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

by munkian Thu 22 Aug - 18:37

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 **rodders** Fri 23 Aug - 19:57

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 for him for backing himself and selecting the players he thought were most likely to win the deciding Test.

Yeah and Gatland got what he wanted. However the way he went about it leaves a sour taste.

No one deserves special treatment but given what O'Driscoll has contributed over the years and the fact that, regardless of what some might claim, there was plenty of form and purely rugby based reasons to select him over Davies to start then this is going to be a call which people will debate for many years to come.

Winning the series buys Gatland some leeway with the media but it doesn't totally absolve him from criticism of what can only be percieved a cynical and spiteful act on his part.

I think deep down though Gatland enjoys this sort of controversy and if he was reading this he'd have a wry old grin on his face.

That said this is not Davies fault, he was picked and did a good job which is all you can ask from him. Any one giving abuse to him, on twitter or otherwise is a ****.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug - 19:58

Cyril wrote:
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

If only the series had been drawn...

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 20:00

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

He said (after the test) that the young Welsh players were inhibited by BOD presence which isn't the same thing as what you are claiming.

If Davies was awestruck by BOD, he should have been dropped. Roberts seemed to have been able to cope in his presence back in 2009.

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug - 20:01

aucklandlaurie wrote: 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 expect, with respect Laurie, that this approach whilst to be admired is best suited to a culture which encourages meritocracy at its core rather than nepotism and politics.

by jimmyinthewell68 Fri 23 Aug - 20:04

Sin é wrote:
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

Im getting the dvd soon so will have a look .

by maestegmafia Fri 23 Aug - 20:05

rodders wrote:
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.

Rodders, in actuality BOD was dropped for Roberts and Davies moved to his preferred outside centre slot. Maybe anger at Davies was unjustified when Roberts, who had been absent with injury for the two previous tests, was a bigger story. This the threats to JD2 by some online clowns was all the more unfair.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug - 20:06

rodders wrote:Winning the series buys Gatland some leeway with the media but it doesn't totally absolve him from criticism of what can only be percieved a cynical and spiteful act on his part.

If this thread's taught us anything, it's that that's not true!

by aucklandlaurie Fri 23 Aug - 20:06

Rodders you may find that its only something to be admired, but might I suggest to you that its also one of the basics upon which to build a winning culture in a team.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 20:07

aucklandlaurie wrote: 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.

Graham Henry got stick for picking on merit in 2001. He had to get out of Wales because he picked on what he thought was merit.

Woodward brought all his old England warriors and he got criticised for that.

Geech/Rowentree got criticised (abused by the Welsh) for picking his old pal Vickery in 2009 (but at least he tried to pick the best team and everyone seemed to have a good chance).

by The Saint Fri 23 Aug - 20:08

GoodinTightSpaces wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
GoodinTightSpaces wrote:
The Saint wrote:
munkian wrote:
Sin é wrote:
munkian wrote:Bit of a hair trigger there Slosty

Back on topic (?) its hard to judge the performances of the centres in the first 2 tests as they were getting very little ball as our line out wasn't functioning, nothing to run on to. North was the star of the show really. He will hopegfuly become an excellent centre
Well, he has the physique to survive the Gatland 'beat everyone up' gameplan, unlike Warburton.
I'm starting to feel sorry for you.

The Gatland 'technique', for the most part, works. Its won 2 Grandslams, a 6 Nations Championship and a Lions tour.

For North, well, did you see his try in the first test ? I don't think anyone got a hand on him did they ? No beating up needed there. He did, however, run through what, 3 Irish defenders to score against you ?

As for the Warburton comment, I'm not sure what to say. He certainly has the physique, hes probably one of the strongest on the Welsh team. He is, however, prone to a few niggling injuries. But then so was Moody and SOB barely has the knee cartlidge to run anymore.

Even Sin and his cronies claimed North (along with Warburton) was outplayed in the first two tests. You couldn't even make it up, except if you're Irish I guess.
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!!!

