision.

maestegmafia wrote:It is quite amazing to see how posters have reversed their opinions on BOD so drastically.

When BOD was selected for the squad many posters were enraged. Saying he wasn't fit enough, he was too old, lost his game etc etc etc...!

He has produced one or two great performances in the warm ups, but hasn't been his greatest in the tests. His omission is not so much a surprise, even less of a surprise is that the story is being used to beat the lions before they start...!

Not only do the Lions have to beat the Wallabies in a sell out Sydney stadium but they have to win over 75% of their own supporters over something 75% wanted originally when the squad was announced...!

Many? Don't remember that. Remember a lot of people saying he should be captain as he was a nailed in starter.

The backs have been starved of ball. Its hard for O'Driscoll to shine if he rarely gets ball in his hands.

If Jenkins and Warburton were fit it would have been a 12 man Welsh side. Gatland's choices reflect a man that has brought a lot of prejudice to the position of Lion's Head Coach.

Davies ahead of O'Driscoll  .............seems BOD is being set up as the fall guy. Stinks of Gatland trying to pass the blame. I never thought I'd say this but I hope Wales get trounced by Australia on Sunday.

Maybe a Southern hemisphere coach will never understand what the Lion's is about.

Strongback wrote:The backs have been starved of ball.  Its  hard for O'Driscoll to shine if he rarely gets ball in his hands.

If Jenkins and Warburton were fit it would have been a 12 man Welsh side.  Gatland's choices reflect a man that has brought a lot of prejudice to the position of Lion's Head Coach.  

Davies ahead of O'Driscoll  .............seems BOD is being set up as the fall guy.  Stinks of Gatland trying to pass the blame.  I never thought I'd say this but I hope Wales get trounced by Australia on Sunday.

Maybe a Southern hemisphere coach will never understand what the Lion's is about.  

Not just be the coachs.

If the Lions win on saturday night I wonder if all the offended Brian O'Driscoll supporters will see this from another perspective.

And the Most Outraged Oscar goes to.............

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Strongback wrote:The backs have been starved of ball.  Its  hard for O'Driscoll to shine if he rarely gets ball in his hands.

If Jenkins and Warburton were fit it would have been a 12 man Welsh side.  Gatland's choices reflect a man that has brought a lot of prejudice to the position of Lion's Head Coach.  

Davies ahead of O'Driscoll  .............seems BOD is being set up as the fall guy.  Stinks of Gatland trying to pass the blame.  I never thought I'd say this but I hope Wales get trounced by Australia on Sunday.

Maybe a Southern hemisphere coach will never understand what the Lion's is about.  

 Not just be the coachs.

If the Lions win on saturday night I wonder if all the offended Brian O'Driscoll supporters will see this from another perspective.

Why is Davies going to play a stormer?  He's coming off injury and hadn't been playing great. A lot of prejudice and scape goating in Gatlands call.

winchester wrote:The post isnt neccessarily just on BOD, its about the Lions in general.

To be honest, the only thing seperating Gatland from fielding 12/13 Welshmen is the alienation it would cause to the brand. But if Warburton was fit then he would start and I think Gatland would happily have Cuthbert instead of Bowe. I think BOD is just a by product of this rather than being poor.

As I said on another topic, there is a sense that non Welsh players were brought in just to give the poor performing Welsh a gee up. Only the Welsh guys who didn't perform early doors seem to have been given a reprieve.

so a northern hemisphere lions coaches would know that doesn't matter about winning the series its just about the taking part with equal national players involved . u sure  

jimmyinthewell68 wrote:so a northern hemisphere lions coaches would  know that doesn't matter about winning the series   its just about the taking part with equal national players involved .   u sure    

The Lion's is about picking the best players across 4 nations not picking players from one country because you are the coach of that country. Only for a couple of injuries there would have been 12 Welsh players starting.

I'm not criticizing Wales........Wales are not picking the team Gatland is. Gatland has history with Ireland and its showing in his picks. For these reasons I hope Gatland falls on his face on Saturday.

Gatland is not on the pitch. Why are the players taking none of the blame for playing poorly? "It's the game plan, it's the game plan" you all cry in girly voices. Is it the game plan to not beat your man or break the line? Absolutely not. In truth the players have not done the basics well enough and so should cop some (if not most) of the flak.

