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

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

I'm impressed by the level of detail in these posts

Just a question, will there be extra feeling in the next game between Wales and Ireland? I appreciate there's probably no beef between players, but maybe the general feelings of some fans will spill over onto them.

The Saint wrote:He hasn't suffered anything due to Warren. However he has been the victim of some bitter Irish twitter trolls. That's the fault of them only, and in part Wood and McBride who made daft comments that fuelled the fire, and neither backtracked when they were shown up to be wrong either.

How do you know the nationality of the trolls? Mates of yours?

Lumping Wood and McBride in with them is a truly daft comment (bordering on libelous). Remember it was Gatland who lit the touchpaper and retreated to a safe distance when the fireworks went off.

Corbs won the 3rd test (practically on his own) so I don't understand this BOD/Davies argument.

flyhalffactory wrote:

miaow wrote:flyhalf, I think you do have to accept that Davies was partly at fault for the try, as was BOD. Whether through a breakdown in communication, or trust, regardless, Davies looked like he wanted a ma to man rush, and BOD trusted his pace on the drift. After 15 phases, it's understandable that the centre may not be defending exactly in his channel, or any other position. It's a fairly trivial issue, and plucking at hand gestures and who called for who to move  or cover just shows how desperate this 'debate' is.

The crux is that that one event has little bearing on whether Gatland was right to drop BOD if he wished to do so, which he did. The Lions won. They were far more accurate and cohesive than the previous two Tests. He went for bust, arguably controversial based on the number of 'Welsh' Lions, but if you're basing it individually on each player in isolation, there is little room for grievance. Including O'Driscoll and Davies. Microscopic analysis like this solves nothing; as with history, the same 'factual' evidence will always lead people to different conclusions based on their bias, interpretation, and perspective at the time of the event, if they experienced it. O'Driscoll didn't have a fantastic Tour individually, but he won, and I'm sure he is very happy about that, at the same time wishing he could have played a part in that third Test, without feeling the need to vilify anyone. He's still a great player, and I'm sure he will still have a part to play in Ireland's fortunes next season.

Let this thread die?

Its not that I don't accept a players fault........ its I don't believe it was one mans fault which some posters were and still are trying to suggest and for obvious reasons.

Yes Davies should have left JOC to BOD full stop, and let history judge the passage of play.

And I agree with you (as I have often said) BOD is one of the all time greats, definitely should have toured and who still has a lot to offer. IMHO he was treated fairly by Mr G who gave adequate reasons for the 3rd Test selection.

Yep he should have and that's why the try was his fault.If he left him and BoD couldn't make the tackle it would have been BoDs fault and seeing as BoD comfortably caught and dragged JoC down it's obvious he wouldn't have had a problem.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

miaow wrote:flyhalf, I think you do have to accept that Davies was partly at fault for the try, as was BOD. Whether through a breakdown in communication, or trust, regardless, Davies looked like he wanted a ma to man rush, and BOD trusted his pace on the drift. After 15 phases, it's understandable that the centre may not be defending exactly in his channel, or any other position. It's a fairly trivial issue, and plucking at hand gestures and who called for who to move  or cover just shows how desperate this 'debate' is.

The crux is that that one event has little bearing on whether Gatland was right to drop BOD if he wished to do so, which he did. The Lions won. They were far more accurate and cohesive than the previous two Tests. He went for bust, arguably controversial based on the number of 'Welsh' Lions, but if you're basing it individually on each player in isolation, there is little room for grievance. Including O'Driscoll and Davies. Microscopic analysis like this solves nothing; as with history, the same 'factual' evidence will always lead people to different conclusions based on their bias, interpretation, and perspective at the time of the event, if they experienced it. O'Driscoll didn't have a fantastic Tour individually, but he won, and I'm sure he is very happy about that, at the same time wishing he could have played a part in that third Test, without feeling the need to vilify anyone. He's still a great player, and I'm sure he will still have a part to play in Ireland's fortunes next season.

Let this thread die?

Its not that I don't accept a players fault........ its I don't believe it was one mans fault which some posters were and still are trying to suggest and for obvious reasons.

Yes Davies should have left JOC to BOD full stop, and let history judge the passage of play.

And I agree with you (as I have often said) BOD is one of the all time greats, definitely should have toured and who still has a lot to offer. IMHO he was treated fairly by Mr G who gave adequate reasons for the 3rd Test selection.

Yep he should have and that's why the try was his fault.If he left him and BoD couldn't make the tackle it would have been BoDs fault and seeing as BoD comfortably caught and dragged JoC down it's obvious he wouldn't have had a problem.

He damn well didn't..........

THE BALL HAD BEEN PASSED AND AAC HAD SCORED THE DAMN TRY BEFORE BOD ACTUALLY TOUCHED JOC...... THATS WHY FOXY WAS CAUGHT IN NO-MANS LAND....... ATTEMPTING TO COVER THE I/C LINE AND THE O/C LINE........ IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

ARE WE GETTING THROUGH TO YOU?

