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.

 

bedfordwelsh wrote:Davies was the best or most consistent centre on tour and in theory BOD got dropped for Roberts as Davies was already the incumbent from the 2nd test.

I tried that line bedford, I got told I was a wum

Theres no winning this war, its why we departed the last thread....

Sin é wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Sin e

Surely it should be the best of the 4 countries.... not the best of a represenative of the 4 countries i.e. 3 from each nation and then 3 coaches picks.

This is sport, professional sport. Ideas like that remind me of the old WW1 stories where POW british officers in German prison camps were allowed home to visit sick relatives on the condition they returned to their POW camp (with only their word as a British officer as bond).... An honourable idea but one best left to the history books.

Don't try and tell me that Davies is a better centre than Manu Tualagi, or that Mike Phillips is a better scrumhalf than Conor Murray. We have no idea if Stuart Hogg would have been better than Leigh Halfpenny (and he wouldn't have been needed if anyone other than Halfpenny was allowed to take the kicks). Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cutbert, but he wasn't selected for the 1st Test. God only knows why an injured Tommy Bowe was used!

There you go again  
Making blunt statements generally isn't how a debate goes, you need to back them up with evidence. Cuthbert has been top try-scorer in the two 6N's he's played in and scored an important try in the first test. How can Zebo match this? Phillips has been a key part of three 6N's championships for Wales and has largely outplayed Murray when they've gone head to head. Granted Murray is a better option against Australia but to suggest he's already surpassed Phillips is laughable and disrespectful to the latter. Don't even get me started on Halfpenny and Hogg! The former was part of the backbone of the 3rd test win and rightly seen as the best 15 in the NH at this point.

Sin é wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Sin e

Surely it should be the best of the 4 countries.... not the best of a represenative of the 4 countries i.e. 3 from each nation and then 3 coaches picks.

Exactly. The 1989 Lions Test side was largely English and Scottish because those countries happened to have the best players at the time.

Thats the problem with the selections - Wales doesn't have all the best players. If they had, I don't think anyone would have minded too much.

But the team was not all Welsh, there were Irish and English in the starting team, as they were better than their counterparts (be it welsh, scottish, english/irish)

Sin é wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Sin e

Surely it should be the best of the 4 countries.... not the best of a represenative of the 4 countries i.e. 3 from each nation and then 3 coaches picks.

Exactly. The 1989 Lions Test side was largely English and Scottish because those countries happened to have the best players at the time.

Thats the problem with the selections - Wales doesn't have all the best players. If they had, I don't think anyone would have minded too much.

That's it......

Based on your rationale, would you say there was far too many players from one club or region. I mean how many players came from Leinster, or Leicester or The Ospreys?, should there have been some from Exeter or Connacht or Worcester..... or........ I mean if we have to have fair representation why not have a player from each club, province or region.

Strewth!

The Lions selection criteria was not just "form", but many others to gel as a unified force with one objective "to win the tour"

fa0019 wrote:Sin é

I don't disagree with you at all. But crucially Tuilagi was coming back from injury and even when playing for England he would have only got 30mins max in a come back game.

Apparently he is still injured - 2 months after he was selected (while injured) to play in the 3rd Test and having played vs the Rebels.

Brian O'Driscoll was fit  

As for Phillips, he suits Gatlands style. Every coach has a method...  it hamper all players and only the very best who can adapt to any environment.

So you agree, Gatland was unable to blend the 4 nations and reverted back to what he knows (i.e., he failed as Lions coach). Looks like Conor Murray adapted to the Lions environment very well. Why was he not rewarded for being the inform SH who had an existing partnership with both Sexton & Heislip?

Either Gatland is a poor selector or he is biased towards his Welsh players. Which is it?

Fitness is one area I think we often overlook. Its not like when one of the respected home nations sides tours a country and plays 3 tests... because they all play in 3-4 games prior to this also.

Thats why even when winning Gatland was shifting his side around.

He also made poor squad selections (i.e., one inside centre who promptly got injured).

In these tours there will always be winners, always be losers... to all Gatland's worth he dropped Cuthbert when he was playing well and suited his play down to the ground. He was ruthless but without which perhaps we wouldn't have won the series... the only real objective.

Cuthbert was in the 23 for the 2nd Test, so Gatty wasn't that ruthless. He was let down gently.

Sin é wrote:

In these tours there will always be winners, always be losers... to all Gatland's worth he dropped Cuthbert when he was playing well and suited his play down to the ground. He was ruthless but without which perhaps we wouldn't have won the series... the only real objective.

Cuthbert was in the 23 for the 2nd Test, so Gatty wasn't that ruthless. He was let down gently.

 

Poor little BOD, not being "let down gently". Bad Warren. I now fully endorse the "resentment".

Some pretty flimsy arguments here as always.

Sin é wrote:Either Gatland is a poor selector or he is biased towards his Welsh players. Which is it?

So do you think that Gatland was biased towards one club or province based on his original squad selection?

Apparently, police are continuing their search of the River Liffey for a plethera of children's toys which are still missing since exiting Mr O'Driscoll's pram several weeks ago.

Police insist that this could go on for months as there were so many thrown out over the past weeks.