O'Driscoll has been part of that problem (certainly not on his own) in that he offered so little in attack. Everyone has been saying that "you can't just defend against Oz we must attack", but the players haven't been successful in this. BOD is the fall guy for a poorly performing back line, and JD2 is lucky to have kept his place. Others are lucky too such Sexton as he has failed to get the backline going with 3 different scrum halves (so perhaps it's not always the scrum halves fault - for what it's worth I would have started Murray). But people have been banging on about Gatland trying the same thing over and over when it's not working - why then would he try O'Driscoll over and over if it's not working - hence he's brought Roberts into 12 and moved JD2 to his usually position of 13 - changing the way they play as demanded by the rugby public.

Griff wrote:Gatland is not on the pitch. Why are the players taking none of the blame for playing poorly? "It's the game plan, it's the game plan" you all cry in girly voices. Is it the game plan to not beat your man or break the line? Absolutely not. In truth the players have not done the basics well enough and so should cop some (if not most) of the flak.

O'Driscoll has been part of that problem (certainly not on his own) in that he offered so little in attack. Everyone has been saying that "you can't just defend against Oz we must attack", but the players haven't been successful in this. BOD is the fall guy for a poorly performing back line, and JD2 is lucky to have kept his place. Others are lucky too such Sexton as he has failed to get the backline going with 3 different scrum halves (so perhaps it's not always the scrum halves fault - for what it's worth I would have started Murray). But people have been banging on about Gatland trying the same thing over and over when it's not working - why then would he try O'Driscoll over and over if it's not working - hence he's brought Roberts into 12 and moved JD2 to his usually position of 13 - changing the way they play as demanded by the rugby public.

Why are you spamming with the same post in different articles.

The most contentious selection in this team is parling if you ask me. Bod is not untouchable. Gatland had one last roll of the dice and he's gone with the courage of his convictions. Good for him.

stevetynant wrote:The most contentious selection in this team is parling if you ask me. Bod is not untouchable. Gatland had one last roll of the dice and he's gone with the courage of his convictions. Good for him.

Well said.

The debate is media lead. The media think it is a huge story and it obviously ticks a few people's boxes. Many of this same people outraged by BODs exclusion now were outraged at his inclusion post squad announcement.

Strongback wrote:

Griff wrote:Gatland is not on the pitch. Why are the players taking none of the blame for playing poorly? "It's the game plan, it's the game plan" you all cry in girly voices. Is it the game plan to not beat your man or break the line? Absolutely not. In truth the players have not done the basics well enough and so should cop some (if not most) of the flak.

O'Driscoll has been part of that problem (certainly not on his own) in that he offered so little in attack. Everyone has been saying that "you can't just defend against Oz we must attack", but the players haven't been successful in this. BOD is the fall guy for a poorly performing back line, and JD2 is lucky to have kept his place. Others are lucky too such Sexton as he has failed to get the backline going with 3 different scrum halves (so perhaps it's not always the scrum halves fault - for what it's worth I would have started Murray). But people have been banging on about Gatland trying the same thing over and over when it's not working - why then would he try O'Driscoll over and over if it's not working - hence he's brought Roberts into 12 and moved JD2 to his usually position of 13 - changing the way they play as demanded by the rugby public.

Why are you spamming with the same post in different articles.

I dont know if youve noticed but there are about half a dozen articles debating the same issue, griff was just being efficient.

I am English, but foremost (for the last month and a bit) a Lions Fan.
Ignoring the stunning lack of success Welsh Warrenball has had in Oz, my disgust at Gatland remains at his inability to pick for form, adventure and x-factor, something the Lions need (and have somewhat with North).

Manu and BOD played well together and given the Roberts is off-form, coming off the back of injury and more importantly has NOT played with Davis this centre selection stinks.

We have lost a golden opportunity of seeing two Big Game Players, who compliment each other well, whom the Aussies genuinely fear and Gatland drops completely and reverts to type.

I hope we win, but off some George North Brilliance, some 10m half way line penalties from Faz and the pack and its replacements shoving the Aussie scrum's heads through their spines

maestegmafia wrote:Not only do the Lions have to beat the Wallabies in a sell out Sydney stadium but they have to win over 75% of their own supporters over something 75% wanted originally when the squad was announced...!