To be honest with you, after the team was announced every single Irish poster on here was bitching about it. Even the 'peaceful' ones. A number of them made outrageous claims like North, Lydiate and Warburton had been dominated in every single test, and one said that Davies was a overweight, baby-faced numpty or something along those lines. Referring to this group as 'Irish' was a lot easier for me, than remembering each individual (there were too many to remember) Wink

.

by maestegmafia Fri 23 Aug - 20:12

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
rodders wrote:Winning the series buys Gatland some leeway with the media but it doesn't totally absolve him from criticism of what can only be percieved a cynical and spiteful act on his part.
If this thread's taught us anything, it's that that's not true!

Exactly LP,

He said it was a decision based on rugby merit and not sentiment, it was a brave call but a very very good one that paid off for the lions.

If the coaches were to be criticised for the selection of players JD2 would be very low on the list of players who's selection was contentious in any shape or form...!

by Guest Fri 23 Aug - 20:12

rodders wrote:He also won more ball on the deck than Warburton

See, I don't see the point in bringing this up, when it was evident that Pollock wouldn't allow us to compete at ruck time. Warburton even said he felt he couldn't compete after he saw BOD get pinged early doors.

by GoodinTightSpaces Fri 23 Aug - 20:12

The Saint wrote:
GoodinTightSpaces wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
GoodinTightSpaces wrote:
The Saint wrote:
munkian wrote:
Sin é wrote:
munkian wrote:Bit of a hair trigger there Slosty

Back on topic (?) its hard to judge the performances of the centres in the first 2 tests as they were getting very little ball as our line out wasn't functioning, nothing to run on to. North was the star of the show really. He will hopegfuly become an excellent centre
Well, he has the physique to survive the Gatland 'beat everyone up' gameplan, unlike Warburton.
I'm starting to feel sorry for you.

The Gatland 'technique', for the most part, works. Its won 2 Grandslams, a 6 Nations Championship and a Lions tour.

For North, well, did you see his try in the first test ? I don't think anyone got a hand on him did they ? No beating up needed there. He did, however, run through what, 3 Irish defenders to score against you ?

As for the Warburton comment, I'm not sure what to say. He certainly has the physique, hes probably one of the strongest on the Welsh team. He is, however, prone to a few niggling injuries. But then so was Moody and SOB barely has the knee cartlidge to run anymore.

Even Sin and his cronies claimed North (along with Warburton) was outplayed in the first two tests. You couldn't even make it up, except if you're Irish I guess.
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!!!
To be honest with you, after the team was announced every single Irish poster on here was bitching about it. Even the 'peaceful' ones. A number of them made outrageous claims like North, Lydiate and Warburton had been dominated in every single test, and one said that Davies was a overweight, baby-faced numpty or something along those lines. Referring to this group as 'Irish' was a lot easier for me, than remembering each individual (there were too many to remember) .

thats fair enough. i just hope that you will remember the "Irish" who just got on wiht it too. (i'm sure he is a nice guy angel

)

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 20:12

maestegmafia wrote:
rodders wrote:
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.
Rodders, in actuality BOD was dropped for Roberts and Davies moved to his preferred outside centre slot. Maybe anger at Davies was unjustified when Roberts, who had been absent with injury for the two previous tests, was a bigger story. This the threats to JD2 by some online clowns was all the more unfair.

I've done a search on twitter for any abusive comments (even comments) and I couldn't find one that even gave Davies any stick.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug - 20:12

Sin é wrote:
aucklandlaurie wrote: 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.
Graham Henry got stick for picking on merit in 2001. He had to get out of Wales because he picked on what he thought was merit.

Woodward brought all his old England warriors and he got criticised for that.

Geech/Rowentree got criticised (abused by the Welsh) for picking his old pal Vickery in 2009 (but at least he tried to pick the best team and everyone seemed to have a good chance).

Every coach who ever lived tried to pick the best team.

by Jenifer McLadyboy Fri 23 Aug - 20:14

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.

Ah sh1t. Now I'm getting dragged into it.

My theory is that Gatland did it BECAUSE it would cause a sh1tstorm. Allowing him to get on with his business and create a bit of mental jiggery pokery inside the team.