Knowsit17 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Sin e

Surely it should be the best of the 4 countries.... not the best of a represenative of the 4 countries i.e. 3 from each nation and then 3 coaches picks.

This is sport, professional sport. Ideas like that remind me of the old WW1 stories where POW british officers in German prison camps were allowed home to visit sick relatives on the condition they returned to their POW camp (with only their word as a British officer as bond).... An honourable idea but one best left to the history books.

Don't try and tell me that Davies is a better centre than Manu Tualagi, or that Mike Phillips is a better scrumhalf than Conor Murray. We have no idea if Stuart Hogg would have been better than Leigh Halfpenny (and he wouldn't have been needed if anyone other than Halfpenny was allowed to take the kicks). Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cutbert, but he wasn't selected for the 1st Test. God only knows why an injured Tommy Bowe was used!

There you go again  
Making blunt statements generally isn't how a debate goes, you need to back them up with evidence. Cuthbert has been top try-scorer in the two 6N's he's played in and scored an important try in the first test. How can Zebo match this? Phillips has been a key part of three 6N's championships for Wales and has largely outplayed Murray when they've gone head to head. Granted Murray is a better option against Australia but to suggest he's already surpassed Phillips is laughable and disrespectful to the latter. Don't even get me started on Halfpenny and Hogg! The former was part of the backbone of the 3rd test win and rightly seen as the best 15 in the NH at this point.

Exactly! He can't match it if he isn't given a chance. Zebo was playing really well on tour and certainly played well against Wales. Just a reminder of how well he played.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT3MCAo1atU

You are deluded if you think Phillips was playing well (and outplayed Murray) against Ireland in the last 6Ns.  It was also very obvious in every test that Murray came on that the Lions started playing better than when they were playing with Phillips on the pitch.

I can't wait to hear you justifying why he was selected when his form was obviously so poor and particularly when Murray had key existing playing partnership with both Sexton & Heislip.

We all know that Gatland failed as a Lions coach to get players from different nations to win a test series. He reverted back to his Welsh gameplan and his Welsh players with a few players like Corbs & Sexton to plug the holes.

I know you keep harping on back to how ireland played against wales...how did they go for the rest of the tournament?

Im just gonna say this, even with the limited gametime for others, BOD was the worst performing centre on tour.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Sin é wrote:

In these tours there will always be winners, always be losers... to all Gatland's worth he dropped Cuthbert when he was playing well and suited his play down to the ground. He was ruthless but without which perhaps we wouldn't have won the series... the only real objective.

Cuthbert was in the 23 for the 2nd Test, so Gatty wasn't that ruthless. He was let down gently.

 

Poor little BOD, not being "let down gently". Bad Warren. I now fully endorse the "resentment".

Some pretty flimsy arguments here as always.

Thats not an argument - its a fact.

Sin é wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Sin é wrote:

In these tours there will always be winners, always be losers... to all Gatland's worth he dropped Cuthbert when he was playing well and suited his play down to the ground. He was ruthless but without which perhaps we wouldn't have won the series... the only real objective.

Cuthbert was in the 23 for the 2nd Test, so Gatty wasn't that ruthless. He was let down gently.

 

Poor little BOD, not being "let down gently". Bad Warren. I now fully endorse the "resentment".

Some pretty flimsy arguments here as always.

Thats not an argument - its a fact.

Please explain how this is "fact"? Please.  

gcBlues wrote:I know you keep harping on back to how ireland played against wales...how did they go for the rest of the tournament?

I'm comparing the form of individual players for the 6Ns.

Murray had good form in the 6Ns (and the warm-up games) and he certainly wasn't outplayed by Phillips in the 6Ns as claimed above.

Likewise Zebo (until he got injured).

Sin é wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Sin é wrote:

In these tours there will always be winners, always be losers... to all Gatland's worth he dropped Cuthbert when he was playing well and suited his play down to the ground. He was ruthless but without which perhaps we wouldn't have won the series... the only real objective.

Cuthbert was in the 23 for the 2nd Test, so Gatty wasn't that ruthless. He was let down gently.

 

Poor little BOD, not being "let down gently". Bad Warren. I now fully endorse the "resentment".

Some pretty flimsy arguments here as always.

Thats not an argument - its a fact.

It is not fact that he was on the bench to 'let him down gently', it is just the way that you are presenting the fact that he was on the bench.

Comfort wrote:

Sin é wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Sin é wrote:

In these tours there will always be winners, always be losers... to all Gatland's worth he dropped Cuthbert when he was playing well and suited his play down to the ground. He was ruthless but without which perhaps we wouldn't have won the series... the only real objective.

Cuthbert was in the 23 for the 2nd Test, so Gatty wasn't that ruthless. He was let down gently.

 

Poor little BOD, not being "let down gently". Bad Warren. I now fully endorse the "resentment".

Some pretty flimsy arguments here as always.

Thats not an argument - its a fact.

Please explain how this is "fact"? Please.  

Its a fact that Cuthbert started the 1st Test and was in the 23 for the 2nd Test.

He wasn't dropped out of the matchday team for the 2nd Test.

That is a fact.

thats not what you said was fact sin

It is fact that BOD/JD2 started the 2nd test, but Jamie Roberts/JD2 started the 3rd test, meaning that BOD was dropped for Roberts, not JD2, and thus this witch hunt has been completely unjust and aimed at the wrong welsh centre.