Give me strength..... you just haven't got a clue have you

This thread is solid gold.

flyhalffactory wrote:IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

And then Foxy would have got slated for leaving BOD with JOC all alone, when it was obvious he was going to go it alone. Honestly it was a lose lose situation for Foxy. He stayed back to cover JOC, he was to blame for not covering AAC. If he covered AAC, he would be blamed for not covering JOC with BOD. The end of the day the fact is this Lions tour was billed as the BOD retirement tour since before the six nations started, and he was even being asked about the captaincy of the Lions back then. Because of all that nonesnece people seem to have forgotten it was a rugby tour for the B&I Lions, and not a tour for the BOD Lions.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

And then Foxy would have got slated for leaving BOD with JOC all alone, when it was obvious he was going to go it alone.  Honestly it was a lose lose situation for Foxy.  He stayed back to cover JOC, he was to blame for not covering AAC.  If he covered AAC, he would be blamed for not covering JOC with BOD.  The end of the day the fact is this Lions tour was billed as the BOD retirement tour since before the six nations started, and he was even being asked about the captaincy of the Lions back then.  Because of all that nonesnece people seem to have forgotten it was a rugby tour for the B&I Lions, and not a tour for the BOD Lions.

Exactly

There is an argument to say Davies should have marked the O/C only....... but he would have been slated for that by the usual suspects, either way it would have been his fault and not BODs.

Incredible!

THE BALL HAD BEEN PASSED AND AAC HAD SCORED THE DAMN TRY BEFORE BOD ACTUALLY TOUCHED JOC...... THATS WHY FOXY WAS CAUGHT IN NO-MANS LAND....... ATTEMPTING TO COVER THE I/C LINE AND THE O/C LINE........ IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

ARE WE GETTING THROUGH TO YOU?

Give me strength..... you just haven't got a clue have you

Sorry FHF but you are just making stuff up now.

I'm sure you can find the video you have posted and watch it again. The things you have said about this make me wonder if you are watching the wrong match.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

And then Foxy would have got slated for leaving BOD with JOC all alone, when it was obvious he was going to go it alone.  Honestly it was a lose lose situation for Foxy.  He stayed back to cover JOC, he was to blame for not covering AAC.  If he covered AAC, he would be blamed for not covering JOC with BOD.  The end of the day the fact is this Lions tour was billed as the BOD retirement tour since before the six nations started, and he was even being asked about the captaincy of the Lions back then.  Because of all that nonesnece people seem to have forgotten it was a rugby tour for the Welsh Lions, and not a tour for the BOD Lions.

Fixed that for you.

The Great Aukster wrote:

The Saint wrote:He hasn't suffered anything due to Warren. However he has been the victim of some bitter Irish twitter trolls. That's the fault of them only, and in part Wood and McBride who made daft comments that fuelled the fire, and neither backtracked when they were shown up to be wrong either.

How do you know the nationality of the trolls? Mates of yours?

Lumping Wood and McBride in with them is a truly daft comment (bordering on libelous). Remember it was Gatland who lit the touchpaper and retreated to a safe distance when the fireworks went off.

Because nobody outside of Ireland gave a s*it about the dropping. They accepted the decision and got behind the Lions.

How is it daft? I've already stated how Wood and McBride were involved and now I have to repeat myself. If that is libellous then Wood/McBride themselves made libellous comments about Gatland destroying the Lions. Also, neither of them admitted they were wrong. They provoked a lot of the abuse coming out of Ireland and didn't condemn any of it. And if you for some reason think me stating that is libellous then your previous accusations of Gatland are libellous. As are Sin's countless accusations and also his changing of the goal posts IE, the Welsh love Gatland, the Welsh hate BOD, Rolland, etc.

Sin é wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

And then Foxy would have got slated for leaving BOD with JOC all alone, when it was obvious he was going to go it alone.  Honestly it was a lose lose situation for Foxy.  He stayed back to cover JOC, he was to blame for not covering AAC.  If he covered AAC, he would be blamed for not covering JOC with BOD.  The end of the day the fact is this Lions tour was billed as the BOD retirement tour since before the six nations started, and he was even being asked about the captaincy of the Lions back then.  Because of all that nonesnece people seem to have forgotten it was a rugby tour for the Welsh Lions, and not a tour for the BOD Lions.

Fixed that for you.

Aaaah its becoming clear now...... you have accepted the post as the 606v2 resident troll (and credit to you), you are putting your heart and soul into it

MrsP wrote:

THE BALL HAD BEEN PASSED AND AAC HAD SCORED THE DAMN TRY BEFORE BOD ACTUALLY TOUCHED JOC...... THATS WHY FOXY WAS CAUGHT IN NO-MANS LAND....... ATTEMPTING TO COVER THE I/C LINE AND THE O/C LINE........ IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

ARE WE GETTING THROUGH TO YOU?