Made up and exaggerated stats alert!

The biggest factor in this test series has been injuries to both sides and the fact the lions can't get any line out ball at the tail. The media scrum over bods exclusion is detracting from Saturday .he us a modern great no doubt but as already mentioned not untouchable. Gats had made his calls now its time for us all to back the boys chosen to represent rugby in this part of the world.

The reason O'Driscoll has been dropped is what happens to every rugby player at the end of his career, even the stars.

There comes a time when a player loses his pace, his reflexes and his ability to dominate opponents. For a while his experience and vision can mask and even overcome the aging body but eventually it is not enough.

The reason why he was dropped for this test is purely a case of Jamie Roberts being fit enough to play and he is primarily a player Gatland believes in.

whether it is fair on O'Driscoll to be dropped for a player who hasn't played a minute of rugby in anger for a number of weeks is neither here nor there.

This is Gatland's team, he makes the decisions on what and who he believes in.

there is no conspiracy here, there are no alterior motives here, Gatland wants to win this test, in his mind the best chance he has is with a core of Welsh players and those from the other nations he believes will make a better impact on matchday.

It doesn't matter whether you believe he is wrong, it is his team and his decision.

whether it will bare fruits is altogether a discussion which can really only take place after the weekend.

Strongback wrote:
Davies ahead of O'Driscoll  .............

Well yes actually  

Take the romance & massive hysteria out of the equation, and only a complete and utter idiot could say that Davies hasn't been the form centre of the four. History will show that BOD was slightly the better centre in the 2nd test but apart from that Davies has been far ahead of him.

Now if you said Roberts ahead of BOD   and gave a reasons why..... then you could have a "chin man"

I am as frustrated (a Scot) as many others but at this stage in the game (Mr G has slowly stubbornly slammed all the doors shut and in all honestly this squad has been force fed GatlandBall Style over the last 3 months) that 23 apart from Parling starting and Vunipola bench is the best option.

This tour will go down as Mr Stubborn Fatman and his "GatlandBall Prime or his attempt at GatlandBall Lite has ruined reputations (BOD), stalled careers (Tipuric, Gray), and killed players confidence (Hogg, Grant, Farrell). It will also go down as the most boring and unspectacular tour ever.

From the start I said this guy has been lucky at international level, I am sure some posters will correct me if I am wrong but he was a game away from having the worst losing sequence in Welsh history, his slams have been followed by 4ths and 3rds (apart from the last). I was of the opinion he never executed a plan B for the very reason he was incapable of thinking of one now I am utterly convinced and even if we win the decider my opinion will not change. IMHO he has made massive selection c0ck ups all along but possible the worse was not taking Edwards as his defence coach because he is the reason Wales have won their recent Slams and this seasons 6Ns

Damage.   How can you seriously say Davies has not played with Roberts when they have been the Wales pairing for quite some time now

flyhalffactory wrote:

Strongback wrote:
Davies ahead of O'Driscoll  .............

Well yes actually  

Take the romance & massive hysteria out of the equation, and only a complete and utter idiot could say that Davies hasn't been the form centre of the four. History will show that BOD was slightly the better centre in the 2nd test but apart from that Davies has been far ahead of him.

Now if you said Roberts ahead of BOD   and gave a reasons why..... then you could have a "chin man"

Here's what Will Carling said and there are many more similar opinion out there:


Carling admitted: “My jaw almost hit the floor when I heard the news.

“Gatland will be hung out to dry if he gets this one wrong and I firmly believe he has made the wrong call.

“There is just no logic to his decision. I would never pick a team on sentiment but O’Driscoll would still be in my team on merit.

“OK, he hasn’t set the world alight in this Test series but in make-or-break games like this you need players of proven world class.

“You need guys with experience, ability, temperament and a knack of channelling their passion the right way.

“O’Driscoll ticks all the boxes. And because of that I’d have given him the captaincy in place of the injured Sam Warburton.

“It is a huge call and Gatland will be aware it could easily blow up in his face if things go badly.

“But being a coach is not just about making brave decisions. It is about making the right ones — and I am genuinely struggling to see how you can justify this one.”



Carling added: “I’m fine with Jamie Roberts coming back.