Roberts had to play no matter what if remotely fit as he was the only inside centre taken in the original party and Barritt and Twelvetrees were there for a nothing game to prevent injury. The choice then came to BOD or JD. JD was chosen due to his national partnership and performances in the warm up games. Fair?

Comfort wrote:thats not what you said was fact sin

That is what I meant is a fact Comfort. Its up to yourself to deduce something from it;) 

I'm deducing that Gatland has one way of dropping a Welsh player and another way of dropping an Irish player.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Roberts had to play no matter what if remotely fit as he was the only inside centre taken in the original party and Barritt and Twelvetrees were there for a nothing game to prevent injury. The choice then came to BOD or JD. JD was chosen due to his national partnership and performances in the warm up games. Fair?

Not only that

JD also played well in the 1st test. The the decision-making and awareness when Warburton went off injured in the 2nd test clearly declined, position-ally we were a mess. One of the reasons to retain BOD for the 3rd and deciding test was as much for his leadership qualities and for his all around play in the middle of the park, and the last 15 or so mins of the 2nd test kinda put the decision to bed.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Roberts had to play no matter what if remotely fit as he was the only inside centre taken in the original party and Barritt and Twelvetrees were there for a nothing game to prevent injury. The choice then came to BOD or JD. JD was chosen due to his national partnership and performances in the warm up games. Fair?

Davies played mostly at 12 for the Tour - even Tualagi played 13 when partnered with Davies (and 12 when partnered with BOD).

As regards partnerships - how come Sexton & Murray were not partnered together - is it because only the Welsh players were allowed play in existing partnerships?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Roberts had to play no matter what if remotely fit as he was the only inside centre taken in the original party and Barritt and Twelvetrees were there for a nothing game to prevent injury. The choice then came to BOD or JD. JD was chosen due to his national partnership and performances in the warm up games. Fair?

Not really because the test matches are more important and BOD can rightfully claim to have out performed Davies in test matches even if only marginally. BOD also added over 100 caps of experience 80 of which were as captain.

Davies has never had as effective a partnership with Roberts as Drico did with Roberts in the SA Lions tour.

Sin é wrote:As regards partnerships - how come Sexton & Murray were not partnered together - is it because only the Welsh players were allowed play in existing partnerships?

Yes.

flyhalffactory wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Roberts had to play no matter what if remotely fit as he was the only inside centre taken in the original party and Barritt and Twelvetrees were there for a nothing game to prevent injury. The choice then came to BOD or JD. JD was chosen due to his national partnership and performances in the warm up games. Fair?

Not only that

JD also played well in the 1st test. The the decision-making and awareness when Warburton went off injured in the 2nd test clearly declined, position-ally we were a mess. One of the reasons to retain BOD for the 3rd and deciding test was as much for his leadership qualities and for his all around play in the middle of the park, and the last 15 or so mins of the 2nd test kinda put the decision to bed.  

If that happened in the last 15 minutes of the 2nd Test, why did Gatland first of all have BOD at a press conference the following Monday and why was he intimating that he would be captain?

flyhalffactory wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Roberts had to play no matter what if remotely fit as he was the only inside centre taken in the original party and Barritt and Twelvetrees were there for a nothing game to prevent injury. The choice then came to BOD or JD. JD was chosen due to his national partnership and performances in the warm up games. Fair?

Not only that

JD also played well in the 1st test. The the decision-making and awareness when Warburton went off injured in the 2nd test clearly declined, position-ally we were a mess. One of the reasons to retain BOD for the 3rd and deciding test was as much for his leadership qualities and for his all around play in the middle of the park, and the last 15 or so mins of the 2nd test kinda put the decision to bed.  

That's where I have to disagree. Davies didn't play well in either of the tests for me. O'Driscoll wasn't much better but he was better. Oh well I'm getting off the ride here as we've been going round long enough.

Sin é wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Sin e

Surely it should be the best of the 4 countries.... not the best of a represenative of the 4 countries i.e. 3 from each nation and then 3 coaches picks.

This is sport, professional sport. Ideas like that remind me of the old WW1 stories where POW british officers in German prison camps were allowed home to visit sick relatives on the condition they returned to their POW camp (with only their word as a British officer as bond).... An honourable idea but one best left to the history books.

Don't try and tell me that Davies is a better centre than Manu Tualagi, or that Mike Phillips is a better scrumhalf than Conor Murray. We have no idea if Stuart Hogg would have been better than Leigh Halfpenny (and he wouldn't have been needed if anyone other than Halfpenny was allowed to take the kicks). Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cutbert, but he wasn't selected for the 1st Test. God only knows why an injured Tommy Bowe was used!

There you go again  
Making blunt statements generally isn't how a debate goes, you need to back them up with evidence. Cuthbert has been top try-scorer in the two 6N's he's played in and scored an important try in the first test. How can Zebo match this? Phillips has been a key part of three 6N's championships for Wales and has largely outplayed Murray when they've gone head to head. Granted Murray is a better option against Australia but to suggest he's already surpassed Phillips is laughable and disrespectful to the latter. Don't even get me started on Halfpenny and Hogg! The former was part of the backbone of the 3rd test win and rightly seen as the best 15 in the NH at this point.