He loves the mind games side of things. He also loves to confront the "establishment" so this would have given him a bit of a jolly too.

Never a big Lions fan. Watched all the games and was behind them in them all but could always take it or leave it over the years. Happy for the players who got selected and their families. It is a big honour. Just never did that much for me personally. Possibly a lot to do with the South Africa situation back in the 70s & 80s, and the fact that back then the concept of the "British" Lions did not appeal.

Never commented here or anywhere else on Bods dropping at the time.

Davies got the spot, grand, fair play to him. Ridiculous for any rugby fan to say anything against him personally because he was selected ahead of Bod. He is not a selector.

by aucklandlaurie Fri 23 Aug - 20:14

Sin é wrote:
aucklandlaurie wrote: 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.
Graham Henry got stick for picking on merit in 2001. He had to get out of Wales because he picked on what he thought was merit.

Woodward brought all his old England warriors and he got criticised for that.

Geech/Rowentree got criticised (abused by the Welsh) for picking his old pal Vickery in 2009 (but at least he tried to pick the best team and everyone seemed to have a good chance).

Sine e i agree there may have been debate and disagreement with some selections in the past, but nothing like the extreme vindictiveness as shown by Irish fans on here for the non selection of O'Drsicoll, it was the coach's call, he made the call, he won the game, ands thats what its all about.

by **rodders** Fri 23 Aug - 20:16

Jenifer McLadyboy 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.
Ah sh1t. Now I'm getting dragged into it.

My theory is that Gatland did it BECAUSE it would cause a sh1tstorm. Allowing him to get on with his business and create a bit of mental jiggery pokery inside the team.

He loves the mind games side of things. He also loves to confront the "establishment" so this would have given him a bit of a jolly too.

Totally agree Jen.

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug - 20:17

aucklandlaurie wrote: 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.

Hi Aucklandlaurie. Absolutly you must have the utmost respect for your coach and not sulk if you arent picked. I always abided by this as a player. However, in this case obviously I am not a player but a fan and it is absolutley ok for fans to debate whatever decisions they choose. Same goes for the media.

Can I please remind you that it was not just Irish fans nor the Irish media that disagreed with Warren G. A plethora of ex-professionals and current pros from across the globe questioned the decision. I dont think Gatland has to explain anything at all but that doesnt mean I have to agree with him. Its ok to debate these decisions.

Im sure there are plenty of decisions that Steve Hanson makes you dont agree with.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug - 20:17

And there was me thinking he did it to improve our chances of winning! I feel so foolish!

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug - 20:21

rodders wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:
Even on this thread there have been a multitude of xenaphobic comments aimed at Irish posters.
Well in fairness Guns there's probably only been 3 and 2 of those by the same poster..... but then much of this whole debate is founded on gross exageration on all sides so ....

Absolutly Rodders. I didnt claim otherwise. The point I was making was that just like the twitter comments you shouldnt allow silly comments to form your opinion of a nation. That sadly seems to be the crux of the debate arising from this article.

by aucklandlaurie Fri 23 Aug - 20:23

Guns

By chance I have always agreed with Hansens decisions and Grant fox's selections.

What I'm getting at though is the extreme hatred and demands by the Irish that Gatland owes them something because he dropped their player O'Driscoll, that is not debate its just vindictiveness.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 20:30

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Sine e i agree there may have been debate and disagreement with some selections in the past, but nothing like the extreme vindictiveness as shown by Irish fans on here for the non selection of O'Drsicoll, it was the coach's call, he made the call, he won the game, ands thats what its all about.

But you see, that isn't what its all about. Apologies are being demanded from Gatland's critics (Willie John McBride & Keith Wood). Why do they have to apologise for what they think? I'm pretty sure that Keith (along with everyone else) was critical of Woodward's management of the NZ tour but seemingly he doesn't have to apologise for that opinion because everyone agrees with him.

Woody is being vilified by mainly Welsh fans on that BBC news thread. Woody wouldn't give a toss, but because the Welsh & Gatland are so insecure they can't handle any criticism.

