Jonathan Davies victim of Twitter abuse and threats after displacing Brian O'Driscoll in Lions side for deciding Test

by munkian Thu 22 Aug 2013, 09:37

First topic message reminder :

Jonathan Davies victim of Twitter abuse and threats after displacing Brian O'Driscoll in Lions side for deciding Test

The Scarlets and Wales centre was one of the standout performers during the 2-1 series success over the Wallabies and was given the vote to play alongside countryman Jamie Roberts in Sydney.

Coach Warren Gatland’s selection, which included nine Welshmen in the starting XV, gave rise to some serious criticism from the likes of Lions’ great Willie John McBride and former Ireland and Lions hooker Keith Wood.

The opposition to Gatland’s decision – particularly in relation to O’Driscoll – became further inflamed on Twitter, where a handful of supporters posted threatening messages towards Davies.

Davies said: “There was a lot of stuff on Twitter but I tried not to take too much notice of it. I had some good advice from players like Mike Phillips who just told me to ignore it.

“I was just grateful to have been given the opportunity to win the series. I did get a bit of verbal abuse and people wanting to break my legs and stuff. But I didn’t really care.

“I did feel like public enemy number one and there was a lot of pressure. But I felt like I had performed well under pressure.

“It was a great experience and I enjoyed every minute. Brian congratulated me afterwards and said well done. We were tight as a squad and Brian will be glad to have it on his CV.”

Davies will now turn his attention to helping the Scarlets re-establish themselves as a force in European club rugby.

“I have had six weeks offf and I’ve enjoyed it. I’ve been away on holiday and can’t wait to get back playing.”

Pretty disgusting stuff, rugby becoming more popular is attracting football like behaviour

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:14

Taylorman wrote:Yet isnt it lucky that the only person that mattered did get the selction right?

BOD's absence, rightly or wrongly, directly contributed to a better overall performance. That is one concept that you simply will never, ever understand or even try to comprehend isnt it Sin? The thought is so foreign to you that it will pain you until you leave us. How sad.

And for telling JD to 'get over it' after the tweets, and oh...Gatland to get over it after the facebook attacks. Its obvious that theres only one group not getting over it, and it aint JD or Gats...

Get....over....it.

Sorry exactly how do you come to the conclusion that the Lions destruction of Australia is down to the fact that BOD wasnt picked. Are you psychic? You happen to know that the Lions would not have played that well if BOD was playing? Think you need to get over it Taylorman.

by GoodinTightSpaces Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:15

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
GoodinTightSpaces wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
GoodinTightSpaces wrote:cheers for branding us all with the same brush!!!!
Good luck branding anything with a brush!
its a special brush that brands stuff. i call it a branding brush!!!
Ah, I see. They must be new.

not to mention state of the art. i could explain how it works but it would take all day and i still have to submit the patent!!!! Very Happy

by Geordie Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:17

Wow and i thought England and Wales slanging threads dragged on....

by rainbow-warrior Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:19

Sin é wrote:
Taylorman wrote:Gibson was never mentioned as the test centre in the lead up to the tests. He played the mid week games well but Fenwick was always going to play, the more physical of the two. never rated Fenwick myself. Never knew anything of Gibsons wife at the time and that tour as a budding 14 year old with scrapbooks and the like was probably the closest I followed of any other tour ever. Still know just about every score and tryscorers in the big ones. Though at 14 admittedly I probably didnt give a stuff about wives on tour...
Moss said the politics was horrible on the tour. Of course Fenwick was going to start - a predominantly Welsh squad, a welsh coach - Gatty's precedent

Anyway, Moss wasn't too impressed with this whole Lions concept.

Sour grapes must be bitter +++ in Ireland. BOD should never have been on the tour in the first place. Let's get back to The BRITISH Lions. Only the Irish could bring politics into sport in this way. picard

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:22

rainbow-warrior wrote:Sour grapes must be bitter +++ in Ireland. BOD should never have been on the tour in the first place. Let's get back to The BRITISH Lions. Only the Irish could bring politics into sport in this way.