Exactly! He can't match it if he isn't given a chance. Zebo was playing really well on tour and certainly played well against Wales. Just a reminder of how well he played.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT3MCAo1atU

You are deluded if you think Phillips was playing well (and outplayed Murray) against Ireland in the last 6Ns.  It was also very obvious in every test that Murray came on that the Lions started playing better than when they were playing with Phillips on the pitch.

I can't wait to hear you justifying why he was selected when his form was obviously so poor and particularly when Murray had key existing playing partnership with both Sexton & Heislip.

We all know that Gatland failed as a Lions coach to get players from different nations to win a test series. He reverted back to his Welsh gameplan and his Welsh players with a few players like Corbs & Sexton to plug the holes.

Oh I'm sorry, is Zebo an established try-scorer for Ireland? Two tries to his name in national colours would suggest not. Cuthbert has scored 10 in 19 appearances (9 for Wales, 1 for the Lions) so could rightly be called an established try-scorer at this stage. Naturally he was always going to be above Zebo in the pecking order, that isn't really a point of contention to anyone outside Ireland. Again it follows that your general statement that "Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cuthbert" doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

You rely on single, isolated incidents (particularly the last 6Ns game between Wales and Ireland) as your defence of big statements like that, which really isn't enough. Generally not many would disagree that Cuthbert has looked the more impressive of the two at this level and was rightly in ahead of Zebo.

You use the same strategy in relation to Phillips and Murray, mentioning this year's game as your only example of a game where Murray has played better. The two games before that (RWC 2011 and 6Ns 2012) Phillips certainly came out on top. As usual you completely neglect my key points, mentioning only what is convenient to you and ignoring what isn't. Phillips has been a key part of Wales winning three 6Ns titles and reaching the RWC semis (in fact almost getting us to the final with a fine try). Can Murray boast as much or more?

Sin é wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Roberts had to play no matter what if remotely fit as he was the only inside centre taken in the original party and Barritt and Twelvetrees were there for a nothing game to prevent injury. The choice then came to BOD or JD. JD was chosen due to his national partnership and performances in the warm up games. Fair?

Not only that

JD also played well in the 1st test. The the decision-making and awareness when Warburton went off injured in the 2nd test clearly declined, position-ally we were a mess. One of the reasons to retain BOD for the 3rd and deciding test was as much for his leadership qualities and for his all around play in the middle of the park, and the last 15 or so mins of the 2nd test kinda put the decision to bed.

If that happened in the last 15 minutes of the 2nd Test, why did Gatland first of all have BOD at a press conference the following Monday and why was he intimating that he would be captain?

Perhaps because at that stage he was still considering selecting BOD and making him captain for the third Test.

GunsGerms wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Roberts had to play no matter what if remotely fit as he was the only inside centre taken in the original party and Barritt and Twelvetrees were there for a nothing game to prevent injury. The choice then came to BOD or JD. JD was chosen due to his national partnership and performances in the warm up games. Fair?

Not really because the test matches are more important and BOD can rightfully claim to have out performed Davies in test matches even if only marginally. BOD also added over 100 caps of experience 80 of which were as captain.

Davies has never had as effective a partnership with Roberts as Drico did with Roberts in the SA Lions tour.

I think the amount of game won with a Davies & Roberts combo in Lions tests matches that of Roberts & BOD, and the Roberts & Davies combinator in the three quarters has been utilised in back to back Six Nations titles, so I would say that it is arguably better than the Roberts & BOD combo.

Its not about six nations titles. Roberts and Davies didnt win those titles by themselves. Both are great players, IMO anyway but as a combination they have never been as impressive as BOD and Roberts were in SA.

Guns - BOD & Dr Jamie didn't play together in a winning game during the SA tour (test), but Roberts and Foxy did player together in a winning test in Aus, as did BOD and Foxy, so going purely on Lions results the worst combination would be BOD and Roberts (statistically speaking).

Knowsit17 wrote:Oh I'm sorry, is Zebo an established try-scorer for Ireland? Two tries to his name in national colours would suggest not. Cuthbert has scored 10 in 19 appearances (9 for Wales, 1 for the Lions) so could rightly be called an established try-scorer at this stage. Naturally he was always going to be above Zebo in the pecking order, that isn't really a point of contention to anyone outside Ireland. Again it follows that your general statement that "Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cuthbert" doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

You rely on single, isolated incidents (particularly the last 6Ns game between Wales and Ireland) as your defence of big statements like that, which really isn't enough. Generally not many would disagree that Cuthbert has looked the more impressive of the two at this level and was rightly in ahead of Zebo.

You use the same strategy in relation to Phillips and Murray, mentioning this year's game as your only example of a game where Murray has played better. The two games before that (RWC 2011 and 6Ns 2012) Phillips certainly came out on top. As usual you completely neglect my key points, mentioning only what is convenient to you and ignoring what isn't. Phillips has been a key part of Wales winning three 6Ns titles and reaching the RWC semis (in fact almost getting us to the final with a fine try). Can Murray boast as much or more?

Cuthbert had a fairly poor tour by his standards though. He looked sluggish, off the pace and even injured for most of the tour. His try in the second test was well executed though.