I don't know why Davies is bringing it up again anyway. Most had forgotten he was invovled - its like he is jealous of all the attention BOD got from it.

by maestegmafia Fri 23 Aug - 20:33

Sin é wrote:
aucklandlaurie wrote:
Sine e i agree there may have been debate and disagreement with some selections in the past, but nothing like the extreme vindictiveness as shown by Irish fans on here for the non selection of O'Drsicoll, it was the coach's call, he made the call, he won the game, ands thats what its all about.
But you see, that isn't what its all about. Apologies are being demanded from Gatland's critics (Willie John McBride & Keith Wood). Why do they have to apologise for what they think? I'm pretty sure that Keith (along with everyone else) was critical of Woodward's management of the NZ tour but seemingly he doesn't have to apologise for that opinion because everyone agrees with him.

Woody is being vilified by mainly Welsh fans on that BBC news thread. Woody wouldn't give a toss, but because the Welsh & Gatland are so insecure they can't handle any criticism.

I don't know why Davies is bringing it up again anyway. Most had forgotten he was invovled - its like he is jealous of all the attention BOD got from it.

You are confusing media hyperbole with actual people's real opinions here. The article the OP refers too is from the BBC not from a public statement by Davies.

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug - 20:34

aucklandlaurie wrote: Guns

By chance I have always agreed with Hansens decisions and Grant fox's selections.

What I'm getting at though is the extreme hatred and demands by the Irish that Gatland owes them something because he dropped their player O'Driscoll, that is not debate its just vindictiveness.

The decision was a big one and was always going to make the headlines. I think we can agree on that. Such things are always the catalyst for a lot of debate. Where there is a raging debate on anything the trolls will come out.

Probably hasnt made the news in NZ but recently a British and Irish girl were arrested in Peru for posession of approx €1.5 of contraband. It has been one of the biggest stories lately in B&I. Whatever your opinion on drug mules and the extent of their guilt or not there have been a lot of really disgusting distasteful comments online aimed at those girls before a trial have even begun.

This might be a bad example because Gatland is not a drug mule he is a good man but my point is any big news story brings out the trolls. In your post you have said "extreme hatred and demands by the Irish that Gatland..." You should excercise caution in brading everyone with the same brush under the category of a single nation for obvious reasons. I have been guilty of this myself on occasion and it is wrong.

I dont think any sane minded Irish person could justify abusing Davies or WG on twitter. Thats disgusting behaviour.

I am quite surprised at how well Hanson has done actually. Little things like the speed at which NZ get organised at lineout time and execute very quickly their calls at the line out have been impressive. This ifor me is a clear sign to me that Hanson is a very organised manager that doesnt miss much.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 20:36

aucklandlaurie wrote: Guns

By chance I have always agreed with Hansens decisions and Grant fox's selections.

What I'm getting at though is the extreme hatred and demands by the Irish that Gatland owes them something because he dropped their player O'Driscoll, that is not debate its just vindictiveness.

Look, Gatland never got over getting the bullet from Ireland - its the one major blot on his cv so every chance he gets he likes to take a little dig at us. He has pretty made sure that Eddie O'Sullivan never got a job again in rugby.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug - 20:37

Sin é wrote:Apologies are being demanded from Gatland's critics (Willie John McBride & Keith Wood).

I'm pretty sure neither of them is demanding an apology from Gatland. Because they're not idiots.

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug - 20:39

GunsGerms wrote:Gatland is not a drug mule

*edits Wikipedia*

by Jenifer McLadyboy Fri 23 Aug - 20:39

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:And there was me thinking he did it to improve our chances of winning! I feel so foolish!

Increase the chances of winning by creating a sh1tstorm and using that effect in whatever way to bring the (predominantly Welsh) team together mentally. Perhaps by creating a "them and us" mentality. ie. Them (all the numptys making stupid comments) and Us (the Lions team)

It's just my theory. I don't hate Gatland (I actually had a beer with him in London the night of the Ulster QF in the HC) I may not be to fond of some of his methods, and I think he could have won the series earlier by using a more expansive game.