Nice bit of xenophobia to start the day. Candidate for most obnoxious comment of the day and its only 9:24.

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:30

I'm happy enough for the IRFU to pull out of the Lions. Gatland has buried the concept, with some help from the ARU and HSBC.

Geech did his best to revive things in 09, and almost succeeded but this tour was a farce, 2005 all over again with the test team selected months in advance of the tour.

Great men have made their name on the Lions - McBride, Edwards, Jonno, Wood - now any old yahoo can get a cap if they have friends in the right places.

by aucklandlaurie Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:32

GunsGerms wrote:
rainbow-warrior wrote:Sour grapes must be bitter +++ in Ireland. BOD should never have been on the tour in the first place. Let's get back to The BRITISH Lions. Only the Irish could bring politics into sport in this way.
Nice bit of xenophobia to start the day. Candidate for most obnoxious comment of the day and its only 9:24.

Rubbish! Theres been hundreds of abnoxious posts all day its 8:30 at night.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:38

rodders wrote:I'm happy enough for the IRFU to pull out of the Lions. Gatland has buried the concept, with some help from the ARU and HSBC.

Geech did his best to revive things in 09, and almost succeeded but this tour was a farce, 2005 all over again with the test team selected months in advance of the tour.

O'Driscoll and Jamie Heaslip benefitted from that.

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:45

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
rodders wrote:I'm happy enough for the IRFU to pull out of the Lions. Gatland has buried the concept, with some help from the ARU and HSBC.

Geech did his best to revive things in 09, and almost succeeded but this tour was a farce, 2005 all over again with the test team selected months in advance of the tour.
O'Driscoll and Jamie Heaslip benefitted from that.

No I don't think so, Heaslip was in stellar form in the end of season run in and O'Driscoll did more than enough to show he is still the best outside centre, alongside Tuilagu in the the british isles.

People like to rewrite history. North and Davies have been absolutely dire for Scarlets and bar one game for Wales against England have done nothing in the past 12 months. Warburton too. Phillips, Jenkins, Lydiate same... I could go on.

If you'd have said Tommy Bowe benefitted I'd agree. He did ok on tour but was there on reputation mainly like a lot of others.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:55

I never said anything about form, just that those two were always going to start the first Test.

by munkian Fri 23 Aug 2013, 09:57

rodders wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
rodders wrote:I'm happy enough for the IRFU to pull out of the Lions. Gatland has buried the concept, with some help from the ARU and HSBC.

Geech did his best to revive things in 09, and almost succeeded but this tour was a farce, 2005 all over again with the test team selected months in advance of the tour.
O'Driscoll and Jamie Heaslip benefitted from that.
No I don't think so, Heaslip was in stellar form in the end of season run in and O'Driscoll did more than enough to show he is still the best outside centre, alongside Tuilagu in the the british isles.

People like to rewrite history. North and Davies have been absolutely dire for Scarlets and bar one game for Wales against England have done nothing in the past 12 months. Warburton too. Phillips, Jenkins, Lydiate same... I could go on.

If you'd have said Tommy Bowe benefitted I'd agree. He did ok on tour but was there on reputation mainly like a lot of others.

So all the 6 Nations games they won BEFORE beating England were what ? Warm ups ?

Heaslip on stellar form ? He wasn't during the Six Nations and certainly wasn't on the Lions tour. Surely when picking a sqaud for a Test series you base it on the player's Test match form ?

by Guest Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:00

rodders wrote:I'm happy enough for the IRFU to pull out of the Lions. Gatland has buried the concept, with some help from the ARU and HSBC.

Geech did his best to revive things in 09, and almost succeeded but this tour was a farce, 2005 all over again with the test team selected months in advance of the tour.

Great men have made their name on the Lions - McBride, Edwards, Jonno, Wood - now any old yahoo can get a cap if they have friends in the right places.

The tour wasn't great in 09. Some people have hazy memories. Wrong selections blew the first test (Vickery and/or Mears and Monye for a start), which is purely down to him (if people are prepared to solely chastise Gatland so much for dropping old man BOD).