In general I think he is a better player than Zebo but he was as bad as I have ever seen him on the Lions tour.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Guns - BOD & Dr Jamie didn't play together in a winning game during the SA tour (test), but Roberts and Foxy did player together in a winning test in Aus, as did BOD and Foxy, so going purely on Lions results the worst combination would be BOD and Roberts (statistically speaking).

So what? Dont see how that is relevant when BOD and Roberts were both outstanding in two of the best matches the Lions have played since the first test in Australia 2001. To judge a player in isolation by whether their team won or not is ridiculous especially when SA in '09 were so much better that Aus in '13. There are way too many other factors at play to base your decision on that.

GunsGerms wrote:Its not about six nations titles. Roberts and Davies didnt win those titles by themselves. Both are great players, IMO anyway but as a combination they have never been as impressive as BOD and Roberts were in SA.

I don't see how you can draw those sorts of conclusions based on a few warm-up games and one or two tests. Things like centre combos are usually judged based on what they achieve in the long term. If BOD and Roberts had the chance to play regular rugby together they might prove you right or they might not look nearly as effective as they did in 2009. Unfortunately we're likely to never know. What we do know is that Roberts and Davies are a more established partnership and have usually combined quite effectively, as is reflected by the RWC and the two 6Ns since, even the final Lions test itself. Hopefully this illustrates why saying something like "True but BOD and Roberts looked better for a few games back in 09" is a somewhat weaker line of argument.

Knowsit17 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Its not about six nations titles. Roberts and Davies didnt win those titles by themselves. Both are great players, IMO anyway but as a combination they have never been as impressive as BOD and Roberts were in SA.

I don't see how you can draw those sorts of conclusions based on a few warm-up games and one or two tests. Things like centre combos are usually judged based on what they achieve in the long term. If BOD and Roberts had the chance to play regular rugby together they might prove you right or they might not look nearly as effective as they did in 2009. Unfortunately we're likely to never know. What we do know is that Roberts and Davies are a more established partnership and have usually combined quite effectively, as is reflected by the RWC and the two 6Ns since, even the final Lions test itself. Hopefully this illustrates why saying something like "True but BOD and Roberts looked better for a few games back in 09" is a somewhat weaker line of argument.

+1 (worded far better than my attempts)

Knowsit17 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Its not about six nations titles. Roberts and Davies didnt win those titles by themselves. Both are great players, IMO anyway but as a combination they have never been as impressive as BOD and Roberts were in SA.

I don't see how you can draw those sorts of conclusions based on a few warm-up games and one or two tests. Things like centre combos are usually judged based on what they achieve in the long term. If BOD and Roberts had the chance to play regular rugby together they might prove you right or they might not look nearly as effective as they did in 2009. Unfortunately we're likely to never know. What we do know is that Roberts and Davies are a more established partnership and have usually combined quite effectively, as is reflected by the RWC and the two 6Ns since, even the final Lions test itself. Hopefully this illustrates why saying something like "True but BOD and Roberts looked better for a few games back in 09" is a somewhat weaker line of argument.

No international pairing plays regularly together at all unless they play at the same club. Max 10 games per year is not a lot. Davies plays for the Scarlets and Roberts played for cardiff and now Racing Metro.

Saying Roberts and Davies make a great partnership is as revelant as saying Drico and Roberts make a great partnership. Not particularly relevant at all. It is a very weak agruement for Davies inclusion over O'Driscoll because we all know how well O'Driscoll and Roberts played together in the past making it a fairly moot arguement.

GunsGerms wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:Oh I'm sorry, is Zebo an established try-scorer for Ireland? Two tries to his name in national colours would suggest not. Cuthbert has scored 10 in 19 appearances (9 for Wales, 1 for the Lions) so could rightly be called an established try-scorer at this stage. Naturally he was always going to be above Zebo in the pecking order, that isn't really a point of contention to anyone outside Ireland. Again it follows that your general statement that "Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cuthbert" doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

You rely on single, isolated incidents (particularly the last 6Ns game between Wales and Ireland) as your defence of big statements like that, which really isn't enough. Generally not many would disagree that Cuthbert has looked the more impressive of the two at this level and was rightly in ahead of Zebo.

You use the same strategy in relation to Phillips and Murray, mentioning this year's game as your only example of a game where Murray has played better. The two games before that (RWC 2011 and 6Ns 2012) Phillips certainly came out on top. As usual you completely neglect my key points, mentioning only what is convenient to you and ignoring what isn't. Phillips has been a key part of Wales winning three 6Ns titles and reaching the RWC semis (in fact almost getting us to the final with a fine try). Can Murray boast as much or more?

Cuthbert had a fairly poor tour by his standards though. He looked sluggish, off the pace and even injured for most of the tour. His try in the first test was well executed though.

In general I think he is a better player than Zebo but he was as bad as I have ever seen him on the Lions tour.

Fixed. I wish we'd had Lions tries in the second test!

I hear what you're saying, Cuthbert was far from perfect this tour. But if anything I feel he's demonstrated that he's quite a consistent attacking threat even when he's not 100%. He had been anonymous during the 1st test before his try. His defence needs work but imo the least you must concede is that his positioning in attack and finishing rarely disappoints.