“But no one will convince me Jonathan Davies has made a strong enough case to move across and replace ‘BOD’ at outside centre.

“This isn’t an anti-Welsh thing — I don’t care what country a Lion is from as long as he is the best man in his position. In fact, my side would still have had nine Welshmen in it — even with four changes from Gatland’s.

“I’d pick O’Driscoll ahead of Davies, Tom Youngs for Hibbard, Richie Gray for Geoff Parling and Justin Tipuric instead of O’Brien.

“Most people would find it hard to agree on the best XV for this match but I guarantee the vast majority would have had O’Driscoll at No 13.

“Gatland obviously believes he has picked the best team to clinch the series.

“For his sake, I hope he is right.”

flyhalffactory wrote: IMHO he has made massive selection c0ck ups all along but possible the worse was not taking Edwards as his defence coach because he is the reason Wales have won their recent Slams and this seasons 6Ns

Edwards was the architect for Wasps success too.

I disagree that Davies has been the form centre. He played one good game, Roberts none.

Tuilgai and BOD have both but in a couple of good showings so for me are the form pairing. Even North's brief stint at 13 was better than Davies, who was taken to the cleaners by BOD in the 6N and has had a diabolilical club season for Scarlets.

He's made BOD look bad in the tests by frequently over running the pass and picking the wrong lines in attack. Defensively he is a weak link too.

Ex England Captain Carling is what he is: a guy who lives off controversial (Cool Britannia / Reality TV) style ahem "journalism". He makes a living this way...... You can be guaranteed that he will be pushing for the Welsh players when they play England (he has been on Scrum5 as a guest in the past on 6Ns review time) etc, so its not surprising he has (or his shadow writer) has penned these words

Very few take him seriously..... except for some

rodders wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote: IMHO he has made massive selection c0ck ups all along but possible the worse was not taking Edwards as his defence coach because he is the reason Wales have won their recent Slams and this seasons 6Ns

Edwards was the architect for Wasps success too.

I disagree that Davies has been the form centre. He played one good game, Roberts none.

Tuilgai and BOD have both but in a couple of good showings so for me are the form pairing. Even North's brief stint at 13 was better than Davies, who was taken to the cleaners by BOD in the 6N and has had a diabolilical club season for Scarlets.

He's made BOD look bad in the tests by frequently over running the pass and picking the wrong lines in attack. Defensively he is a weak link too.

Like most people I have been a huge BOD nutcase, probably the best player of his generation so I am looking at it rationally

I believe everything you have said is incorrect (but its emotional time now and I am not going into a debate and very likely it all ending in tears)

Suffice to say if you re-run the second test there was only one centre who played in the wrong defensive and offensive line frequently. I went through this a few days ago to prove silly comments like Davies was the guilty party when if you looked at the extract it was clear who was delinquent in his role.

He is not a defensive weak-link that is just not true.

flyhalffactory wrote:Ex England Captain Carling is what he is: a guy who lives off controversial (Cool Britannia / Reality TV) style ahem "journalism". He makes a living this way...... You can be guaranteed that he will be pushing for the Welsh players when they play England (he has been on Scrum5 as a guest in the past on 6Ns review time) etc, so its not surprising he has (or his shadow writer) has penned these words

Very few take him seriously..... except for some

If you dont like the argument you attack the guy who is making it not the argument itself. I used to see that a lot. It is poor behavior that belongs in cults

its been a witch hunt really . gats been dunked in the water and drowned before he can justify is selection .

Good comments from Carling - He's always been a class operator IMO irrespective of his TV appearances - I think Carling was the main reason England started to become a force in the early 90's and he laid the foundations for their success

Flyhalf, I just can't understand what you are seeing on Davies in the second test. Australian TV analysists even pointed it out after the match- maybe the video is on Youtube for you to watch. Time and time again Davies ran incorrect lines and over ran in attack. He was hugely at fault for the try. It is clear as crystal from replays that BOD has O'Connor covered, he pointed for Davies to keep his width and he failed and AAC scored. That cannot be dressed up. I dont blame either centre for their attacking toothlessness- that's clearly on Gatland. But Davies was patently worse than BOD. Worse than that, he was mostly playing at 13 rather than being out of position. Davies was definitely better In the warmup matches but worse in the matches that matter. When elements of the a Welsh media and Welsh rugby legends are questioning the decision you know something is up.