It is wishful thinking to think a Lions concept should include all nations equally also. Can you tell me anymore thoughts from the selectors minds, given that you know their thinking from the advanced selection of the test team?

Think JD2 has it spot on

"But it's a results-based game and we won the series - and that was the most important thing."

by rainbow-warrior Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:02

GunsGerms wrote:
rainbow-warrior wrote:Sour grapes must be bitter +++ in Ireland. BOD should never have been on the tour in the first place. Let's get back to The BRITISH Lions. Only the Irish could bring politics into sport in this way.
Nice bit of xenophobia to start the day. Candidate for most obnoxious comment of the day and its only 9:24.

Like I said the Irish as a nation have no place to criticise anyone on xenophobia or politics pal. I never wanted the Irish included in the British Lions after all it was the British Lions for far longer, that's an opinion not being racist or xenophobic.

The Lions can be proud VERY proud of what they did. Gatland proved he is class and dropping a has been was blown out of all proportion by some, at least he won a test series.

Oh by the way BOD may have had more of a game of it in NZ in 2005 had he not insulted the Haka

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:02

munkian wrote:
Heaslip on stellar form ? He wasn't during the Six Nations and certainly wasn't on the Lions tour. Surely when picking a sqaud for a Test series you base it on the player's Test match form ?

Well if thats the case then O'Driscoll should have started the 3rd test having played better than Davies, you can't have it both ways.

Lydiate and Croft were in better test form than O'Brien, Tipuric or even Robshaw?

by No 7&1/2 Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:03

munkian wrote:
rodders wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
rodders wrote:I'm happy enough for the IRFU to pull out of the Lions. Gatland has buried the concept, with some help from the ARU and HSBC.

Geech did his best to revive things in 09, and almost succeeded but this tour was a farce, 2005 all over again with the test team selected months in advance of the tour.
O'Driscoll and Jamie Heaslip benefitted from that.
No I don't think so, Heaslip was in stellar form in the end of season run in and O'Driscoll did more than enough to show he is still the best outside centre, alongside Tuilagu in the the british isles.

People like to rewrite history. North and Davies have been absolutely dire for Scarlets and bar one game for Wales against England have done nothing in the past 12 months. Warburton too. Phillips, Jenkins, Lydiate same... I could go on.

If you'd have said Tommy Bowe benefitted I'd agree. He did ok on tour but was there on reputation mainly like a lot of others.
So all the 6 Nations games they won BEFORE beating England were what ? Warm ups ?

Heaslip on stellar form ? He wasn't during the Six Nations and certainly wasn't on the Lions tour. Surely when picking a sqaud for a Test series you base it on the player's Test match form ?

Which brings us back to the fact that BOD was better than JD in the 1st 2 tests.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:05

Neither was great in the first two Tests. Davies had played the better of the two on tour.

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:07

Risca Rev wrote:
It is wishful thinking to think a Lions concept should include all nations equally also. Can you tell me anymore thoughts from the selectors minds, given that you know their thinking from the advanced selection of the test team?

I didn't say representation should be equal, what should be equal is the criteria used for selection across the board.

Gatland had alterior motives for this tour which played out over the course of it. He used it to bury some high profile players from rival unions and also to boost Wales RWC prospects.

I have no problem with no Irish players getting picked, if selection is merit based but this tour was a farce.

If we'd have been touring NZ or SA this squad would have been destroyed, I have zero doubt about it.

by Guest Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:08

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Neither was great in the first two Tests. Davies had played the better of the two on tour.

Precisely. Maybe old man BOD won't be so forthcoming in his praise for a rival in future.

by No 7&1/2 Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:09

Neither was great, but BOD was better. JD had a bit of a mare in the 2nd so you could see why a few people were surprised at the pick. A guy who can rightly be a bit more peeved than BOD though is Tipuric who was class in the warm ups only to lose his place completely.

by Taylorman Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:10

GunsGerms wrote:
Taylorman wrote:Yet isnt it lucky that the only person that mattered did get the selction right?

BOD's absence, rightly or wrongly, directly contributed to a better overall performance. That is one concept that you simply will never, ever understand or even try to comprehend isnt it Sin? The thought is so foreign to you that it will pain you until you leave us. How sad.

