BOD resentment for Gatland lingers

First topic message reminder :

Just seen an article on planetrugby where BOD has admitted that his disappointment with not being selected for the third test naturally carries with it some resentment for Gatland. He was quick to point out that Davies played a good game but feels that he could have equally contributed good things to that performance. http://www.planetrugby.com/lions/story/0,25883,16024_8907321,00.html

Is this a way of increasing ticket sales for the Wales Ireland match? Is this a journalist seeking out a story and BOD simply stating the truth? Is it wrong to make a statement like this now after the good way in which BOD conducted himself before and after the match? Does this resentment go further back than the Lions series to when Gatland was Ireland coach or when he made those comments before the Wales Ireland 6N match about how the Welsh view those games?

I'd like to know your opinion.

looks like gatland be in for a good shout for the lions New Zealand gig . i can see the headlines Im absolutly gutted not to be involved says BOD whom retired from rugby after 2015 world cup

Every god has his yad.

jimmyinthewell68 wrote:looks like gatland be in for a good shout for the lions New Zealand gig .  i can see the headlines     Im absolutly gutted not to be involved   says BOD  whom retired from rugby after 2015 world cup

Gats will be gone before the next Lions tour! There is no chance he will be hanging around the NH, when he can be in NZ looking at getting the All Blacks job (even if he needs to wait it out in the s15 for a few years).

This Lions tour for me was a succesful failure.

It succeeded in winning the test series but again failed to get the Lions ethos correct.

Gatland made some interesting and frankly biased calls. However his style of play and his winning mentality could never be doubted and the final result spoke for itself.

Q. Did we win the series?
A. Yes

Q. Was I happy with the result?
A. Yes

Q. Were mistakes made along the way in terms of tactics and selections?
A. Yes

Q. Will he be in charge for the next tour?
A. Probably, but I don't think the rift between some in the Irish camp and Mr Gatland will have healed by then.

The interview just proves that BOD thinks he is better than the team, totally against what Rugby and the Lions is about.

IronMike wrote:The interview just proves that BOD thinks he is better than the team, totally against what Rugby and the Lions is about.

Are you that naive to think that nobody would feel disappointed after being dropped in such a high calibre match? Especially if it was your final chance to win a Lions tour.

He was asked how he felt, and he answered truthfully. He was disappointed about the decision. End of.

Not saying he shouldn't be disappointed, its just the whole resentment of the coach that dropped him because he saw it as "his" Lions tour, as though he was entitled to play in all 3 tests, regardless of form, tactics and whatever else. Watch the interview where he says he was even more disappointed after finding out Tuilagi was selected on the bench ahead of him, talk about being a good supportive player.

Fact is, he has every right to feel disappointed, but coming out with these interviews is only damaging his reputation by making him seem quite selfish to be honest.

IronMike wrote:Not saying he shouldn't be disappointed, its just the whole resentment of the coach that dropped him because he saw it as "his" Lions tour, as though he was entitled to play in all 3 tests, regardless of form, tactics and whatever else. Watch the interview where he says he was even more disappointed after finding out Tuilagi was selected on the bench ahead of him, talk about being a good supportive player.

Fact is, he has every right to feel disappointed, but coming out with these interviews is only damaging his reputation by making him seem quite selfish to be honest.

That to me shows he's an even more supportive not less. He was gutted about and still helped them and wore a smile on his face doing it. The fact he was honest months later rather than the normal sportsman PR job doesn't harm him at all for me. No ones going to change their minds on whether it was a good decision or not but the people criticising what he's saying here would also criticise him if he said nothing and only like him if he lied and said he thought that JD fully deserved to start. I'd rather people said what they thought than have them tip toe around an answer no matter what.

IronMike wrote:The interview just proves that BOD thinks he is better than the team, totally against what Rugby and the Lions is about.

I agree with this comment too.