If Gatland wanted to I with something different I would wholly support Roberts & Tuilagi playing together. If the reason BOD is dropped is form then grand. But to keep his partner who he outplayed? It doesn't make sense. Gatland has paniced and gone for what he knows irrespective of form. BOD is an example of this, but there are worse in the team than this.

lostinwales wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:Ex England Captain Carling is what he is: a guy who lives off controversial (Cool Britannia / Reality TV) style ahem "journalism". He makes a living this way...... You can be guaranteed that he will be pushing for the Welsh players when they play England (he has been on Scrum5 as a guest in the past on 6Ns review time) etc, so its not surprising he has (or his shadow writer) has penned these words

Very few take him seriously..... except for some

If you dont like the argument you attack the guy who is making it not the argument itself. I used to see that a lot. It is poor behavior that belongs in cults

Wow that's really off the wall and a tad weird (bit of Mulder and Scully here!).

Its not that I don't want to counter the "cut and paste" with some valid ripostes but to be honest I just cant be asked to repeat myself on the selection as I have done so on previous posts.

I remember a certain Mr Gibbs replacing a certain Mr Carling in a certain test series and that was met with similar outrage at the time. Now that was a brill series and worthy of my savings as a live spectator.

Always liked the guy and very entertaining however like I said he is what he is............... frivolous and lightweight. I have actually sat on a dinner table with him when a he was the token motivational speaker on two occasions, great laugh, seriously more limited in his range than he believes, hence not to be taken too seriously.

I remember his comments in the 6Ns and a lot of his comments today seem to be the polar opposite. As I said it sells newspapers, magazines and best selling books very much quite like the artist previously known as Jordan.

Have to say I am still chuckling at the "belongs in cults"................ very dangerous and think s ice my man you are skating on.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:I dont blame either centre for their attacking toothlessness- that's clearly on Gatland.

I love this. Excuse me while I mess up all the spreadsheets here at work and blame it on my boss.

There's a distinct lack of credit to the Wallabies' defence on these boards.

maestegmafia wrote:It is quite amazing to see how posters have reversed their opinions on BOD so drastically.

When BOD was selected for the squad many posters were enraged. Saying he wasn't fit enough, he was too old, lost his game etc etc etc...!

He has produced one or two great performances in the warm ups, but hasn't been his greatest in the tests. His omission is not so much a surprise, even less of a surprise is that the story is being used to beat the lions before they start...!

Not only do the Lions have to beat the Wallabies in a sell out Sydney stadium but they have to win over 75% of their own supporters over something 75% wanted originally when the squad was announced...!

Some facts:

BODs conditioning at the moment is as good if not better than ever. He might be slightly slower but fitness definitely isnt an issue.

BOD has done what has been asked of him in the tests. Playing in a Gatland side means the 2nd centre doesnt attack because all attacks have been very narrow. Everyone knows this so why claim he should be dropped because he offers nothing in attack? His defense has been very good.

BOD has offered more than Davies and made less mistakes.

If anything it should be Roberts plus BOD.

lostinwales wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:Ex England Captain Carling is what he is: a guy who lives off controversial (Cool Britannia / Reality TV) style ahem "journalism". He makes a living this way...... You can be guaranteed that he will be pushing for the Welsh players when they play England (he has been on Scrum5 as a guest in the past on 6Ns review time) etc, so its not surprising he has (or his shadow writer) has penned these words

Very few take him seriously..... except for some

If you dont like the argument you attack the guy who is making it not the argument itself. I used to see that a lot. It is poor behavior that belongs in cults

Not about this thread but I was thinking exactly the same thing about some other posters on other threads. They keep popping in with crazy offensive/defensive responses to opinions which have not been stated. One guy aksed if the Irish were going to have a concert for BOD because of all the moaning. It was about five posts in to the thread and no Irish poter had even posted to it yet. Reminded me of a documentary I saw on Scientologist recruitment strategies.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:I dont blame either centre for their attacking toothlessness- that's clearly on Gatland.

I love this. Excuse me while I mess up all the spreadsheets here at work and blame it on my boss.