And for telling JD to 'get over it' after the tweets, and oh...Gatland to get over it after the facebook attacks. Its obvious that theres only one group not getting over it, and it aint JD or Gats...

Get....over....it.
Sorry exactly how do you come to the conclusion that the Lions destruction of Australia is down to the fact that BOD wasnt picked. Are you psychic? You happen to know that the Lions would not have played that well if BOD was playing? Think you need to get over it Taylorman.

yup...absolutely gg. BOD was a problem. His reputation got in the way and he had to go. If you cant comprehend that reasoning the I cant help you.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:11

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Taylorman wrote:Gibson was never mentioned as the test centre in the lead up to the tests. He played the mid week games well but Fenwick was always going to play, the more physical of the two. never rated Fenwick myself. Never knew anything of Gibsons wife at the time and that tour as a budding 14 year old with scrapbooks and the like was probably the closest I followed of any other tour ever. Still know just about every score and tryscorers in the big ones. Though at 14 admittedly I probably didnt give a stuff about wives on tour...
Moss said the politics was horrible on the tour. Of course Fenwick was going to start - a predominantly Welsh squad, a welsh coach - Gatty's precedent

Anyway, Moss wasn't too impressed with this whole Lions concept.

Dont see why Keane would have any animosity against the Welsh, After the first test he was dropped and replaced for the rest of the tour by that great Lock Gordon Brown who happened to be Scottish.

He didn't have any animosity against the Welsh for his own treatment. His gripe was on how badly treated Mike Gibson was - though now that you mention it, wasn't a Scot the tour manager?

by Guest Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:12

rodders wrote:
Risca Rev wrote:
It is wishful thinking to think a Lions concept should include all nations equally also. Can you tell me anymore thoughts from the selectors minds, given that you know their thinking from the advanced selection of the test team?
I didn't say representation should be equal, what should be equal is the criteria used for selection across the board.

Gatland had alterior motives for this tour which played out over the course of it. He used it to bury some high profile players from rival unions and also to boost Wales RWC prospects.

I have no problem with no Irish players getting picked, if selection is merit based but this tour was a farce.

If we'd have been touring NZ or SA this squad would have been destroyed, I have zero doubt about it.

Gatland had ulterior motives? So why didn't he select Faletau more? Cuthbert and Tipuric more? Select Dan Biggar to tour? That's quite a big assertion to make.

by munkian Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:12

You are changing your arguement mid flow like Sin

We were talking about the squad not being picked on form now you are talking about the test team ?

by Geordie Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:12

Well anyway...we all know it should have been
12 Barritt
13 Tuilagi

So neither Bod OR Davies should have been in there Wink

Jonathan Davies victim of Twitter abuse and threats after displacing Brian O'Driscoll in Lions side for deciding Test - Page 5 1347041234

by Guest Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:13

GeordieFalcon wrote:Well anyway...we all know it should have been
12 Barritt
13 Tuilagi

So neither Bod OR Davies should have been in there

Wrong, wrong, just wrong. Twelvetrees 12, Tuilagi 13.

by Jenifer McLadyboy Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:14

This thread is great. Get all the Wums in the same dark room (and anyone else who wants to join in for the crack) and let them knock 7 shades of shyte out of each other. Perfect!

Good work lads! Smile

(Special thanks to old Spunkian for kicking it off) thumbsup

by Geordie Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:15

Well Ricsca, ill give you that one...either combination would have been fine... Very Happy

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:17

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Neither was great in the first two Tests. Davies had played the better of the two on tour.

No I don't agree with that. Davies had one good game in the build up games and BOD two but given the quality of the opposition then little could be taken from that.

There is no form based argument that supports Davies selection - his club form was poorer than BODS, head to head in the 6N was clear cut, tour form was much a muchness and test form over the first 2 tests BOD was better.

If it was down to physicality and the gameplan then fair enough but in which clase BOD shouldn't have toured because Gatland was always going to select Davies.