However, the problem I have with the selections for that 3rd test are the same problems I had throughout the whole tour. Gatland let his personal favourites and his knowledge and comfort of the Welsh based players affect his judgement. BOD knows this, as does anyone who isn't Welsh. Even a lot of the Welsh contingent know the truth of the matter. Gatland defaulted to what he knows. I can't say truthfully I wouldn't be biased in his position, however it was Gatland's responsibility to not let his familiarity with players influence his judgement. He failed in that regard. He did win the test and ultimately was successful in his goals. Mistakes were made though.

I'll list examples and will be happy to elaborate if it causes problems.

1. Warburton as captain, when he was dropped as captain of Wales.
2. Lydiate travelling despite Gatland saying the 6N was the place to prove yourselves. Kelly Brown, Robshaw, Wood, Ryan Jones and others proved themselves time and time again and were ignored.
3. Dropping BOD for the last test and selecting Roberts for the last test when neither merited being dropped or included respectively.
4. Dropping Cuthbert after the 1st test for Bowe who had been injured and lacking match practice.
5a. Bringing Hogg, the youngest guy on the tour as utility cover when he isn't a utility back.
5b. Bringing Kearney who wasn't fit and not letting Hogg challenge Halfpenny for the fullback slot by playing him out of position.
6. Bringing Shane Williams into the squad at all whilst guys like Visser, Liam Williams, Foden, Brown, Goode et al were all left at home.
7. Not giving Ryan Grant a shot in the 2nd test whilst Vinapola was destroyed.

I could go on but I won't. Gatland got some aspects of the Lions but I think making the head coach a current incumbent coach of one of the 4 nations is a mistake. A mistake that looks likely to be repeated in 4 years’ time. Certainly if the head coach is Gatland he would do well to include coaches from all the home nations so each country has a coach that can advise him and perhaps make a better case for some of the player who were ignored in this tour. Zebo, Hogg, Gray and Grant to name some of those who could have played an important role in the tests but were never given the opportunity.

I agree with most of your points, I think what it ultimately boiled down to when picking that heavily Welsh biased 3rd test team was the fact the coaching team didnt feel confident in the combinations and players they had tried out on the tour, and under the preassure of a series decider reverted to what they knew *could* work,

IronMike wrote:I agree with most of your points, I think what it ultimately boiled down to when picking that heavily Welsh biased 3rd test team was the fact the coaching team didnt feel confident in the combinations and players they had tried out on the tour, and under the preassure of a series decider reverted to what they knew *could* work,

This comment is symptomatic of why I described the tour as a succesful failure. Gatland before he even announced the squad said he knew what his test team would look like. I know it's an extreme comparrison but compare Gatland's comment to SCW's mindset in the debacle in NZ in 2005. He had his test team and his dirt trackers.

This tour we never got a chance to see AWJ and Gray play together. Or Zebo, Hogg and Halfpenny play in tandem with both attacking from the back of the pitch. We also never saw a front row of Grant, Hibbard and Jones take to the pitch.

Gatland wasn't bold enough experimenting in the games before the tests, hence he didn't exhaust all the possibilities and in a way backed himself into a corner when picking for the final test.

The significant difference between SCW's "debacle" and Gatland's "successful failure" being the host opposition and their form at the time?

Can't believe you guys are still on about this.

Have you no new material?

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:The significant difference between SCW's "debacle" and Gatland's "successful failure" being the host opposition and their form at the time?

I agree.

However I do feel the pedigree of guys like North, AWJ, Adam Jones, Hibbard, Davies, Halfpenny and a lot of the players picked for that 3rd test were the best players available at the time of selection and at the time of the test.

The same cannot be said for SCW's 2005 Lions, who were for the most part too old and trully picked on the back of bias.

Gatland on the other hand picked players who he was familiar with but for the most part it's hard to argue that the bulk of the team picked weren't the best performers over the course of the tour. As I said, there were some anomolies however.

Biltong wrote:Can't believe you guys are still on about this.

Have you no new material?

meh, I haven't got much more to say about Edinburgh or Glasgow on the club section untill they have played.