Knowsit17 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Sin e

Surely it should be the best of the 4 countries.... not the best of a represenative of the 4 countries i.e. 3 from each nation and then 3 coaches picks.

This is sport, professional sport. Ideas like that remind me of the old WW1 stories where POW british officers in German prison camps were allowed home to visit sick relatives on the condition they returned to their POW camp (with only their word as a British officer as bond).... An honourable idea but one best left to the history books.

Don't try and tell me that Davies is a better centre than Manu Tualagi, or that Mike Phillips is a better scrumhalf than Conor Murray. We have no idea if Stuart Hogg would have been better than Leigh Halfpenny (and he wouldn't have been needed if anyone other than Halfpenny was allowed to take the kicks). Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cutbert, but he wasn't selected for the 1st Test. God only knows why an injured Tommy Bowe was used!

There you go again  
Making blunt statements generally isn't how a debate goes, you need to back them up with evidence. Cuthbert has been top try-scorer in the two 6N's he's played in and scored an important try in the first test. How can Zebo match this? Phillips has been a key part of three 6N's championships for Wales and has largely outplayed Murray when they've gone head to head. Granted Murray is a better option against Australia but to suggest he's already surpassed Phillips is laughable and disrespectful to the latter. Don't even get me started on Halfpenny and Hogg! The former was part of the backbone of the 3rd test win and rightly seen as the best 15 in the NH at this point.

Exactly! He can't match it if he isn't given a chance. Zebo was playing really well on tour and certainly played well against Wales. Just a reminder of how well he played.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT3MCAo1atU

You are deluded if you think Phillips was playing well (and outplayed Murray) against Ireland in the last 6Ns.  It was also very obvious in every test that Murray came on that the Lions started playing better than when they were playing with Phillips on the pitch.

I can't wait to hear you justifying why he was selected when his form was obviously so poor and particularly when Murray had key existing playing partnership with both Sexton & Heislip.

We all know that Gatland failed as a Lions coach to get players from different nations to win a test series. He reverted back to his Welsh gameplan and his Welsh players with a few players like Corbs & Sexton to plug the holes.

Oh I'm sorry, is Zebo an established try-scorer for Ireland? Two tries to his name in national colours would suggest not. Cuthbert has scored 10 in 19 appearances (9 for Wales, 1 for the Lions) so could rightly be called an established try-scorer at this stage. Naturally he was always going to be above Zebo in the pecking order, that isn't really a point of contention to anyone outside Ireland. Again it follows that your general statement that "Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cuthbert" doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

You rely on single, isolated incidents (particularly the last 6Ns game between Wales and Ireland) as your defence of big statements like that, which really isn't enough. Generally not many would disagree that Cuthbert has looked the more impressive of the two at this level and was rightly in ahead of Zebo.

You use the same strategy in relation to Phillips and Murray, mentioning this year's game as your only example of a game where Murray has played better. The two games before that (RWC 2011 and 6Ns 2012) Phillips certainly came out on top. As usual you completely neglect my key points, mentioning only what is convenient to you and ignoring what isn't. Phillips has been a key part of Wales winning three 6Ns titles and reaching the RWC semis (in fact almost getting us to the final with a fine try). Can Murray boast as much or more?

You do realise that Zebo has only 6 starts for Ireland (against NZ, SA, Argentina, Wales, England & USA) and with that world famous flick, Ireland retained the ball and Healy went onto score against Wales. Then he also scored a try (remember that pass from BOD to Zebo that Davies couldn't cope with) on Cuthbert's wing. He also scored against Argentina. (He got injured with first touch of all against England in case you don't know).

If you are going on 2011 world cup form, BOD should have started against Australia then as Ireland beat Australia in the 2011 world cup and Wales lost to Aus then (and every game that they have played since then).

The problem with Phillips on this tour was that he was in terrible form and the only reason he was starting was because he was Welsh.

Guns - Foxy and Roberts have played together far more regularly than BOD and Roberts, and a hell of a lot more recently. If going by '09 Lions tour form and partnerships is fair tehn I am outraged that Steve Jones got overlooked for the starting fly half spot, and positively shaking with fury he didn't even get on the plane. Gats is so anti-turk it is unbelievable, he only took one of us, yet he took 5 Ospreys even though they finished lower than us!

GunsGerms wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Its not about six nations titles. Roberts and Davies didnt win those titles by themselves. Both are great players, IMO anyway but as a combination they have never been as impressive as BOD and Roberts were in SA.

I don't see how you can draw those sorts of conclusions based on a few warm-up games and one or two tests. Things like centre combos are usually judged based on what they achieve in the long term. If BOD and Roberts had the chance to play regular rugby together they might prove you right or they might not look nearly as effective as they did in 2009. Unfortunately we're likely to never know. What we do know is that Roberts and Davies are a more established partnership and have usually combined quite effectively, as is reflected by the RWC and the two 6Ns since, even the final Lions test itself. Hopefully this illustrates why saying something like "True but BOD and Roberts looked better for a few games back in 09" is a somewhat weaker line of argument.

No international pairing plays regularly together at all unless they play at the same club. Max 10 games per year is not a lot. Davies plays for the Scarlets and Roberts played for cardiff and now Racing Metro.