In my opinion Gatland always planned to take BOD and not select him for the tests.

by maestegmafia Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:18

Risca Rev wrote:
rodders wrote:
Risca Rev wrote:
It is wishful thinking to think a Lions concept should include all nations equally also. Can you tell me anymore thoughts from the selectors minds, given that you know their thinking from the advanced selection of the test team?
I didn't say representation should be equal, what should be equal is the criteria used for selection across the board.

Gatland had alterior motives for this tour which played out over the course of it. He used it to bury some high profile players from rival unions and also to boost Wales RWC prospects.

I have no problem with no Irish players getting picked, if selection is merit based but this tour was a farce.

If we'd have been touring NZ or SA this squad would have been destroyed, I have zero doubt about it.
Gatland had ulterior motives? So why didn't he select Faletau more? Cuthbert and Tipuric more? Select Dan Biggar to tour? That's quite a big assertion to make.

Gatland had one criteria, to win the tour, he did that. Wales were always going to be the biggest beneficiaries as they had the largest contingent of players. None of which let anyone down.

by Cyril Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:18

Can we change the title to "The Welsh and Irish Bickering Thread (with the odd sarky comment thrown in by other nations)"?

Cracking.

Long Live The Lions! Wink

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:19

No 7&1/2 wrote:Neither was great, but BOD was better. JD had a bit of a mare in the 2nd

Didn't BOD throw a pass straight to a Wallaby in the second Test? Then there's the question of whether, as stand-in captain, he indicated a kick at goal without consulting Halfpenny, who'd already seen a kick fall short from closer to the posts.

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:19

Taylorman wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:Sorry exactly how do you come to the conclusion that the Lions destruction of Australia is down to the fact that BOD wasnt picked. Are you psychic? You happen to know that the Lions would not have played that well if BOD was playing? Think you need to get over it Taylorman.
yup...absolutely gg. BOD was a problem. His reputation got in the way and he had to go. If you cant comprehend that reasoning the I cant help you.

Look Taylorman if you look at the three test objectively you would agree that of the centres Roberts made the biggest difference in the last test. In the previous two tests O'Driscoll marginally out-performed Davies. In reality both BOD and Davies were at much the same level performance wise for the whole tour. Many think O'Driscoll had the edge because of his experience and leadership abilities. This is a very logical conclusion to arrive at. Most WC winning sides are full of experience for example If you cant grasp that there is no hope for you.

The point I have made all along is it actually made zero difference on the day as Davies proved he is capable of the same standard as BOD and Ryan Jones performed very very well as captain. All this nonsense about Gatland being vindicated and reputations getting in the way is the last refuge of someone who cant actually put forward a logical arguement.

by maestegmafia Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:21

rodders wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Neither was great in the first two Tests. Davies had played the better of the two on tour.
No I don't agree with that. Davies had one good game in the build up games and BOD two but given the quality of the opposition then little could be taken from that.

There is no form based argument that supports Davies selection - his club form was poorer than BODS, head to head in the 6N was clear cut, tour form was much a muchness and test form over the first 2 tests BOD was better.

If it was down to physicality and the gameplan then fair enough but in which clase BOD shouldn't have toured because Gatland was always going to select Davies.

In my opinion Gatland always planned to take BOD and not select him for the tests.

Davies improved his form throughout the six nations, he wasn't bad vs Ireland, despite two missed passes. BOD had a great game vs Wales, but dwindled from the next game onwards.

by Geordie Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:22

Cyril wrote:Can we change the title to "The Welsh and Irish Bickering Thread (with the odd sarky comment thrown in by other nations)"?

Cracking.

Long Live The Lions!

Cyril...it makes a refreshing change from the English and Welsh going at it...whats the comon factor in all this...hhmmmm chin

by No 7&1/2 Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:23

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:Neither was great, but BOD was better. JD had a bit of a mare in the 2nd
Didn't BOD throw a pass straight to a Wallaby in the second Test? Then there's the question of whether, as stand-in captain, he indicated a kick at goal without consulting Halfpenny, who'd already seen a kick fall short from closer to the posts.