Furthermore it's a go slow Friday for me at work.

Biltong wrote:Can't believe you guys are still on about this.

Have you no new material?

As of about 9pm tonight we will have "the ref shafted us", "that cehating git <insert name> cheated and got away with it and cost us the game".

Everyone has been so caught up on selection for the recent Lions tour, I don't think there was too much wrong with it, what left me disappointed was the quality and style of the rugby over the whole tour save for the last 40mins.  Not particularly surprising given the low standard of attacking rugby shown by all the sides throughout last year's 6N, but I had hoped coming together the unions would show some ambition and prove greater than the sum.  As it was the rugby was largely dull and we were lucky that we got to the final test with the opportunity to win the series against what was the worst host side in decades.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Biltong wrote:Can't believe you guys are still on about this.

Have you no new material?

As of about 9pm tonight we will have "the ref shafted us", "that cehating git <insert name> cheated and got away with it and cost us the game".

Cool, can I bring Bryce Lawrence along?  

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:The significant difference between SCW's "debacle" and Gatland's "successful failure" being the host opposition and their form at the time?

I agree.

However I do feel the pedigree of guys like North, AWJ, Adam Jones, Hibbard, Davies, Halfpenny and a lot of the players picked for that 3rd test were the best players available at the time of selection and at the time of the test.

Exactly, they won, didn't they?

No need to justify or explain anything further.

Whether they would have won by another point or two if someone else was picked, really doesn't matter.

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:The significant difference between SCW's "debacle" and Gatland's "successful failure" being the host opposition and their form at the time?

I agree.

However I do feel the pedigree of guys like North, AWJ, Adam Jones, Hibbard, Davies, Halfpenny and a lot of the players picked for that 3rd test were the best players available at the time of selection and at the time of the test.

Exactly, they won, didn't they?

No need to justify or explain anything further.

Whether they would have won by another point or two if someone else was picked, really doesn't matter.

With the greatest of respects Bilt, being from South Africa you'll never understand what the Lions and their tradition means to some supporters.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:The significant difference between SCW's "debacle" and Gatland's "successful failure" being the host opposition and their form at the time?

I agree.

However I do feel the pedigree of guys like North, AWJ, Adam Jones, Hibbard, Davies, Halfpenny and a lot of the players picked for that 3rd test were the best players available at the time of selection and at the time of the test.

Exactly, they won, didn't they?

No need to justify or explain anything further.

Whether they would have won by another point or two if someone else was picked, really doesn't matter.

With the greatest of respects Bilt, being from South Africa you'll never understand what the Lions and their tradition means to some supporters.

Mate, I don't think it is that hard to comprehend.

Whether you are talking of Provinces in SA making up a representative side between all of them, or you use four home nations to make up a representative side like the British and Irish Lions, the principle does not differ.

There may be more resentment between nations because of a more complicated history, but at the end of the day it is rugby.

Players get selected and players are not selected. Players get upset, supporters get upset, but the Lions won, for that reason alone, it doesn't really make any difference to whether one player was dropped and another replaced him.

Think of the Scottish supporters, now they have reason to be upset as Gatland marginalised them.

I have to admit I've lost a little bit of respect for BOD over this, Gatland was the coach and he made the call which he was paid to do, whatever side of the fence you're on you have to respect that and move on.

markb wrote:Everyone has been so caught up on selection for the recent Lions tour, I don't think there was too much wrong with it, what left me disappointed was the quality and style of the rugby over the whole tour save for the last 40mins.  Not particularly surprising given the low standard of attacking rugby shown by all the sides throughout last year's 6N, but I had hoped coming together the unions would show some ambition and prove greater than the sum.  As it was the rugby was largely dull and we were lucky that we got to the final test with the opportunity to win the series against what was the worst host side in decades.

+1

Scrumpy wrote:I have to admit I've lost a little bit of respect for BOD over this, Gatland was the coach and he made the call which he was paid to do, whatever side of the fence you're on you have to respect that and move on.