Give me strength..... you just haven't got a clue have you

Sorry FHF but you are just making stuff up now.

I'm sure you can find the video you have posted and watch it again. The things you have said about this make me wonder if you are watching the wrong match.

He's just stating that it wasn't Jonathan Davies' fault that the Lions (the B&I Lions, not the BOD Lions) lost the 2nd test, and I agree with him. You can't blame one guy for that type of defensive error. Just like I don't believe it was solely the fault of Sexton that his opposite man scored a try in the 3rd test.

flyhalffactory wrote:He damn well didn't..........

THE BALL HAD BEEN PASSED AND AAC HAD SCORED THE DAMN TRY BEFORE BOD ACTUALLY TOUCHED JOC...... THATS WHY FOXY WAS CAUGHT IN NO-MANS LAND....... ATTEMPTING TO COVER THE I/C LINE AND THE O/C LINE........ IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

ARE WE GETTING THROUGH TO YOU?

Give me strength..... you just haven't got a clue have you

Shouting doesn't make what you're saying any less of a nonsense. If Davies had satyed out on AAC and JOC had made the try then some people may have blamed Davies...but they would be wrong. BOD clearly had JOC covered and should have made the tackle. If he had missed it it would have been his fault. However in this case the 'right' thing to do is to trust the inside man and cover your own man. He didn't. It was a mistake and it lead to a try. May have a try had been scored else where? Yes, and that would have been someone elses fault. It didn't happen so speculating is pointless.

MrsP wrote:

THE BALL HAD BEEN PASSED AND AAC HAD SCORED THE DAMN TRY BEFORE BOD ACTUALLY TOUCHED JOC...... THATS WHY FOXY WAS CAUGHT IN NO-MANS LAND....... ATTEMPTING TO COVER THE I/C LINE AND THE O/C LINE........ IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

ARE WE GETTING THROUGH TO YOU?

Give me strength..... you just haven't got a clue have you

Sorry FHF but you are just making stuff up now.

I'm sure you can find the video you have posted and watch it again. The things you have said about this make me wonder if you are watching the wrong match.

Do you want me to post the video again and give you time-frame (the exact moment that JOC passed the ball) and where BOD was?...... if BOD tackled him and JOC passed the ball then how haven't the stats shown it as a miss-tackle. Its funny how you can post the video link and stop it at the exact moment for each phase and still people cant (or won't) see it. JOC had options to score himself or delay the pass to AAC, BOD was immaterial to JOC as he was out of the picture the only player he was facing was Davies and that's the only reason he run and delayed the pass. JOC is not going to be the quickest but BOD couldn't get to him before he passed.

I don't lie and I don't make things up....... I had no bias to either player albeit personally as a Scot I would have preferred BOD to play the tests before Foxy but the reality was Davies played better than BOD did throughout the tour, was much more aware and managed the matches better than a guy on his 4th tour.

What difference does it make when BOD made the tackle? The point was he had him covered. As soon as JOC passed BOD and JOC were out of the play (made sure by BOD as he completed the tackle). That leaves a 2 on 2, which, if JD had been positioned correctly, would have been covered (barring mis-tackles or other man sausage ups.). He wan't positioned correctly, so the try was easily scored.

flyhalffactory wrote:

Sin é wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

And then Foxy would have got slated for leaving BOD with JOC all alone, when it was obvious he was going to go it alone.  Honestly it was a lose lose situation for Foxy.  He stayed back to cover JOC, he was to blame for not covering AAC.  If he covered AAC, he would be blamed for not covering JOC with BOD.  The end of the day the fact is this Lions tour was billed as the BOD retirement tour since before the six nations started, and he was even being asked about the captaincy of the Lions back then.  Because of all that nonesnece people seem to have forgotten it was a rugby tour for the Welsh Lions, and not a tour for the BOD Lions.

Fixed that for you.

Aaaah its becoming clear now...... you have accepted the post as the 606v2 resident troll (and credit to you), you are putting your heart and soul into it  

I think ScarletSpiderman has also put his hand up for that job in that case (i.e., referring to the 'BOD Lions.')

Sin, there was no nastiness about any of the other players that lost their places for the final test though, the whole poop storm was about how BOD has been robbed of his fairwell jaunt for the Lions etc etc. Anyhow, thanks for the Troll reference towards me, it's been a while since I've had that tag thrown at me

FHF,

I have watched the video you posted and BOD clearly tackles JOC while the ball is still in mid air.

HammerofThunor wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:He damn well didn't..........