Saying Roberts and Davies make a great partnership is as revelant as saying Drico and Roberts make a great partnership. Not particularly relevant at all. It is a very weak agruement for Davies inclusion over O'Driscoll because we all know how well O'Driscoll and Roberts played together in the past making it a fairly moot arguement.

As I said, BOD and Roberts played well in 09 against club opposition (the Golden Lions is the one I remember clearly) and maybe in the 1st test (the 2nd I think they were less effective). Let me use an example, for instance in Ireland I believe BOD and D'Arcy are generally well-known as an experienced and effective centre combo, perhaps more so before than now. Let's say Ireland are playing a side like Russia or Romania and have picked Paddy Wallace to partner BOD, be it to rest D'Arcy or just try out something new. If that centre combo has a stormer and looks better than D'Arcy-BOD usually do, is that enough to conclude that Wallace-BOD is the better combo?

Roberts and Davies have played together maybe between 20 and 30 games which is hardly nothing. We can say with some reliability that they usually pair up effectively based on their past three or four seasons of being a partnership for Wales. As I said before we can't conclude, based on a handful of games, that BOD and Roberts would be more effective were they to get equivalent exposure. You can't draw conclusions based on what you don't know or can't prove beyond doubt.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Guns - Foxy and Roberts have played together far more regularly than  BOD and Roberts, and a hell of a lot more recently.  If going by '09 Lions tour form and partnerships is fair tehn I am outraged that Steve Jones got overlooked for the starting fly half spot, and positively shaking with fury he didn't even get on the plane.  Gats is so anti-turk it is unbelievable, he only took one of us, yet he took 5 Ospreys even though they finished lower than us!

Completely missing the point.

Sin é wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Sin e

Surely it should be the best of the 4 countries.... not the best of a represenative of the 4 countries i.e. 3 from each nation and then 3 coaches picks.

This is sport, professional sport. Ideas like that remind me of the old WW1 stories where POW british officers in German prison camps were allowed home to visit sick relatives on the condition they returned to their POW camp (with only their word as a British officer as bond).... An honourable idea but one best left to the history books.

Don't try and tell me that Davies is a better centre than Manu Tualagi, or that Mike Phillips is a better scrumhalf than Conor Murray. We have no idea if Stuart Hogg would have been better than Leigh Halfpenny (and he wouldn't have been needed if anyone other than Halfpenny was allowed to take the kicks). Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cutbert, but he wasn't selected for the 1st Test. God only knows why an injured Tommy Bowe was used!

There you go again  
Making blunt statements generally isn't how a debate goes, you need to back them up with evidence. Cuthbert has been top try-scorer in the two 6N's he's played in and scored an important try in the first test. How can Zebo match this? Phillips has been a key part of three 6N's championships for Wales and has largely outplayed Murray when they've gone head to head. Granted Murray is a better option against Australia but to suggest he's already surpassed Phillips is laughable and disrespectful to the latter. Don't even get me started on Halfpenny and Hogg! The former was part of the backbone of the 3rd test win and rightly seen as the best 15 in the NH at this point.

Exactly! He can't match it if he isn't given a chance. Zebo was playing really well on tour and certainly played well against Wales. Just a reminder of how well he played.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT3MCAo1atU

You are deluded if you think Phillips was playing well (and outplayed Murray) against Ireland in the last 6Ns.  It was also very obvious in every test that Murray came on that the Lions started playing better than when they were playing with Phillips on the pitch.

I can't wait to hear you justifying why he was selected when his form was obviously so poor and particularly when Murray had key existing playing partnership with both Sexton & Heislip.

We all know that Gatland failed as a Lions coach to get players from different nations to win a test series. He reverted back to his Welsh gameplan and his Welsh players with a few players like Corbs & Sexton to plug the holes.

Oh I'm sorry, is Zebo an established try-scorer for Ireland? Two tries to his name in national colours would suggest not. Cuthbert has scored 10 in 19 appearances (9 for Wales, 1 for the Lions) so could rightly be called an established try-scorer at this stage. Naturally he was always going to be above Zebo in the pecking order, that isn't really a point of contention to anyone outside Ireland. Again it follows that your general statement that "Simon Zebo is a much better winger than Cuthbert" doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

You rely on single, isolated incidents (particularly the last 6Ns game between Wales and Ireland) as your defence of big statements like that, which really isn't enough. Generally not many would disagree that Cuthbert has looked the more impressive of the two at this level and was rightly in ahead of Zebo.

You use the same strategy in relation to Phillips and Murray, mentioning this year's game as your only example of a game where Murray has played better. The two games before that (RWC 2011 and 6Ns 2012) Phillips certainly came out on top. As usual you completely neglect my key points, mentioning only what is convenient to you and ignoring what isn't. Phillips has been a key part of Wales winning three 6Ns titles and reaching the RWC semis (in fact almost getting us to the final with a fine try). Can Murray boast as much or more?

You do realise that Zebo has only 6 starts for Ireland (against NZ, SA, Argentina, Wales, England & USA) and with that world famous flick, Ireland retained the ball and Healy went onto score against Wales. Then he also scored a try (remember that pass from BOD to Zebo that Davies couldn't cope with) on Cuthbert's wing. He also scored against Argentina. (He got injured with first touch of all against England in case you don't know).