That has been exactly my point from the start.

He was the coach, he made the decisions, it worked out, great guns, come next tour, someone else will make the decisions, and someone else will be upset. Vicious circle.

I wonder would the Lions traditions have been brought up if, just suppose if, BOD was picked and the Lions lost?

I am sorry BOD missed his chance for Lions glory, and I know the Lions had a tradition, but I think last 3 tours or even more it has become a normal side, where winning the series is the point of the tour.

Host sides don't usually put their best sides out when not playing the tests, nor do the Lions. It's the test results that matters and I feel Gatland got it right by winning the series.

My 2c worth.

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:The significant difference between SCW's "debacle" and Gatland's "successful failure" being the host opposition and their form at the time?

I agree.

However I do feel the pedigree of guys like North, AWJ, Adam Jones, Hibbard, Davies, Halfpenny and a lot of the players picked for that 3rd test were the best players available at the time of selection and at the time of the test.

Exactly, they won, didn't they?

No need to justify or explain anything further.

Whether they would have won by another point or two if someone else was picked, really doesn't matter.

With the greatest of respects Bilt, being from South Africa you'll never understand what the Lions and their tradition means to some supporters.

Mate, I don't think it is that hard to comprehend.

Whether you are talking of Provinces in SA making up a representative side between all of them, or you use four home nations to make up a representative side like the British and Irish Lions, the principle does not differ.

There may be more resentment between nations because of a more complicated history, but at the end of the day it is rugby.

Players get selected and players are not selected. Players get upset, supporters get upset, but the Lions won, for that reason alone, it doesn't really make any difference to whether one player was dropped and another replaced him.

Think of the Scottish supporters, now they have reason to be upset as Gatland marginalised them.

Like me you mean?  

gelodge wrote:

markb wrote:Everyone has been so caught up on selection for the recent Lions tour, I don't think there was too much wrong with it, what left me disappointed was the quality and style of the rugby over the whole tour save for the last 40mins.  Not particularly surprising given the low standard of attacking rugby shown by all the sides throughout last year's 6N, but I had hoped coming together the unions would show some ambition and prove greater than the sum.  As it was the rugby was largely dull and we were lucky that we got to the final test with the opportunity to win the series against what was the worst host side in decades.

+1

+1

They should release a copy of the tour DVD with the last chapter at the beginning so people don't have to go through the menu options to get to the only part worth watching.

"I am sorry BOD missed his chance for Lions glory."

Did he?

He was part of a winning Lions tour, if he felt that upset then he shouldn't have walked out onto the pitch at the end of the 3rd test and celebrated the win.

Gatland did the job he was paid to do, I'm not a huge fan of his but I respect him for making that difficult call.

It seems odd that BOD complained on twitter about being taken out of context as the resentment and Christmas card comments seemed pretty clear. Perhaps Shane Horgan, the interviewer, shouldn't have asked him the leading question "Do you resent him a bit for the decision?".

In my opinion the most unfortunate comment he made was not saying he resents Gats, which is ok if a bit unnecessary, but saying "What should have probably been one of the greatest achievements in my career hasn’t unfortunately turned out to be that case". His disappointment was completely understandable but this sense of entitlement is a bit difficult to swallow. I mean, it's not like Jamie Roberts and JD2 haven't achieved anything during the last 2 years or so is it.

And as for him not being on the bench either, that's the strangest criticism of all. If George North had come off injured in the first 5 minutes, who would you prefer on the wing, BOD or Manu? And who would provide more impact at centre coming off the bench?

Anyway, it will be interesting to see what Joe Schmidt does selection-wise if BOD's form does not hold up in his farewell season and what the Irish fans/media reaction would be if he dared not to pick him.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:The significant difference between SCW's "debacle" and Gatland's "successful failure" being the host opposition and their form at the time?

I agree.

However I do feel the pedigree of guys like North, AWJ, Adam Jones, Hibbard, Davies, Halfpenny and a lot of the players picked for that 3rd test were the best players available at the time of selection and at the time of the test.