But I have to acknowledge his record. Which is damn good. Also, I believe the "mental" side of the game is massively important, and he obviously has a handle on this.

Just my theory btw. Not putting it forward as F.A.C.T or anything

by maestegmafia Fri 23 Aug - 20:41

Sin é wrote:
aucklandlaurie wrote: Guns

By chance I have always agreed with Hansens decisions and Grant fox's selections.

What I'm getting at though is the extreme hatred and demands by the Irish that Gatland owes them something because he dropped their player O'Driscoll, that is not debate its just vindictiveness.
Look, Gatland never got over getting the bullet from Ireland - its the one major blot on his cv so every chance he gets he likes to take a little dig at us. He has pretty made sure that Eddie O'Sullivan never got a job again in rugby.

Oh come on...!

What on Earth can Gatland do to prevent EOS getting a job. You guys were calling for Eddies head as much as you were for his successor, who started out by winning you the first GS you had won in years...!

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug - 20:41

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:Gatland is not a drug mule
*edits Wikipedia*

Nice to inject a bit of humour back into the thread no?

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 20:48

maestegmafia wrote:
Sin é wrote:
aucklandlaurie wrote:
Sine e i agree there may have been debate and disagreement with some selections in the past, but nothing like the extreme vindictiveness as shown by Irish fans on here for the non selection of O'Drsicoll, it was the coach's call, he made the call, he won the game, ands thats what its all about.
But you see, that isn't what its all about. Apologies are being demanded from Gatland's critics (Willie John McBride & Keith Wood). Why do they have to apologise for what they think? I'm pretty sure that Keith (along with everyone else) was critical of Woodward's management of the NZ tour but seemingly he doesn't have to apologise for that opinion because everyone agrees with him.

Woody is being vilified by mainly Welsh fans on that BBC news thread. Woody wouldn't give a toss, but because the Welsh & Gatland are so insecure they can't handle any criticism.

I don't know why Davies is bringing it up again anyway. Most had forgotten he was invovled - its like he is jealous of all the attention BOD got from it.

You are confusing media hyperbole with actual people's real opinions here. The article the OP refers too is from the BBC not from a public statement by Davies.

There is a direct quote from Davies in that article about the abuse (i.e., public statement).

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.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 20:49

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
Sin é wrote:Apologies are being demanded from Gatland's critics (Willie John McBride & Keith Wood).
I'm pretty sure neither of them is demanding an apology from Gatland. Because they're not idiots.
Are you implying then that the people demanding an apology from Woody are ediots? (there is a lot of them, mainly Welsh )

Sorry, I misread your post - I thought you said Wood and McBride were demanding an apology from Gatland for dropping O'Driscoll.

I don't think either of them should have to apologise for their opinion. Fair play to them for saying what they think.

About 300 of the 400 posts on that BBC blog are about what a Meat trombone soloist Woody is.

by Cyril Fri 23 Aug - 20:50

What does Davies mean by "verbal abuse"? I thought it was all on Twitter.

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug - 20:52

Sin é wrote:
I don't think either of them should have to apologise for their opinion. Fair play to them for saying what they think.About 300 of the 400 posts on that BBC blog are about what a Meat trombone soloist Woody is.

Hey, at least thats funny. I kinda agree too. He annoys me sometimes.

by jimmyinthewell68 Fri 23 Aug - 20:54

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
Cyril wrote:
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
If only the series had been drawn...

. .,

by maestegmafia Fri 23 Aug - 20:59

Sin é wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:
Sin é wrote:
aucklandlaurie wrote:
Sine e i agree there may have been debate and disagreement with some selections in the past, but nothing like the extreme vindictiveness as shown by Irish fans on here for the non selection of O'Drsicoll, it was the coach's call, he made the call, he won the game, ands thats what its all about.
But you see, that isn't what its all about. Apologies are being demanded from Gatland's critics (Willie John McBride & Keith Wood). Why do they have to apologise for what they think? I'm pretty sure that Keith (along with everyone else) was critical of Woodward's management of the NZ tour but seemingly he doesn't have to apologise for that opinion because everyone agrees with him.