THE BALL HAD BEEN PASSED AND AAC HAD SCORED THE DAMN TRY BEFORE BOD ACTUALLY TOUCHED JOC...... THATS WHY FOXY WAS CAUGHT IN NO-MANS LAND....... ATTEMPTING TO COVER THE I/C LINE AND THE O/C LINE........ IF HE (DAVIES) HADN'T DELAYED  THE COVER OF AAC THEN JOC WOULD HAVE HAD A FREE RUN IN BECAUSE NO WAY IN THE WORLD WAS BOD EVEN AWARE HE HAD THE BALL.

ARE WE GETTING THROUGH TO YOU?

Give me strength..... you just haven't got a clue have you

Shouting doesn't make what you're saying any less of a nonsense. If Davies had satyed out on AAC and JOC had made the try then some people may have blamed Davies...but they would be wrong. BOD clearly had JOC covered and should have made the tackle. If he had missed it it would have been his fault. However in this case the 'right' thing to do is to trust the inside man and cover your own man. He didn't. It was a mistake and it lead to a try. May have a try had been scored else where? Yes, and that would have been someone elses fault. It didn't happen so speculating is pointless.

Hammer I will say it in a way that maybe you will understand......

The stats show that BOD didn't make a Miss-Tackle, the video shows JOC passing the ball before BOD touched him. If BOD had tackled him before the ball was passed then it would have been classed as a miss-tackle, the very fact that he tackled him AFTER the ball was distributed highlights that he wouldn't have got to him.

This was JOC running sideways, slowing down, concentrating on delaying the pass..... because Davies was covering the straight run not BOD, if Davies had covered AAC then JOC would have run straight from 8-10 metres...... and a certain try IMHO.

You are correct "The right thing was cover your own man", Davies had indicated to BOD some 5-10 seconds before than there was a 3-2 overlap and that he (BOD) should be next to Bowe marking the 13 (AAC), but BOD concentrated on ushering Lydiate to take his place behind the centre of the ruck. Leaving a gap that (MR G probably was referring to as poor management). Davies was covering both the his defensive line and the O/C line it was quite clear if the game had been managed properly by the then acting captain, then Foxy would have been face onto JOC with BOD face onto AAC

HammerofThunor wrote:What difference does it make when BOD made the tackle? The point was he had him covered. As soon as JOC passed BOD and JOC were out of the play (made sure by BOD as he completed the tackle). That leaves a 2 on 2, which, if JD had been positioned correctly, would have been covered (barring mis-tackles or other man sausage ups.). He wan't positioned correctly, so the try was easily scored.

The point is............ if Davies had gone with AAC there would have been a straight-line defensive gap that BOD wouldn't have made and JOC would have seen the gap and easily scored

...So, if you don't make stuff up how can you say,

"...AAC HAD SCORED THE DAMN TRY BEFORE BOD ACTUALLY TOUCHED JOC..."

?

MrsP wrote:...So, if you don't make stuff up how can you say,

"...AAC HAD SCORED THE DAMN TRY BEFORE BOD ACTUALLY TOUCHED JOC..."

?

Yep you are correct there and I will revise that

on the video at 7.51 the ball is passed BOD still hasn't touched JOC...... at 7.53 AAC scores the try while BOD is still going through the attempted tackle movement.

At the end of the day to lay the blame of the try on Davies' door is pathetic....... it was a combination of errors and mis-judgement

I cant believe I actually got embroiled in this again........ FHF has just left the building

I agree that it is daft to lay all the blame for that try on one player, but you do have to admit that your version of events loses credibility when you claim to have dissected the video you have posted repeatedly, and have derided others for not seeing what you are seeing, and then clearly haven't looked very hard at it yourself.

"asoreleftshoulder

How can you make such fabrications in the light of the clear video evidence. "

 


FHF seems to have become a lot less keen on the old...

flyhalffactory wrote:

MrsP wrote:

ARE WE GETTING THROUGH TO YOU?

Give me strength..... you just haven't got a clue have you

Do you want me to post the video again and give you time-frame

...Its funny how you can post the video link and stop it at the exact moment for each phase and still people cant (or won't) see it.

I don't lie and I don't make things up.......  

...thing all of a sudden.

I wonder why?

The Saint wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

The Saint wrote:He hasn't suffered anything due to Warren. However he has been the victim of some bitter Irish twitter trolls. That's the fault of them only, and in part Wood and McBride who made daft comments that fuelled the fire, and neither backtracked when they were shown up to be wrong either.

How do you know the nationality of the trolls? Mates of yours?

Lumping Wood and McBride in with them is a truly daft comment (bordering on libelous). Remember it was Gatland who lit the touchpaper and retreated to a safe distance when the fireworks went off.

Because nobody outside of Ireland gave a s*it about the dropping. They accepted the decision and got behind the Lions.

