Graham Henry Says Lions Future at Risk

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/sir-graham-henry-concerned-for-british-and-irish-lions-brand-should-they-lose-final-test-to-wallabies/story-fn5k35fo-1226674542766

Henry says he had only eight players fit on the eve of the final Test in 2001. He thinks shorter tours are necessary.

Judging by the amount of money being made im sure 'the lions' will be around for a while yet.

Its for this reason I really hope they win on Saturday

It's the same question which has been raised here on 606.

For Henry, a long tour is just too difficult to manage, given the rate of attrition which seems to be inescapable on a Lions tour.

On the other hand, it's not like a national side where you already have a working idea of your starting fifteen from previous games.

Henry solution in 2001 was to choose his Test team early, and favour them within the squad. This went down very poorly, especially since the Lions DVD from 1997 had shown a happy band of brothers.

Woodward decided Henry was right, but caused problems for himself because he hadn't gone far enough. His choice in 2005 was for two distinct squads. This went down even worse.

McGeechan went back to the ethos of 1997 in 2009, giving all players a chance to start and compete for a place. The problem that year, is that the opposition teams in the run-up to the Tests were not a good yardstick to judge performances. He got his selection wrong.

Gatland appears to have mixed a bit of all three. He's ended up with the size and scale of Woodward's tour party, probably had a preferred Test team like Henry, but tried to foster McGeechan's tour party spirit.

I said the same thing months ago and was accused of being a WUM! Good old SGH!

Graham Henry says Lions future at risk

He'd know.

i actually think the tours should be longer by 2 weeks than this tour

Graham Henry Says Lions Future at Risk
Yep, and he helped

Graham Henry has won four tests during Lions series. Another record!

GloriousEmpire wrote:Graham Henry has won four tests during Lions series. Another record!

What record is that?

It does make you wander how Long the Lions can go on for if they dont start winng test series.

Rugby Fan wrote:It's the same question which has been raised here on 606.

For Henry, a long tour is just too difficult to manage, given the rate of attrition which seems to be inescapable on a Lions tour.

On the other hand, it's not like a national side where you already have a working idea of your starting fifteen from previous games.

Henry solution in 2001 was to choose his Test team early, and favour them within the squad. This went down very poorly, especially since the Lions DVD from 1997 had shown a happy band of brothers.

Woodward decided Henry was right, but caused problems for himself because he hadn't gone far enough. His choice in 2005 was for two distinct squads. This went down even worse.

McGeechan went back to the ethos of 1997 in 2009, giving all players a chance to start and compete for a place. The problem that year, is that the opposition teams in the run-up to the Tests were not a good yardstick to judge performances. He got his selection wrong.

Gatland appears to have mixed a bit of all three. He's ended up with the size and scale of Woodward's tour party, probably had a preferred Test team like Henry, but tried to foster McGeechan's tour party spirit.

There's only one real answer to that litany of misery. You don't let a lame horse linger in pain. Of course, the Vet is on the way and tomorrow might result in it lingering on a while yet.