There's a distinct lack of credit to the Wallabies' defence on these boards.

A more apt analogy would be if your boss asked you to email him the figures and gave you a ledger, a quill and an empty inkpot.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:Flyhalf, I just can't understand what you are seeing on Davies in the second test. Australian TV analysists even pointed it out after the match- maybe the video is on Youtube for you to watch. Time and time again Davies ran incorrect lines and  over ran in attack. He was hugely at fault for the try. It is clear as crystal from replays that BOD has O'Connor covered, he pointed for Davies to keep his width and he failed and AAC scored. That cannot be dressed up. I dont blame either centre for their attacking toothlessness- that's clearly on Gatland. But Davies was patently worse than BOD. Worse than that, he was mostly playing at 13 rather than being out of position. Davies was definitely better In the warmup matches but worse in the matches that matter. When elements of the a Welsh media and Welsh rugby legends are questioning the decision you know something is up.

If Gatland wanted to I with something different I would wholly support Roberts & Tuilagi playing together. If the reason BOD is dropped is form then grand. But to keep his partner who he outplayed? It doesn't make sense. Gatland has paniced and gone for what he knows irrespective of form. BOD is an example of this, but there are worse in the team than this.

He most certainly was not at fault for the try. I have actual cut the UTUBE extract and gone through it second by second you can see where BOD was (at the rear middle of the breakdown) and at that point there was a 3 on 2 it was Davies who was screaming for him to get back in the midfield defensive line. He was captain at the time and was trying to drag the exhausted forwards to defend the breakdown unfortunately he was delinquent and unaware of the Aussies potential threat of the outside. Davies was marking his man the Aussie 13 the eventual try scorer, BOD should have been covering the outside line between Davies and Bowe, unfortunately he wasn't there and worse still was not even on the inside of Davies but at the back of the ruck. By the time he realised O'Connor was not marked and there was three Aussies bearing down on Davies and Bowe it was damn well too late. He made the tackle but the ball had already gone to Ashley-Cooper and Davies was in no-mans-land unsure to have gone for O'Connor or hoping that BOD would have made the cover tackle. It was absolutely without a shadow of a doubt that BOD didn't get to O'Connor and his lack of positional awareness left Davies with the choice of staying with his opposition number and left BOD to take the flak or at the last moment go for O'Connor

He most certainly not much different in the "poor" performance. The stats reveal they weren't that far apart, tackles 12-0  8-3 in favour of BOD means nothing when you realise why Davies made the miss tackles, and ball in hand Foxy made 50% more yardage.

Both played poorly unfortunately it was due to the tactics not the players

For a one-off, winner-takes-all Test match, you want to reunite a centre pairing last seen four years ago? That's some punt.

flyhalffactory wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:Flyhalf, I just can't understand what you are seeing on Davies in the second test. Australian TV analysists even pointed it out after the match- maybe the video is on Youtube for you to watch. Time and time again Davies ran incorrect lines and  over ran in attack. He was hugely at fault for the try. It is clear as crystal from replays that BOD has O'Connor covered, he pointed for Davies to keep his width and he failed and AAC scored. That cannot be dressed up. I dont blame either centre for their attacking toothlessness- that's clearly on Gatland. But Davies was patently worse than BOD. Worse than that, he was mostly playing at 13 rather than being out of position. Davies was definitely better In the warmup matches but worse in the matches that matter. When elements of the a Welsh media and Welsh rugby legends are questioning the decision you know something is up.

If Gatland wanted to I with something different I would wholly support Roberts & Tuilagi playing together. If the reason BOD is dropped is form then grand. But to keep his partner who he outplayed? It doesn't make sense. Gatland has paniced and gone for what he knows irrespective of form. BOD is an example of this, but there are worse in the team than this.

He most certainly was not at fault for the try. I have actual cut the UTUBE extract and gone through it second by second you can see where BOD was (at the rear middle of the breakdown) and at that point there was a 3 on 2 it was Davies who was screaming for him to get back in the midfield defensive line. He was captain at the time and was trying to drag the exhausted forwards to defend the breakdown unfortunately he was delinquent and unaware of the Aussies potential threat of the outside. Davies was marking his man the Aussie 13 the eventual try scorer, BOD should have been covering the outside line between Davies and Bowe, unfortunately he wasn't there and worse still was not even on the inside of Davies but at the back of the ruck. By the time he realised O'Connor was not marked and there was three Aussies bearing down on Davies and Bowe it was damn well too late. He made the tackle but the ball had already gone to Ashley-Cooper and Davies was in no-mans-land unsure to have gone for O'Connor or hoping that BOD would have made the cover tackle.