How is it daft? I've already stated how Wood and McBride were involved and now I have to repeat myself. If that is libellous then Wood/McBride themselves made libellous comments about Gatland destroying the Lions. Also, neither of them admitted they were wrong. They provoked a lot of the abuse coming out of Ireland and didn't condemn any of it. And if you for some reason think me stating that is libellous then your previous accusations of Gatland are libellous. As are Sin's countless accusations and also his changing of the goal posts IE, the Welsh love Gatland, the Welsh hate BOD, Rolland, etc.

Actually somebody outside of Ireland did give a s*it (proving your opening statement wrong) - have you heard of a guy called Dan Carter? Without evidence the trolls cannot be ascribed to any race as that would be simply racial prejudice.

With regard to Wood and McBride, lumping them in with the twitter lowlife attacking Davies is daft, when neither of them criticised Davies or pointed an accusing finger in his direction. Criticising the erosion of the Lions' ethos is a totally different matter and both are eminently placed to make their comments given their long associations with the team. Considering they are probably among the biggest supporters of the Lions and what it stands for, the suggestion that they are in any way complicit in or condoning of twitter abuse against a player is frankly ridiculous.

The Great Aukster wrote:

The Saint wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

The Saint wrote:He hasn't suffered anything due to Warren. However he has been the victim of some bitter Irish twitter trolls. That's the fault of them only, and in part Wood and McBride who made daft comments that fuelled the fire, and neither backtracked when they were shown up to be wrong either.

How do you know the nationality of the trolls? Mates of yours?

Lumping Wood and McBride in with them is a truly daft comment (bordering on libelous). Remember it was Gatland who lit the touchpaper and retreated to a safe distance when the fireworks went off.

Because nobody outside of Ireland gave a s*it about the dropping. They accepted the decision and got behind the Lions.

How is it daft? I've already stated how Wood and McBride were involved and now I have to repeat myself. If that is libellous then Wood/McBride themselves made libellous comments about Gatland destroying the Lions. Also, neither of them admitted they were wrong. They provoked a lot of the abuse coming out of Ireland and didn't condemn any of it. And if you for some reason think me stating that is libellous then your previous accusations of Gatland are libellous. As are Sin's countless accusations and also his changing of the goal posts IE, the Welsh love Gatland, the Welsh hate BOD, Rolland, etc.

Actually somebody outside of Ireland did give a s*it (proving your opening statement wrong) - have you heard of a guy called Dan Carter? Without evidence the trolls cannot be ascribed to any race as that would be simply racial prejudice.

With regard to Wood and McBride, lumping them in with the twitter lowlife attacking Davies is daft, when neither of them criticised Davies or pointed an accusing finger in his direction. Criticising the erosion of the Lions' ethos is a totally different matter and both are eminently placed to make their comments given their long associations with the team. Considering they are probably among the biggest supporters of the Lions and what it stands for, the suggestion that they are in any way complicit in or condoning of twitter abuse against a player is frankly ridiculous.

Oh dearie me. Carter posted a tweet, I don't think he actually cared enough to the extent he felt the need to vilify Gatland, the Lions and Wales. It was a disappointing tweet from him as it was a comment based on the assumption Ireland fans weren't supporting the Lions, so it was from someone who doesn't understand or support the Lions ethos; though he was correct in this case.

I didn't lump them in with any of the ones criticising Davies. I stated that they provoked the aggro coming out of Ireland over the dropping. The aggro that continues to this day. Again, if you believe this is libellous then you must believe that their comments were libellous as are your incorrect comments about Gatland.

Carter was interested enough to tweet  #ShouldBeTheCaptain”. Lucky for Gatland, Carter will probably be retired by the time the ABs job will come up again.

PS - having played against the Lions, I'm pretty sure Carter knows a fair bit about them.

 "PS - having played against the Lions, I'm pretty sure Carter knows a fair bit about them." How many more times are you going to bring this out? He's played against them a couple times. Doesn't mean he understands the Lions ethos, just like the Irish on here. That was only one part of the tweet, which is opinion. The rest of his tweet was disappointing from a player like him. Don't really give a rats about Healey's tweet before you bring that up again BTW.

The Great Aukster

As a rugby supporter for nearly 60 years, I'm glad the Lions won the series against Australia, to be honest much more glad about that than anything else about the tour. Some people don't see it like that, preferring to concentrate on more negative aspects.

I'm also trying to understand what "the Lions ethos" might be and how and why it's been "eroded".  Hasn't every Lions tour basically been a bunch of men far from home - since 1966 with a coach - trying to beat the best and worst the opposition can throw at them?  How and why was 2013 different?

optimist wrote:The Great Aukster

As a rugby supporter for nearly 60 years, I'm glad the Lions won the series against Australia, to be honest much more glad about that than anything else about the tour. Some people don't see it like that, preferring to concentrate on more negative aspects.

I'm also trying to understand what "the Lions ethos" might be and how and why it's been "eroded".  Hasn't every Lions tour basically been a bunch of men far from home - since 1966 with a coach - trying to beat the best and worst the opposition can throw at them?  How and why was 2013 different?