Woody is being vilified by mainly Welsh fans on that BBC news thread. Woody wouldn't give a toss, but because the Welsh & Gatland are so insecure they can't handle any criticism.

I don't know why Davies is bringing it up again anyway. Most had forgotten he was invovled - its like he is jealous of all the attention BOD got from it.

You are confusing media hyperbole with actual people's real opinions here. The article the OP refers too is from the BBC not from a public statement by Davies.
There is a direct quote from Davies in that article about the abuse (i.e., public statement).

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.

A public statement would be if Davies called a press conference to discuss this, not as in this case where a journalist has asked leading question the he published as a strap line.

The behaviour on twitter was out of line, we all know that some morons use the Internet purely to antagonise and annoy people we see it on the posters here who are continuously banned and keep returning posting the same old rubbish.

Whether BOD was or wasn't the right man for the job will never be known, there was likely no way for Gatland to drop BOD gently without a media campaign to make a selection decision a bigger deal than it was.

by The Saint Fri 23 Aug - 21:01

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Luckless Pedestrian wrote:
Sin é wrote:Apologies are being demanded from Gatland's critics (Willie John McBride & Keith Wood).
I'm pretty sure neither of them is demanding an apology from Gatland. Because they're not idiots.
Are you implying then that the people demanding an apology from Woody are ediots? (there is a lot of them, mainly Welsh )

Sorry, I misread your post - I thought you said Wood and McBride were demanding an apology from Gatland for dropping O'Driscoll.

I don't think either of them should have to apologise for their opinion. Fair play to them for saying what they think.

I don't think they need to apologise for stating an opinion either. They could admit they were wrong though and admit they fuelled the hyperbole and xenophobia surrounding Gatland's selection.

Sin E should apologise and admit he's wrong so we can move on.

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug - 21:02

100% agree Maestegmafia.

Move on Saint, you are boring and as bad as the twitter trolls.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 21:03

Cyril wrote:What does Davies mean by "verbal abuse"? I thought it was all on Twitter.

I think he is referring to a lot of comment on twitter (which is ok) and some of it was abusive.

Must say, I couldn't find much (any) of the abusive stuff. In fact all the criticism if of Gatland or how wronged BOD is.

by The Saint Fri 23 Aug - 21:05

GunsGerms wrote:100% agree Maestegmafia.

Move on Saint, you are boring and as bad as the twitter trolls.

I'm not the one posting pics of a coach hanging because I disagree with the correct decision he made. I post fact and my own honest opinion, I'm not gonna sugar-coat it for you just because you dislike that.

#Justice4BOD

by GunsGerms Fri 23 Aug - 21:10

The Saint wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:100% agree Maestegmafia.

Move on Saint, you are boring and as bad as the twitter trolls.
I'm not the one posting pics of a coach hanging because I disagree with the correct decision he made. I post fact and my own honest opinion, I'm not gonna sugar-coat it for you just because you dislike that.

#Justice4BOD

Sure you do.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 21:21

A public statement would be if Davies called a press conference to discuss this, not as in this case where a journalist has asked leading question the he published as a strap line.

The behaviour on twitter was out of line, we all know that some morons use the Internet purely to antagonise and annoy people we see it on the posters here who are continuously banned and keep returning posting the same old rubbish.

Whether BOD was or wasn't the right man for the job will never be known, there was likely no way for Gatland to drop BOD gently without a media campaign to make a selection decision a bigger deal than it was.

He need not have mentioned what he says were a handful of abusive messages on twitter (which I can't find there now). Do you think Woody will be moaning about the abuse he has got on message boards about saying what he thinks?

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.

If Davies cares to check out twitter at the moment, he will mainly find people (a lot of them Irish) saying that it is disgraceful that he got any abuse.