He most certainly not much different in the "poor" performance. The stats reveal they weren't that far apart, tackles 12-0  8-3 in favour of BOD means nothing when you realise why Davies made the miss tackles, and ball in hand Foxy made 50% more yardage.

Both played poorly unfortunately it was due to the tactics not the players  

I think this debunks your theory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VttNqKXu84o

Submachine wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:Flyhalf, I just can't understand what you are seeing on Davies in the second test. Australian TV analysists even pointed it out after the match- maybe the video is on Youtube for you to watch. Time and time again Davies ran incorrect lines and  over ran in attack. He was hugely at fault for the try. It is clear as crystal from replays that BOD has O'Connor covered, he pointed for Davies to keep his width and he failed and AAC scored. That cannot be dressed up. I dont blame either centre for their attacking toothlessness- that's clearly on Gatland. But Davies was patently worse than BOD. Worse than that, he was mostly playing at 13 rather than being out of position. Davies was definitely better In the warmup matches but worse in the matches that matter. When elements of the a Welsh media and Welsh rugby legends are questioning the decision you know something is up.

If Gatland wanted to I with something different I would wholly support Roberts & Tuilagi playing together. If the reason BOD is dropped is form then grand. But to keep his partner who he outplayed? It doesn't make sense. Gatland has paniced and gone for what he knows irrespective of form. BOD is an example of this, but there are worse in the team than this.

He most certainly was not at fault for the try. I have actual cut the UTUBE extract and gone through it second by second you can see where BOD was (at the rear middle of the breakdown) and at that point there was a 3 on 2 it was Davies who was screaming for him to get back in the midfield defensive line. He was captain at the time and was trying to drag the exhausted forwards to defend the breakdown unfortunately he was delinquent and unaware of the Aussies potential threat of the outside. Davies was marking his man the Aussie 13 the eventual try scorer, BOD should have been covering the outside line between Davies and Bowe, unfortunately he wasn't there and worse still was not even on the inside of Davies but at the back of the ruck. By the time he realised O'Connor was not marked and there was three Aussies bearing down on Davies and Bowe it was damn well too late. He made the tackle but the ball had already gone to Ashley-Cooper and Davies was in no-mans-land unsure to have gone for O'Connor or hoping that BOD would have made the cover tackle.

He most certainly not much different in the "poor" performance. The stats reveal they weren't that far apart, tackles 12-0  8-3 in favour of BOD means nothing when you realise why Davies made the miss tackles, and ball in hand Foxy made 50% more yardage.

Both played poorly unfortunately it was due to the tactics not the players  

I think this debunks your theory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VttNqKXu84o

Tell you what mate.............. view the UTUBE extract 5 seconds before that BOD was behind the ruck and there was a 3-2 aussie overlap. Davies knows that there is a 3 on 2 overlap and attempts to close off the gap. its clear when the ball has gone BOD hasn't hit his man.

The first part is clear: inside centre at pace running flat and you can easily see the GAP that Davies is running into, BOD delays unsure when to pass and the opportunity has vanished into thin air. Poor poor decision making on behalf of BOD.

Second example is almost exactly the same but in a tighter area, Davies running in the I/C centre channel over-runs because the pass hasn't come inside, I cant see how the blame is onto any player there, there were options either side of BOD

By the way do you know who the analyst is, and just three examples, that just about sums up that extract and what its trying to prove.

winchester wrote:The post isnt neccessarily just on BOD, its about the Lions in general.

To be honest, the only thing seperating Gatland from fielding 12/13 Welshmen is the alienation it would cause to the brand. But if Warburton was fit then he would start and I think Gatland would happily have Cuthbert instead of Bowe. I think BOD is just a by product of this rather than being poor.

True. The Toulon reserve Gethin Jenkins would be in too if not for injury.

Exiledinborders wrote:

winchester wrote:The post isnt neccessarily just on BOD, its about the Lions in general.