Exactly, they won, didn't they?

No need to justify or explain anything further.

Whether they would have won by another point or two if someone else was picked, really doesn't matter.

With the greatest of respects Bilt, being from South Africa you'll never understand what the Lions and their tradition means to some supporters.

Mate, I don't think it is that hard to comprehend.

Whether you are talking of Provinces in SA making up a representative side between all of them, or you use four home nations to make up a representative side like the British and Irish Lions, the principle does not differ.

There may be more resentment between nations because of a more complicated history, but at the end of the day it is rugby.

Players get selected and players are not selected. Players get upset, supporters get upset, but the Lions won, for that reason alone, it doesn't really make any difference to whether one player was dropped and another replaced him.

Think of the Scottish supporters, now they have reason to be upset as Gatland marginalised them.

Like me you mean?  

exactly.  

A fit BOD has a watertight argument to be picked for Ireland. It must be difficult to make that adjustment when you throw yourself into the Lions mix. Picking a utility back is always a difficult task but BOD could only cover 12 13. Depending on who was injured you could shuffle players around but Manu has enough pace to also be able to cover wing.

The Christmas card comment was a throwaway comment. The resentment issue came from Horgan's question. This was obviously for an Irish audience but in today's world these things get picked up and cherry picked to get attention.

I think there have been many fair comments on this thread though from both sides of the argument. Sometimes we'd all like our players to have said or done something differently. It's ludicrous to think that these comments in any way tarnish BOD's reputation but equally it's fair to say his comments are not going to win over his critics.

Like he said in the interview, it's only natural you stick behind your nationality. This is always the failing of the Lions because fans will never truly step beyond their national loyalties. Yet in saying that, that's what adds to the intrigue of the Lions. Players an fans alike know it can never really work and yet here we are discussing it long after the incident. What in rugby has that level of interest and intensity?

https://www.606v2.com/t45107-please-sponsor-me-for-running-a-10k-again

Shameless plug on a popular thead for trying to raise money for a rugby related charity...   

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

IronMike wrote:The interview just proves that BOD thinks he is better than the team, totally against what Rugby and the Lions is about.

I agree with this comment too.

However, the problem I have with the selections for that 3rd test are the same problems I had throughout the whole tour. Gatland let his personal favourites and his knowledge and comfort of the Welsh based players affect his judgement. BOD knows this, as does anyone who isn't Welsh. Even a lot of the Welsh contingent know the truth of the matter. Gatland defaulted to what he knows. I can't say truthfully I wouldn't be biased in his position, however it was Gatland's responsibility to not let his familiarity with players influence his judgement. He failed in that regard. He did win the test and ultimately was successful in his goals. Mistakes were made though.

I'll list examples and will be happy to elaborate if it causes problems.

1. Warburton as captain, when he was dropped as captain of Wales.
2. Lydiate travelling despite Gatland saying the 6N was the place to prove yourselves. Kelly Brown, Robshaw, Wood, Ryan Jones and others proved themselves time and time again and were ignored.
3. Dropping BOD for the last test and selecting Roberts for the last test when neither merited being dropped or included respectively.
4. Dropping Cuthbert after the 1st test for Bowe who had been injured and lacking match practice.
5a. Bringing Hogg, the youngest guy on the tour as utility cover when he isn't a utility back.
5b. Bringing Kearney who wasn't fit and not letting Hogg challenge Halfpenny for the fullback slot by playing him out of position.
6. Bringing Shane Williams into the squad at all whilst guys like Visser, Liam Williams, Foden, Brown, Goode et al were all left at home.
7. Not giving Ryan Grant a shot in the 2nd test whilst Vinapola was destroyed.

I could go on but I won't. Gatland got some aspects of the Lions but I think making the head coach a current incumbent coach of one of the 4 nations is a mistake. A mistake that looks likely to be repeated in 4 years’ time. Certainly if the head coach is Gatland he would do well to include coaches from all the home nations so each country has a coach that can advise him and perhaps make a better case for some of the player who were ignored in this tour. Zebo, Hogg, Gray and Grant to name some of those who could have played an important role in the tests but were never given the opportunity.