MrsP wrote:I agree that it is daft to lay all the blame for that try on one player, but you do have to admit that your version of events loses credibility when you claim to have dissected the video you have posted repeatedly, and have derided others for not seeing what you are seeing,  and then clearly haven't looked very hard at it yourself.

"asoreleftshoulder


How can you make such fabrications in the light of the clear video evidence. "

Explain?

MrsP wrote: 


FHF seems to have become a lot less keen on the old...

flyhalffactory wrote:

MrsP wrote:

ARE WE GETTING THROUGH TO YOU?

Give me strength..... you just haven't got a clue have you

Do you want me to post the video again and give you time-frame

...Its funny how you can post the video link and stop it at the exact moment for each phase and still people cant (or won't) see it.

I don't lie and I don't make things up.......  

...thing all of a sudden.

I wonder why?

I have read this and for the life of me I don't understand what you are saying............ enlighten the forum and me

optimist wrote:The Great Aukster

As a rugby supporter for nearly 60 years, I'm glad the Lions won the series against Australia, to be honest much more glad about that than anything else about the tour. Some people don't see it like that, preferring to concentrate on more negative aspects.

I'm also trying to understand what "the Lions ethos" might be and how and why it's been "eroded".  Hasn't every Lions tour basically been a bunch of men far from home - since 1966 with a coach - trying to beat the best and worst the opposition can throw at them?  How and why was 2013 different?

Ah, so you agree there are negative aspects to the last Tour then? I thought everything was perfect because the Lions won  

The Lions tour has generally been a blend of the 4 nations. This one was the Welsh team, most the Welsh coaching team and the Welsh gameplan (which only the Welsh players selected for the tour suited). Anyone else touring were there as tackle bags - i.e., Zebo, Hogg etc. would be Australian/SH style players.

I must be stupid because I don't understand any of this

flyhalffactory wrote:Hammer I will say it in a way that maybe you will understand......

The stats show that BOD didn't make a Miss-Tackle, the video shows JOC passing the ball before BOD touched him. If BOD had tackled him before the ball was passed then it would have been classed as a miss-tackle, the very fact that he tackled him AFTER the ball was distributed highlights that he wouldn't have got to him.

Eh? If he had made the tackle before the pass it would have been a miss-tackle? Whether JOC passes or not has nothing to do with BOD. If JOC hadn't passed before being tackled he would have fluffed up a try oppotunity.

This was JOC running sideways, slowing down, concentrating on delaying the pass..... because Davies was covering the straight run not BOD, if Davies had covered AAC then JOC would have run straight from 8-10 metres...... and a certain try IMHO.

From the camera behind JOC is just outside BOD. BOD deliberately left the guy in front so it would be harder for him to stepped on the inside. There was no where near enough room for JOC to pass BOD on the outside without BOD missing the tackle (as in he should have made it but failed).

You are correct "The right thing was cover your own man", Davies had indicated to BOD some 5-10 seconds before than there was a 3-2 overlap and that he (BOD) should be next to Bowe marking the 13 (AAC), but BOD concentrated on ushering Lydiate to take his place behind the centre of the ruck. Leaving a gap that (MR G probably was referring to as poor management). Davies was covering both the his defensive line and the O/C line it was quite clear if the game had been managed properly by the then acting captain, then Foxy would have been face onto JOC with BOD face onto AAC

If JD wanted BOD to pass him to get to the outside centre position to defend he truly is an idiot. Do you really want you two centres in the same position for any amount of time? You push out regardless of who is there. In a fluid game of rugby you can't afford to defence your positional channel all the time.

BOD made sure there wasn't gap on his inside. He then pushed out, tracking JOC and pushing him towards the touch line. There is nothing I've seen in the footage that suggests that BOD did anything but the textbook defending in that situation. If BOD had pushed out quicker it would have been simple for JOC to step inside and get in the try himself.

And just to clarify. I'm English, couldn't give a toss about the Lions other than as an event, not a particular fan of BOD and don't have much of an opinion on Davies other than he's not god's gift to the rugby world.

It's funny how CW carried out a crime against rugby by not respecting the Lions ethos but that same ethos is not a myth. All that stuff about selecting players he new and were out of form. Setting on the test team early. Lots of players. It turns out his biggest crime was touring against the All Blacks in stead of Australia. The dastard

MrsP

Just for you.......... there is a massive difference between repeating yourself and eventually making a mistake and telling a falsehood to promote one player over another.

We are living in a sensationalistic society and the furore over dropping BOD and the rubbish that Mr G had not shown him respect and hadn't explained to the press the reasons is utter tosh. He said that he felt Roberts/Davies knew each others game very well and been successful as a midfield combo at the highest level. He also informed BOD well before the 3rd Test players knew of their selection. He more than vindicated his decision and it appears that the only people holding a grudge is a few media men and some internet posters.