Also, the Irish Independent had an article at the time: ''We might not like Brian's omission but Jonathan Davies deserves our support.'' How come Davies didn't highlight this support - but no, that wouldn't make him a Welsh martyr. He preferred to vilify those who criticised Gatland's decision and everyone points the finger then at the Irish.

by GoodinTightSpaces Fri 23 Aug - 21:25

Sin é wrote:
A public statement would be if Davies called a press conference to discuss this, not as in this case where a journalist has asked leading question the he published as a strap line.

The behaviour on twitter was out of line, we all know that some morons use the Internet purely to antagonise and annoy people we see it on the posters here who are continuously banned and keep returning posting the same old rubbish.

Whether BOD was or wasn't the right man for the job will never be known, there was likely no way for Gatland to drop BOD gently without a media campaign to make a selection decision a bigger deal than it was.
He need not have mentioned what he says were a handful of abusive messages on twitter (which I can't find there now). Do you think Woody will be moaning about the abuse he has got on message boards about saying what he thinks?

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.
If Davies cares to check out twitter at the moment, he will mainly find people (a lot of them Irish) saying that it is disgraceful that he got any abuse.

Also, the Irish Independent had an article at the time: ''We might not like Brian's omission but Jonathan Davies deserves our support.'' How come Davies didn't highlight this support - but no, that wouldn't make him a Welsh martyr. He preferred to vilify those who criticised Gatland's decision and everyone points the finger then at the Irish.

he probably doesnt read the irish independent!!!

by Rory_Gallagher Fri 23 Aug - 21:26

Oh dear. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at some of the things on this thread.

by maestegmafia Fri 23 Aug - 21:29

Sin é wrote:
A public statement would be if Davies called a press conference to discuss this, not as in this case where a journalist has asked leading question the he published as a strap line.

The behaviour on twitter was out of line, we all know that some morons use the Internet purely to antagonise and annoy people we see it on the posters here who are continuously banned and keep returning posting the same old rubbish.

Whether BOD was or wasn't the right man for the job will never be known, there was likely no way for Gatland to drop BOD gently without a media campaign to make a selection decision a bigger deal than it was.
He need not have mentioned what he says were a handful of abusive messages on twitter (which I can't find there now). Do you think Woody will be moaning about the abuse he has got on message boards about saying what he thinks?

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.
If Davies cares to check out twitter at the moment, he will mainly find people (a lot of them Irish) saying that it is disgraceful that he got any abuse.

Also, the Irish Independent had an article at the time: ''We might not like Brian's omission but Jonathan Davies deserves our support.'' How come Davies didn't highlight this support - but no, that wouldn't make him a Welsh martyr. He preferred to vilify those who criticised Gatland's decision and everyone points the finger then at the Irish.

Jonathan Davies didn't write the article in question. How would we know his opinion was fairly and accurately represented in the piece? His quotes certainly say that it bothered him little.

As to whether he was a better selection than BOD, probably not much in it, Davies is an exceptional talent as BOD himself says.

From one of BOD's articles in the English Telegraph.

"Warren Gatland mentioned that I was full of praise for Jonathan Davies afterwards. Why would not I be? He was awesome. He was involved in everything that was good. You have to tip your hat to that. Jonathan was comfortably the best player on the night.
The great thing is that it makes me, Manu and others in the same position realise that that is the level we need to be at. You have to embrace that and salute him. You would be bitterly disappointed not to be in the Test side but this series is bigger than any individual. You have to be selfless. It is about the Lions. I would rather the Lions won the series without me in the team than lose with me in it."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/britishandirishlionsrugby/10123705/Lions-2013-Brian-ODriscoll-explains-why-he-was-inspired-by-Jonathan-Davies-performance-against-Waratahs.html

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 21:34

GoodinTightSpaces wrote:
he probably doesnt read the irish independent!!!

He reads twitter, which is where I found the reference to it (its still up there). The Indo promotes itself by twetting the articles they publish with a link to them.

by Sin é Fri 23 Aug - 21:42

maestegmafia wrote:
Sin é wrote:
A public statement would be if Davies called a press conference to discuss this, not as in this case where a journalist has asked leading question the he published as a strap line.