Its an opinion of yours..... and nothing more.
1. Warburton was a fantastic selection and he proved how good a captain he has been prior to the Lions and most certainly in the 2nd test, we lost our direction when he went off Croft came on and BOD was made up to captain. Correct Call
2. Lydiate 6Ns man of the series 2011, had the best part of 6-8 weeks to regain match fitness to the first test, brave selection I thought Brown should have gone, Jones should have gone, Robshaw should have gone but when on top form Lydiate had proved he was ahead of them all. Correct Call.
3. He had to select somebody in the centre and the Roberts/Davies combo was proven. So how was it a mistake?. Correct Call
4. Agree.. as Bowe was injured (and what! eight weeks later is still injured), Cuthbert was the form wing or even Maitland or Hogg would have been the better choice . Poor Call
5a. Agree
5b. Agree 100%
6.  Agree 100% and that's what destroyed the "ethos" of the Lions 2013 tour
7.  Agree 100%
8. 2nd Test: Not bringing on Farrell for an off colour Sexton, not bringing on Cuthbert for an average Bowe, not bringing on Grant when the forwards were absolutely out on their feet.
9. Not selecting the best defence coach in Europe Sean Edwards

and on and on and on............ Opinons not Facts

Leonardo da Vinci wrote:The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions.

come on Brian,  put on a   meatloaf  track because  2 out of 3  ain't bad

Like a BOD out of hell I'm not going to send you a Christmas card, Warren.  

Many times I've said the "injuries" of welsh players in the 6N who were subsequently selected was an unfair inside Job. The injuries were clearly fictitious and I for one demand an enquiry. This is worse than Bathgate.

Gatland does have the build of Meatloaf.

Well all said and done now. It all just goes to prove that the Lions is an inherently flawed concept, divisive by its very nature and fully explains why the Lions get done in NZ. You might get away with the shabbiness, seemingly backroom deals, prima donnas, squabbling fans in oz, but in NZ all of that will get chewed up and spat out where it belongs. on the scorboard. look forward to the next one...just hope a kiwi coach is not at the head of this outfit again.

The deal with the SANZAR nations expires after 2017 and a whole shake-up may well occur then.

Who knows what the format/fixtures will be agreed or if it will even continue in a recognisable form.

This last series could well have an impact on future decisions in order to improve it for the future.

Gatland apparently played a lot of time I would do anything to win but I won't pick BOD. No I won't pick BOD.  

90% of the money going to the hosts is not exactly enticing for the Lions.

You took my name right out of the squad
It must have been when you were dissing me

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Gatland apparently played a lot of time I would do anything to win but I won't pick BOD. No I won't pick BOD.  

or ... i want you... i need you...but there aint no way Im ever gonna pick you...but two out of three ai---nt bad!

If BOD could talk
Would He tell you to come back to me?

If BOD could talk

Would He tell you it's alright, just leave

And don't look back at all the memories

The best of times, the mess you made of me

Walk on, if you think it's gonna make you strong

Go ahead and pick...JD.

For crying out loud I still hate you.

Gimme the future with a modern centre....

...can't you hear Brian groaning like a broken down machine, rusty with the guilty tears of over the hill kings and queens...

etc etc etc

If nothing else this thread has proven that Meatloaf has a healthy following among rugby fans.

It's something I always suspected.

Well I am outta here like a Bat outta hell.

bods 3rd test...all revved up with no place to go...

no hang on gats...will you pick me forever? i wanna know right now... will you pick me....will you pick me forever? will you make me so happy for the rest of my life...will you...PICK ME!

ah ah ah let me sleep on it BOD-y BOD-y let me sleep on it.......

I gotta know right now!

ah ah ah...

Cyril wrote:You took my name right out of the squad
It must have been when you were dissing me

We have a winner!