Oh well... shall we go back and moan how few Scots were selected for the tour......

Sin é wrote:Carter was interested enough to tweet  #ShouldBeTheCaptain”. Lucky for Gatland, Carter will probably be retired by the time the ABs job will come up again.

PS - having played against the Lions, I'm pretty sure Carter knows a fair bit about them.

Lucky for Gatland....phew.....I'm sure Carter would have torpedoed any suggestion that Gatland coach the ABs based on the "BOD decision".

I'm sure Carter is still fuming about it. I sure he cares deeply, and were Gatland to be in with a shot after the next WC, I suspect that Carter will probably put his career on the line for BOD, and stand down if Gatland were picked:

"I'm sorry Warren, but only selecting BOD for two of the three Lions test matches two years ago was a complete disgrace, despite the fact that you recorded a record victory in the 3rd Test. I feel very strongly about it, you demeaned the Lions and more importantly Ireland, and I felt so strongly about it I even Tweeted an entire word expressing my outrage at the time. It's clear from this one incident that you are a poor coach, and not fit to coach the ABs. I hereby retire from international rugby #shouldhaveignoredyourinstinctsandpickedonreputation".

 

HammerofThunor wrote:I must be stupid because I don't understand any of this

flyhalffactory wrote:Hammer I will say it in a way that maybe you will understand......

The stats show that BOD didn't make a Miss-Tackle, the video shows JOC passing the ball before BOD touched him. If BOD had tackled him before the ball was passed then it would have been classed as a miss-tackle, the very fact that he tackled him AFTER the ball was distributed highlights that he wouldn't have got to him.

Eh? If he had made the tackle before the pass it would have been a miss-tackle? Whether JOC passes or not has nothing to do with BOD. If JOC hadn't passed before being tackled he would have fluffed up a try oppotunity.

This was JOC running sideways, slowing down, concentrating on delaying the pass..... because Davies was covering the straight run not BOD, if Davies had covered AAC then JOC would have run straight from 8-10 metres...... and a certain try IMHO.

From the camera behind JOC is just outside BOD. BOD deliberately left the guy in front so it would be harder for him to stepped on the inside. There was no where near enough room for JOC to pass BOD on the outside without BOD missing the tackle (as in he should have made it but failed).

You are correct "The right thing was cover your own man", Davies had indicated to BOD some 5-10 seconds before than there was a 3-2 overlap and that he (BOD) should be next to Bowe marking the 13 (AAC), but BOD concentrated on ushering Lydiate to take his place behind the centre of the ruck. Leaving a gap that (MR G probably was referring to as poor management). Davies was covering both the his defensive line and the O/C line it was quite clear if the game had been managed properly by the then acting captain, then Foxy would have been face onto JOC with BOD face onto AAC

If JD wanted BOD to pass him to get to the outside centre position to defend he truly is an idiot. Do you really want you two centres in the same position for any amount of time? You push out regardless of who is there. In a fluid game of rugby you can't afford to defence your positional channel all the time.

BOD made sure there wasn't gap on his inside. He then pushed out, tracking JOC and pushing him towards the touch line. There is nothing I've seen in the footage that suggests that BOD did anything but the textbook defending in that situation. If BOD had pushed out quicker it would have been simple for JOC to step inside and get in the try himself.

And just to clarify. I'm English, couldn't give a toss about the Lions other than as an event, not a particular fan of BOD and don't have much of an opinion on Davies other than he's not god's gift to the rugby world.

It's funny how CW carried out a crime against rugby by not respecting the Lions ethos but that same ethos is not a myth. All that stuff about selecting players he new and were out of form. Setting on the test team early. Lots of players. It turns out his biggest crime was touring against the All Blacks in stead of Australia. The dastard

Your comments beggars belief

1. from the rear view its even more damning even though the camera angle favours the Lions, its clear when the ball comes out the only player who is still looking at the ruck - BOD, even a knackered Lydiate responds sooner. JOC is running before BOD moves his head......... Davies cuts off the straight line run i.e. he comes out quickly otherwise JOC would have run straight as there is no way that BOD would have got to him even from the rear angle which is really doesn't show the true reflection of the direction of play.

2. even the rear angle shows Davies looking at BOD pleading "I am in no-mans land here mate", if BOD was face on to JOC then why would he have turned sideways running when he could have just cover tackled him face on....... and why do Davies and Bowe run towards the three Aussies.

3. If BOD was tracking him so well, then why didn't he get to him before JOC got to the 5 metre line and why was he fully stretched and almost tackling him with his finger nails, I mean JOC is regarded as fairly pedestrian in flight. Why did JOC have the time from 15m to 5m pass the ball before BOD tackled him.