The behaviour on twitter was out of line, we all know that some morons use the Internet purely to antagonise and annoy people we see it on the posters here who are continuously banned and keep returning posting the same old rubbish.

Whether BOD was or wasn't the right man for the job will never be known, there was likely no way for Gatland to drop BOD gently without a media campaign to make a selection decision a bigger deal than it was.
He need not have mentioned what he says were a handful of abusive messages on twitter (which I can't find there now). Do you think Woody will be moaning about the abuse he has got on message boards about saying what he thinks?

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.
If Davies cares to check out twitter at the moment, he will mainly find people (a lot of them Irish) saying that it is disgraceful that he got any abuse.

Also, the Irish Independent had an article at the time: ''We might not like Brian's omission but Jonathan Davies deserves our support.'' How come Davies didn't highlight this support - but no, that wouldn't make him a Welsh martyr. He preferred to vilify those who criticised Gatland's decision and everyone points the finger then at the Irish.
Jonathan Davies didn't write the article in question. How would we know his opinion was fairly and accurately represented in the piece? His quotes certainly say that it bothered him little.

As to whether he was a better selection than BOD, probably not much in it, Davies is an exceptional talent as BOD himself says.

From one of BOD's articles in the English Telegraph.

"Warren Gatland mentioned that I was full of praise for Jonathan Davies afterwards. Why would not I be? He was awesome. He was involved in everything that was good. You have to tip your hat to that. Jonathan was comfortably the best player on the night.
The great thing is that it makes me, Manu and others in the same position realise that that is the level we need to be at. You have to embrace that and salute him. You would be bitterly disappointed not to be in the Test side but this series is bigger than any individual. You have to be selfless. It is about the Lions. I would rather the Lions won the series without me in the team than lose with me in it."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/britishandirishlionsrugby/10123705/Lions-2013-Brian-ODriscoll-explains-why-he-was-inspired-by-Jonathan-Davies-performance-against-Waratahs.html

That just demonstrates is that BOD is a class act (that didn't deserve the treatment he got from Gatland).

Just to clearify my opinion on this - as far as I'm concerned, it was up to Gatland to select the team he wanted to play. What I do think was wrong was the way he mislead Brian into thinking he would be the captain and then dropping him completely out of the 23 on the day.

My beef isn't with Jonathan Davies (though his comment that BOD should be happy to have a Lions test win on his cv pretty pathetic - as if being able to put that on his cv would mean anything to him when he wasn't involved in the test).

by Luckless Pedestrian Fri 23 Aug - 21:44

Sin é wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:From one of BOD's articles in the English Telegraph.

"Warren Gatland mentioned that I was full of praise for Jonathan Davies afterwards. Why would not I be? He was awesome. He was involved in everything that was good. You have to tip your hat to that. Jonathan was comfortably the best player on the night.
The great thing is that it makes me, Manu and others in the same position realise that that is the level we need to be at. You have to embrace that and salute him. You would be bitterly disappointed not to be in the Test side but this series is bigger than any individual. You have to be selfless. It is about the Lions. I would rather the Lions won the series without me in the team than lose with me in it."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/britishandirishlionsrugby/10123705/Lions-2013-Brian-ODriscoll-explains-why-he-was-inspired-by-Jonathan-Davies-performance-against-Waratahs.html
That just demonstrates is that BOD is a class act (that didn't deserve the treatment he got from Gatland).

My beef isn't with Jonathan Davies (though his comment that BOD should be happy to have a Lions test win on his cv pretty pathetic - as if being able to put that on his cv would mean anything to him when he wasn't involved in the test).

You couldn't make it up.

by Knowsit17 Fri 23 Aug - 21:48

He need not have mentioned what he says were a handful of abusive messages on twitter (which I can't find there now).

Yeah, how dare he make any reference to threatening behaviour directed at him. In fact let's all threaten and spit bile at each other seeing as it obviously isn't an issue as eloquently pointed out by Sin. Anyone got a friend or close relative they'd allow me the courtesy of threatening to bottle in some dark alley?

by Sponsored content