If you are going on 2011 world cup form, BOD should have started against Australia then as Ireland beat Australia in the 2011 world cup ;)and Wales lost to Aus then (and every game that they have played since then).

The problem with Phillips on this tour was that he was in terrible form and the only reason he was starting was because he was Welsh.

The number of individual starts is irrelevant, you still provide no support to your claim that Zebo is "much better" than Cuthbert or that he in any way deserved to start any tests over Cuthbert. Oh and btw, Zebo didn't get that much less opportunity than Cuthbert during the warm-ups. Cuthbert started three games and scored three tries, going on to score in his only test start. Zebo started two, came on as a sub in one and scored nothing.

Anyway Cuthbert also scored in the 6Ns opener, coming in from the angle and scything through the Irish defence as is his trademark. Zebo didn't have any defenders to beat for his score, BOD put him in (and hasn't done anything of note since).

Keep telling yourself the bottom line, the rest of us will rest with the knowledge that Phillips was picked because he's more experienced and his contributions and achievements outstrip Murray's by a long way.

Guns - what is that point, because the way it come across to me (and I could be the only one) is that BOD has a right to feel agrieved because him and Roberts formed a decent partnership in SA four years ago, playing in two losing tests. And the Foxy and Roberts, with 20+ appearances together (and a few champions titles), are not as good a combination.

(the anti-turk bit was just a laugh, as this whole thread gives me a 'bout to kick off vibe)

I do get a bit confused when people compare Zebo to Cuthbert, when Cuthbert also scored v Ireland. Zebo's flukey flick is not really justification to start comparing against a double championship winning try scorer (12/13).

Also why do we keep going on about RWC 2011 and conveniently cherry pick our games we are counting? Australia v Ireland then Wales and nothing happened in between?

Risca Rev wrote:I do get a bit confused when people compare Zebo to Cuthbert, when Cuthbert also scored v Ireland. Zebo's flukey flick is not really justification to start comparing against a double championship winning  try scorer (12/13).

Also why do we keep going on about RWC 2011 and conveniently cherry pick our games we are counting? Australia v Ireland then Wales and nothing happened in between?

What I don't get is Zebo wasn't selected to tour (originally) so to think he should have started the tests over a player that was originally selected, and performing acceptably, seems a bit one-eyed.

GunsGerms wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Guns - Foxy and Roberts have played together far more regularly than  BOD and Roberts, and a hell of a lot more recently.  If going by '09 Lions tour form and partnerships is fair tehn I am outraged that Steve Jones got overlooked for the starting fly half spot, and positively shaking with fury he didn't even get on the plane.  Gats is so anti-turk it is unbelievable, he only took one of us, yet he took 5 Ospreys even though they finished lower than us!

Completely missing the point.

Which 'one' SS, - Davies or North?

Is North not a Turk anymore?

Comfort wrote:Im just gonna say this, even with the limited gametime for others, BOD was the worst performing centre on tour.

How many try's did BOD let in? I think you will find that it was in fact Davis who let Aus off the hook in the second test

Knowsit17 wrote:
Keep telling yourself the bottom line, the rest of us will rest with the knowledge that Phillips was picked because he's more experienced and his contributions and achievements outstrip Murray's by a long way.

Selective arguments. You use this argument with these names. You could easily replace everything apart from 'was picked' with the names of a couple of centers..

slane wrote:

Comfort wrote:Im just gonna say this, even with the limited gametime for others, BOD was the worst performing centre on tour.

How many try's did BOD let in? I think you will find that it was in fact Davis who let Aus off the hook in the second test

BOD was the worst performing centre on tour.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Guns - what is that point, because the way it come across to me (and I could be the only one) is that BOD has a right to feel agrieved because him and Roberts formed a decent partnership in SA four years ago, playing in two losing tests.  And the Foxy and Roberts, with 20+ appearances together (and a few champions titles), are not as good a combination.

(the anti-turk bit was just a laugh, as this whole thread gives me a 'bout to kick off vibe)

No I dont think that is why he feels aggreived at all. Its more to do with how Gatland handled the whole affair. I think the selection issues are twofold. Firstly he was playing better than Davies, in both tests he offered more albeit maybe only marginally more. Secondly it had been implied on a number of occasions by Gatland that BOD was in the running to be captain. In the end he selected as captain a guy with zero experience as captain ahead of him and a guy in his centre position who didnt quite merit it on form.

To be perfectly honest I would have preferred if O'Driscoll had said nothing at all but he has been asked a few times now in interviews so I suppose he is just being honest. I also believe it has all been blown out of proportion and really silly at this stage and I find it all really boring.

For me the tour was a big disapointment but not because of o'Driscoll getting a winning Lions farewell, which I must admit I thought before the tour would happen but because I geuninely thought the Lions should have blown the Aussies out of the water and I still think they would have if they had been much more positive in particular in the backs. The Lions performed better overall on the SA '09 tour IMO.

In the whole test series the Lions used two backs moves. The dummy runner move for Cuthberts try and the loop move for Sexton's try. With a bit more imagination and endevour I think the Lions could have run riot as North did when he scored his try.