To clarify Hound we know you are English and we know you your opinion of the Welshman Davies ....... likewise I am Scottish and personally would rather a Davies/BOD midfield than a Roberts/Davies midfield for any test but the right decision was made by Mr G

Hammer wrote:It's funny how CW carried out a crime against rugby by not respecting the Lions ethos but that same ethos is not a myth. All that stuff about selecting players he new and were out of form. Setting on the test team early. Lots of players. It turns out his biggest crime was touring against the All Blacks in stead of Australia. The dastard

Come on now. Apart from a couple players picked on rep (and neither of them let down the Lions anyway) Gats picked on form. Is there any positive aspects you can take from the 2005 tour?

It does make you wonder how many NZ would have put on this year's Lions, doesn't it?

I'd imagine, Carter, McCaw, Smith and a few others that the NZRU want to keep happy and playing in NZ would be asked for their views. Would they want to stay in NZ and risked getting dropped out of nowhere by Gatland or would they prefer to head for foreign shores and make a stack of money in the lap of luxury.

Thinking ahead to after the next rugby world cup, seems like a fair few of the Chief's players (Savea, Sonny Bill, Cruden, have a coaching relationship with Rennie & Smith (and play well for them) and will be key players for the ABs.

Cyril wrote:It does make you wonder how many NZ would have put on this year's Lions, doesn't it?

Yeah 30000 points because this was apparently the worst Lions team headed by the worst coaching staff in the history of rugby. Not to mention it was the worst Australian rugby team of last 10,000 years.

Sin é wrote:I'd imagine, Carter, McCaw, Smith and a few others that the NZRU want to keep happy and playing in NZ would be asked for their views. Would they want to stay in NZ and risked getting dropped out of nowhere by Gatland or would they prefer to head for foreign shores and make a stack of money in the lap of luxury.

Your imagination goes running away sometimes.

flyhalffactory wrote:

MrsP wrote: 


FHF seems to have become a lot less keen on the old...

flyhalffactory wrote:

MrsP wrote:

ARE WE GETTING THROUGH TO YOU?

Give me strength..... you just haven't got a clue have you

Do you want me to post the video again and give you time-frame

...Its funny how you can post the video link and stop it at the exact moment for each phase and still people cant (or won't) see it.

I don't lie and I don't make things up.......  

...thing all of a sudden.

I wonder why?

I have read this and for the life of me I don't understand what you are saying............ enlighten the forum and me

Okay FHF. I will explain.

I was quoting some of the things you have said to other posters about their alleged inability to see your truth in the video you keep posting when in fact you have made glaring errors in your own interpretation of what is shown. And those are just a couple I picked up in the last page or 2.

I find it is difficult to take any of your analysis of that video seriously when you distort the truth to that extent.

Won't fall out about it mind.

 

The Saint wrote:

Cyril wrote:It does make you wonder how many NZ would have put on this year's Lions, doesn't it?

Yeah 30000 points because this was apparently the worst Lions team headed by the worst coaching staff in the history of rugby. Not to mention it was the worst Australian rugby team of last 10,000 years.

You've obviously not seen the scrum that the 3400BC Aussie side had. They were pitiful. Ask alanmackie if you need more details. He's got a match report.

Sin é wrote:I'd imagine, Carter, McCaw, Smith and a few others that the NZRU want to keep happy and playing in NZ would be asked for their views. Would they want to stay in NZ and risked getting dropped out of nowhere by Gatland or would they prefer to head for foreign shores and make a stack of money in the lap of luxury.

Thinking ahead to after the next rugby world cup, seems like a fair few of the Chief's players (Savea, Sonny Bill, Cruden, have a coaching relationship with Rennie & Smith (and play well for them) and will be key players for the ABs.

But you of all people surely aren't suggesting that Rennie and Smith, were they to get the job, select players they are familiar with and have a coaching relationship with?? Surely not!

Also love the "out of nowhere" suggestion, as if that were actually the case. Whichever side of the fence you are on, if you had even the smallest shred of objectivity you'd acknowledge that there was little to separate JD2 and BOD on the tour, and the decision was always going to be a close one once Roberts was available. It was certainly not "out of nowhere", at least for rugby fans with two eyes and a moderately functioning brain (and certainly not for a man of your imagination).

The thought that a whole host of senior ABs would genuinely turn their backs on the All Black jersey purely because Gatland only played BOD for 2/3 of the Lions Test series, and ultimately won the 3rd Test by a record margin (thus at the very least the decision had no particular detriment to the side), goes well beyond wishful thinking.

Keep chasing those rainbows son.

 

BOD has surely negated the running threat of JOC at this point, possibly even earlier. Note JOC isn't moving very fast, Davies should now focus on AAC.



1 second later Davies finally tries to take down AAC. Too late. But look, that's 1 second that has cost him, I wouldn't say it should have had any implications on 3rd test selection.

I'm open to interpretations, but come on...

This is like CSI

Cyril wrote:This is like CSI

Or...what was the name or that programme where people would give three definitions of a word and the panel had to choose which one was true?