Yup. And I still think he was still better than JD in the 2nd test; obviously you don't though which is fine.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:25

munkian wrote:You are changing your arguement mid flow like Sin

We were talking about the squad not being picked on form now you are talking about the test team ?

Look, you are out of your league here if you can't deal with more than one argument as to why BOD should have been in the match day squad.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:27

rodders wrote:BOD shouldn't have toured because Gatland was always going to select Davies.

In my opinion Gatland always planned to take BOD and not select him for the tests.

1) There will always be players on tours that don't play in the Tests. Is O'Driscoll above being a mere tourist?

2) I disagree. O'Driscoll was always going to play in the Tests and Gatland was banking on a) a moment of magic and b) leadership. In the event, neither transpired: there were no moments of magic, and he was lucky he didn't get into more trouble for mouthing off to Chris Pollack in the first Test.

by Taylorman Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:28

GunsGerms wrote:
Taylorman wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:Sorry exactly how do you come to the conclusion that the Lions destruction of Australia is down to the fact that BOD wasnt picked. Are you psychic? You happen to know that the Lions would not have played that well if BOD was playing? Think you need to get over it Taylorman.
yup...absolutely gg. BOD was a problem. His reputation got in the way and he had to go. If you cant comprehend that reasoning the I cant help you.
Look Taylorman if you look at the three test objectively you would agree that of the centres Roberts made the biggest difference. In the previous two tests O'Driscoll marginally out-performed Davies. In reality both BOD and Davies were at much the same level performance wise for the whole tour. Many think O'Driscoll had the edge because of his experience and leadership abilities. This is a very logical conclusion to arrive at. Most WC winning sides are full of experience for example If you cant grasp that there is no hope for you.

The point I have made all along is it actually made zero difference on the day as Davies proved he is capable of the same standard as BOD and Ryan Jones performed very very well as captain. All this nonsense about Gatland being vindicated and reputations getting in the way is the last refuge of someone who cant actually put forward a logical arguement.

trouble is you dont get to dictate the terms GG no matter how much logic you throw at it.

Fact is: Gatland SAID BOD was negatively affecting the side.
Fact is Gatland calls the shots.
Fact is the backline functioned far better in the last test than the two BOD played.
You dont get to do ifs and buts.
The coach made a call. The side won convincingly.

You get no say in the matter...end of gg. why is that so difficult to accept?

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:30

maestegmafia wrote:
Davies improved his form throughout the six nations, he wasn't bad vs Ireland, despite two missed passes. BOD had a great game vs Wales, but dwindled from the next game onwards.

Accepted but from then onwards BOD went on to help Leinster win two trophies whereas Davies put in some of the most heartless and disinterested performances, alongside North, that I've ever witnessed at professional level for the Scarlets.

This would suggest that some players new they had been selected already because if you knew Lions selection was on the line you'd be trying to put your best form on, not easing up, two weeks prior to the selection.

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:33

Taylorman wrote:
Fact is: Gatland SAID BOD was negatively affecting the side.

He did? Do you have a quote?

by Cyril Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:36

GeordieFalcon wrote:
Cyril wrote:Can we change the title to "The Welsh and Irish Bickering Thread (with the odd sarky comment thrown in by other nations)"?

Cracking.

Long Live The Lions!
Cyril...it makes a refreshing change from the English and Welsh going at it...whats the comon factor in all this...hhmmmm

Hmmm. Difficult to say. I can't quite put my finger on it.

In other news, here's a picture of a dragon Wales

by GoodinTightSpaces Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:40

Cyril wrote:
GeordieFalcon wrote:
Cyril wrote:Can we change the title to "The Welsh and Irish Bickering Thread (with the odd sarky comment thrown in by other nations)"?

Cracking.

Long Live The Lions!
Cyril...it makes a refreshing change from the English and Welsh going at it...whats the comon factor in all this...hhmmmm
Hmmm. Difficult to say. I can't quite put my finger on it.