To be honest, the only thing seperating Gatland from fielding 12/13 Welshmen is the alienation it would cause to the brand. But if Warburton was fit then he would start and I think Gatland would happily have Cuthbert instead of Bowe. I think BOD is just a by product of this rather than being poor.

True. The Toulon reserve Gethin Jenkins would be in too if not for injury.

m

Would he? I'd have thought Healy would be more likely.

flyhalffactory wrote:

Submachine wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:Flyhalf, I just can't understand what you are seeing on Davies in the second test. Australian TV analysists even pointed it out after the match- maybe the video is on Youtube for you to watch. Time and time again Davies ran incorrect lines and  over ran in attack. He was hugely at fault for the try. It is clear as crystal from replays that BOD has O'Connor covered, he pointed for Davies to keep his width and he failed and AAC scored. That cannot be dressed up. I dont blame either centre for their attacking toothlessness- that's clearly on Gatland. But Davies was patently worse than BOD. Worse than that, he was mostly playing at 13 rather than being out of position. Davies was definitely better In the warmup matches but worse in the matches that matter. When elements of the a Welsh media and Welsh rugby legends are questioning the decision you know something is up.

If Gatland wanted to I with something different I would wholly support Roberts & Tuilagi playing together. If the reason BOD is dropped is form then grand. But to keep his partner who he outplayed? It doesn't make sense. Gatland has paniced and gone for what he knows irrespective of form. BOD is an example of this, but there are worse in the team than this.

He most certainly was not at fault for the try. I have actual cut the UTUBE extract and gone through it second by second you can see where BOD was (at the rear middle of the breakdown) and at that point there was a 3 on 2 it was Davies who was screaming for him to get back in the midfield defensive line. He was captain at the time and was trying to drag the exhausted forwards to defend the breakdown unfortunately he was delinquent and unaware of the Aussies potential threat of the outside. Davies was marking his man the Aussie 13 the eventual try scorer, BOD should have been covering the outside line between Davies and Bowe, unfortunately he wasn't there and worse still was not even on the inside of Davies but at the back of the ruck. By the time he realised O'Connor was not marked and there was three Aussies bearing down on Davies and Bowe it was damn well too late. He made the tackle but the ball had already gone to Ashley-Cooper and Davies was in no-mans-land unsure to have gone for O'Connor or hoping that BOD would have made the cover tackle.

He most certainly not much different in the "poor" performance. The stats reveal they weren't that far apart, tackles 12-0  8-3 in favour of BOD means nothing when you realise why Davies made the miss tackles, and ball in hand Foxy made 50% more yardage.

Both played poorly unfortunately it was due to the tactics not the players  

I think this debunks your theory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VttNqKXu84o

Tell you what mate.............. view the UTUBE extract 5 seconds before that BOD was behind the ruck and there was a 3-2 aussie overlap. Davies knows that there is a 3 on 2 overlap and attempts to close off the gap. its clear when the ball has gone BOD hasn't hit his man.

The first part is clear: inside centre at pace running flat and you can easily see the GAP that Davies is running into, BOD delays unsure when to pass and the opportunity has vanished into thin air. Poor poor decision making on behalf of BOD.

Second example is almost exactly the same but in a tighter area, Davies running in the I/C centre channel over-runs because the pass hasn't come inside, I cant see how the blame is onto any player there, there were options either side of BOD

By the way do you know who the analyst is, and just three examples, that just about sums up that extract and what its trying to prove.

There was a 3-2 overlap which BOD clearly addressed by getting into the perfect defensive position on JOC before the ball left the ruck. You can see him telling Davies to look after AAC but Davies hesitates and lets in the score. I don't know what point you are trying to make about BOD not hitting his man after the ball has gone. Both BOD and JOC have done their jobs here. JOC has fixed BOD, BOD has covered JOC and forced him to pass rather run. Davies made a tiny hesitation and a try was scored. Credit to Aus for forcing the mistake but the mistake was Davies'.

As for the attacking examples. What I would say is that BOD and Davies are probably too similar. Each expects the other to play more like their usual playing partners which is why both have worked very well with Roberts in the past.

Are you saying the analyst is biased? I don't think he has a monopoly on that to be fair.