In other news, here's a picture of a dragon

i think its a disgrace that there are no pictures of shamrocks that i can post so here is a cool santa Jonathan Davies victim of Twitter abuse and threats after displacing Brian O'Driscoll in Lions side for deciding Test - Page 5 3845856932

Jonathan Davies victim of Twitter abuse and threats after displacing Brian O'Driscoll in Lions side for deciding Test - Page 5 3845856932

by jimmyinthewell68 Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:42

gatland knew that Roberts and Davies played better together then bod and Davies . please dont say Roberts and bod . that was four years ago and now a much younger and more inform player like Davies took bods place . simple

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:42

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
rodders wrote:BOD shouldn't have toured because Gatland was always going to select Davies.

In my opinion Gatland always planned to take BOD and not select him for the tests.
1) There will always be players on tours that don't play in the Tests. Is O'Driscoll above being a mere tourist?

2) I disagree. O'Driscoll was always going to play in the Tests and Gatland was banking on a) a moment of magic and b) leadership. In the event, neither transpired: there were no moments of magic, and he was lucky he didn't get into more trouble for mouthing off to Chris Pollack in the first Test.

1) You're twisting my words. What I said was he had no intention of selcting him for the tests if Roberts and Davies were fit, same with Tuilgai.

2) If this is true, then what was the expectation on Davies? Was he too required to have moments of magic? I can think of 2 standout moments from O'Driscoll in test 1 and 2 - the huge hit on Hooper and the half break in test one which Davies botched. He also won more ball on the deck than Warburton and missed no tackles unlike Davies.

Yes he threw an intercept and conceded some penalties - it wasn't vintage stuff- but what did Davies do in the first two tests to warrant selection in the third?

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:46

Taylorman wrote:
Fact is: Gatland SAID BOD was negatively affecting the side. - This is not a fact. Provide a source.

Fact is Gatland calls the shots. - So what? Whats your point? I accept the decision. That doesnt mean I agreed with it

Fact is the backline functioned far better in the last test than the two BOD played. Who cares. Thats not relevant if Davies himself didnt function far better.

You dont get to do ifs and buts.The coach made a call. The side won convincingly. The call made not a jot of difference because the game was won well and truely up front.

You get no say in the matter...end of gg. why is that so difficult to accept? Really no idea what you are trying to say here. Honestly do you think I think I am a candidate for Lions manager or something? Think you may have lost your marbles Taylorman you seem to be really struggling to analyse the actual issue and instead keep throwing out generic meaningless arguements.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:48

Once Roberts was fit, one of the two had to make way. Gatland knew better than anyone that if he went with O'Driscoll, he'd avoid the sh!tstorm that dropping him would cause. But kudos to him for backing himself and selecting the players he thought were most likely to win the deciding Test.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:51

jimmyinthewell68 wrote: gatland knew that Roberts and Davies played better together then bod and Davies . please dont say Roberts and bod . that was four years ago and now a much younger and more inform player like Davies took bods place . simple

A lot of people thought that BOD & Tualagi were pretty good together as well. They looked so good together in fact, Gatland decided not to play them together again Wink

by jimmyinthewell68 Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:53

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Once Roberts was fit, one of the two had to make way. Gatland knew better than anyone that if he went with O'Driscoll, he'd avoid the sh!tstorm that dropping him would cause. But kudos to him for backing himself and selecting the players he thought were most likely to win the deciding Test.

imaging what it would be like on here if we did lose . i feel certain individuals would rather that

by Cyril Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:55

jimmyinthewell68 wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Once Roberts was fit, one of the two had to make way. Gatland knew better than anyone that if he went with O'Driscoll, he'd avoid the sh!tstorm that dropping him would cause. But kudos to him for backing himself and selecting the players he thought were most likely to win the deciding Test.
imaging what it would be like on here if we did lose . i feel curtain individuals would rather that

I think these individuals should pull themselves together Wink

by aucklandlaurie Fri 23 Aug 2013, 10:56

Guns and Germs

Are you guys not taught about respecting the coach and who he selects, and if you are a member of the squad, and not selected you never question the coach?

I get the feeling on here that there is some obligation on Gatland to have to justify his selections to the irish fans, how can a coach work in that environment? He cant.

by Sponsored content